r113500

6 ms·

1.
by r113500 3y ago
you want to explore, what "political" means, that's fine. we're not making a thesis here, so allow me to also ramble, but i'm cautious of your alies: another person in this thread has implicitly acused me of homopho
2.
by r113500 3y ago
this thread started with me basically saying that i'm not willing to engage, and there's a lively downvote brigading going on against the original comment (it goes from -3 to 3 over and over and over again, the grand battle of ide
3.
by r113500 3y ago
hello, man from the other side of the divide! i grew up in a socialist country, so i find socialist activism frightful and dangerous, so yes, i think that they are activists for something bad, in general, though not necessarily specifically
4.
by r113500 3y ago
op's is a valid criticism in a post gonzo journalism world. hunter thompson, an otherwise conventionally trained professional, embeds himself in the world of his subjects, and produces a masterpiece of investigative journalism. it&#x27
5.
by r113500 3y ago
if you look into the names of the founders, all of them are activists, one of them has a colorful gamergate history, one mentions labour issues in their byline. their position statement is in the fourth paragraph, it starts with "wides
6.
by r113500 3y ago
I've been meaning to look into it, so these are mostly notes, that others might find useful, arenas are x86_64 only, not sure how involved are ports, but there's at least a VOP, that as of right now exists only on x86_64. (the bui
7.
by r113500 3y ago
the public's wants are always reduced to trite generalizations, so maybe it's not about thunder, maybe the upset is that one can generate lively conversation easily by exploiting trite dichotomies, and that such a behavior is dist
8.
by r113500 3y ago
jeez, krapp, you've been posting on hacker news since like forever, doing drive by hate posts in random threads all the time, and you tell me to "touch grass". I'll change the password on this bad boy, and won't int
9.
by r113500 3y ago
danny's meaning didn't have this romantic component. it was specifically "bad internet as experienced by non-technologically sophisticated users in the early 2000s", as opposed to the "wild internet". the examp
10.
by r113500 3y ago
I'm curious about this type of response. it sort of implies that I don't know why things have changed the way they did. the causality is implicitly in the original also. we have a lot of mobile first websites, because most people
11.
by r113500 3y ago
thanks to the bbc brit, the subthread essentially culminated in your comment. I'd like to clarify that this dichotomy didn't exist in my original. "technology elite" like somebody hinted elsewhere in the thread, could be
12.
by r113500 3y ago
I'm not hn, and primarily it's because I don't believe that pseudonymous conversation generates interesting dialog. I mean user a says something, user b misunderstand, user c attacks user b's misunderstanding. in aggrega
13.
by r113500 3y ago
it's quite cyberpunk, in a dystopian sense, I don't think most people realize. it can of course be framed as benign and I'm sure there are protective policies in place. but you know, if you take a sweeping look from a distanc
14.
by r113500 3y ago
think of it from a subjective experience of somebody who was "from the internet" in the early 2000s (because that's when Danny coined the term): mIRC made irc easy, jabber was already a thing, you're have a bunch of book
15.
by r113500 3y ago
you misunderstood the concept, brought in your own windmills, and then successfully attacked them. I guess it generated an interesting subthread, even if it did derail my point into the tired "internet ain't what it used to be!&qu
16.
by r113500 3y ago
Danny o'brien, he runs one of the oldest surviving blogs, oblomovka, coined a term "hinternet" sometime in 2007, that was when the internet was still being run by the technological elite, for themselves, but normal people hav