[mistermann]

I suggest that we fully acknowledge in comprehensive, "dimensional & behavioural complexity", that which lies at the bottom of all of these problems: the human mind. [1]

And then, to ensure that all that hard work does not go to waste, modify the HN guidelines (or, introduce a brand new, experimental mode that includes these modified guidelines, to be used when discussing culture-war topics) such that ignoring this aspect of reality is explicitly forbidden.

There's no way of knowing whether this technique would fix the problem unless we actually try it. But as long as all social media platforms refuse to try this (or similar experimental ideas), choosing instead to only pay lip service to the idea of trying new ideas to improve the situation, I do not foresee humanity escaping this mud pit that we have built for ourselves.

[1] This is the fundamental root problem, but there are a few subordinate ideas that should be addressed simultaneously to maximize the chances of success.

[calinet6]

The problem is not on HN. Making changes here will have precisely zero impact on society.

[mistermann]

I'm curious: how does one know such things?

Is there no possibility that you may be somewhat mistaken?

Note:

- your first statement references the entirety of HN; it is plausibly likely that you have not consumed (and comprehensively perceived with complete accuracy, and remembered) the entirety of forum discussions on HN

- your second statement involves events in the future - as far as I know, the ability to accurately predict the future in a multivariate scenario has never been proven

If I am incorrect on either of these two items, I would appreciate any corrections you may have.

[calinet6]

"precisely zero" was an exaggeration to be sure, but it's rather close to reality.

Look up a Fermi problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_problem

That's a good place to start with these kinds of questions.

I figure this is true simply because of the remarkably low population of Hacker News compared to society at large; there's simply not enough people here for changes to this specific site to make an impact on the larger social media ecosystem.

To be more realistic, I'll estimate that getting the social media platform Hacker News exactly perfect from a systemic standpoint might have an impact on around 0.001% of the societal social media problem. We've then got 99.999% more to impact.

And if you believe that people reading Hacker News are somehow more influential to society than the average social media user or something... well, we would not then have that belief in common.

[mistermann]

To review, the question was:

>>> How do we get back from where we are now? I have to admit, my social skills are lacking, my patience is low; and the problem just seems so vastly overwhelming that I can't imagine where to even begin.

I suggested a novel idea:

>> I suggest that we fully acknowledge in comprehensive, "dimensional & behavioural complexity", that which lies at the bottom of all of these problems: the human mind.

>> And then, to ensure that all that hard work does not go to waste, modify the HN guidelines (or, introduce a brand new, experimental mode that includes these modified guidelines, to be used when discussing culture-war topics) such that ignoring this aspect of reality is explicitly forbidden.

What I meant by the root problem being the human mind, is this commonly recurring issue where people make stuff up, and assert it as fact.

And lo and behold, observe the response.

> Look up a Fermi problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_problem

Ok...

> In [physics or engineering education], a Fermi problem, Fermi quiz, Fermi question, Fermi estimate, order-of-magnitude problem, order-of-magnitude estimate, or order estimation is an estimation problem designed to teach dimensional analysis or approximation of [extreme scientific calculations], and such a problem is usually a back-of-the-envelope calculation.

> Example questions given by the official Fermi Competition:

> "If the mass of one teaspoon of water could be converted entirely into energy in the form of heat, what volume of water, initially at room temperature, could it bring to a boil? (litres).", "How much does the Thames River heat up in going over the Fanshawe Dam? (Celsius degrees).", "What is the mass of all the automobiles scrapped in North America this month? (kilograms)" [2][3], Possibly the most famous Fermi Question is the Drake equation, which seeks to estimate the number of intelligent civilizations in the galaxy. The basic question of why, if there were a significant number of such civilizations, ours has never encountered any others is called the Fermi paradox.[4]

These are pretty extreme, needle in a haystack class problems. Funny thing though: I seem to be able to find "needles in a haystack" on HN with about 75% of my comments. This is suggestive that perhaps these needles may not actually be as rare as you perceive, and claim (with evidence that consists of nothing but rhetoric).

> I figure this is true simply because of the remarkably low population of Hacker News compared to society at large; there's simply not enough people here for changes to this specific site to make an impact on the larger social media ecosystem.

My thinking is that if one group of people could learn how to have honest(!), non-imagination-presented-as-fact based discussions about the nature of reality (which includes massive amounts of unknown variables), something no other social media site (or perhaps even individual human being) that I know of seems to be able to accomplish in the year 2020, perhaps this knowledge could be shared to other subreddits, and we could get some sort of a grassroots anti-delusion movement underway. I know of several subreddits that have been trying different things to get people to stop fighting, I doubt they'd turn their nose up at a technique with a proven track record.

> To be more realistic, I'll estimate that getting the social media platform Hacker News exactly perfect from a systemic standpoint might have an impact on around 0.001% of the societal social media problem. We've then got 99.999% more to impact.

More imagination-based numbers, with no concern for the details of the underlying idea, or what might actually be possible. No concern or intent to improve the world. Must. Win. Argument. Must. Support. Tribe.

> And if you believe that people reading Hacker News are somehow more influential to society than the average social media user or something... well, we would not then have that belief in common.

Alternatively, you could consider the possibility that you are not omniscient, and that someone you disagree with may actually have a valid point.

[calinet6]

I guess you did not appreciate any corrections I might have.

More seriously, I think you would be surprised at the variety of human experience that’s not covered by your ideals here.

[mistermann]

Not at all! I very much appreciate any corrections you may have.

> More seriously, I think you would be surprised at the variety of human experience that’s not covered by your ideals here.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here. I am not talking about my "ideals", or at least that is not the primary focus of my comments. The primary focus of my comments is this phenomenon whereby people have an extremely strong aversion to discuss what is Actually True.

If you believe I am mistaken in this, I would be more than happy to discuss it at great length. Perhaps I have some imperfections in my analysis that I am unable to see, and you can point them out so I can then improve upon my model.

I welcome being proven wrong - I encourage people to do it.