Thread

1. tolerance · 1789588420 · focus · HN ↗

   > Then came a threat. An account with a much larger following DM'd her and told her to take down the sign, or they would post about it to their local artist community. The person offered to help her find an artist to pay to make a new sign, or else they would post about it.

   > They gave her a day to "think about it."

   When this is sort of behavior that the "good guys" advance then it's hard not to expect a "bad guy" with money to show up on the scene and thwart it.

   1. ratelimitsteve · 1789588666 · focus · HN ↗

      why is talking about this with their community a threat?

      1. F3nd0 · 1789590613 · focus · HN ↗

         It’s more about the way it was phrased and presented. Just sharing publicly available facts with your community (or anyone really) is not a problem in itself, but the message does rub me the wrong way.

         The message’s author is trying to present themselves as someone helpful and compassionate (‘I understand’, ‘I’m trying to help’), but at the same time, they’re one-sidedly setting a firm and short deadline (‘I’ll give you a day’) unprompted and suggesting the café owner strike a deal with one of the people they’re going to recommend. They might have written this with good intentions at heart, but it also wouldn’t feel out of place in a mafia setting (as in ‘do business with us, or else’), so it’s a hard sell.

         If they really were compassionate and wanted to help, they easily could have suggested to get the owner in touch with some affordable artists and left her with time to mentally deal with the backlash and all. They didn’t need to emphasise how they were going to tell on her like they were about to launch a vendetta smear campaign or something.

         1. fakedang · 1789590882 · focus · HN ↗

            There are no good intentions here. This is the mafia playbook through and through - "It would be a pity if something were to happen to your <insert valuable property or reputation here>".

            1. Apocryphon · 1789595967 · focus · HN ↗

               Certainly, but considerate the alternative: the account simply publicly posts about a public posting (not private business). Which happens all of the time for public ridicule or shame. At least this provides some recourse for the person affected. Sure, the alternative is simply to not post in the first place; but such is the nature of large social media accounts.

               1. fakedang · 1789597863 · focus · HN ↗

                  In this case, the account clearly stated: -

                  1.) We don't like your poster so you better remove it or we'll badmouth you within our network.

                  2.) You have 1 day to comply.

                  3.) You can instead work with an artist we will recommend (aka connected to us), and we'll cease.

                  Textbook mafia-style extortion.

                  1. Apocryphon · 1789598343 · focus · HN ↗

                     I don’t deny that based on the screenshot there is both strong-arming and a lack of sympathy or empathy from the other account towards the fact that it seems like many people are just using AI tools without giving it a second thought.

                     However, I’m just pointing out that as far as the implications of the threat goes, in most instances it would’ve just happened anyway, without a “warning”, because people simply post things to make fun of them and mock them. Sometimes those accounts might at least anonymize their subjects, but this might be a name them and shame them type situation.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.