5 ms·

I hate Facebook as much as anyone here on HN, but the enemy of my enemy is my friend. If keeping end-to-end-encryption also happens to be in the interest of so

I hate Facebook as much as anyone here on HN, but the enemy of my enemy is my friend. If keeping end-to-end-encryption also happens to be in the interest of some faceless multinational corporation, we can use their resources in this fight. We can go back to fighting Facebook once this is over.

wizzwizz4 5y ago
Facebook's big enough that we don't even have to stop fighting them while we support them in this endeavour.
- capableweb 5y ago
  This is something I don't understand that continues to happen in politics, technology and many other facets of life. Why do you have to either fully support or fully be against a entity? You can selectively like some things someone does while not liking other things they do, same goes for corporations. You also don't have to justify bad things by listing good things they've also done, you can just like the good thing and hate the bad thing. People are so black and white. Don't think it's a new thing, but the internet has made it very popular to be black and white in our thinking.
  - Ellipse0934 5y ago
    Most political systems tend to converge into a two-party system. I think the internet has made people more vocal but access to opposing and nuanced viewpoints has made a lot of people grey. I know that's the case for me, not sure if it encapsulates the majority.
    - Koenvh 5y ago
      Do you have a source for that? Coming from a country where there are 16 different parties in parliament (the Netherlands), neighboured by two countries which each have at least five parties in parliament (Belgium and Germany), I find that statement difficult to believe.
      - edgyquant 5y ago
        To be fair the Netherlands is a unique republic dating back so far that even Louis XIV complained that any opinion held is represented in The Hague. https://www.jstor.org/stable/439669?seq=1 https://www.jstor.org/stable/439669?seq=1
        GekkePrutser 5y ago
        I think that's the whole point of democracy though. That our chosen representatives actually represent us. Rather than their corporate donors.
    - Koenvh 5y ago
      Do you have a source for that? Most of Western Europe has more than two parties in parliament, thus I find that hard to believe.
      - MomoXenosaga 5y ago
        Yes this is more a "British Empire" thing. See Australia, Canada, India etc. They copied the English political system.
        GekkePrutser 5y ago
        Yeah new Zealand dropped first past the post in the 70s and has a decidedly better political climate for it
    - baby 5y ago
      Rank choice voting would definitely change that
    - armagon 5y ago
      Widely used voting systems converge on two parties. The worst offender is the first-past-the-post system. Instant-run-off voting is better, but still converges on two parties. Wish I had a good citation for you, but I do have an try-it-yourself guide on voting systems to link to: https://ncase.me/ballot/ https://ncase.me/ballot/
      - valarauko 5y ago
        India has FPTP as well, where the tendency has usually been in the opposite direction - splitting parties.
  - mattgreenrocks 5y ago
    > People are so black and white The social benefits of this type of thinking are too big to ignore for many people. You get to be a part of a group. (I'm going to skip any hand-wavey allusions to evolutionary psych because they don't really add much.) I get the appeal. I'm just not always one of them. I'm sure I'm black and white on some things, but I always joke that my teamwork/togetherness gene is busted for the most part.
  - eptcyka 5y ago
    In my humble opinion, this is partly why most modern democracies have reduced themselves into two party theater. Much more time is spent arguing optics and deciding who's truly the scotsman in the current crop of leaders than what policies are best suited to achieve goals the electorate might be interested in reaching.
    - jean_tta 5y ago
      Is it "most" or is it UKUSA? France is not a two party theater and suffers from the same thing. Germany is not a two party theater and suffers from the same thing.
      - Zababa 5y ago
        > France is not a two party theater and suffers from the same thing. France was for a long time until recently though, the current situation is the exception.
        jean_tta 5y ago
        When? In 2012, when the top two candidates have ~50% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10%? In 2007, when the top two candidates have ~50% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10% (note: note the same parties)? In 2002, when the top two candidates have ~35% of the votes and the loss of the leading left wing candidate was blamed on too many different left wing parties fielding candidates and getting votes? In 2002, when the top two candidates have ~45% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10%? Same thing for 1995, 1988, 1981. In the last US presidential election, the top two candidates got a combined 98.17% of votes. The next candidate got 1.18%. This is a completely different situation.
        Zababa 5y ago
        Apart from 2002 and 2017, all the elections have been the incarnation at that time of the PS vs the incarnation at that time of the UMP.
    - 5y ago
amelius 5y ago
Or just use other tools for communication.
bidirectional 5y ago
I also dislike and don't trust Facebook, but I agree. I often have to remind myself that Facebook are just a business with dubious practices. They're not some evil entity hellbent on destroying privacy in every shape or form.
pmontra 5y ago
> the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I don't want to get into who's your enemy and your enemy's enemy and why, but in general the enemy of you enemy is only the enemy of your enemy. It can be your enemy too. Lighthearted example: any competitive game between 3 or more players. There might be occasional alliances but everybody is the enemy of everybody else.
- edgyquant 5y ago
  The idea is that you can both defeat the common enemy leaving only one fight afterwards. It doesn’t mean you’re actually bffs with the enemy of your enemy
- coolspot 5y ago
  In any competitive game, if you’re ranked as #2 player, but you can join forces with player ranked #3 to eliminate player ranked #1, your best course of action is do that. After player #1 is defeated, you have a good chance to defeat player #3 (because you’re #2, meaning you’re better player). Player #3 joins this campaign in hope to defeat you, but also because they can get whatever second place gives.

wizzwizz4 5y ago

Facebook's big enough that we don't even have to stop fighting them while we support them in this endeavour.

capableweb 5y ago
This is something I don't understand that continues to happen in politics, technology and many other facets of life. Why do you have to either fully support or fully be against a entity? You can selectively like some things someone does while not liking other things they do, same goes for corporations. You also don't have to justify bad things by listing good things they've also done, you can just like the good thing and hate the bad thing. People are so black and white. Don't think it's a new thing, but the internet has made it very popular to be black and white in our thinking.
- Ellipse0934 5y ago
  Most political systems tend to converge into a two-party system. I think the internet has made people more vocal but access to opposing and nuanced viewpoints has made a lot of people grey. I know that's the case for me, not sure if it encapsulates the majority.
  - Koenvh 5y ago
    Do you have a source for that? Coming from a country where there are 16 different parties in parliament (the Netherlands), neighboured by two countries which each have at least five parties in parliament (Belgium and Germany), I find that statement difficult to believe.
    - edgyquant 5y ago
      To be fair the Netherlands is a unique republic dating back so far that even Louis XIV complained that any opinion held is represented in The Hague. https://www.jstor.org/stable/439669?seq=1 https://www.jstor.org/stable/439669?seq=1
      - GekkePrutser 5y ago
        I think that's the whole point of democracy though. That our chosen representatives actually represent us. Rather than their corporate donors.
  - Koenvh 5y ago
    Do you have a source for that? Most of Western Europe has more than two parties in parliament, thus I find that hard to believe.
    - MomoXenosaga 5y ago
      Yes this is more a "British Empire" thing. See Australia, Canada, India etc. They copied the English political system.
      - GekkePrutser 5y ago
        Yeah new Zealand dropped first past the post in the 70s and has a decidedly better political climate for it
  - baby 5y ago
    Rank choice voting would definitely change that
  - armagon 5y ago
    Widely used voting systems converge on two parties. The worst offender is the first-past-the-post system. Instant-run-off voting is better, but still converges on two parties. Wish I had a good citation for you, but I do have an try-it-yourself guide on voting systems to link to: https://ncase.me/ballot/ https://ncase.me/ballot/
    - valarauko 5y ago
      India has FPTP as well, where the tendency has usually been in the opposite direction - splitting parties.
- mattgreenrocks 5y ago
  > People are so black and white The social benefits of this type of thinking are too big to ignore for many people. You get to be a part of a group. (I'm going to skip any hand-wavey allusions to evolutionary psych because they don't really add much.) I get the appeal. I'm just not always one of them. I'm sure I'm black and white on some things, but I always joke that my teamwork/togetherness gene is busted for the most part.
- eptcyka 5y ago
  In my humble opinion, this is partly why most modern democracies have reduced themselves into two party theater. Much more time is spent arguing optics and deciding who's truly the scotsman in the current crop of leaders than what policies are best suited to achieve goals the electorate might be interested in reaching.
  - jean_tta 5y ago
    Is it "most" or is it UKUSA? France is not a two party theater and suffers from the same thing. Germany is not a two party theater and suffers from the same thing.
    - Zababa 5y ago
      > France is not a two party theater and suffers from the same thing. France was for a long time until recently though, the current situation is the exception.
      - jean_tta 5y ago
        When? In 2012, when the top two candidates have ~50% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10%? In 2007, when the top two candidates have ~50% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10% (note: note the same parties)? In 2002, when the top two candidates have ~35% of the votes and the loss of the leading left wing candidate was blamed on too many different left wing parties fielding candidates and getting votes? In 2002, when the top two candidates have ~45% of the votes & four candidates total are above 10%? Same thing for 1995, 1988, 1981. In the last US presidential election, the top two candidates got a combined 98.17% of votes. The next candidate got 1.18%. This is a completely different situation.
        Zababa 5y ago
        Apart from 2002 and 2017, all the elections have been the incarnation at that time of the PS vs the incarnation at that time of the UMP.
  - 5y ago

amelius 5y ago

Or just use other tools for communication.

bidirectional 5y ago

I also dislike and don't trust Facebook, but I agree. I often have to remind myself that Facebook are just a business with dubious practices. They're not some evil entity hellbent on destroying privacy in every shape or form.

pmontra 5y ago

> the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I don't want to get into who's your enemy and your enemy's enemy and why, but in general the enemy of you enemy is only the enemy of your enemy. It can be your enemy too. Lighthearted example: any competitive game between 3 or more players. There might be occasional alliances but everybody is the enemy of everybody else.

edgyquant 5y ago
The idea is that you can both defeat the common enemy leaving only one fight afterwards. It doesn’t mean you’re actually bffs with the enemy of your enemy
coolspot 5y ago
In any competitive game, if you’re ranked as #2 player, but you can join forces with player ranked #3 to eliminate player ranked #1, your best course of action is do that. After player #1 is defeated, you have a good chance to defeat player #3 (because you’re #2, meaning you’re better player). Player #3 joins this campaign in hope to defeat you, but also because they can get whatever second place gives.