Trent Reznor Quits Web 2.0, Offers Cutting Advice To Haters(forum.nin.com)
forum.nin.com
Trent Reznor Quits Web 2.0, Offers Cutting Advice To Haters
http://forum.nin.com/bb/read.php?9,731489
10 comments
Anonymity seems to play a larger role than the size of the group. Join any moderately active IRC channel and you are sure to see someone acting up eventually. A channel that I frequent with fewer than 50 people has a regular troll that bugs the channel almost daily and occasional racists.
Can you ban or killfile him? With such a small population, the IRC channel could probably get away with blocking the whole IP address range that he could possibly occupy. You shouldn't have to put up with jackasses like that.
Seriously, bans work. I know at least one forum which has kept trolls away for years with the mighty ban-hammer, and maintained consistent quality of posts by making chronic idiocy a ban-worthy offense.
Seriously, bans work. I know at least one forum which has kept trolls away for years with the mighty ban-hammer, and maintained consistent quality of posts by making chronic idiocy a ban-worthy offense.
> Trent could probably solve some of this with technology
From the post:
In a closed environment like nin.com a lot of this can be moderated away, or code can be implemented to make it more difficult for troublemakers to persist. It's tedious and feels like wasted energy doing that shit, but some people exist to ruin it for others - and they are the ones who have nothing better to do with their time.
They've done the tech thing, but it's an arms race. I think the point of the "experiment" comment in the third to last paragraph is that the problem doesn't want to be fixed. The coping effort is doing more harm than good, idiots rule.
From the post:
In a closed environment like nin.com a lot of this can be moderated away, or code can be implemented to make it more difficult for troublemakers to persist. It's tedious and feels like wasted energy doing that shit, but some people exist to ruin it for others - and they are the ones who have nothing better to do with their time.
They've done the tech thing, but it's an arms race. I think the point of the "experiment" comment in the third to last paragraph is that the problem doesn't want to be fixed. The coping effort is doing more harm than good, idiots rule.
Quite right, and that's got a lot to do with NIN's style of music. You wouldn't expect Lionel Ritchie to experience the same thing if he emulated Reznor online. He'd probably get some middle-aged air-heads but no suicidal mischief-makers.
You wouldn't expect Lionel Ritchie to experience the same thing if he emulated Reznor online.
Well, having been on the receiving end of something I thought I'd share my experience. There are raving lunatic fans all around the place, regardless of what genre the artists are in.
During the campaign to get Rick Astley voted as Best Act Ever for last years MTV Europe Music Awards, I started receiving large volumes of hate mail from one or two of Astley's fans (I've never seen anything quite like it before or since... and I've seen some pretty angry emails).
I was also getting some quite vitriolic comments posted about me by these same fans on many blogs around the web (Thanks Google Alerts!)... these fans, I found out, just happened to be women in their mid 40's who have a "thing" for Astley.
Having spoken to several people close to Astley (I can't say who) they have mentioned who these people are and that they were "loonies" and could effectively be ignored.
So, I imagine Reznor would get more than his fair share and I feel for him, I really do (I experienced about 3 weeks of it, and that was 3 weeks too much) - raving lunatic fans are everywhere.
Anyway, back to the story at hand, I think Trent talking about verified forum profiles is great, but I think that you could take it one step further.
Some sort of centralised system for verified identities online with a simple API that people could plug into their forums/comment systems on blogs.
Only want verified people to comment on your blog - easy, same with forums? - easy
I think when you start removing the anonymous posting aspect of parts of the web, it becomes civil. That's why I never post anywhere anonymously, I self regulate and I find I don't troll - unfortunately I expect there is a significant contingent online that don't have the same self control and do cause problems for others.
I think right now is that we're seeing a tipping point from when trolling was an accepted fact of the web the experience that new users are experiencing as how to act given it's becoming more widespread, and those people are simply emulating that.
It's a problem that is just snowballing.
</rant>
Well, having been on the receiving end of something I thought I'd share my experience. There are raving lunatic fans all around the place, regardless of what genre the artists are in.
During the campaign to get Rick Astley voted as Best Act Ever for last years MTV Europe Music Awards, I started receiving large volumes of hate mail from one or two of Astley's fans (I've never seen anything quite like it before or since... and I've seen some pretty angry emails).
I was also getting some quite vitriolic comments posted about me by these same fans on many blogs around the web (Thanks Google Alerts!)... these fans, I found out, just happened to be women in their mid 40's who have a "thing" for Astley.
Having spoken to several people close to Astley (I can't say who) they have mentioned who these people are and that they were "loonies" and could effectively be ignored.
So, I imagine Reznor would get more than his fair share and I feel for him, I really do (I experienced about 3 weeks of it, and that was 3 weeks too much) - raving lunatic fans are everywhere.
Anyway, back to the story at hand, I think Trent talking about verified forum profiles is great, but I think that you could take it one step further.
Some sort of centralised system for verified identities online with a simple API that people could plug into their forums/comment systems on blogs.
Only want verified people to comment on your blog - easy, same with forums? - easy
I think when you start removing the anonymous posting aspect of parts of the web, it becomes civil. That's why I never post anywhere anonymously, I self regulate and I find I don't troll - unfortunately I expect there is a significant contingent online that don't have the same self control and do cause problems for others.
I think right now is that we're seeing a tipping point from when trolling was an accepted fact of the web the experience that new users are experiencing as how to act given it's becoming more widespread, and those people are simply emulating that.
It's a problem that is just snowballing.
</rant>
> Some sort of centralised system for verified identities online with a simple API that people could plug into their forums/comment systems on blogs.
This would not even be particularly hard; the infrastructure already exists in the form of SSL certificate issuance/verification.
PGP keysigning is supposed to accomplish the same thing but has never seemed to work as well in my experience. It's a lot easier to just pay $20 to Thawte or Verisign and send them copies of some identity documents than to chase down volunteers and get them to verify you. (Not because there's anything wrong with the volunteers, but I always feel like I'm imposing, in a way that I don't with Verisign.)
And if the cost component to SSL/X.509 is problematic, there's always CACert -- they have a fairly rigorous system for identity verification (at least on par with the commercial issuers), using either trusted third parties or a web-of-trust -- and they don't charge for it.
I think there are JS libraries around already for doing S/MIME signing in-browser; you could build that in to a comment form and just reject anything that wasn't signed with a trustworthy certificate bearing a real name (not "Thawte Freemail Member" or something similarly generic).
Of course you'd lose 99.9% of prospective contributors, but that's the case with any barrier to entry that removes anonymity. People aren't going to join something like that unless the content is really good.
This would not even be particularly hard; the infrastructure already exists in the form of SSL certificate issuance/verification.
PGP keysigning is supposed to accomplish the same thing but has never seemed to work as well in my experience. It's a lot easier to just pay $20 to Thawte or Verisign and send them copies of some identity documents than to chase down volunteers and get them to verify you. (Not because there's anything wrong with the volunteers, but I always feel like I'm imposing, in a way that I don't with Verisign.)
And if the cost component to SSL/X.509 is problematic, there's always CACert -- they have a fairly rigorous system for identity verification (at least on par with the commercial issuers), using either trusted third parties or a web-of-trust -- and they don't charge for it.
I think there are JS libraries around already for doing S/MIME signing in-browser; you could build that in to a comment form and just reject anything that wasn't signed with a trustworthy certificate bearing a real name (not "Thawte Freemail Member" or something similarly generic).
Of course you'd lose 99.9% of prospective contributors, but that's the case with any barrier to entry that removes anonymity. People aren't going to join something like that unless the content is really good.
This must be opt-in, though. I find the idea of a centralized system where totalitarian governments can track their Internet users absolutely terrifying. As Internet usage expands, like cell phone usage has, the technology designers will increasingly have to look at the moral implications of putting something like this in place. Trolls are a small price to pay for the safety anonymity can grant in many cases.
On the other hand don't some things need to be said anonymously or they will never be said, I'm thinking esp. in the realm of political opinion for example.
Mark, how come your blog's empty? Something to do with those fans?
Mark, how come your blog's empty? Something to do with those fans?
No, nothing like that.
I did have the intention of writing some essays on the site (I really just registered the domain to have my name as a TLD and for the email) but I've been working on my startup, so really haven't made the time to write essays.
It's not really a priority right now, whereas the startup is.
No, nothing like that.
I did have the intention of writing some essays on the site (I really just registered the domain to have my name as a TLD and for the email) but I've been working on my startup, so really haven't made the time to write essays.
It's not really a priority right now, whereas the startup is.
During the campaign to get Rick Astley voted as Best Act Ever for last years MTV Europe Music Awards, I started receiving large volumes of hate mail from one or two of Astley's fans (I've never seen anything quite like it before or since... and I've seen some pretty angry emails).
Nice rant, and that line is particularly striking. You'd think the fans would be favoring such an award for Rick, given they were his fans. They were jealous some new groupies would get to him first, likely. But to be such strong fans for Rick 20 years later: indicates added lunancy. Sheesh, you got Rick Rolled and a half: why would you want Astley to receive such an award? I mean back in the day Rick's music was commercially successful, today it's scene style-wise as a caricature to be mocked. Bizarre to the max.
Nice rant, and that line is particularly striking. You'd think the fans would be favoring such an award for Rick, given they were his fans. They were jealous some new groupies would get to him first, likely. But to be such strong fans for Rick 20 years later: indicates added lunancy. Sheesh, you got Rick Rolled and a half: why would you want Astley to receive such an award? I mean back in the day Rick's music was commercially successful, today it's scene style-wise as a caricature to be mocked. Bizarre to the max.
They were jealous some new groupies would get to him first, likely.
I'd say so, from the content of some of the emails, they were annoyed because they were his fans first and yet we managed to accomplish something in a short amount of time, 20 years after the fact.
I'm guessing these particular people were getting annoyed because they didn't get any recognition for being his fans. I particularly saw their posts on his official forums after he had won... Trying to take a lot of the credit for what really was achieved by nearly half a million people that we managed to get using the autovoting program during october of last year (that I could measure anyway).
It could be higher for all I know, although that being said, I do have the figures for how many votes he did get from MTV themselves and it was nothing short of substantial.
I'd say so, from the content of some of the emails, they were annoyed because they were his fans first and yet we managed to accomplish something in a short amount of time, 20 years after the fact.
I'm guessing these particular people were getting annoyed because they didn't get any recognition for being his fans. I particularly saw their posts on his official forums after he had won... Trying to take a lot of the credit for what really was achieved by nearly half a million people that we managed to get using the autovoting program during october of last year (that I could measure anyway).
It could be higher for all I know, although that being said, I do have the figures for how many votes he did get from MTV themselves and it was nothing short of substantial.
Yeah. He seems destined to be murdered by a "fan". Yikes, no wonder he's tuning out.
Am I the only one that gets a little pissy thinking that this is nothing but pure content thievery? There was a sum total TWO paragraphs of OC there - the rest was a re-post of Trent's entire post. A link would have sufficed. A couple of quotes would've been fine but the whole post? That's content theft as far as I'm concerned.
Although Trent Reznor is not some poor blogger needing ad revenue and so he probably wouldn't mind his missives being rebroadcast verbatim.
I don't see how that matters. Theft is theft, isn't it? The flip side could be that, since Trent Reznor is an important name, he could feel the need to stand up for all the little guys who get their content stolen yet can't afford to do anything about it.
there's the link to the original post at the beginning. I found reading the whole post on stereogum's site more relaxing however.
> A link would have sufficed.
Maybe it was self protection against edits or deletion for the original post.
Maybe it was self protection against edits or deletion for the original post.
And maybe I need the source code to Windows just in case they change something that I didn't want them to change.
Maybe you do. That's solidly among the reasons some of us use open software.
One thought after reading this: Troll filtering is a big, wide open market.
And there are plenty of places to train your algorithm
...but lots of disagreement as to exactly which ones are the trolls.
I've been thinking about this for a while. What it needs is shareable trust networks, so you can see ratings weighted by the votes of those who you particularly approve of or despise. Attempts at objective moderation just end up creating echo chambers and/or popularity contests.
I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of this, which this thread is too small to contain...but I am making notes to write it up in some useful form.
I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of this, which this thread is too small to contain...but I am making notes to write it up in some useful form.
Then you'll run the risk of creating echo subchambers in a community, where people who share similar opinions form trust groups and block competing opinions out. Even if you rely on outside connections (friends and such), you'll still be more likely to network with people you agree with.
Yes, I've wondered about something like that for a while, myself:
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=467574
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=467574
> I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of this, which this thread is too small to contain
This isn't going to be like Fermat's theorem all over again is it?
Seriously though I agree that you need a system that copes with the fact that different people have different tastes. Not a generic 'good' vs 'bad/spam'.
This isn't going to be like Fermat's theorem all over again is it?
Seriously though I agree that you need a system that copes with the fact that different people have different tastes. Not a generic 'good' vs 'bad/spam'.
Reading it, I couldn't help but think: I wonder what happened to Utu[1]. The site, http://savingtheinternetwithhate.com/ appears to be dead. Kinda sad.
(BTW, this is not meant to be flamebait either way about Zed Shaw. I thought it was an interesting project and it came to mind reading this.)
[1](http://www.zedshaw.com/essays/ragel_state_charts.html)
(BTW, this is not meant to be flamebait either way about Zed Shaw. I thought it was an interesting project and it came to mind reading this.)
[1](http://www.zedshaw.com/essays/ragel_state_charts.html)
This is one reason Facebook is so valuable. It's designed from the start to have a strong 1:1 linking with real names, and shows all of your public actions to your real-life peer group. It's approaching internet scale. It could lock up this market -- at least among forums wanting real-name participation.
They're solving a different problem. There's a whole class of trolling that's impossible to identify out of context.
My favorite line: "...the [social media] experiment seems to have yielded a result. Idiots rule."
Idiots rule our countries. Why would online be any different?
(Not being snide - wherever you look, politicians seem to unfailingly be raping and making a mockery of the democratic system. I may be slightly more cynical than usual as we discussed Berlusconi at lunch today, though).
Does anyone have good real-world examples of the the kind of communities we would like to see online? I'd like to hope that degeneration into idiocracy as communities grow is not some kind of natural law.
(Not being snide - wherever you look, politicians seem to unfailingly be raping and making a mockery of the democratic system. I may be slightly more cynical than usual as we discussed Berlusconi at lunch today, though).
Does anyone have good real-world examples of the the kind of communities we would like to see online? I'd like to hope that degeneration into idiocracy as communities grow is not some kind of natural law.
Here is a good one: http://news.ycombinator.com
Does anyone have good real-world examples of the the kind of communities we would like to see online?
Well, I'll give a fairly decent example.
I occasionally played tabletop wargames in the past locally and we have a statewide forum dedicated to it.
http://www.westgamer.com
I've seen disagreements before on the forum, but have never seen anything that would constitute trolling or abusive behaviour. I think this stems from the fact that everyone pretty much knows everyone outside of the forums and so idiotic behaviour can have real-world consequences (eg, not being able to set up games with others)
There is little to no anonymity on those forums and so everyone is quite civil. I suspect that if you make people responsible for their actions that they end up being quite responsible on the forums.
That's not to say there hasn't been the occasional piece of drama, it's just normally localised and doesn't make its way to the forums for everyone to read.
Well, I'll give a fairly decent example.
I occasionally played tabletop wargames in the past locally and we have a statewide forum dedicated to it.
http://www.westgamer.com
I've seen disagreements before on the forum, but have never seen anything that would constitute trolling or abusive behaviour. I think this stems from the fact that everyone pretty much knows everyone outside of the forums and so idiotic behaviour can have real-world consequences (eg, not being able to set up games with others)
There is little to no anonymity on those forums and so everyone is quite civil. I suspect that if you make people responsible for their actions that they end up being quite responsible on the forums.
That's not to say there hasn't been the occasional piece of drama, it's just normally localised and doesn't make its way to the forums for everyone to read.
The Well is fantastic
I've always thought the degradation into idiocracy happened when people felt like they were anonymous which often times is correlated to the size of the community.
It's not that social media has failed but rather Trent is realizing that his audience contains many antisocial malcontents and now he's recoiling in horror.
On the unfiltered internet -every- audience gets quickly dominated by antisocial malcontents.
So there's no way to infer from their presence whether they're a representative sample. I mean, people troll and spew racial slurs on -home improvement sites-. I don't think that means Whirlpool and Bob Villa themselves attract the dregs.
So there's no way to infer from their presence whether they're a representative sample. I mean, people troll and spew racial slurs on -home improvement sites-. I don't think that means Whirlpool and Bob Villa themselves attract the dregs.
I think that's just the result of version 1.
We're on a version way past 1... that has been the result for many years now. The second person on the Internet was probably a troll.
I saw this youtube video of an early 90s broadcast about this thing called internet, and they pretty much talked about how great it is to have a civilized conversation, without trolls.
So early on it wasn't a problem, my guess is that trolls probably didn't really appear until AOL.
So early on it wasn't a problem, my guess is that trolls probably didn't really appear until AOL.
Specifically, on the Internet, when AOL got a Usenet gateway. No-one cared when they stayed within AOL, not least because AOL had moderators.
The real Internet is not HN, it's not Facebook or Livejournal. It's 4chan and the comments on Youtube. That's what we built, that's the glorious future, the pinnacle of high tech, the global collective consciousness. How proud should we be?
The real Internet is not HN, it's not Facebook or Livejournal. It's 4chan and the comments on Youtube. That's what we built, that's the glorious future, the pinnacle of high tech, the global collective consciousness. How proud should we be?
Honestly, 4chan just reminds me of alt.* in Septembers. I'm not a regular visitor, but at least 4chan doesn't pretend to be anything other than the filthy underbelly of the net, and the community there has both a sense of humor about itself and genuinely likes kittehs...plus it has the merit of being funny if you're willing to accept the possibility of being offended.
What's really depressing to me is going to visit the San Francisco Chronicle website, CNN or wherever, and seeing the comment space overrun by arrogant idiots who think they're superior to 4chan, or would if they knew about it. I would far rather be trapped in a lift with a bunch of /b/tards than the over-earnest moralists (of all political stripes) that attach themselves like limpets to the mainstream news and political sites.
What's really depressing to me is going to visit the San Francisco Chronicle website, CNN or wherever, and seeing the comment space overrun by arrogant idiots who think they're superior to 4chan, or would if they knew about it. I would far rather be trapped in a lift with a bunch of /b/tards than the over-earnest moralists (of all political stripes) that attach themselves like limpets to the mainstream news and political sites.
4chan vs. Trent Reznor would be an epic, and (I suspect) enjoyable challenge for both sides.
4chan and Youtube comments are part of the internet. The ghetto parts, to be specific. The 4chan-style scum and villainy gets concentrated at 4chan, the Youtube-style tomfoolery stays on Youtube, and the rest of us can sit in our small splinter forums and have discussions without somebody yelling about how 9/11 was an inside job (WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!!) or posting pictures of naked underage anime characters. There have always been a bunch of people in the world that you'd rather not live near, and it's the same way on the internet.
The real internet isn't HN, but it's also not 4chan or Youtube. The real internet is the internet -- the whole internet. Tautological but true. As long as there's always some readily-accessible part of the internet without troll problems, then I'd say we're doing okay.
The real progress, though, would be figuring out how those civilized parts of the internet can stay civilized. Some forums have a small population. Some forums have a strong sense of community and ban-happy moderators. Some forums have downvoting, although that doesn't seem to stop persistent trolls. If you've got a better way, discussing it would be fun.
The real internet isn't HN, but it's also not 4chan or Youtube. The real internet is the internet -- the whole internet. Tautological but true. As long as there's always some readily-accessible part of the internet without troll problems, then I'd say we're doing okay.
The real progress, though, would be figuring out how those civilized parts of the internet can stay civilized. Some forums have a small population. Some forums have a strong sense of community and ban-happy moderators. Some forums have downvoting, although that doesn't seem to stop persistent trolls. If you've got a better way, discussing it would be fun.
I can't offer the link (reddit is blocked on my computer :D ) but the WAKE UP SHEEPLE guy was one of the best and most useful trolls I have ever seen. Look for his "good bye" post - the guy was way over the average, and not just as a troll.
The comments on Youtube and 4chan have absolutely nothing in common. One is a group of people who recognize they're acting like idiotic jackasses and do it because they find it humorous. The other group is simply mentally retarded.
How did you decide what counts as the real Internet?
Why the 4chan hate? It is what it is, doesn't pretend to be anything else, and there's a place for it. At its best, 4chan can be great.
You can't compare that to YouTube comments at all. 4chan's about lulz, not pure unadulterated stupidity. They're not the same at all.
You can't compare that to YouTube comments at all. 4chan's about lulz, not pure unadulterated stupidity. They're not the same at all.
I'm from the old guard, used to be real thrilled with Usenet. Trolls are The Great Enemy, and 4chan is real big on trolling.
Only a subset, which is called /b/. The rest hang out there, and a few related sites, and basically troll themselves. Better to have them (more or less) all in one place than randomly distributed everywhere else, no?
And anyway - not all "trolling" is created equal, IMO. Smart, organised, (dare I say) funny trolling beats random hate and idiocy anyday. I haven't noticed 4chan moving with any particular malicious intent; they just try to amuse themselves, and the causes are as often defensible (Scientology, Sarah Palin mails) as not.
We're always going to have trolls. If 4chan sets the standard for trolling I think we've done pretty well actually. At least they're intelligent.
And anyway - not all "trolling" is created equal, IMO. Smart, organised, (dare I say) funny trolling beats random hate and idiocy anyday. I haven't noticed 4chan moving with any particular malicious intent; they just try to amuse themselves, and the causes are as often defensible (Scientology, Sarah Palin mails) as not.
We're always going to have trolls. If 4chan sets the standard for trolling I think we've done pretty well actually. At least they're intelligent.
Yeah, I don't buy it. I was on the intertubes in the early nineties, and I distinctly remember trolls running around Usenet.
That said, the caliber of trolling may have been slightly higher. :)
That said, the caliber of trolling may have been slightly higher. :)
I remember this story about a psychologist who pretented to be a woman, and I don't remember exactly who, or where, but it was in a movie about the net beginnings...
Found... don't know if it counts as a troll, tough: Google for "The Strange Case of the Electronic Lover"
Found... don't know if it counts as a troll, tough: Google for "The Strange Case of the Electronic Lover"
You are talking about the student researcher Selena Sol:
http://selenasol.com/selena/
http://selenasol.com/selena/
my guess is that trolls probably didn't really appear until AOL.
I'm old enough to remember that there were trolls on Usenet before AOL built its gateway to Usenet.
I'm pretty sure that verifying the earliest use of "troll" in the sense of this thread and comparing that with the date of AOL's gateway opening would confirm this.
I'm old enough to remember that there were trolls on Usenet before AOL built its gateway to Usenet.
I'm pretty sure that verifying the earliest use of "troll" in the sense of this thread and comparing that with the date of AOL's gateway opening would confirm this.
I agree.
For me version one would have been usenet, FidoNet and BBS chat circa late 80s or early 90s. I knew then what Trent has finally figured out. Sounds like he really is "living next" to us.
For me version one would have been usenet, FidoNet and BBS chat circa late 80s or early 90s. I knew then what Trent has finally figured out. Sounds like he really is "living next" to us.
That is good, because it is so easy to sell to them.
Given Trent's recent sentiments on Web2.0 I took it upon myself to transcribe his feelings to you by rewriting the chorus for his first smash hit, Head Like A Hole from the album Pretty Hate Machine.
web two point oh
black as your soul
he'd rather die than give trolls control
Awesome!
Great piece. As far as social networking goes, this stood out:
> Anyway, we're in a world where the mainstream social networks want any and all people to boost user numbers for the big selloff and are not concerned with the quality of experience.
> Anyway, we're in a world where the mainstream social networks want any and all people to boost user numbers for the big selloff and are not concerned with the quality of experience.
After witnessing his minor meltdown on Twitter the other day I thought to myself celebrities will really need to learn to ignore the trolls. I'm sure Trent will be just the first of many Twitter celebrities to go through this.
I think the majority of celebrities that are established celebrities, will realize they don't need the bs and just stop (like reznor is doing).
It stops being fun for them and it comes down to business. If they are not getting enough out of it to put up with the crap, they will stop or pawn it off on PR people to do it for them.
Same reason Obama and the likes don't watch cable news.
It stops being fun for them and it comes down to business. If they are not getting enough out of it to put up with the crap, they will stop or pawn it off on PR people to do it for them.
Same reason Obama and the likes don't watch cable news.
Interestingly, the only troll-less social places on the internet are those who are started by, and frequented by a "guru" who everyone respects. I visit a handful of such places for different subject areas and they are completely different than the majority of the internet.
There's an important distinction between a guru and an idol, though. Reznor doesn't seem to fulfill that description; a too-distant figure can turn the respect into something like worship, with the accompanying zealotry.
Funny, I just saw him play tonight. He always puts on a good show. He's from Pittsburgh and we got a particularly good setlist.
http://twitter.com/trent_reznor/status/2049368290 probably sums up Trent's feelings in a tweet.
http://twitter.com/trent_reznor/status/2049368290 probably sums up Trent's feelings in a tweet.
Anonymity isn't the problem. The problem is that Trent's mind still cares enough about what other people think of him that it is consumed by the act of surveying his status and trying to please the please-able.
That's a dead end.
Instead, I suggest that at least on a personal level, we should let go and try to realize that nothing* really matters online.
As you begin to welcome anonymity, a certain type of apathy appears. You may even surprise yourself that you don't actually care that some troll just told you to "an hero" or whatever else it is they're bringing.
Although we're not funded yet, my startup is working on bringing the ideas of anonymity (along with privacy/security) to the mainstream.
We believe, that for many, many use cases, identity simply doesn't matter.
*mostly ;)
That's a dead end.
Instead, I suggest that at least on a personal level, we should let go and try to realize that nothing* really matters online.
As you begin to welcome anonymity, a certain type of apathy appears. You may even surprise yourself that you don't actually care that some troll just told you to "an hero" or whatever else it is they're bringing.
Although we're not funded yet, my startup is working on bringing the ideas of anonymity (along with privacy/security) to the mainstream.
We believe, that for many, many use cases, identity simply doesn't matter.
*mostly ;)
I don't know...the impression I got was that what really got under his skin wasn't so much the attacks on him as it was the attacks on people he cared about-like his fiancee and the guy who needs the heart transplant that he was trying to help. It's easier to let anonymous attacks slide if they are just directed against you, but it's different when people start directing their venom at other people because you care about them.
There are many kinds of trolls. Most can easily be ignored, but there are many that can't. Two that spring to mind are the persistent attention takers (switching or maintaining multiple identities as necessary) that amount to a DOS attack, and those who are able to look like signal for a long time before it becomes clear they're just trolls.
In other words, not caring what trolls say is necessary but not sufficient.
In other words, not caring what trolls say is necessary but not sufficient.
And I get that. We (in our apps) have captchas, crapflood limits, banning, etc. that Trent doesn't have IRL.
I'd stand by my identity consistently if it meant revealing the identities of others.
Your life and circumstance may allow for this, others don't. :)
In some cases anonymous expression is preferable to no expression, in others anonymous expression is not preferable over silence.
In some countries you lose your life for "standing by your identity," in others you don't.
http://iranianminorityshumanright.blogspot.com/2009/03/repor...
http://iranianminorityshumanright.blogspot.com/2009/03/repor...
[deleted]
It's a shame that he quits, as he is one of those few people who could make it work. When he quits, it's almost like "game over" for the medium.
Trent could probably solve some of this with technology and create a self-policing environment, in which a core group of half-sane fans could administrate/police/censor to the betterment of all - There's a reason why Wikipedia's NPOV cabal and anti-vandalism bots make it a better place.
Likewise with keeping the community small (and hopefully self selected to be at least semi-lucid) ala the HN approach is also good.
Big, uncontrolled, and lunatic is a recipe for all sorts of wackiness and cruft.