I'm the mom in that viral Giants clip. Let me tell you about my husband
Thread
Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.
I'm the mom in that viral Giants clip. Let me tell you about my husband
Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.
dividefuel · · focus · HN ↗
One very common pattern I saw is that the conclusion is always that the dad is useless. Any provided facts are downplayed. Any omitted facts are imagined in the most negative light possible. And to be fair, there really are LOTS of cases where the dad is useless. The issue is more that posts needed to contain a mountain of evidence to return a neutral ground where the dad is no longer seen as a piece of garbage, rather than starting from neutral ground.
I feel for moms, who in addition to giving birth and having their lives upended to raise a baby, are now told that not only are most men garbage, but their man is garbage too. I feel for the dads, who even if they work hard are told how useless they are, and have to combat a stream of negativity fed to their spouse. It's a divisive wedge thrown into a new family, one that social media algorithms are only happy to encourage for engagement.
When I see instances like the one in this topic, I can see how the default narrative has been applied here. The radio announcers surely aren't aware of the storm they're creating, but it suddenly thrusts two average people into the social media spotlight, where people are happy to assume any missing details to fit their narrative. Everyone is going to apply the default story without taking any time to consider the possibility of other context.
EDIT TO ADD: I know there are manosphere spaces that are toxic too. As a man I've had no problem avoiding them, so this is one of my first extended exposures to this type of content, which is why it stuck with me. Probably also because I felt personally unwelcome as a dad.
CMay · · focus · HN ↗
Foreign adversaries, political extremist groups and so on are all clawing away at every facet of society that can contribute to training people to be and do what they want. For all of our information, language and intellect, those strengths are just an open vulnerability if they aren't protected.
You have to train yourself sufficiently on the grounded basics of reality, the truth and the nature so that when adversarial training against you and others strikes you can be wise enough to push back like this. You have to be able to surround yourself with people who disagree and stand your ground, because they're all being pumped with garbage from everywhere and don't know any better.
It is one of Russia, China, Cuba's and even Iran's way of attacking the US at a distance by funding these groups and amplifying the dumbest stuff you can imagine until these minority voices reach majority saturation in some of the information spaces where they can fester. Taking over education, journalism, social media and so on.
If the idea of the open society is going to survive into the next century, we're either going to need AI to ground society if we can prevent AI from becoming too centralized, or we're going to need to rapidly change education to teach people to think even if the reason we haven't been doing so up to this point is that it fragments society too much. If the alternative is a fragmentation that our enemies control, then a new enlightenment may be the better way.
the_gipsy · · focus · HN ↗
It's the USA eating itself and trying to attack Europe, if anything. It's American fascist billionaires who own, buy, and steer these social networks.
CMay · · focus · HN ↗
Yes, social media bots impacting statistical trend services which some news organizations use to decide what stories to cover.
Communists caused World War 2 and yet love to play the victim. Not everybody who is against communism is a "fascist" and most people don't even know what that really means.
We're not attacking Europe, we're making Europe stronger so it can stand more independently so it doesn't require as much US intervention in the case World War 3 does start and a new front opens there beyond Ukraine. That way the US can invest more of its resources in the pacific. NATO understands this.
The reason we had to do it rudely, is because we've been trying to get Europe to do this for decades nicely and that hasn't work. So you get the rude approach.
the_gipsy · · focus · HN ↗
The man that bought one of the most important social networks and has substantially changed its algorithm is nearly openly a nazi. It's not just the sieg hail the day of the presidential swear-in, it's everything he does to the world and the USA. And so do all the others.
> So you get the rude approach.
You're digging your own grave. Your president is handing over your empire piecewise to your adversaries for a fistful of gold. You must understand this: the only thing worse than communism, is fascism, because it's just corruption as a form of government.
signatoremo · · focus · HN ↗
theGeatZhopa · · focus · HN ↗
for the definition what a nazi is, the movie "american history x" - that imo shows exactly what a nazi is: the main character is not german and not even in germany, but shows the nazi-mindset exactly! He glorifies hitler's thinking about others, fighting for the wrong idealogy for "own" country. ... Thats making a nazi. Neglection/sympathy for holocaust, supremacy thinking, .., too.
As I was told, the word nazi was invented by U.S. for the hitler and his followers so its a short word for national socialists (the party, its memembers and sympathisants) the US was fighting ("name your enemy"). Your question is about/implies nazi as "an individual person with a special characteristic", which makes that someone a nazi.
Its a "nation first + everything for the nation" thinking. For me a nazi is someone who glorifies the nazi time, saying it was all well done then, wanting those times back - like some elderly tend to say "earlier, everything was better". They dream of powerfull country with a straight people-body. Nazi think in races. And always say others are guilty for one's own failure, argument with "they" and "us" when they talk about own country/others.
So basically, patriotism, skinheads and far right are subsets of "nazi", but not full nazi :)
And may be, if one wants to be a REAL full nazi, its a must to shave the head and to have some on topic tattoos with being caucassian at the same time. This is how we differentiate them in germany - you see: "we" and "them". But i'm not nazi :)
funny, in US there was a nazi gang a few years ago, with the group's "leader" having the room full of nazi-stuff, flags and propaganda - as it came out later, he was jewish by himself and did not tell ..
Frank Meeik, Daniel Burros, but the one i mean was just like a joke of a nazi. But still dangerous thinking.
ai_critic · · focus · HN ↗
the_gipsy · · focus · HN ↗
No, they stagnate economically in corruption.
ai_critic · · focus · HN ↗
the_gipsy · · focus · HN ↗
If you think this means "our nation over other nations" then you misunderstood. It means "nation above all", e.g. "everything for the government, above citizens". That is, forget the individual, there is a greater good for which we must endure some hardship, trust me.
FYI, the promised land never materialized, historically.
bigbadfeline · · focus · HN ↗
A distinction without a difference, the second automatically leads to the first, no exceptions.
> "everything for the government, above citizens". That is, forget the individual, there is a greater good for which we must endure some hardship, trust me.
Right, in addition to being a code for "we over the others", "nation above all" also provides the excuse for the social mobilization necessary for wars. Nationalism is a tool of war, it may start in some covert form but the end result is the same.