Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

And this is complicated even more by all the "soft" topic sites, each of which has its own culture.


sort by: page size:

Some "cultures" are just organs of a larger cultural superstructure, and they don't make sense to discuss in isolation.

Problem with "culture" is everyone has their own variation of it.

"I don't know how to do this, so I will google and skim a youtube video" is very much a culture, isn't it?

Every culture has it's own definitions. The problem is that the world's cultures are mixing online, and the lowest tolerable level will win out. So, it doesn't matter what I think, it's what every combined culture, religion, government , etc... will choose.

And they will choose anything and everything that threatens their power. The actual contents don't matter.


Multiple times it mentions that "guess culture" is frustrating and difficult, and that she and her brother prefer ask culture because it's easier.

It's a culture problem.

Is it description of culture or is it framing?

I can’t say, most of this isn’t something I can relate to (fortunately).

The Internet is a collider, smashing contexts together and at an ever increasing clip.


There is no shared global culture forming online. It’s deeply fractured multicultures that have very little in common with each other. You assume everyone is in your bubble but everyone has their own bubble and the cultures are in direct opposition.

I think that, in this specific case, this is pretty clear: If there's a culture that does not allow a dictionary to define rape, there's something wrong with this culture.

I'm certain most Americans agree with me here which makes me assume that this specific problem is not one of culture, but probably scale and an absence of responsiblity at Google.

The more general question is interesting though, because it could go several ways. For example:

You could argue that people should anticipate that the platforms they rely on are not under their control (and should maybe act on that).

Or one could argue that the platforms should anticipate the diversity of cultural standards they are catering to by easing their moral rigidity. (For example through a more diverse/decentral company structure, etc.)

Here in Europe, some approach a somewhat similar question with some form of data nationalism, for better or worse. It plays into the same realization that there is an unresolved cultural difference between global platforms and local standards and intends to politically support local initiatives, corporations, etc. That, I think, doesn't solve the problem, but shifts the level of granularity.

Great problem, many angles.


You have to analyze it on a case by case basis. It only sounds silly if you try to generalize everything into a single rule.

Different choices have different levels of cultural depth. Often the depth is zero. But it varies.

And culture is created by arbitrary decisions coalescing into guidelines. If it's not coalescing, then it's not culture. You have to look at the big picture to tell if something is culture or not.


But the culture isn't.

It's cultural, is it not?

Indeed, the cultural problem is one of the main points of the last section of the post :)

I agree it’s mostly cultural

Trying to control culture is difficult.

Culture in any group is a malleable beast. The strictures required to keep it from changing are far too oppressive to support the type of innovative and creative thinking that the site wants to inspire.

It's not a stable diffusion issue, it's a culture issue.

One of these ("Culture is a non-explanation") is not like the others.

Well, there's always the cultural one. Personally, I think attributing the cause to culture is sloppy research.
next

Legal | privacy