4 ms·

And this, I think, is where our perceptions differ: I do not categorize the above as "shallowly interesting" I see the current political climate as something

And this, I think, is where our perceptions differ: I do not categorize the above as "shallowly interesting" I see the current political climate as something we will look back and read textbooks about. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm just another "doomsaying kid these days", but it seems unrealistically utopian to suggest that tech can exist in isolation of the politics around it. Your own rules, "unless evidence of some new phenomena", I would CERTAINLY categorize many of the current administrations choices under that bracket, and that's why I often find myself disagreeing with some of these flags. (SOME, not all, for sure, but this article in particular was "something new" from my perceptions over the last 30 odd years) I can only speak for myself on this last bit, but as a member of the community, I'm far more OK with an occasional focus on these outliers than some of the other changes I've seen to HN over the last 5~ years. (to give a concrete example, off topic jokes/flamewars/ad hominems/"hive mind" responses seem much more prevelent, and THAT I think presents far greater risk to "shifting principles" than being aware of politics that truly do affect our tech community. You seem to acknowlege this in a post below, "intensity of politics", my argument would be that this is a symptom, where the cause is that the root politics are shifting as well, and this underlying trend is what I want to focus on. I'd be all for quelling the "intensity" to look at things analytically, if such a thing is possible.)

dang 9y ago
Sure it will be written about that way in the future. That doesn't make the mud wrestling of the moment good for intellectually curious discussion. Nobody here thinks silly things like "tech can exist in isolation". If you think of this issue in those terms you're likely to miss the important things about HN. This place is an experiment in escaping the life cycle of internet forums. One way for that to fail is for the experimenters to lose focus and forget what they were trying for.
- existencebox 9y ago
  While your points are sound, and I can't argue on that basis, I would hold up another "noble experiment" which, for being too forceful in its idealism, lost the ability to change with the times when such changes were necessary to maintain power and relevance. (Yes I realize I'm making a HUGE jump here by bringing prohibition into the discussion, it's a rather handwavy/subjective argument, and as such I can't really expect a change from it, but it's still one that weighs on my mind) Simply put, I worry about the pitfalls of idealistic purity and isolation. Your statement of "can't give the community capacities it doesn't have" is fair, if disappointing. Perhaps I'd take a slightly more optimistic spin, that even during the "week politics experiment" I _did_ see corners of good discussion even if the net did devolve, and I might have a more holistic view of trying to encourage those discussions for key issues, but that's not my role at this point. I mostly argue this for that I would be _embarrassed_ for the tech community if we were not both informed and active within the political climate that so spawns all this trouble. I understand this may not be HNs place, and perhaps my desperation comes from not knowing what another place would be. We escape from normal media to come here; but do we run the risk of creating our own bubble, removing ourselves from being active participants opposing even the most egregious shifts of principle? At this point I'm just waxing philosophical. I don't expect you to change your policies, and I'm frankly content/thankful that you even took the time to justify yourself rationally.

dang 9y ago

Sure it will be written about that way in the future. That doesn't make the mud wrestling of the moment good for intellectually curious discussion. Nobody here thinks silly things like "tech can exist in isolation". If you think of this issue in those terms you're likely to miss the important things about HN. This place is an experiment in escaping the life cycle of internet forums. One way for that to fail is for the experimenters to lose focus and forget what they were trying for.

existencebox 9y ago
While your points are sound, and I can't argue on that basis, I would hold up another "noble experiment" which, for being too forceful in its idealism, lost the ability to change with the times when such changes were necessary to maintain power and relevance. (Yes I realize I'm making a HUGE jump here by bringing prohibition into the discussion, it's a rather handwavy/subjective argument, and as such I can't really expect a change from it, but it's still one that weighs on my mind) Simply put, I worry about the pitfalls of idealistic purity and isolation. Your statement of "can't give the community capacities it doesn't have" is fair, if disappointing. Perhaps I'd take a slightly more optimistic spin, that even during the "week politics experiment" I _did_ see corners of good discussion even if the net did devolve, and I might have a more holistic view of trying to encourage those discussions for key issues, but that's not my role at this point. I mostly argue this for that I would be _embarrassed_ for the tech community if we were not both informed and active within the political climate that so spawns all this trouble. I understand this may not be HNs place, and perhaps my desperation comes from not knowing what another place would be. We escape from normal media to come here; but do we run the risk of creating our own bubble, removing ourselves from being active participants opposing even the most egregious shifts of principle? At this point I'm just waxing philosophical. I don't expect you to change your policies, and I'm frankly content/thankful that you even took the time to justify yourself rationally.