|
So, let's say HN does burn to a crisp, let's take that as given. - What is an HN in the world in which we seem to be headed? - What is the possibility, however slim, that HN might serve as a bulwark against that world? Is that a die worth throwing? - What is HN's, and YC's, culpability in creating that world? I'm looking at social media, crypto, AI, AdTech, FinTech, Thiel, Musk, Andreesen, and who knows who else here, as well as general enshittification and authoritarianisation of the Internet (surveillance, propaganda, disinformation, censorship, targeted manipulation,[1] kompromat, the intertwingled and self-reinforcing surveillance capitalism/state/anarchism, killbots, etc.). - What if any sufficient difference would change your mind? Do you, dang, have any personal moral limits at which you'd change your moderator stance, or simply wash your hands and walk away? Or not? I borrowed Anubis's scales, and it seems to me HN compares poorly to the feather of the liberal social democratic experiment. Turning HN into a Nazi bar[2] is also an irreversible outcome. As is turning the polity in which it resides into a fascist state. Scylla, Charybdis. How steer you helmsman? ________________________________ Notes: 1. See: <https://archive.is/8ceqI> 2. A question I've pondered for a while. Toy poll suggests at the least a perception issue: <https://toot.cat/@dredmorbius/112922175293010508>. |
In the world we're headed into, truth is gone. Making an honest judgment based on your best evaluation of the evidence available to you is gone. You will parrot the current insanity that some authoritarian demands, or suffer the consequences. In that world, we really need HN, to keep our sanity, and to avoid the complete destruction of our moral character.
And if you really think that's the world we're headed to, do you think converting HN into all-anti-Trump-all-the-time is really going to be the difference between ending up there and not ending up there?