4 ms·

I don't think attention really matters. A statement remaining on their website is like continuously saying/affirming whatever that statement is. Removing it mea

I don't think attention really matters. A statement remaining on their website is like continuously saying/affirming whatever that statement is. Removing it means they have changed their minds about something it contains. Removing it just stops that affirmation, it doesn't really matter if people know what you used to think as long as they know you no longer do. If you have a statement on your website that promises to never put cats on the moon but then you do, I imagine some shareholders/investors might feel misled. I don't know _if_ that opens someone up to legal action but I could see the argument.

akira2501 3y ago
Is the statement on their website or on a third party website? Changing your mind about what you publish is one thing, changing your mind about an interview you just gave is another.
- swyx 3y ago
  but theres an open question now about whether or not that was MEANT to be an interview, or rather a closed door session to a small group of folks. if Humanloop had not gotten clearance to post what they posted, this would have been a grave overstep of journalistic ethics. (i am not throwing stones, i've fallen foul of this as a blogger before, excusing myself from commonsense precaution in my eagerness to discuss industry relevant insights. private https://www.swyx.io/private https://www.swyx.io/private)
  - 3np 3y ago
    > if Humanloop had not gotten clearance to post what they posted, this would have been a grave overstep of journalistic ethics. Where did you get this idea? You don't "go on record" with a journalist. Everything you do and say around them is on the record by default. There are ethical codes and frameworks on what, when, and how to report but "private conversations are private" is certainly not considered normal. Re your mea culpa, it's a completely different situation and I don't see how journalistic ethics would be applicable there. If you want to have a more appropriate term, maybe "blogger ethics"?
    - swyx 3y ago
      neither Raza nor myself are journalists, but we behave like them when we write stuff up for obvious HN bait. privacy by default is the overwhelming expected norm for private individuals. particularly at a closed door small group event. we abuse the system when we use our status as industry participants and become citizen journalists without first considering if the expectations are aligned.
      - 3np 3y ago
        > we abuse the system when we use our status as industry participants and become citizen journalists Agreed. This includes not making statements like your previous one about "journalistic ethics". Consider this: If your now removed post had been containing the same information but based on a separate conversation with their ex-partner, with their consent to publish, would that had made it less problematic? Without having read the post, I imagine it wouldn't. So it turns out that there's more to it. I'm not saying these posts aren't problematic, nor that journalists lack ethics. I am saying that "private conversations are private" is oversimplifying the matter and not part of journalistic ethics in the general. You're making references to professional code you lack qualifications for. Consider medicine. Let's say Alex is visiting a sick family member. Alex has no medical training. They bring some drugs which later turn out to cause even worse health issues. "Medical ethics" isn't a useful framing for discussing that situation IMO, for similar reasons.
neilv 3y ago
> I don't think attention really matters. Attention Is All You Need
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  As if that weren't already the mantra of the TikTok era.
  - ahahahahah 3y ago
    You missed the reference.
taneq 3y ago
It's like those pentalobe security screws. Nobody thinks they'll stop a determined attempt to disassemble a product, but they're a signal that you're not meant to pull it apart. Then when you do, and you break it, they can point to the screws and say "well clearly you should have known not to do that."

akira2501 3y ago

Is the statement on their website or on a third party website? Changing your mind about what you publish is one thing, changing your mind about an interview you just gave is another.

swyx 3y ago
but theres an open question now about whether or not that was MEANT to be an interview, or rather a closed door session to a small group of folks. if Humanloop had not gotten clearance to post what they posted, this would have been a grave overstep of journalistic ethics. (i am not throwing stones, i've fallen foul of this as a blogger before, excusing myself from commonsense precaution in my eagerness to discuss industry relevant insights. private https://www.swyx.io/private https://www.swyx.io/private)
- 3np 3y ago
  > if Humanloop had not gotten clearance to post what they posted, this would have been a grave overstep of journalistic ethics. Where did you get this idea? You don't "go on record" with a journalist. Everything you do and say around them is on the record by default. There are ethical codes and frameworks on what, when, and how to report but "private conversations are private" is certainly not considered normal. Re your mea culpa, it's a completely different situation and I don't see how journalistic ethics would be applicable there. If you want to have a more appropriate term, maybe "blogger ethics"?
  - swyx 3y ago
    neither Raza nor myself are journalists, but we behave like them when we write stuff up for obvious HN bait. privacy by default is the overwhelming expected norm for private individuals. particularly at a closed door small group event. we abuse the system when we use our status as industry participants and become citizen journalists without first considering if the expectations are aligned.
    - 3np 3y ago
      > we abuse the system when we use our status as industry participants and become citizen journalists Agreed. This includes not making statements like your previous one about "journalistic ethics". Consider this: If your now removed post had been containing the same information but based on a separate conversation with their ex-partner, with their consent to publish, would that had made it less problematic? Without having read the post, I imagine it wouldn't. So it turns out that there's more to it. I'm not saying these posts aren't problematic, nor that journalists lack ethics. I am saying that "private conversations are private" is oversimplifying the matter and not part of journalistic ethics in the general. You're making references to professional code you lack qualifications for. Consider medicine. Let's say Alex is visiting a sick family member. Alex has no medical training. They bring some drugs which later turn out to cause even worse health issues. "Medical ethics" isn't a useful framing for discussing that situation IMO, for similar reasons.

neilv 3y ago

> I don't think attention really matters. Attention Is All You Need

CamperBob2 3y ago
As if that weren't already the mantra of the TikTok era.
- ahahahahah 3y ago
  You missed the reference.

taneq 3y ago

It's like those pentalobe security screws. Nobody thinks they'll stop a determined attempt to disassemble a product, but they're a signal that you're not meant to pull it apart. Then when you do, and you break it, they can point to the screws and say "well clearly you should have known not to do that."