3 ms·

I think about this a lot. Twitter and FB brought a lot of people to the internet who weren't exposed to cultural things like Rule 14 that I feel went a long wa

by wh-uws 6y ago

I think about this a lot. Twitter and FB brought a lot of people to the internet who weren't exposed to cultural things like Rule 14 that I feel went a long way to maintaining civility. They also normalized bringing your identity online. Back in the days i.e. when slashdot would have been HN everyone was anonymous. I feel like it made it easier to focus on ideas instead of the people saying them. Ah simpler times...

snakeboy 6y ago
It's a bit of a double-edged sword, no? In many contexts, having identity tied to your online profile should make people act more like humans and less like they're role-playing their anonymous internet troll persona.
- sowellecho 6y ago
  >>In many contexts, having identity tied to your online profile should make people act more like humans and less like they're role-playing their anonymous internet troll persona. This is only true if everyone agrees on facts. It is perfectly reasonable for people to get shocked by the other side's views if they do not disagree on the facts. When people are in fundamental disagreement with other viewpoints, I would say their behavior is often one angry message away from the anonymous troll personas. It is a very short fuse. A good example is the idea of the "cancel culture". Do you think it is a reality? Someone like Stefan Molyneux would say yes. Someone like AoC would say no. The person who thinks cancel culture is a real thing will say things which just seem completely idiotic to the other side, and vice versa. And they are still using real names. Using real names in fact becomes a liability if there is actually a cancel culture. So, for example, I am safer making this point anonymously. If I accidentally end up offending you, at least I don't have to worry about losing my job.
- zozbot234 6y ago
  > In many contexts, having identity tied to your online profile should make people act more like humans That's the point, isn't it? A person can be good or bad, but when you group people together via social media, you find out just how many of them are just terrible human beings. People acting like humans is exactly what you don't want to happen.
  - PedroBatista 6y ago
    So.. you want people to act like robots? The psychologists and drug companies would love that.
johnchristopher 6y ago
I don't buy it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September has been around two decades before Facebook and Twitter.
yetanta 6y ago
You may be looking back into the past with some rose color glasses. SD was not that good either. Its moderation system basically enforces first posting being the ones who got to control the conversation. So it encouraged camping so you could yell loudest. They added a 'troll' over on soylent. But that did nothing. It just gave people more ways to abuse each other. They even gave more people more mod points. Thinking that would fix things. But it still has the -1/5 problem SD has. The up/down system that hacker and reddit use has its own issues very similar to SD. Early ideas get the most attention late ones get nothing. Wisdom of the crowd sometimes works. But it also can create a negative feedback loop where bad ideas do pop to the top touted as good ones. One of the underlying issues is the use of text. Text is a terrible way of conveying conversational meaning. Which I personally think is how many people consume the internet. "oh that is a good idea" can have so many shades of meaning from "that is actually a really terrible idea lets never talk about that again" to "yes I 100 percent agree lets do that right now". In conversation depending on which word gets the inference the meaning changes. In my head I hear it one way. But you read it a different way and the next person reads it in a totally different way.
Larrikin 6y ago
4chan is a shining example of the outright failure of anonymity on the internet shines a light on the discussion. That concept just introduces people who will argue completely in bad faith, have their argument taken down eloquently by a new user not realizing what is going on, the that same troll will just post the argument again, constantly. Real names are absolutely not necessary for a good discussion but social and structural consequences are very important in removing trolls. HNs rule if allowing throwaway accounts for discussing sensitive content is a good thing, but I'd prefer some kind of linking to the main account to make it obvious that if you're making a green account you troll it will effect your main account as well.
- syshum 6y ago
  Facebook is a shining example of the outright failure of Real Names Policy on the internet. That concept just pushes people to extremes, and excludes moderate voices that will be canceled by all sides for having an opinion that is not exactly in alignment with either extreme Real Names polices that have been tried have also proven to do nothing to remove trolls at all, in fact the only thing that remains is shit string trolls and extremist that want to yell at each other after the shit stirring trolls rile them up It is concerning that I am seeing more and more people push for a resurgence of "Real Names" policies on the internet as a way to curb extremism and/or trolling even after it has been proven to do nothing of the sort

by wh-uws 6y ago

snakeboy 6y ago

It's a bit of a double-edged sword, no? In many contexts, having identity tied to your online profile should make people act more like humans and less like they're role-playing their anonymous internet troll persona.

sowellecho 6y ago
>>In many contexts, having identity tied to your online profile should make people act more like humans and less like they're role-playing their anonymous internet troll persona. This is only true if everyone agrees on facts. It is perfectly reasonable for people to get shocked by the other side's views if they do not disagree on the facts. When people are in fundamental disagreement with other viewpoints, I would say their behavior is often one angry message away from the anonymous troll personas. It is a very short fuse. A good example is the idea of the "cancel culture". Do you think it is a reality? Someone like Stefan Molyneux would say yes. Someone like AoC would say no. The person who thinks cancel culture is a real thing will say things which just seem completely idiotic to the other side, and vice versa. And they are still using real names. Using real names in fact becomes a liability if there is actually a cancel culture. So, for example, I am safer making this point anonymously. If I accidentally end up offending you, at least I don't have to worry about losing my job.
zozbot234 6y ago
> In many contexts, having identity tied to your online profile should make people act more like humans That's the point, isn't it? A person can be good or bad, but when you group people together via social media, you find out just how many of them are just terrible human beings. People acting like humans is exactly what you don't want to happen.
- PedroBatista 6y ago
  So.. you want people to act like robots? The psychologists and drug companies would love that.

johnchristopher 6y ago

I don't buy it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September has been around two decades before Facebook and Twitter.

yetanta 6y ago

You may be looking back into the past with some rose color glasses. SD was not that good either. Its moderation system basically enforces first posting being the ones who got to control the conversation. So it encouraged camping so you could yell loudest. They added a 'troll' over on soylent. But that did nothing. It just gave people more ways to abuse each other. They even gave more people more mod points. Thinking that would fix things. But it still has the -1/5 problem SD has. The up/down system that hacker and reddit use has its own issues very similar to SD. Early ideas get the most attention late ones get nothing. Wisdom of the crowd sometimes works. But it also can create a negative feedback loop where bad ideas do pop to the top touted as good ones. One of the underlying issues is the use of text. Text is a terrible way of conveying conversational meaning. Which I personally think is how many people consume the internet. "oh that is a good idea" can have so many shades of meaning from "that is actually a really terrible idea lets never talk about that again" to "yes I 100 percent agree lets do that right now". In conversation depending on which word gets the inference the meaning changes. In my head I hear it one way. But you read it a different way and the next person reads it in a totally different way.

Larrikin 6y ago

4chan is a shining example of the outright failure of anonymity on the internet shines a light on the discussion. That concept just introduces people who will argue completely in bad faith, have their argument taken down eloquently by a new user not realizing what is going on, the that same troll will just post the argument again, constantly. Real names are absolutely not necessary for a good discussion but social and structural consequences are very important in removing trolls. HNs rule if allowing throwaway accounts for discussing sensitive content is a good thing, but I'd prefer some kind of linking to the main account to make it obvious that if you're making a green account you troll it will effect your main account as well.

syshum 6y ago
Facebook is a shining example of the outright failure of Real Names Policy on the internet. That concept just pushes people to extremes, and excludes moderate voices that will be canceled by all sides for having an opinion that is not exactly in alignment with either extreme Real Names polices that have been tried have also proven to do nothing to remove trolls at all, in fact the only thing that remains is shit string trolls and extremist that want to yell at each other after the shit stirring trolls rile them up It is concerning that I am seeing more and more people push for a resurgence of "Real Names" policies on the internet as a way to curb extremism and/or trolling even after it has been proven to do nothing of the sort