Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Let’s fix the problems causing the devolution to a low trust society instead of just layering on cameras and ubiquitous surveillance.

Maybe the people making grocery store clerks feel afraid at work shouldn’t be free to walk around causing trauma.

Freedom is not anarchy.



> Maybe the people making grocery store clerks feel afraid at work shouldn’t be free to walk around causing trauma.

Have you ever been on NextDoor? A bunch of people are terrified of completely normal interactions because people look & sound different.


Social media is a skewed perspective.

I go outside, and make my opinions on people based on how the general public interacts. I don't make my opinions based on (crazy) outliers (online).


By global standards, the US is not a low trust society, and very few countries could really be considered high trust (https://ourworldindata.org/trust).


Many western nations (I'm in Canada) seem to be doing a speed run towards low trust society.

Is the USA now a low trust society? Probably not (although in places, likely) but the social trust has certainly eroded in recent years.


>Let's just fix society by locking up everyone who causes problems

is right up there with

>Let's just print more money until we have enough

and

>Let's just make the rest of the airplane out of the same stuff they use to make the black box


Many of things that have contributed to this becoming a low trust society are our most highly held social values. There's no sign that those values are going to change so we just have to accept that there are things we must do to protect ourselves in the permanent low trust society.


We’re very much not headed in the direction of fixing that… so things like this. And who or how or..?


We already imprison more people than any other country on earth.


hey now, that's not fair

*more people than any nation in human history


Wrong statement.

The question is: Do they deserve it?

Do not assume that heterogenous countries should be compared with homogenous countries.

EDIT: For the person strawmanning me as a racist:

Consider a nation like Japan, or Finland. Everyone is of similar genetic background, similar wealth, similar living conditions, similar strengths, similar weaknesses, similar struggles, similar educational opportunities, similar transportation requirements, similar family background.

Compare that to the US: Wildly different genetic backgrounds, massive wealth gaps, massive differences in living conditions, massive differences in strengths and weaknesses, massively different struggles, massively different opportunities, different transportation requirements, different family backgrounds.

In Finland or Japan, the amount of empathy you naturally have for other people is very strong, because you can see how most people are just like you, and are inherently less likely to be violent to people you see as similar to yourself. In the US, developing hate for the "outsider" is much easier, no matter who it may be - take last week with the shooting of the healthcare CEO. Diversity is great for people who benefit from diversity; but there will (in my opinion) always be a subset for whom diversity is a temptation to engage in tribalism.

It would stand to reason then, that a heterogeneous country is going to be inherently more violent, and have a higher incarceration rate, than a homogenous one, and therefore comparing violence between the two is like comparing apples-to-oranges.

EDIT 2: For the secondary "racist" complainant:

You're making the assumption that me pointing out "genetic differences" implies superiority/inferiority. I'm merely saying that it affects whether Random Normal Person A views Random Normal Person B as being similar to themselves. Even if Random Normal Person A is not deliberately racist, it does follow that violence is more likely between people who don't see themselves in each other.

Even if we are not deliberately racist, humans are inherently tribal. Heck, we're tribal over blue bubbles versus green bubbles, and letting something that stupid control interaction. There's no way skin color does not also have an effect, consciously or not, maliciously or not, causing an estrangement between the two groups, without implying that blue is better than green or vice versa.

The point is: I'm saying we have differences. Differences (as seen even on smartphones) cause tribal behavior. Tribal behavior (I am theorizing) causes increased violence between tribes inherently. Because of this, a nation with many differences, should not be compared to nations with few.


Could you please reply to peoples comments instead of just editing your statement which gives no indication that a reply was made?

As to your second edit. I can understand the point made about tribalism and could even mostly agree that I’d expect to see some increased amount of friction between multiple groups of ethnicities based on some dark human instincts. But that isn’t what you started this thread on.

You asked if they deserved it. You’ve made a moral statement and then started bringing race into it as an argument for whether or not they did. That’s racism.

Also inb4 you claim that “genetic differences” that people will have tribal reactions to isn’t a 1:1 analogue for race, like people can tell if you have some mutation in a subtle gene different from their own


You can ask someone their zip code and you can figure out from that their chance of being in prison during their life compared to others. Crime is almost entirely an economic issue. There's no reason to bring genetics into this.

Whether anyone deserves it, vengeance has never been an effective deterrent to crime. This is why most countries focus on rehabilitation rather than just torturing people. The US will never learn this lesson.


Wow that’s as close to outright racism as I’ve seen on this site without being blasted into oblivion


> EDIT: For the person strawmanning me as a racist:

Consider a nation like Japan, or Finland. Everyone is of similar genetic background, similar wealth, similar living conditions, similar strengths, similar weaknesses, similar struggles, similar educational opportunities, similar transportation requirements, similar family background.

Claiming it’s a strawmen and then opening up with “genetic differences” when you were suggesting that people “deserved it”. How is that proving that this isn’t a racist belief?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: