3 ms·

> There may come a time when you could be jailed for what you wrote. What kind of stuff are your writing (about)?

raidicy 7y ago
This is the kind of question that would compel the grandparent to feel the way they do. Although, to me, it may be a bit of hyperbole. Or maybe some not completely unjustified paranoia. If we observe an example where we a step back from the severity of judicial repercussions of a post or comment and look at it socially. We could use the "cancel culture" ideology; where you could write something naively and be ambushed by a group that thinks your thoughts are wrong. I am also assuming Grandparent is in a western country. There are other parts of the world where you could have contributed to an online community and later have whatever subject it was about outlawed. Thus exemplifying gp's idea. And on a side note I felt cringey writing my response. Whatever that means.
- mistermann 7y ago
  > Although, to me, it may be a bit of hyperbole. Or maybe some not completely unjustified paranoia. "There may come a time when you could be jailed for what you wrote" certainly sounds hyperbolic, but then go back 20 years and imagine who then would have predicted the massive, high stakes (career and industry revenue wise) controversy over the manager of an NBA team making a comment about the freedom of Hong Kong. Or, who could have foreseen such an interesting combination of situations such as a comedian turned Democratic senator being forced to resign by colleagues over excessive freshness with ~7 or so women, combined with many of the same people's odd disinterest in a shadowy figure who is allegedly involved in fairly significant trafficking young girls to the rich and famous, who then proceeds to commit suicide under similarly odd circumstances. As they say, not only is the universe stranger than we think, it is stranger than we can think.
Nasrudith 7y ago
Anything can qualify since you don't get to decide that nor know what group of lunatics, demagogs, or extremists could get power. They could decide that not having over 50% of your content dedicated to their cause is treason. This isn't just some high minded hypothetical - people were been killed in China's Cultural Revolution because their objective innocous facts were interpetted as too "western" or some sort of coded subversion. They have a dubious successor in terms of willfully ignorant persecution in Boko Haram. There is the mocked concept of Roko's Basilisk as a new Age Pascal's Wager - than a hypothetical future AI singularity who punishes you for not leading to its existence. This is effectively the same sort of irrational punishment for what was literally unknowable - but worse as there are myraid competing ones.
6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
Many things we recognize as terrible now were recognized as okay years ago. People then were blind to it. I assume I have similar blindnesses (e.g. In some of my social circles, using blindness as a metaphor is considered ableist). I know my own opinions have shifted in recent years from things I used to consider cringey PC bullshit to "oh they were right on this one." I remember some jokes I thought were funny as a kid (ones I even repeated to friends) which I think are disgustingly offensive now. The scary part is that with such a strong digital record, people recorded as having now-bad opinions are being held to account all over the place. Sometimes they go viral and lose context, making them seem truly evil. They should be fired from whatever their job is today and shunned, apparently. Or elected prime minister of Canada. It's unpredictable.
- Jamwinner 7y ago
  Jokes being discustingly offensive is the point. Its a joke ffs. Taboo or inapproprite subects or viewpoints is one of the hallmarks of comedy. Unless the joke teller does so specifically to disparage people, Lighten up.
  - 6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
    I'm sorry that I seem to have offended you. Lighten up.

This is the kind of question that would compel the grandparent to feel the way they do. Although, to me, it may be a bit of hyperbole. Or maybe some not completely unjustified paranoia. If we observe an example where we a step back from the severity of judicial repercussions of a post or comment and look at it socially. We could use the "cancel culture" ideology; where you could write something naively and be ambushed by a group that thinks your thoughts are wrong. I am also assuming Grandparent is in a western country. There are other parts of the world where you could have contributed to an online community and later have whatever subject it was about outlawed. Thus exemplifying gp's idea. And on a side note I felt cringey writing my response. Whatever that means.

mistermann 7y ago
> Although, to me, it may be a bit of hyperbole. Or maybe some not completely unjustified paranoia. "There may come a time when you could be jailed for what you wrote" certainly sounds hyperbolic, but then go back 20 years and imagine who then would have predicted the massive, high stakes (career and industry revenue wise) controversy over the manager of an NBA team making a comment about the freedom of Hong Kong. Or, who could have foreseen such an interesting combination of situations such as a comedian turned Democratic senator being forced to resign by colleagues over excessive freshness with ~7 or so women, combined with many of the same people's odd disinterest in a shadowy figure who is allegedly involved in fairly significant trafficking young girls to the rich and famous, who then proceeds to commit suicide under similarly odd circumstances. As they say, not only is the universe stranger than we think, it is stranger than we can think.

Nasrudith 7y ago

Anything can qualify since you don't get to decide that nor know what group of lunatics, demagogs, or extremists could get power. They could decide that not having over 50% of your content dedicated to their cause is treason. This isn't just some high minded hypothetical - people were been killed in China's Cultural Revolution because their objective innocous facts were interpetted as too "western" or some sort of coded subversion. They have a dubious successor in terms of willfully ignorant persecution in Boko Haram. There is the mocked concept of Roko's Basilisk as a new Age Pascal's Wager - than a hypothetical future AI singularity who punishes you for not leading to its existence. This is effectively the same sort of irrational punishment for what was literally unknowable - but worse as there are myraid competing ones.

6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago

Many things we recognize as terrible now were recognized as okay years ago. People then were blind to it. I assume I have similar blindnesses (e.g. In some of my social circles, using blindness as a metaphor is considered ableist). I know my own opinions have shifted in recent years from things I used to consider cringey PC bullshit to "oh they were right on this one." I remember some jokes I thought were funny as a kid (ones I even repeated to friends) which I think are disgustingly offensive now. The scary part is that with such a strong digital record, people recorded as having now-bad opinions are being held to account all over the place. Sometimes they go viral and lose context, making them seem truly evil. They should be fired from whatever their job is today and shunned, apparently. Or elected prime minister of Canada. It's unpredictable.

Jamwinner 7y ago
Jokes being discustingly offensive is the point. Its a joke ffs. Taboo or inapproprite subects or viewpoints is one of the hallmarks of comedy. Unless the joke teller does so specifically to disparage people, Lighten up.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 7y ago
  I'm sorry that I seem to have offended you. Lighten up.