I have to disagree, there is a huge difference between internet mobs and face 2 face bullying. In my oppinion, as long as you don't cause physical harm, you can say whatever you want.
That's a slippery slope to argue for, I think. If an internet mob starts harassing someone habitually to the point where they can't go online without finding abuse aimed at them, especially if they had preexisting anxiety or depression or what have you, and that person had a breakdown or worse, blame can squarely be blamed on the hate mob - their actions lead directly towards physical violence. I think negative comments can have their place, to be sure, but should definitely be filtered through a respectful lens, not intending to make the subject feel bad about themselves but rather to give them ideas as to how they could do things better the next time.
Blaming people simply because they were one cause of something is a much bigger slippery slope. Freedom of speech requires that we allow unpopular opinions (though not actual harassment), even if expressing them causes harm. Otherwise anti-feminists could all agree to cry whenever feminism was mentioned, and then talking about feminism would become illegal.
The thing is in a lot of ways outside is just as bad or worse. As someone who has worked in retail. I have been yelled and scremed at and called every name in the book for other people's mistakes or customer's mistakes. So it's easy to say "go outside", but in a lot of ways it's just as bad the internet.
it often makes me think when i realize a lot of these concepts, even just pertaining to ways to describe it, simply dont apply to non-us (or non-north american, even) countries and languages properly, yet its always merely glossed over at most. terms dont translate, norms dont translate, and often as a non-american i feel like my internet presence is a different world from my irl presence not only because of what it allows me to do, but also because spaces and conversations like on here simply dont and cant exist here. realizing that makes it all a really weird experience, and sometimes the different mindsets im forced to adept to really do start to blur.
You know, I think that Idea Channel response videos can sometimes rely a little heavily on those comments who almost overly quote academic sources and use big words... very often I see longer, better comments that are better if only because they have such amazing internal logic. But, this time I legitimately think they had some of the best comments on the video! This was almost more thought provoking than the original video, I love the comment responses. Great job everyone, featured or no!
I tried to write a good response, but I'm glad it's not featured as those that were are a lot more thought-provoking. Thanks to all thoughtful commenters out there (here?).
On the subject of negative comments coming in all at once, I think I have some idea on the "unit of communication" thing. If you stretch and skew the signal to noise ratio, I think it's easy to understand. A small number of negative comments can be a signal and get you to think about it, whereas it easily becomes noise if it's all you ever hear. Also, with so much noise comes feelings like, your message was a mistake, and depending on your intentions, how awful it feels to elicit such a one-sided, strong reaction. When people communicate earnestly, they rarely want everyone to agree or disagree.
So what is your relationship with PBS? Do they give you funding, or do they just slap a seal of approval on your work to show how great you are at what you do or some third option?
Is the lunch space in a office building a public space? Is any place within a country a public space? The government in my country doesn't allow everybody in. Yet it the borders are not considered an exclusive area. Following this idea I feel most places on the internet where you can post a comment like this can be considered public spaces regardless of sign up conditions.. (Their are plenty of under 10's who ignore the rules and have a RUclips account anyway) (Its impossible to administrate and verify everyone is telling the truth.)
For me, the difference between public and private is clear. Something is public when it is owned by a non-commercial entity; usually a government. Even though you might argue that some countries enforce censorship, it is still public in that country. The lunch space in an office building might have resemblances of an accessible place which serves the purpose of relaxation, it is, by all means, privately owned. What is your opinion on this?
Moreover, to verify someone is telling the truth is difficult in both public and private situations. You can lie to your government about the money you make and thus the tax you pay, but you can also lie to an employee about your previous working experiences. Simply because something is difficult to administrate doesn't mean it's public. Also, just like countries have boundaries with an application process for a visa, you have websites like RUclips with Terms of Agreement and physical companies with an employment contract. These things, by themselves, do not make anything private, nor public
I realize this is probably not an easy change to make, or one without consequences I'm not considering, but in terms of how I consume these comment response videos, I know how I would like them organized: 1. Here's a comment, presented for 2-3 seconds, with no speaking behind it. During that time I would pause to read it, knowing I'm not interrupting Mike speaking while I pause. 2. Afterwards, Mike talks about the comment, with an annotation linking to the point in the video where the comment was (can you do that? link to a place in the same video with an annotation?) Right now I basically have to choose between reading the comment and listening to Mike, and reading the comment isn't easy either, since it is pasted in chunks every few seconds, requiring frequent pausing and unpausing. If, having read it, I want to hear the response, I then have to seek back, without knowing exactly where to.
One nice change that RUclips apparently made is having transparency in the controls window. It used to be if you hovered your mouse in the lower part of the window to do something like pause the video, the controls section was opaque, preventing me from seeing the lower part of the comment on the screen. Now, I can still see most of the comment through the transparency. A small change, but what a difference it makes.
It's not Twitter/youtube/etc, it's the people who were on the internet close to the start and originated the early internet services who started these social norms that Twitter followed, at least initially. There's other places that could be considered public spaces instead of just government owned sites. Federated services where there is no one server that runs the entire thing, but rather servers owned by many people all supporting one small part of it. Usenet, and Diaspora are a couple of examples. Technically, the web is such as well, but the technical aspects are such that each server is its own little domain with its own rules.
Mean comments aren't harassment. If you want to manage comments so you never see anything that might hurt your feelings, just don't look at the comments. Saying things publicly is inherently seeking a response from the public, good or bad. Don't say things publicly if you don't want the public to respond, and if you want to say something publicly without hearing the response you can do that by just not looking at the responses.
If 10,000 hateful messages should be banned for harassment, then so should 10,000 overly-praising messages for unfairly inflating someone's ego and turning them into a vain prick. If a Neo-Nazi was waving a Nazi flag in a public forum and thousands of people surrounded him and shouted their disapproval and called him names, would you advocate making it illegal for these people to "harass" someone like this? Or are the people in favor of stopping internet harassment only interested in serving their own personal desires?
"... there is no fundamental reason that the internet has to be that way..." i thought the entire point is that there is, that the virtual anonymity fundamentally afforded by the internet (outside of intricate, privatizing, artificially restricted "spaces") frees people of most IRL social considerations and potential repercussions; restricting this as with net neutrality fundamentally breaks something about what makes the internet the valuable and vibrant creative catalyst that it is over-all; and people have been acting such fools since some of the earliest days of Usenet if not sooner, with no true solution in sight beyond fostering a sense of necessarily self-curated and to some extent moderated sub-community, whether formally or informally..... listening to this discussion, it's starting to seem to me we are getting into fundamental aspects of how human social groups organize and censure themselves in general.....
the main difference nowadays being that EVERYone and their mom is online now, and usually using their IRL names and identities, both incredible messes completely throwing off earlier advances in community.....P
+camron reynosa I believe it's a kind of ownership thing, sort of. I think people comment it to show "I was here before anyone else, and therefore I am in some way superior." I just wrote it because was looking for an individual such as yourself to have a conversation about the whole "First" thing. So what are your opinions?
"Negative comments are jsut a fact of life to live with" -Someone who have never had a harassment mob targeted at them.
I have to disagree, there is a huge difference between internet mobs and face 2 face bullying. In my oppinion, as long as you don't cause physical harm, you can say whatever you want.
That's a slippery slope to argue for, I think. If an internet mob starts harassing someone habitually to the point where they can't go online without finding abuse aimed at them, especially if they had preexisting anxiety or depression or what have you, and that person had a breakdown or worse, blame can squarely be blamed on the hate mob - their actions lead directly towards physical violence. I think negative comments can have their place, to be sure, but should definitely be filtered through a respectful lens, not intending to make the subject feel bad about themselves but rather to give them ideas as to how they could do things better the next time.
+Nu Vagus Then maybe they should create an anonymous profile, or better yet, go outside.
Blaming people simply because they were one cause of something is a much bigger slippery slope. Freedom of speech requires that we allow unpopular opinions (though not actual harassment), even if expressing them causes harm. Otherwise anti-feminists could all agree to cry whenever feminism was mentioned, and then talking about feminism would become illegal.
The thing is in a lot of ways outside is just as bad or worse. As someone who has worked in retail. I have been yelled and scremed at and called every name in the book for other people's mistakes or customer's mistakes. So it's easy to say "go outside", but in a lot of ways it's just as bad the internet.
Hi mom! I was honestly surprised I was featured but I'm glad people thought I brought something to the discussion.
(*≧∀≦*)
it often makes me think when i realize a lot of these concepts, even just pertaining to ways to describe it, simply dont apply to non-us (or non-north american, even) countries and languages properly, yet its always merely glossed over at most. terms dont translate, norms dont translate, and often as a non-american i feel like my internet presence is a different world from my irl presence not only because of what it allows me to do, but also because spaces and conversations like on here simply dont and cant exist here. realizing that makes it all a really weird experience, and sometimes the different mindsets im forced to adept to really do start to blur.
11:44 when are we gonna get another video about linguistic determinism and the way language shapes thought?
I always love when someone notices it.
Wow! You actually responded to my comment! You guys just made my day!
You know, I think that Idea Channel response videos can sometimes rely a little heavily on those comments who almost overly quote academic sources and use big words... very often I see longer, better comments that are better if only because they have such amazing internal logic. But, this time I legitimately think they had some of the best comments on the video! This was almost more thought provoking than the original video, I love the comment responses. Great job everyone, featured or no!
Well for what its worth, this channel has to be one of the most brilliant I have stumbled upon in all of the internet!
These are some very measured and thoughtful responses! Thanks
I tried to write a good response, but I'm glad it's not featured as those that were are a lot more thought-provoking. Thanks to all thoughtful commenters out there (here?).
On the subject of negative comments coming in all at once, I think I have some idea on the "unit of communication" thing. If you stretch and skew the signal to noise ratio, I think it's easy to understand. A small number of negative comments can be a signal and get you to think about it, whereas it easily becomes noise if it's all you ever hear. Also, with so much noise comes feelings like, your message was a mistake, and depending on your intentions, how awful it feels to elicit such a one-sided, strong reaction. When people communicate earnestly, they rarely want everyone to agree or disagree.
So what is your relationship with PBS? Do they give you funding, or do they just slap a seal of approval on your work to show how great you are at what you do or some third option?
2:16 idea is utopic, that's ironic, 'cause utopia means it's not a place
Is the lunch space in a office building a public space? Is any place within a country a public space? The government in my country doesn't allow everybody in. Yet it the borders are not considered an exclusive area. Following this idea I feel most places on the internet where you can post a comment like this can be considered public spaces regardless of sign up conditions.. (Their are plenty of under 10's who ignore the rules and have a RUclips account anyway) (Its impossible to administrate and verify everyone is telling the truth.)
For me, the difference between public and private is clear. Something is public when it is owned by a non-commercial entity; usually a government. Even though you might argue that some countries enforce censorship, it is still public in that country. The lunch space in an office building might have resemblances of an accessible place which serves the purpose of relaxation, it is, by all means, privately owned. What is your opinion on this?
Moreover, to verify someone is telling the truth is difficult in both public and private situations. You can lie to your government about the money you make and thus the tax you pay, but you can also lie to an employee about your previous working experiences. Simply because something is difficult to administrate doesn't mean it's public. Also, just like countries have boundaries with an application process for a visa, you have websites like RUclips with Terms of Agreement and physical companies with an employment contract. These things, by themselves, do not make anything private, nor public
I realize this is probably not an easy change to make, or one without consequences I'm not considering, but in terms of how I consume these comment response videos, I know how I would like them organized:
1. Here's a comment, presented for 2-3 seconds, with no speaking behind it. During that time I would pause to read it, knowing I'm not interrupting Mike speaking while I pause.
2. Afterwards, Mike talks about the comment, with an annotation linking to the point in the video where the comment was (can you do that? link to a place in the same video with an annotation?)
Right now I basically have to choose between reading the comment and listening to Mike, and reading the comment isn't easy either, since it is pasted in chunks every few seconds, requiring frequent pausing and unpausing. If, having read it, I want to hear the response, I then have to seek back, without knowing exactly where to.
One nice change that RUclips apparently made is having transparency in the controls window. It used to be if you hovered your mouse in the lower part of the window to do something like pause the video, the controls section was opaque, preventing me from seeing the lower part of the comment on the screen. Now, I can still see most of the comment through the transparency.
A small change, but what a difference it makes.
I think I'm most surprised that they never really talked about censorship/free speech in Chinese internet spaces. But A+ video and responses :)
It's not Twitter/youtube/etc, it's the people who were on the internet close to the start and originated the early internet services who started these social norms that Twitter followed, at least initially.
There's other places that could be considered public spaces instead of just government owned sites. Federated services where there is no one server that runs the entire thing, but rather servers owned by many people all supporting one small part of it. Usenet, and Diaspora are a couple of examples. Technically, the web is such as well, but the technical aspects are such that each server is its own little domain with its own rules.
Mean comments aren't harassment. If you want to manage comments so you never see anything that might hurt your feelings, just don't look at the comments. Saying things publicly is inherently seeking a response from the public, good or bad. Don't say things publicly if you don't want the public to respond, and if you want to say something publicly without hearing the response you can do that by just not looking at the responses.
If 10,000 hateful messages should be banned for harassment, then so should 10,000 overly-praising messages for unfairly inflating someone's ego and turning them into a vain prick. If a Neo-Nazi was waving a Nazi flag in a public forum and thousands of people surrounded him and shouted their disapproval and called him names, would you advocate making it illegal for these people to "harass" someone like this? Or are the people in favor of stopping internet harassment only interested in serving their own personal desires?
"... there is no fundamental reason that the internet has to be that way..."
i thought the entire point is that there is, that the virtual anonymity fundamentally afforded by the internet (outside of intricate, privatizing, artificially restricted "spaces") frees people of most IRL social considerations and potential repercussions; restricting this as with net neutrality fundamentally breaks something about what makes the internet the valuable and vibrant creative catalyst that it is over-all; and people have been acting such fools since some of the earliest days of Usenet if not sooner, with no true solution in sight beyond fostering a sense of necessarily self-curated and to some extent moderated sub-community, whether formally or informally.....
listening to this discussion, it's starting to seem to me we are getting into fundamental aspects of how human social groups organize and censure themselves in general.....
the main difference nowadays being that EVERYone and their mom is online now, and usually using their IRL names and identities, both incredible messes completely throwing off earlier advances in community.....P
you mentioned Milo.... but why? isn't he like the devil to you?
Earlee
early gang
You're the leader, the true FIRST COMMENTER!!!!!!🎉🎉🎉🎉
Wow, I'm first.
what is the facination with being first? its just like the guild based games having people always asking to be co leaders upon joining..
+camron reynosa
not exactly directed at you, i just notice this as a trend on vids lately.
+camron reynosa I believe it's a kind of ownership thing, sort of. I think people comment it to show "I was here before anyone else, and therefore I am in some way superior." I just wrote it because was looking for an individual such as yourself to have a conversation about the whole "First" thing. So what are your opinions?
#earlysquad