NY Times 'Troll' Article
Check out this insane article about internet trolls:
NY Times Article
Probably one of the most insane reads of my life. Basically a bunch of kids who think they are cool because they can harass people. What do you guys think?
Quote:Original post by programmermattc
Probably one of the most insane reads of my life. Basically a bunch of kids who think they are cool because they can harass people. What do you guys think?
I don't see what's so insane about it. Trolls are just glorified sociopaths, and the article makes that painfully clear.
Quote:Original post by RaStill, it's kind of interesting to see how the internet allows that to be unleashed on the world.Quote:Original post by programmermattc
Probably one of the most insane reads of my life. Basically a bunch of kids who think they are cool because they can harass people. What do you guys think?
I don't see what's so insane about it. Trolls are just glorified sociopaths, and the article makes that painfully clear.
Dark Knight parallels go!
Quote:Original post by RaQuote:Original post by programmermattc
Probably one of the most insane reads of my life. Basically a bunch of kids who think they are cool because they can harass people. What do you guys think?
I don't see what's so insane about it. Trolls are just glorified sociopaths, and the article makes that painfully clear.
Honestly, I think that's an insultingly simplified look at the troll subculture. Well, maybe not the sociopath part, and except on 4chan and similar they don't seem glorified...
Against all rationality, I still disagree with your assessment.
Trolling happens because people allow themselves to be trapped by it. Because we all have these silly, stupid human doubts and fears that make us easily psychological prey. It's merely the act of hunting, moved from physical targeting of animals, to mental targeting of humans.
Quote:Original post by coldacid
Trolling happens because people allow themselves to be trapped by it. Because we all have these silly, stupid human doubts and fears that make us easily psychological prey. It's merely the act of hunting, moved from physical targeting of animals, to mental targeting of humans.
I'm not really surprised by them attacking people about certain things like a deceased family member. What I was surprised by is like the whole fancy car pulling up and getting in all mysteriously and whatnot. It's like they're trying to recreate spy or movie things when in reality they're usually just some nerds who know how to use a browser and talk on some websites. It was like they were over-exaggerating their 'l33tness' and having it spill into their real lives.
I could jump on GameDev and talk some stuff up but when I leave my computer I don't like run around thinking I'm cool cause I know how to post online.
Quote:Original post by RaQuote:Original post by programmermattc
Probably one of the most insane reads of my life. Basically a bunch of kids who think they are cool because they can harass people. What do you guys think?
I don't see what's so insane about it. Trolls are just glorified sociopaths, and the article makes that painfully clear.
Don't forget amoral. Some of that behavior crosses well into the realm of mental illness.
This is perhaps the most insightful article on the internet and trolling I have ever read. I have to say, I thought "journalistic integrity" was a myth these days, but here is an author who went above and beyond. He really did an excellent job of reporting the facts without passing judgement, presenting the arguments without pushing the reader in one direction. Brilliant work.
As for the issue at hand, I very much believe in the what I call the "life is life" theory: I am as distinct of a person in internet "life" as I am in real life, that I have chosen my own name instead of using the one I was given does not change that fact. After having been on this site as "capn_midnight" for the last 8 years, in actuallity it is a community and identity with which I have had more continuity than most other communities or imaginings of my identity. The only ones that are longer are the conception of me that my family has (25 years), and conception of me that my best friends have (18 years). I am no less as real to Promit, boolean, and coldacid as capn_midnight than I am to my friends and coworkers as "Sean T. McBeth". In fact, I am probably more real as capn_midnight to gdnet than I am as "Sean T. McBeth" to my current employer (only 1.5 years).
A point of clarification. I talk about "imaginings" and "conceptions" of my "identity", and it sounds like it is a contradiction to my assertion that you have but one identity. What I mean is that, reallistically, there is only one me. However, I cannot directly communicate that identity, I must communicate it through my actions and words, of which I am in direct control. I do not have control over how those actions and words are interpreted by others. So, metaphysically, there are many versions of "me" that exist as the opinions that others have on my identity.
The internet is just a means of communication. I could write letters or make phone calls or send emails, I am the same person in each. You cannot be anyone other than yourself. This isn't an existential "be true to yourself" argument, this is pragmatic to the point of being a tautology.
If you attempt to use dishonesty to mislead people into thinking you are someone you are not, but only do it through one medium of communication over all others, it does not make you any less of a dishonest person. Equally such, I am still a liar if I tell the truth to everyone but the members of the hypothetical social club I joined last month.
The medium through which I communicate those lies does not matter. To attempt to manipulate the metaphysical versions of my identities does not give me more than one reallistic identity, it only further clarifies my one reallistic identity as being a deceitful one.
Therefore, you act as you wish to be known, both in "real life" and in "internet life" (even though I have already established that "internet life" is just real life expressed to others through the internet).
but if you had a Rolls Royce to run around in, and did live a jet-setting life, wouldn't you therefore be a cool mofo?
As for the issue at hand, I very much believe in the what I call the "life is life" theory: I am as distinct of a person in internet "life" as I am in real life, that I have chosen my own name instead of using the one I was given does not change that fact. After having been on this site as "capn_midnight" for the last 8 years, in actuallity it is a community and identity with which I have had more continuity than most other communities or imaginings of my identity. The only ones that are longer are the conception of me that my family has (25 years), and conception of me that my best friends have (18 years). I am no less as real to Promit, boolean, and coldacid as capn_midnight than I am to my friends and coworkers as "Sean T. McBeth". In fact, I am probably more real as capn_midnight to gdnet than I am as "Sean T. McBeth" to my current employer (only 1.5 years).
A point of clarification. I talk about "imaginings" and "conceptions" of my "identity", and it sounds like it is a contradiction to my assertion that you have but one identity. What I mean is that, reallistically, there is only one me. However, I cannot directly communicate that identity, I must communicate it through my actions and words, of which I am in direct control. I do not have control over how those actions and words are interpreted by others. So, metaphysically, there are many versions of "me" that exist as the opinions that others have on my identity.
The internet is just a means of communication. I could write letters or make phone calls or send emails, I am the same person in each. You cannot be anyone other than yourself. This isn't an existential "be true to yourself" argument, this is pragmatic to the point of being a tautology.
If you attempt to use dishonesty to mislead people into thinking you are someone you are not, but only do it through one medium of communication over all others, it does not make you any less of a dishonest person. Equally such, I am still a liar if I tell the truth to everyone but the members of the hypothetical social club I joined last month.
The medium through which I communicate those lies does not matter. To attempt to manipulate the metaphysical versions of my identities does not give me more than one reallistic identity, it only further clarifies my one reallistic identity as being a deceitful one.
Therefore, you act as you wish to be known, both in "real life" and in "internet life" (even though I have already established that "internet life" is just real life expressed to others through the internet).
Quote:Original post by programmermattc
I could jump on GameDev and talk some stuff up but when I leave my computer I don't like run around thinking I'm cool cause I know how to post online.
but if you had a Rolls Royce to run around in, and did live a jet-setting life, wouldn't you therefore be a cool mofo?
Quote:Original post by coldacid
Trolling happens because people allow themselves to be trapped by it. Because we all have these silly, stupid human doubts and fears that make us easily psychological prey. It's merely the act of hunting, moved from physical targeting of animals, to mental targeting of humans.
Now who is simplifying things? Alot of the targets described in the article did nothing to make themselves deserving of extreme harassment.
What is even more worrying is that your statements almost justify what is unjustifiable.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement