Comment by stackghost

10 days ago

This is what happens when one allows oneself to hide in "safe spaces" (like HN) where there's a "no politics" rule enabling people to hide and avoid being confronted with the ramifications of their actions.

The entire world runs on technology now. It's all inherently political.

I'm going to defend the HN "no politics" rule here.

The reason "no politics" zones exist is because there are enough people going out of their way to shout at everybody, everywhere, in every corner of the internet and enough people are tired of it that they flock to...no politics zones. In real life, a person like that confronts you...you remove yourself from the situation, because that person who can't stop shouting at everybody comes across as nuts.

  • Trying to decide how to categorize those giant first page threads from 2022 where Brian Armstrong would complain about activist employees or Google employees would stage walkouts about their employer doing contracts with the Department of Defense, the comments would be chock full of "yeah, actually a company should fire those employees, because business isn't about politics" then a few years later Coinbase drops $150M on the elections and Google is happily working with Palantir to build dragnet surveillance of US citizens.

  • There's a vast difference between tribal partisan politics and discussing policy as a system of governance (hacking society). I do my best to avoid the former and embrace the latter.

    That said, there's a disappointingly significant number of HN members who hew to the latter and embrace the current regime. I consider this to be a forum of intellectual engagement, and that those people walk amongst us is quite distressing.

    • The “those people” comment is kinda the issue though isn’t it?

      I generally try to assume that everyone has good intentions, but we’re all being fed massive amounts of different information. I learned years ago that it wasn’t an issue of people reporting things that were factually inaccurate, it was an issue of people leaving out details to frame the story in the context that supports your readers/viewers belief system.

      And then there are the Stanford studies like this:

      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46553818

      2 replies →

  • I think what op is getting at is that "no politics" rule is what allowed the frog to boil. So banning political discussion is political in and of itself.

    I'd agree with your no politics preference if we were in a functioning society that wasn't actively spiralling towards fascism. I recognize that this line is blurry, and that's exactly the reason why no politics zones exist, there is always someone yelling about fascism. He might be a crazy guy on the corner who yells about everything.

    I think the difference here is that there is a big critical mass of people who have recognized that the pillars on which our country sit are being actively sabotaged. It's not that everyone wants to be talking about politics all of a sudden, it's that the frog is finally boiling.

    • > I think what op is getting at is that "no politics" rule is what allowed the frog to boil.

      But this simply isn't the case. The fact that "no politics" zones exist is a response to the fact that politics is everywhere else.

      People here aren't blissfully unaware, they're just tired of it and many realize that arguing about it on the internet won't accomplish anything other than wasting time. As I sit here writing this, I'm thinking that I'm probably wasting my time.

      We all have this idea in our head that if people are confronted with enough evidence, they'll change their minds. But that doesn't happen. People rationalize.

      My goodness, people attack RFK Jr non-stop simply because he's part of the Trump administration and all he's done for his entire life is try to help the country be healthier. Every point he's made, every plan he's had and every policy he has advocated for have been totally logically sound. There's been nothing extreme in any of it. Every young parent I know is so relieved with what he's doing and frustrated that it took so long to do what seemed obvious.

      But it's not that. It's inflammatory headline after inflammatory headline. It's putting words in his mouth, saying things he didn't say, making statements he didn't make, berating him in front of Congress for click bait video nonsense reading from a script.

      It's exhausting. We're all tired of it. If you show me something that you think will convince me of something, I will look at it. And then I will look deeper. I will look to see if any information has been left out. I will look to see if editing has happened.

      Because almost every time I invest the time to look into something, I find that it's exaggerated internet nonsense that only plays well in echo chambers. When you do that enough times, your skepticism meter goes to 11.

      4 replies →

  • I was going to remove myself from this conversation, but then I had to shout it out, so.

Yes, HN is my safe space. I have enough politics in my daily life, I don't need it when I'm with phone in my bed trying to wind down.

And which politics? American internal politics are foreign and distant to me. How much do you care about my country internal affairs? Probably not much. And it's OK, you can't fix every country in existence, and if you tried to care you would get insane.

  • Pro-tip: when you see a headline on the main page, you don't have to click on it. Just keep scrolling.

    • While I completely agree in principle, these threads get very very heated so I can kinda see why HN/dang/our reptilian overlords are trying to keep them from becoming a majority of the site (which they easily could be, absent the flagging of these stories).

      2 replies →

  • > How much do you care about my country internal affairs? Probably not much.

    Oh how I wish this were true of non-Americans.

>"no politics"

No politics is a privilege that many do not have.

  • It's a privilege that many people working in tech have, who then create and populate forums where discussion of that privilege is considered political and therefore forbidden.

  • Thank you! Everytime you interact with government, it is politics. Filing taxes is politics. TurboTax lobbying against free self filing and government filing is politics and technology. It goes on and on. You cannot avoid politics because politics is about people.

  • But chatting with absolute strangers about random tech-adjacent topics is an inherently privileged activity. So let's just say the privilege needed to do that is large enough that it also gives you the privilege to not talk about politics.

    "My children are starving. Militants have surrounded our village. But let me pop into HN for a bit and drop my hot take on the San Remo Pasta Measurer."

You can see in this threat that confronting people with the ramifications of their actions causes them to double down. They'll just come up with more and more justifications of why the victims deserve it. Same as every mass atrocity.

I don't think you can really blame HN specifically here. It's much wider than that; pretty much the tech industry as a whole actively discourages any kind of philosophical reflection on technology, at least the kind that says you shouldn't build something, even if it's profitable.

  • That is a fair take. Everybody wants to say "it is just a tool" and get away with it

> This is what happens when one allows oneself to hide in "safe spaces" (like HN) where there's a "no politics" rule

HN does not have, and never has had (except for a very brief experiment that failed spectacularly and was very quickly aborted) a “no politics” rule, and, in fact, politics is usually all over the site.

This exactly hits in on the head. You're trying create a forum absent of politics. In fact, you're just enabling one political view over another. This hides social issues and in the end comes back to undermine your pure "technical view". It's not apolitical, it's disassociation from reality.

  • Exactly. Declaring that there must be no discussion when confronted with situations in which one party is doing harm to others, is an implicit endorsement of the harms being perpetuated.

    • Thank you all in this thread! I couldn't have put it better. I cannot stand "no politics rules". Politics divides and it is personal. But it shouldn't be either of those. We should be attacking policy and not people. No politics rules just deny reality because software doesn't exist in a vacuum without policy and money. Heck most people want to use software to get money which is a product of policy.

  • HN isn't even absent of politics, just the front page is really.

    Everything we do is political. When we are making software and publishing it, whether or a company or ourselves, for sale or for free, there are political implications to those actions.

There have been some insane politics (especially "culture war" stuff) that got laundered through the HN "reasonable discussion" filter, especially from 2021 through 2024. They still come up all the time. HN loves talking about politics when the commenters can get critical mass to grind the libertarian or "anti-woke" axe.

Not to mention every leader of YCombinator has had some kind of wild politics that come from having money that separates you from any kind of consequence.

[flagged]

  • [flagged]

    • I don't see much moderation of criticism of meta and their employees behavior. Anti authoritarian politics has always been popular on HN. It's only the byzantine team color politics that is moderated.

      1 reply →

    • I maybe get where you’re coming from, but what’s the solution to the issue you’re proposing? Screening everyone’s resume before allowing them to comment? What about people who work at companies that deal with Palantir at completely different departments (Microsoft and Xbox)? It’s obviously untenable

      It is true that some users here spew vile ideology while hiding behind HN intellectual rhetoric. Then posts that understandably react strongly to that get flagged, and users get banned. I wish it was different, but I’ve made peace with that being a significant percent of the user base here.

      A particular interaction I had comes to mind. A user here boldly and openly proclaimed he discriminated in interviews against people that look different from him, or that are neurodivergent. Actual illegal behaviour that will get you sued in many countries. I reacted strongly and my post got flagged and I received a comment from the moderation team.

      I don’t envy the moderation team though, it’s a tough job.

      5 replies →