- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- tech@piefed.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- tech@piefed.world
You must log in or register to comment.
People in positions of privilege very often tell on themselves when they dismiss anything that challenges their worldview as “political,” and therefore inappropriate for whatever “no politics, please” forum they’re in. It doesn’t mean they’re stupid, but it does mean they’re stunted. They would be better leaders if they had broader horizons.
Politics and society are bifurcating, and Hacker News is taking the fork on the right. “Apolitical” is an excuse to favor the status quo, a resistance to change, and therefore a re-enforcement of the existing biases and power structures of society.
Quote of the day right there.
Years ago, in the early 20-teens, I had posted on HN in protest to some new web property that aimed to tie yet another aspect of life to cell phones. I said something like “I work in software but I still don’t have a cell phone, I don’t like them, I don’t want one, I don’t want yet another aspect of modern life to encourage dependence on some subscription service like a phone.” Which was all true.
This attracted rather more reaction than anything else I posted on there. The reactions fell into a few categories:
- I don’t believe you, liar, why would you post this
- I have no sympathy for you, loser, go buy a phone
- Fuck you
Any illusion I had that the HN people were software-loving geeks like me kind of dissolved after that, and I stopped visiting. I suppose that’s exactly what they wanted.
Doesn’t internet require a subscription service?..
Yes, it kinda does! Isn’t that crummy?
My library has free access, as do any number of local business and location. And I once lived in a building that bundled internet/TV service for every resident.
That site has always been the feckless asshole version of Slashdot.
I think HN is one of the most rigged websites I encountered.
Some posts there look clearly botted regarding the score.
Not a single soul can tell me that it’s normal that the 345th “new AI model”-post get’s 1k upvotes within like 3 hours while articles like “I can steal Mastercard transactions” barely have 800 after an entire day.
I’ve also noticed the HN community has been on an accelerating train of lower quality discussion since some time before COVID.
Some of the community has always had a bit of a silicon valley libertarian brain rot, but it used to be balanced out by the open source crowd and just normal professional engineers across the world. The latter demographics have mostly evaporated leaving some of the most braindead takes completely unchallenged, until they’ve become the only noise in the room.
It’s a bit of a shame really, because it used to be a pretty good resource for keeping on top of the comings and goings of the software engineering industry. Combined with Reddit shitting the bed just after COVID, I’ve yet to actually find a decent replacement for what I got out of browsing it, really. Here does a fairly decent job, but as with many subjects, the breadth of content and opinions isn’t quite the same.
Perhaps I need to give Mastodon another go despite not really enjoying microblog social media as a format in general (any recs for follows are greatly appreciated)
He links it at the end, life imitating art: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49817280
See here’s the thing - to get the ability to downvote / flag articles, you have to say stuff in public enough times to get the 200 (400?) karma to unlock that. Well, how do you get that karma? You say the things that people on that site want to hear so they click upvote. Spot the curricular bias problem? It was intentionally designed this way.
But “want to hear” on HN is sometimes just intelligent or interesting comments, not necessarily bias confirming…
I’m not sure there is a better way - all the user moderation approaches I’ve seen involve leaning on the regulars to spot stuff. The alternative is dedicated moderators which tends to lead to it’s own problems. I don’t think you want to rely on those who have just signed up as that would be open to abuse pretty quickly.
I always liked old slashdot. The meta moderation system applied to reddit like moderators would be an interesting experiment allowing the community to police the moderators…
deleted by creator
Lobsters manages an okay community (caveat: from what I’ve seen), but their lack of particularly strong rules or guidelines (just as with HN) don’t give me a ton of confidence in their ability to handle value conflict. Following, they don’t really state their community values anyway, which is something I find increasingly important.
Also with respect to the feedback cycles from hiding progressive comments that has been posed; I see a similar thing happening with these invite-only platforms. You are less likely to have diverse opinions and viewpoints from a userbase that largely grows only from the people in the same degree as existing users.
I’ve written about that last part before, and I’d like to stress that’s as neutral an appraisal I can proffer; I think for some communities that is an ideal model, but for many others it would be smothering.
I read both, though lobsters seems to have more useful content lately. I would like to join so I ask comment/ask questions, but don’t know anyone there to ask.
I can invite you if you DM me your email! I don’t use lobsters super often since I mainly use Lemmy but I do have an account there
I chat in their IRC chatroom occasionally but idk how to turn that into an invite like their about page says <.<
Couldn’t immediately find an RSS feed there, does it require an account?
Not sure how I found it, but the “top stories” feed is https://lobste.rs/top/rss
It does require an account with invitation to comment and upvote
Agree with all of this, but why then does the author stay on HN? It’s as with Xitter, at some point staying on the platform makes you complicit.
I don’t think he is on HN actually
I’d assume because there’s no alternative that’s good enough.
HN has its problems, but it’s still worthwhile if you can ignore the politics and focus on technical discussions.
Technical people ignoring the politics and focusing on technical discussions is like… the whole problem.
It’s funny and sad how many people that consider themselves apolitical and above the quarrels of the left and the right are completely oblivious to how they let the political devils pipeline bias straight into their brain.
And how people that consider themselves centrist seem to have a genuine hate against anything actually centrist. Centrism today is anything from market liberalism and rightwards straight into fascism it seems.
They use excuses like this:
The flagged comments given as examples are exactly the type I don’t want to see here. Not because they are wrong (they are not), but because they are boring, low-calorie declarations of obvious that add very little value to the topic at hand.
They see rhemselves as people who should only have to read what they deem as intellectual conversations.
And that stems from the HN rules.
It’s all designed to shut down progressives.
It’s quite common to reinforce the idea that they are just talking about objective truth while “the others” are being confused by emotions. While they are having a most agreeable circle jerk on right wing talking points wrapped in pandering to their ego.
Anoþer issue is defining what “political” topics are. Is AI a political topic? It’s certainly an eþical one, and as soon as someone politicizes it (“super intelligence”) it becomes one. Co-opting is also a problem for everyone: you used to be able to like red baseball caps wiþout making a political statement.
Lots of stuff is apolitical until someone makes it political. Omarchy is, I þink, a good example. I’m certain a lot of people liked and like it wiþouy agreeing wiþ DHH’s politics, and now feel conflicted about using it. I know I feel þat way about Framework, and Mullvad, alþough þose are more clear because if you’re giving þem money you’re only one degree from financially supporting people you may not want to.
Edit: to be clear, I’m not contradicting Drew’s position, nor am I implying HN is just talking about tech which has been politicized. I re-read my comment and it could easily be interpreted þat way. I agree wiþ Drew about HN; I was just considering it in context of my sites and projects, to which I’ve been adding “no JS” and “human written” banners - and wondering if I’m making a political or expressing an apolitical opinion about some technologies. I feel as if it’s þe latter.
Depends on when you read HN. Right now, I see a fierce debate about the evils of AI at the top. On the one hand there are folks defending AI and dreaming of the end of human labour, pointing at Wall-E as a utopia. On the other hand, there are others pointing out that the ultra-rich in the tech industry have openly expressed a desire to build a techno-feudalism with themselves living as kings, while the masses die in unemployed squalor.
Currently there is an interesting discussion of Georgism with 300+ comments. Not exactly a right wing subject…
Maybe not now, but noted right wing economist Milton Friedman was a supporter of LVT.
