5 ms·

I agree it is not as bad as the DDR was, but it is way more decadent and that may end up being every bit as effective as a police state. No one wants to tip ove

by cmurf 7y ago

I agree it is not as bad as the DDR was, but it is way more decadent and that may end up being every bit as effective as a police state. No one wants to tip over this apple cart under some vague notion of ethics or actual equality - my goodness no, we want to keep on being entertained and to buy crap we don't need and have stuff. We have more attachment to stuff than we have to any sense of rights let alone normative behavior for leaders. It's a classist system of neo-feudalism and any attempt to moderate it is communism/socialism. Who needs a police state when most people believe the propaganda willingly and repeat it?

DoreenMichele 7y ago
I gave up my car more than a decade ago. I spent nearly six years homeless. I have lived in an SRO for about 18 months or so. Since getting divorced, I have mostly not owned a TV. I think I have been to one movie at a theater in the many years since my ex moved out. I'm aware it is a classist, sexist, racist system in many ways. I also seem to be the only woman to have ever spent time on the leaderboard of Hacker News. I hit the board under my original handle of Mz about a month or so after finally getting off the street, so a lot of the upvotes that got me to the leaderboard were gotten during the years I was homeless. I bitch regularly about the classism and sexism both in the world and on HN. But I'm not really the right person to aim your remark at. Because if you imagine you are "talking about me," then you have absolutely no idea whatsoever who the hell I am.
- coldtea 7y ago
  >Because if you imagine you are "talking about me," then you have absolutely no idea whatsoever who the hell I am. Making a point in a discussion is not about the personal circumstances of the one we're talking to. Doubly so if they're an outlier, and triply so if we don't know their circumstances to begin with, because the discussion happens in an online forum.
  - DoreenMichele 7y ago
    A. I made that inference based on the framing of the remark, not based on straight up stupidity. B. Plenty of people here know plenty about my circumstances. I know because they routinely use that against me. So it is not unreasonable on my part to assume some people here do have some idea who I am and what I'm about. I was, in fact, very recently told I'm full of shit if I assume they don't: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19776469 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19776469
    - coldtea 7y ago
      Well, I for one, never even knew the backstory. I wouldn't assume most do. Could be a few that have grievances against you or something. I've noticed that some people, on online forums, get an obsession with another they had a dispute with (and felt wronged or whatever), and follow them from post to post, gather intelligence, and act like stalkers. Then again, some people are cuckoo with no personal lives and compensate in all kinds of bizarro ways online. Best to ignore those kind of people...
      - DoreenMichele 7y ago
        I'm not assuming most do. I would thank you to stop trying to police my participation here. You have something of a history of treating me like an idiot. If you want to engage some point I've made in a good faith manner: awesome. If you want to continue your pattern of talking at me like I have no fucking clue how public discourse on HN works, please stop doing that. I view it as a form of harassment. If you are not consciously aware of doing that, well, consider yourself notified that I have noticed a pattern of behavior here and it's something I don't like and don't want done to me. And if you are suggesting I simply "ignore" jacquesm, I assure you I've tried. He's impossible to ignore. He's extremely influential here.
        coldtea 7y ago
        >I would thank you to stop trying to police my participation here. I'm not policing anyone, I'm offering my opinion. Likewise, I would thank you to stop being paranoid, and either respond to what I said or ignore it. Not respond on some imagined "intentions". >You have something of a history of treating me like an idiot. Actually, I have absolutely no recollection of who you are, and of having treated you like anything. I don't even remember the name "DoreenMichele" or having had a history of discussing with you, or whatever. If I indeed have a history of treating you like an idiot, it's not because I go out of my way to treat that particular username (which I don't recognize and don't follow across threads) as an idiot. It's either because I treat almost everybody like an idiot (which I might tend to), or because your individual (non-connected as belonging to a single person to me) comments over threads pushed the same kind of buttons on my responses (e.g. because you tend to make comments that I tend to disagree with and respond in a certain way to). In any case, I don't go around keeping tabs. For most people I talk with on HN, I only ever remember the names/opinions of a few frequenter commenters which tend to commend often and on the same things so end up as identifiable, e.g. pjmlp has a soft spot for older languages, research compilers and so on, dang is one of the moderators, tcpatec is a security boffin, and so on. I only recognize as specific people on HN something like 10 persons or so, the majority are just opaque aliases that tell me nothing when I see them, even if I have engaged in threads with them at various times. >If you are not consciously aware of doing that, well, consider yourself notified that I have noticed a pattern of behavior here and it's something I don't like and don't want done to me. Well, the problem is I seldom ever check who I respond to. I mostly check what's written in their comment and whether it triggers a "somebody is wrong on the internet" / "I must respond to this" sentiment. I might glance at their username, but in most cases I wouldn't even remember it. I could do some effort to check for your name and not respond in the future. In fact, if there's something like "block" I could use that and spare us the drama.

by cmurf 7y ago

DoreenMichele 7y ago

I gave up my car more than a decade ago. I spent nearly six years homeless. I have lived in an SRO for about 18 months or so. Since getting divorced, I have mostly not owned a TV. I think I have been to one movie at a theater in the many years since my ex moved out. I'm aware it is a classist, sexist, racist system in many ways. I also seem to be the only woman to have ever spent time on the leaderboard of Hacker News. I hit the board under my original handle of Mz about a month or so after finally getting off the street, so a lot of the upvotes that got me to the leaderboard were gotten during the years I was homeless. I bitch regularly about the classism and sexism both in the world and on HN. But I'm not really the right person to aim your remark at. Because if you imagine you are "talking about me," then you have absolutely no idea whatsoever who the hell I am.

coldtea 7y ago
>Because if you imagine you are "talking about me," then you have absolutely no idea whatsoever who the hell I am. Making a point in a discussion is not about the personal circumstances of the one we're talking to. Doubly so if they're an outlier, and triply so if we don't know their circumstances to begin with, because the discussion happens in an online forum.
- DoreenMichele 7y ago
  A. I made that inference based on the framing of the remark, not based on straight up stupidity. B. Plenty of people here know plenty about my circumstances. I know because they routinely use that against me. So it is not unreasonable on my part to assume some people here do have some idea who I am and what I'm about. I was, in fact, very recently told I'm full of shit if I assume they don't: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19776469 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19776469
  - coldtea 7y ago
    Well, I for one, never even knew the backstory. I wouldn't assume most do. Could be a few that have grievances against you or something. I've noticed that some people, on online forums, get an obsession with another they had a dispute with (and felt wronged or whatever), and follow them from post to post, gather intelligence, and act like stalkers. Then again, some people are cuckoo with no personal lives and compensate in all kinds of bizarro ways online. Best to ignore those kind of people...
    - DoreenMichele 7y ago
      I'm not assuming most do. I would thank you to stop trying to police my participation here. You have something of a history of treating me like an idiot. If you want to engage some point I've made in a good faith manner: awesome. If you want to continue your pattern of talking at me like I have no fucking clue how public discourse on HN works, please stop doing that. I view it as a form of harassment. If you are not consciously aware of doing that, well, consider yourself notified that I have noticed a pattern of behavior here and it's something I don't like and don't want done to me. And if you are suggesting I simply "ignore" jacquesm, I assure you I've tried. He's impossible to ignore. He's extremely influential here.
      - coldtea 7y ago
        >I would thank you to stop trying to police my participation here. I'm not policing anyone, I'm offering my opinion. Likewise, I would thank you to stop being paranoid, and either respond to what I said or ignore it. Not respond on some imagined "intentions". >You have something of a history of treating me like an idiot. Actually, I have absolutely no recollection of who you are, and of having treated you like anything. I don't even remember the name "DoreenMichele" or having had a history of discussing with you, or whatever. If I indeed have a history of treating you like an idiot, it's not because I go out of my way to treat that particular username (which I don't recognize and don't follow across threads) as an idiot. It's either because I treat almost everybody like an idiot (which I might tend to), or because your individual (non-connected as belonging to a single person to me) comments over threads pushed the same kind of buttons on my responses (e.g. because you tend to make comments that I tend to disagree with and respond in a certain way to). In any case, I don't go around keeping tabs. For most people I talk with on HN, I only ever remember the names/opinions of a few frequenter commenters which tend to commend often and on the same things so end up as identifiable, e.g. pjmlp has a soft spot for older languages, research compilers and so on, dang is one of the moderators, tcpatec is a security boffin, and so on. I only recognize as specific people on HN something like 10 persons or so, the majority are just opaque aliases that tell me nothing when I see them, even if I have engaged in threads with them at various times. >If you are not consciously aware of doing that, well, consider yourself notified that I have noticed a pattern of behavior here and it's something I don't like and don't want done to me. Well, the problem is I seldom ever check who I respond to. I mostly check what's written in their comment and whether it triggers a "somebody is wrong on the internet" / "I must respond to this" sentiment. I might glance at their username, but in most cases I wouldn't even remember it. I could do some effort to check for your name and not respond in the future. In fact, if there's something like "block" I could use that and spare us the drama.