4 ms·

The barrier of entry for someone to go and write counter-productive / aggressive / abrasive comments online is very low now. In the past you had to have half a

by keyle 7y ago

The barrier of entry for someone to go and write counter-productive / aggressive / abrasive comments online is very low now. In the past you had to have half a brain to even be online. I don't mean internet connection wise, I mean to set it up and find stuff. What scares me the most is "justice by social media". People felt wrong doing against them burning torches and calling for pitchforks online, instead of getting a lawyer and getting justice. It's a lot easier, but it then snowballs into a raging fury of everyone strongly or mildly related to the issue chiming in, demanding justice. Then is justice served? no.

ohyeshedid 7y ago
"...but it then snowballs into a raging fury of everyone strongly or mildly related to the issue chiming in, demanding justice." I think mobs often mistake vengeance for justice.
- dymk 7y ago
  Your average individual mistakes vengeance for justice. Read almost any thread in r/AmItheAsshole. The top comments will be the most vindictive, knee-jerk-y reaction you'll ever see.
  - maxheadroom 7y ago
    >Your average individual mistakes vengeance for justice. I think it's far graver than that, sadly: A cacophony of kangaroo courts, all yelling into echo chambers. Worse, though, is the failure to delineate between an individual's actions and those who have nothing to do with the 'x' thing in question. More egregiously, as a result of that aforementioned failure, even family members of those "suspected" for 'x' thing are ripe targets for abuse; which is entirely ignoring the premise that the individual in question could ultimately be innocent, in the end[0]. It seems that this group of individuals (en masse) demands its pound of flesh and its going to get it, no matter who it comes from. I'd say that's far worse than simply mistaking vengeance for justice. [0] - https://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-falsely-accuses-sunil-tripathi-of-boston-bombing-2013-7?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-falsely-accuses-sunil...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
0xADEADBEE 7y ago
I agree with the second point emphatically. I enjoy that the barrier to entry with places like IRC are higher because it's directly correlated with the quality of discussion, in my experience at least. Regarding the other points, we may well look back at things like Myspace as Halcyon days of somewhat pure Social Media usage. It's a pity we can't still have a social media platform that isn't mined to hell for analytics, ads and GPS stalking but it seems that the tide is turning and people in the Western world are getting over the hype cycle and caring less about being a part of it. Tellingly I had cause to listen to a focus group this week that had privacy concerns about Facebook; before then I assumed it was only the HN crowd who thought that! I look forward to the next 5 years in tech but if I were to lay odds, I wouldn't bet on Facebook weathering well.
- chronogram 7y ago
  > I enjoy that the barrier to entry with places like IRC are higher because it's directly correlated with the quality of discussion, in my experience at least. Opposite experience here. Examples: the #archlinux channel on Freenode I had on autojoin for ages but never saw that higher quality discussion there. The #Fedora channel is pretty good but not so much chatting there. Last I used IRC was over a year ago, so maybe things changed.
  - cbm-vic-20 7y ago
    Unfortunately, a lot of people have been switching over to using Discord, and that's splitting up a lot of the IRC community who doesn't want to move to a closed, corporate controlled system.
    - chronogram 7y ago
      It was not the quantity, it was the quality of especially the arch channel. But it is understandable that people move away from IRC, since, let’s be honest it’s not something you’d want to start with nowadays. Discord isn’t great, but it is easy and there doesn’t seem to be much in the way of alternatives.
ethbro 7y ago
> In the past you had to have half a brain to even be online https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September
barry-cotter 7y ago
The internet used to be the preserve of people with money or a real desire to be on the internet, which either meant a desire to engage with ideas or later, a desire for variety in porn they couldn’t satisfy offline. Money and intellectualism both select for more highly educated populations. > And if the Anglophone internet is ::gestures:: like this now maybe it’s cause it’s less of a professional-class preserve? The dividing line maybe being smartphones where “people on the internet” went from “people who specifically spend $X/mo on it as luxury” to “people with telephone service”? That’s a real possibility, that for all the “Global Village” stuff the wondrous effect of the ‘90s internet was to create a cultural space that was MORE gatekept by wealth and education. > That’s… kind of depressing, though. “Haha you thought the world was getting better because you were eliminating elitist barriers but actually it’s cause you were making them higher, which is good because the poor and non-elite are disproportionately idiots with worthless ideas and to the extent they’re on top of things the thing they’re on top of is undermining the basis of a good society, and anyway those times were a phenomenon of a narrow early adopter base and you’ll never ever get them back unless you make the non-elite economically and politically irrelevant.” Depressing but very well precedented, that’s exactly the arc newsprint, radio, and TV followed before. https://kontextmaschine.tumblr.com/post/185164859368/your-granddad-on-the-internet https://kontextmaschine.tumblr.com/post/185164859368/your-gr...
skohan 7y ago
> What scares me the most is "justice by social media". I think a big part of the problem is that somewhere along the line "real world" entities started to capitulate to the demands of social media mobs. Like there was that case of the young woman who made a joke in poor taste to her dozen twitter followers on a trip to Africa, and somehow it blew up into a front-page story on traditional media and I believe she was fired from her job. Her employer, and indeed all of us, could choose not to react to this kind of outrage storm, and then it would have no consequences besides perhaps some passing embarrassment until the internet chooses to move on to something else. Social media only has power because we give it power.

by keyle 7y ago

ohyeshedid 7y ago

"...but it then snowballs into a raging fury of everyone strongly or mildly related to the issue chiming in, demanding justice." I think mobs often mistake vengeance for justice.

dymk 7y ago
Your average individual mistakes vengeance for justice. Read almost any thread in r/AmItheAsshole. The top comments will be the most vindictive, knee-jerk-y reaction you'll ever see.
- maxheadroom 7y ago
  >Your average individual mistakes vengeance for justice. I think it's far graver than that, sadly: A cacophony of kangaroo courts, all yelling into echo chambers. Worse, though, is the failure to delineate between an individual's actions and those who have nothing to do with the 'x' thing in question. More egregiously, as a result of that aforementioned failure, even family members of those "suspected" for 'x' thing are ripe targets for abuse; which is entirely ignoring the premise that the individual in question could ultimately be innocent, in the end[0]. It seems that this group of individuals (en masse) demands its pound of flesh and its going to get it, no matter who it comes from. I'd say that's far worse than simply mistaking vengeance for justice. [0] - https://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-falsely-accuses-sunil-tripathi-of-boston-bombing-2013-7?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/reddit-falsely-accuses-sunil...

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

0xADEADBEE 7y ago

I agree with the second point emphatically. I enjoy that the barrier to entry with places like IRC are higher because it's directly correlated with the quality of discussion, in my experience at least. Regarding the other points, we may well look back at things like Myspace as Halcyon days of somewhat pure Social Media usage. It's a pity we can't still have a social media platform that isn't mined to hell for analytics, ads and GPS stalking but it seems that the tide is turning and people in the Western world are getting over the hype cycle and caring less about being a part of it. Tellingly I had cause to listen to a focus group this week that had privacy concerns about Facebook; before then I assumed it was only the HN crowd who thought that! I look forward to the next 5 years in tech but if I were to lay odds, I wouldn't bet on Facebook weathering well.

chronogram 7y ago
> I enjoy that the barrier to entry with places like IRC are higher because it's directly correlated with the quality of discussion, in my experience at least. Opposite experience here. Examples: the #archlinux channel on Freenode I had on autojoin for ages but never saw that higher quality discussion there. The #Fedora channel is pretty good but not so much chatting there. Last I used IRC was over a year ago, so maybe things changed.
- cbm-vic-20 7y ago
  Unfortunately, a lot of people have been switching over to using Discord, and that's splitting up a lot of the IRC community who doesn't want to move to a closed, corporate controlled system.
  - chronogram 7y ago
    It was not the quantity, it was the quality of especially the arch channel. But it is understandable that people move away from IRC, since, let’s be honest it’s not something you’d want to start with nowadays. Discord isn’t great, but it is easy and there doesn’t seem to be much in the way of alternatives.

ethbro 7y ago

> In the past you had to have half a brain to even be online https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September

barry-cotter 7y ago

The internet used to be the preserve of people with money or a real desire to be on the internet, which either meant a desire to engage with ideas or later, a desire for variety in porn they couldn’t satisfy offline. Money and intellectualism both select for more highly educated populations. > And if the Anglophone internet is ::gestures:: like this now maybe it’s cause it’s less of a professional-class preserve? The dividing line maybe being smartphones where “people on the internet” went from “people who specifically spend $X/mo on it as luxury” to “people with telephone service”? That’s a real possibility, that for all the “Global Village” stuff the wondrous effect of the ‘90s internet was to create a cultural space that was MORE gatekept by wealth and education. > That’s… kind of depressing, though. “Haha you thought the world was getting better because you were eliminating elitist barriers but actually it’s cause you were making them higher, which is good because the poor and non-elite are disproportionately idiots with worthless ideas and to the extent they’re on top of things the thing they’re on top of is undermining the basis of a good society, and anyway those times were a phenomenon of a narrow early adopter base and you’ll never ever get them back unless you make the non-elite economically and politically irrelevant.” Depressing but very well precedented, that’s exactly the arc newsprint, radio, and TV followed before. https://kontextmaschine.tumblr.com/post/185164859368/your-granddad-on-the-internet https://kontextmaschine.tumblr.com/post/185164859368/your-gr...

skohan 7y ago

> What scares me the most is "justice by social media". I think a big part of the problem is that somewhere along the line "real world" entities started to capitulate to the demands of social media mobs. Like there was that case of the young woman who made a joke in poor taste to her dozen twitter followers on a trip to Africa, and somehow it blew up into a front-page story on traditional media and I believe she was fired from her job. Her employer, and indeed all of us, could choose not to react to this kind of outrage storm, and then it would have no consequences besides perhaps some passing embarrassment until the internet chooses to move on to something else. Social media only has power because we give it power.