[defrost]

> Mmm, this I disagree with particularly.

I'd suggest taking that up with Paul Graham, @dang, and @tomhow - they would respond that curious conversation about second order effects is what they seek - sans the direct personal attacks seeking to directly shame another person for their choices.

> How do you feel about the moral dilemma of working for a weapons manufacturer?

Weapons, of course, cut both ways; Ukraine is pushing back against an aggressor by using weapons, long range sensing, passive radar, etc.

> Every year that passes it becomes more important that technologists are aware of the ethical implications of their work

Agreed - that doesn't imply you should call perceived less enlightened others names or champion throwing them in the stocks .. such things rarely convert and often harden resistance.

[datsci_est_2015]

We can argue about whether the OP should have found a more elegant way to call out the commenter he was responding to, of course. But I stand my ground firm that this industry needs an extreme dose of self-reflection injected directly to its heart, and shame seems to be an effective medium available to us as peer technologists. There are different methods of shaming, of course, but ideally those who are currently earning money from unethical sources should feel ashamed. Furthermore, whether someone does feel ashamed because of what someone commented should not be a criteria for whether a comment is a “personal attack”.

Humans use shame to correct antisocial behavior, and humans feel shame in order to avoid antisocial behavior. The technology professions are rife with antisocial behavior. Our leaders are chosen and their behavior is optimized as antisocial, for shareholder (and personal) short-term growth.

> Weapons, of course, cut both ways; Ukraine is pushing back against an aggressor by using weapons, long range sensing, passive radar, etc.

This is an entirely different subject that I don’t think we should get sidetracked by. I’ll just recommend Die Physiker (or one of its translations) as a fun starting point for radicalization against the argument you presented.

[defrost]

> as a fun starting point for radicalization against the argument you presented

As a gentle reminder, it was yourself that raised weapons as a moral dilemma, I responded with no argument other than a plain observation.

> but ideally those who are currently earning money from unethical sources should feel ashamed

More often they likely sleep deeply on sheets of insanely high thread count, shame only goes so far to effect change.

> I’ll just recommend Die Physiker

If I recall correctly that came up when I had a long discussion with Mark Oliphant in the late 1970s, William Tutte had a few books of his own to recommend on similar themes not long after.

[datsci_est_2015]

> More often they likely sleep deeply on sheets of insanely high thread count, shame only goes so far to effect change.

Do you have alternative suggestions, or will you stick to simply discouraging the use of shame on this forum?

[tomhow]

I'm a moderator here, and defrost is right. It's not cool to berate or “shame” people on HN. The very first phrase in the "In Comments" section of the guidelines is "Be Kind".

We can critique issues and trends in the industry or broader economy, including advertising; that happens all the time here. But also, on HN we're trying for conversation that is curious and thoughtful, at a standard that is higher than the average discussion forum. If we're going to make sweeping assertions like “advertising shouldn't exist”, we also need to offer suggestions of viable alternatives for ways that companies can get their products known about by people who might need them, and for websites to generate income to fund their operations. These are absolutely valid topics of thoughtful discussion in the spirit of curious conversation, which is entirely what HN is for.

Shaming an individual for working in a domain you've decided you don't like (though legal and widespread) is never okay here.

[datsci_est_2015]

Weak response imo. Shame is a powerful tool and lots of people on this forum should feel more shame for what they do.

In fact, I see quite a bit of shaming that occurs here on HN when someone says something completely out of pocket (in fact, in a way you are shaming both me and the original poster) - but that rarely gets called out by moderators because it’s already accepted as not impolite. I often see shaming when users are outright racist - which to be clear I also agree with the use of shame in that instance.

The moderation is not unbiased in this regard.

[tomhow]

> lots of people on this forum should feel more shame for what they do

If we allow ourselves to feel virtuous by shaming others for things we unilaterally decree as being pernicious, we're on the fast track to hell.

For most people here, "what they do", they do because they need to make a living via the skills they have in an often-brutal job market, as do most people here, and they do it by working on things that are legal, and in the case of advertising, one of the few ways anyone has discovered for generating income for online products (and indeed almost all media products for decades before that).

To attack someone for doing something legal and widespread without offering any viable alternative is just lazy argumentation and incurious, low-quality discussion. It gives the shamer the feeling of being morally superior and pure, whilst avoiding the work of thinking about and articulating better ways that the online industry can generate income. All of this is what HN is designed to optimize against, and why shaming is never encouraged here.

The same applies to our moderation. Our role here is to point out where people have breached the guidelines, and remind them what the guidelines are, and in many cases, explain in some detail how they could get their point across while observing the guidelines. Everything we're asking people to do should be in the spirit of promoting healthy discussion and should be actionable.

Nowhere should you find HN moderators taking pleasure in shaming anyone. That's not what we're about. We're here to cultivate curious conversation, and a big part of that is posting comments that range from polite reminders and educational explanations, to less frequent stern warnings and then to occasional bans.

If you can find any instance where we stray from that, you're welcome to point it out.

[defrost]

I'm pretty happy abiding by the spirit of this forum.

There are many forums that allow and even encourage attacks on others.