3 ms·

Let's see: - Google: monopolistic tendencies, decline of their search engine, copyright troubles for youtubers, overall bad execution with their projects recen

Let's see: - Google: monopolistic tendencies, decline of their search engine, copyright troubles for youtubers, overall bad execution with their projects recently. - iot: really bad security and privacy, otherwise it would be neat. - modern websites: gauntlet of cookie banners and modals, ads and surveillance are criticized, page weight often silly, but the capabilities of modern websites are generally appreciated here. - crypto: enables ransomware and other crime, insane energy use, bad track record of ponzi schemes and hacked services, speculation vehicle with few winners, not generally used/usable for real payments; blockchain-based services not feasible (oracle problem, if possible then killer apps would have appeared, a Hello World program requires mining and melts your CPU, etc.) Did I sum up HN's sentiment correctly? Could you point out where the lack of self awareness lies?

fleddr 5y ago
Yes, I could. You just did it, as did the 3 other replies. You double down and confirm my point. Like I said, I see the humor in it. It's culture. Every forum has a culture. That's why you came to the defense, even in absence of an attack. I know I won't change that, but I do want to explain my counter point by means of an example. You have absolutely no idea how deeply I hate Google. I could write books full of it. Yet I will still not fall in the trap of an absolute closed mind or simplistic binary rejection. Same for crypto and for anything large and impactful. It's a hard thing to do these days, to be a technologist for technology sake, and to cleanly separate it from the maker's reputation, personal politics, and so on. Very few things in life can be sorted into good or bad. So when you have topics that are close to taboo, yes, I do think that's odd.
- UweSchmidt 5y ago
  I tried to present the arguments around here in a nuanced way. I don't think that there is much of a closed mind or a simplistic binary rejection, or a taboo, on technical topics here on HN. The onus is on crypto boosters (who are usually invested and would benefit from more hype) to present better arguments and demonstrate the general benefit/feasability of crypto.
  - fleddr 5y ago
    You don't think there's a closed mind because you're never on that other side. So you likely never experience it. Yes, there are self-serving crypto maximalists. But even if you add nuance, you get downvoted and standard replies debunked years ago. Doesn't matter what you say, the arguments aren't even heard. That's absolute closed mindedness. And the quality of many of those replies shows how extremely little those people know about it at all. A massive problem? No. But I'm just telling you it does exist.
- Karrot_Kream 5y ago
  Shrug it's happening throughout technical circles, at least in the English-speaking world. It's one thing to try to push back against politics that you feel are harmful and disenfranchising, in purely political or social forums. It's another when technology forums develop taboos on what technology you can and cannot discuss. I agree it's cultural, but folks who are immersed in the culture don't seem to be willing to call it that. I'm really looking forward for this to be "over" so that the internet can have nuanced discussions about technology again.
  - fleddr 5y ago
    I know what you mean. I suppressed that reasoning in my other comments as it tends to make things worse, but I might as well spit it out: it's US culture. The US has always had a binary culture: winner/loser. Democrats vs Republicans. Success or failure. No room for nuance or a gray zone. Nothing new, but now brought to truly explosive levels of polarization. We all know why. This mentality has now made its way into everything. As an example, a lot of people, in this example non-tech people, instinctively reject crypto purely based on the narrative presented to them by the media they follow (which fits their world view) and their Twitter friends. These people haven't spent a minute even trying to understand what it is, yet blindly follow an ever-narrowing behavioral group consensus. Don't get me wrong, you may very well come to the conclusion that crypto is garbage, but wouldn't you first want to learn about it before you flat out reject it? Another example is web development, in particular the community on Twitter. It's basically a radical feminist community now. Recently, a high profile account blasted the life's work of some guy. The guy responds that this pile-on ruined his day. The response: an army of angry women complaining about his "white tech bro" behavior. He was close to losing its job (and reputation) for pointing out that he did not appreciate the out-of-the-blue mass pile-on. Does any of this sound reasonable, healthy, constructive? Dismissing vastly complex topics without knowing a thing about it? Basing good or bad on group think, and rejecting everything else? Basing who is right or wrong based on ethnicity, gender, the like? How very limiting life must be to look at the world through this lens. It has like 90% of pixels blacked out. That's what I mean with the lack of self awareness. US people don't even see this anymore. It's normalized. When you point out they have a closed mind and binary world view, they make effort to show they're on the right side of that binary, failing to see the irony.

fleddr 5y ago

Yes, I could. You just did it, as did the 3 other replies. You double down and confirm my point. Like I said, I see the humor in it. It's culture. Every forum has a culture. That's why you came to the defense, even in absence of an attack. I know I won't change that, but I do want to explain my counter point by means of an example. You have absolutely no idea how deeply I hate Google. I could write books full of it. Yet I will still not fall in the trap of an absolute closed mind or simplistic binary rejection. Same for crypto and for anything large and impactful. It's a hard thing to do these days, to be a technologist for technology sake, and to cleanly separate it from the maker's reputation, personal politics, and so on. Very few things in life can be sorted into good or bad. So when you have topics that are close to taboo, yes, I do think that's odd.

UweSchmidt 5y ago
I tried to present the arguments around here in a nuanced way. I don't think that there is much of a closed mind or a simplistic binary rejection, or a taboo, on technical topics here on HN. The onus is on crypto boosters (who are usually invested and would benefit from more hype) to present better arguments and demonstrate the general benefit/feasability of crypto.
- fleddr 5y ago
  You don't think there's a closed mind because you're never on that other side. So you likely never experience it. Yes, there are self-serving crypto maximalists. But even if you add nuance, you get downvoted and standard replies debunked years ago. Doesn't matter what you say, the arguments aren't even heard. That's absolute closed mindedness. And the quality of many of those replies shows how extremely little those people know about it at all. A massive problem? No. But I'm just telling you it does exist.
Karrot_Kream 5y ago
Shrug it's happening throughout technical circles, at least in the English-speaking world. It's one thing to try to push back against politics that you feel are harmful and disenfranchising, in purely political or social forums. It's another when technology forums develop taboos on what technology you can and cannot discuss. I agree it's cultural, but folks who are immersed in the culture don't seem to be willing to call it that. I'm really looking forward for this to be "over" so that the internet can have nuanced discussions about technology again.
- fleddr 5y ago
  I know what you mean. I suppressed that reasoning in my other comments as it tends to make things worse, but I might as well spit it out: it's US culture. The US has always had a binary culture: winner/loser. Democrats vs Republicans. Success or failure. No room for nuance or a gray zone. Nothing new, but now brought to truly explosive levels of polarization. We all know why. This mentality has now made its way into everything. As an example, a lot of people, in this example non-tech people, instinctively reject crypto purely based on the narrative presented to them by the media they follow (which fits their world view) and their Twitter friends. These people haven't spent a minute even trying to understand what it is, yet blindly follow an ever-narrowing behavioral group consensus. Don't get me wrong, you may very well come to the conclusion that crypto is garbage, but wouldn't you first want to learn about it before you flat out reject it? Another example is web development, in particular the community on Twitter. It's basically a radical feminist community now. Recently, a high profile account blasted the life's work of some guy. The guy responds that this pile-on ruined his day. The response: an army of angry women complaining about his "white tech bro" behavior. He was close to losing its job (and reputation) for pointing out that he did not appreciate the out-of-the-blue mass pile-on. Does any of this sound reasonable, healthy, constructive? Dismissing vastly complex topics without knowing a thing about it? Basing good or bad on group think, and rejecting everything else? Basing who is right or wrong based on ethnicity, gender, the like? How very limiting life must be to look at the world through this lens. It has like 90% of pixels blacked out. That's what I mean with the lack of self awareness. US people don't even see this anymore. It's normalized. When you point out they have a closed mind and binary world view, they make effort to show they're on the right side of that binary, failing to see the irony.