4 ms·

I'm going to use the adjective "flammable" now to describe people who can be easily riled up into political rage. It's great because it emphasizes that not onl

I'm going to use the adjective "flammable" now to describe people who can be easily riled up into political rage. It's great because it emphasizes that not only is there a match, there's tinder.

wins32767 5y ago
It's also great in that the same piece of wood can be more or less flammable given environment. Social media is a like change in climatic conditions leading to less rain and more evaporation.
- ignoramous 5y ago
  > It's also great in that the same piece of wood can be more or less flammable given environment. imo, it is not just the wood, but the environment too, which matters perhaps more: >> But there’s nothing natural or inevitable about the specific ways that Facebook and YouTube corral our attention. The patterns, by now, are well known. As Buzzfeed famously reported in November 2016, "top fake election news stories generated more total engagement on Facebook than top election stories from 19 major news outlets combined." >> Humans are a social species, equipped with few defenses against the natural world beyond our ability to acquire knowledge and stay in groups that work together. We are particularly susceptible to glimmers of novelty, messages of affirmation and belonging, and messages of outrage toward perceived enemies. These kinds of messages are to human community what salt, sugar, and fat are to the human appetite. And Facebook gorges us on them... >> The most effective forms of censorship today involve meddling with trust and attention, not muzzling speech itself. As a result, they don’t look much like the old forms of censorship at all. They look like viral or coordinated harassment campaigns, which harness the dynamics of viral outrage to impose an unbearable and disproportionate cost on the act of speaking out. They look like epidemics of disinformation, meant to undercut the credibility of valid information sources. They look like bot-fueled campaigns of trolling and distraction, or piecemeal leaks of hacked materials, meant to swamp the attention of traditional media. https://www.wired.com/story/free-speech-issue-tech-turmoil-new-censorship/ https://www.wired.com/story/free-speech-issue-tech-turmoil-n...
jjcon 5y ago
Agreed! I feel like it is also a good term for a psychologically disarming recognition. I am flammable about certain topics, and having that word now makes it easier for me recognize my flammability (and hopefully tone it way down), if that makes sense.
Maxburn 5y ago
Another group I'm in calls it an inflamed amygdala.
- sleepysysadmin 5y ago
  >Another group I'm in calls it an inflamed amygdala. Is that medically speaking a thing? People who might be more emotional might just have an inflamed amygdala?
crate_barre 5y ago
Flammable is just a synonym for ‘triggered’. Funnily, we seem to speak the same language as the everyone else, however smarter we may think we are. New Yorkers are a weird breed, we don’t get triggered. You have the craziest people on the subway and we still take the subway. Nothing bugs us because the subway is that worthwhile. There’s no moderator on the subway. The internet is a subway, and we better start accepting that. EDIT: Annnnnd, someone flagged this post lol. Grow up kids.
open-paren 5y ago
I agree. It's a great metaphor. I'm also going to start using flamebait more frequently, where previously I just lumped it under the more generic "clickbait" (a flamebait headline is a clickbait headline but a clickbait headline is not a flamebait headline).
smsm42 5y ago
Given enough heat and suitable environment, virtually anything is flammable.
seoulmetro 5y ago
It's actually quite a modern idea that instead of controlling your own response to someone, you are better off responding as poorly as possible and blaming the person who you're responding to "for making you do it". It's not good. Any gamers here will be familiar with the new "tilt" slang and how it actually places the blame on anyone but the person doing the wrong deed. I do not enjoy this new world of blaming imaginary catalysts instead of blaming bad actors.
- smt88 5y ago
  > It's actually quite a modern idea that instead of controlling your own response to someone, you are better off responding as poorly as possible and blaming the person who you're responding to "for making you do it". I disagree. Almost no human behaviors are "modern" -- sometimes frustratingly so. Historically, authorities would often blame those they subjugated for "making them" do something (monarchs, jailers, armies, etc.) It's also a very common model of spousal abuse. In general, it's easier to blame someone else when you overreact than to face your own mistakes and apologize. I don't know any reason modern society would have invented that. The impulse to shift blame is intrinsic to having the human set of emotions.
  - kibbleble 5y ago
    Yeah, everyone conveniently forgets what is the second sin of Adam from the Bible (if they're subscribed to that belief system)
  - seoulmetro 5y ago
    Nope. There's a difference between having the power to rewrite an idea and actually appealing to others to follow suit. In one case the other is rewriting what happened, the other is claiming that what happened was done only for the reason of _____. I don't know any logical reasons why someone would invent this. I know a fair few illogical ones. We don't really live in a logical world, constantly inventing idiocy.

I'm going to use the adjective "flammable" now to describe people who can be easily riled up into political rage. It's great because it emphasizes that not only is there a match, there's tinder.

wins32767 5y ago

It's also great in that the same piece of wood can be more or less flammable given environment. Social media is a like change in climatic conditions leading to less rain and more evaporation.

ignoramous 5y ago
> It's also great in that the same piece of wood can be more or less flammable given environment. imo, it is not just the wood, but the environment too, which matters perhaps more: >> But there’s nothing natural or inevitable about the specific ways that Facebook and YouTube corral our attention. The patterns, by now, are well known. As Buzzfeed famously reported in November 2016, "top fake election news stories generated more total engagement on Facebook than top election stories from 19 major news outlets combined." >> Humans are a social species, equipped with few defenses against the natural world beyond our ability to acquire knowledge and stay in groups that work together. We are particularly susceptible to glimmers of novelty, messages of affirmation and belonging, and messages of outrage toward perceived enemies. These kinds of messages are to human community what salt, sugar, and fat are to the human appetite. And Facebook gorges us on them... >> The most effective forms of censorship today involve meddling with trust and attention, not muzzling speech itself. As a result, they don’t look much like the old forms of censorship at all. They look like viral or coordinated harassment campaigns, which harness the dynamics of viral outrage to impose an unbearable and disproportionate cost on the act of speaking out. They look like epidemics of disinformation, meant to undercut the credibility of valid information sources. They look like bot-fueled campaigns of trolling and distraction, or piecemeal leaks of hacked materials, meant to swamp the attention of traditional media. https://www.wired.com/story/free-speech-issue-tech-turmoil-new-censorship/ https://www.wired.com/story/free-speech-issue-tech-turmoil-n...

jjcon 5y ago

Agreed! I feel like it is also a good term for a psychologically disarming recognition. I am flammable about certain topics, and having that word now makes it easier for me recognize my flammability (and hopefully tone it way down), if that makes sense.

Maxburn 5y ago

Another group I'm in calls it an inflamed amygdala.

sleepysysadmin 5y ago
>Another group I'm in calls it an inflamed amygdala. Is that medically speaking a thing? People who might be more emotional might just have an inflamed amygdala?

crate_barre 5y ago

Flammable is just a synonym for ‘triggered’. Funnily, we seem to speak the same language as the everyone else, however smarter we may think we are. New Yorkers are a weird breed, we don’t get triggered. You have the craziest people on the subway and we still take the subway. Nothing bugs us because the subway is that worthwhile. There’s no moderator on the subway. The internet is a subway, and we better start accepting that. EDIT: Annnnnd, someone flagged this post lol. Grow up kids.

open-paren 5y ago

I agree. It's a great metaphor. I'm also going to start using flamebait more frequently, where previously I just lumped it under the more generic "clickbait" (a flamebait headline is a clickbait headline but a clickbait headline is not a flamebait headline).

smsm42 5y ago

Given enough heat and suitable environment, virtually anything is flammable.

seoulmetro 5y ago

It's actually quite a modern idea that instead of controlling your own response to someone, you are better off responding as poorly as possible and blaming the person who you're responding to "for making you do it". It's not good. Any gamers here will be familiar with the new "tilt" slang and how it actually places the blame on anyone but the person doing the wrong deed. I do not enjoy this new world of blaming imaginary catalysts instead of blaming bad actors.

smt88 5y ago
> It's actually quite a modern idea that instead of controlling your own response to someone, you are better off responding as poorly as possible and blaming the person who you're responding to "for making you do it". I disagree. Almost no human behaviors are "modern" -- sometimes frustratingly so. Historically, authorities would often blame those they subjugated for "making them" do something (monarchs, jailers, armies, etc.) It's also a very common model of spousal abuse. In general, it's easier to blame someone else when you overreact than to face your own mistakes and apologize. I don't know any reason modern society would have invented that. The impulse to shift blame is intrinsic to having the human set of emotions.
- kibbleble 5y ago
  Yeah, everyone conveniently forgets what is the second sin of Adam from the Bible (if they're subscribed to that belief system)
- seoulmetro 5y ago
  Nope. There's a difference between having the power to rewrite an idea and actually appealing to others to follow suit. In one case the other is rewriting what happened, the other is claiming that what happened was done only for the reason of _____. I don't know any logical reasons why someone would invent this. I know a fair few illogical ones. We don't really live in a logical world, constantly inventing idiocy.