Very well written both in prose and tone. I'm glad she decided to tell this story. If the author isn't a professional writer I think she could be.<p>This is a great "behind the scenes" style look at the actual people behind a viral clip. Luckily they have an extremely strong relationship to help soften the blows here, I'm not sure an average (not even bad!) relationship could come out of something like this unscathed.<p>There's something feral in us that comes out from time to time, especially online from the safety of our screens. I found the announcers within the range of good fun but when it gets to people reaching out to break up their marriage or telling him to kill himself it becomes really sobering.<p>I think this is part of what people are calling the lonlieness epidemic - despite thousands of screaming voices the whole thing makes me feel hollow and hopeless.
A really toxic part of online interactions is that it's very common for people to see a tiny snippet of another person's life and then project all of their own personal resentments onto them.
Telling women they're being abused even when the woman herself disagrees is a very ironic pattern I see often. Somehow it's seen as anti-sexist and yet it puts the onus on the woman to justify herself like the case here where she wrote an entire article. What happened to letting women make their own choices? I'm sure some of them are legitimately concerned, but I think a lot of people just want to spread their preferred narratives about the world.
The father-mother-child-donkey conundrum. Its only solution is: to hell with anyone's thoughts, we'll act as we prefer.
Story also mentions SF Giants sports commentators making jokes about this
It’s not only online. Just last weekend, someone heckled me at Costco because my wife was pushing a heavy ass cart while I was walking freely next to her. She chose to do it, I offered to take it and she refused. But somehow a random stranger had something to say about it.<p>Online behavior is unfortunately a slightly worse mirror of real life. If you want to experience people outside of your bubble, just go to any public hearings or meetings and you’ll find that a lot of people are quite out there.
I admired a man tending to his partner at a restaurant, and my then-girlfriend told me that she could tell from observing them that he was controlling, and his deference was purely performative.<p>Because "of similar situations she'd seen".<p>She had magically deep telepathic abilities, it seems.
Ok, but like were you offended, I feel like it's mostly a harmless slightly funny observation. I wasn't there but like were they really trying to be mean spirited with it? I live in the south and there's a pretty much constant running stream of public commentary on any and everything going on and 99.9% of it is friendly intentioned even if on the surface it's deriding. So really the idea of thinking someone is making a meaningful judgement is strange. And of course, even if they really were, why care?
> I wasn't there but like were they really trying to be mean spirited with it?<p>Flip genders and most likely people say things like this. Somehow men are just expected to deal with this but if it’s directed at a woman it’s all bad.
I’ll jump in- why care? Because it sucks to have people taking pot shots at you. If it is just one, then sure, that isn’t so bad, but when you have a group doing it, it can become existential. You may not have seen this type of violence before but it is unsettling. A group of people can do low effort violence that feels fun and harmless to them (each taking a lazy swing at someone), but the cumulative effect can be beating up or killing someone. Getting yelled at, or having someone write threatening things to you, is not as bad as being punched or having a stone thrown, but it is still damaging to humans.
"A really toxic part of online interactions is that it's very common for people to see a tiny snippet of another person's life and then project all of their own personal resentments onto them."<p>While also erasing everything that is real about that person's life, too.<p>I cringe whenever I hear someone angrily yell something like "You don't/can't know how I feel!", because unless the person making the accusation knows the accused <i>very, very</i> well, they could well be really stepping it. Nobody makes it through this life unscathed. Everybody loses people they love. Everybody gets kicked in the gut multiple times in life. Yes, everyone's personal life story, if you get specific enough, isn't exactly like someone else's. I won't claim to know exactly what it's like to be sexually abused, for instance. Wouldn't dream of it. Very serious issue. But I've had kicks to the gut that the one screaming that they may not have an exact analog for either.<p>I may not know how your exact gut punch feels. Maybe you've had noticeably more gut punches than I have. But everybody has had some sort of experience with them.<p>If one day a genie's magic spell made you see text pop ups above everyone's head with their traumas and abuses in life, and the emotional and physical burdens they're carrying today, you'd probably have a very hard time walking down the street.<p>Similarly, I really have a distaste for any variation of the "everyone's sheep" meme, especially when it's because they're not being active in some particular political way that the person flinging the meme around thinks they should be. If you could see those popups, maybe you'd understand why not everyone has a bunch of spare time to do whatever it is you think they should do to not be "sheep". Looking out on to a crowd of people and presuming they are "sheeple" reveals a lack of imagination and sympathy with people rather that the possession of a wise eye and strong understanding of the world.
That seems to be a big part of it.<p>There's a widespread problem of anti-intellectualism and acting-out, including, in the US, by both right and left. Most of the learning feedback to that -- pointing out to people when they might be missing something or acting unfairly -- is ignored, except to attack those who point it out.<p>AFAICT, for various reasons, they're proud of being warriors for their beliefs, and anyone who sounds like they're saying anything differently is the enemy, and the only thing you do with an enemy is score points against them or hurt them, while trying not to concede anything that the enemy would claim as points or hurt you. It's a toxic recipe for society.<p>Coincidentally, recently I've decided even Fedi isn't safe from that (it's just different and fewer people doing ideological bully thinking), and have resigned myself that issues of substance can't be discussed there either. Maybe the only safe thing to post is cat pictures.<p>I think it's much less a problem with HN. Of course, over time you realize certain positions get downvotes that aren't flattering to the people doing it, and some annoying commenting behaviors, and not always all the integrity we'd like to see, which are relatively mild by social media standards. However, I'm also seeing occasional random individual actor extreme toxicity problems with HN. And I'm anticipating some related but different kind of problems from how AI-powered tools will be easily used with the corpus/firehose to play toxic games.
> There's a widespread problem of anti-intellectualism and acting-out, including, in the US, by both right and left.<p>As of 2026, it's disingenuous to both sides this issue, at least in the US
Or speculation grows and a few hours later it's suddenly historical fact, like a modern version of telephone... just with a more harmful outcome.
Is there any benefit to social media? Just seems like a new form of cancer we have to deal with now along with everything else.
A place for those who would be marginalised by their own community, gay, religious apostates etc etc.<p>Communicating with relatives on the other side of the world.<p>Maintaining old friendships that would have died due to distance.<p>Somewhere to find like minded people.<p>Somewhere like hacker news (I count it as social media top) where I discovered great books, expanded my horizons and learnt that there were other ways at looking at the world.<p>Anyway, it's not all bad :)
There are social sharing functions and then there are algorithmic feedback loops that induce doomscrolling. Pretty sure it’s technically feasible to have one without the other.<p>The question to me is, with enough content and a powerful enough recommendation algorithm trained with enough eyeballs can short form videos be considered addictive in a clinical sense? If so what are the deleterious effects of the addiction? Should it be regulated?<p>I’m all for freedom, but we regulate drugs because we deem them bad for society.
You are describing old-school social-network designs that began to be marginalized already before Covid, not modern social media. The latter would prefer that you not forge or maintain authentic connections with other human beings, but rather doomscroll through endless-scroll content.<p>Keeping in touch with relatives or friends in much of the world has long since moved to chat apps like WhatsApp instead of an open social network.
You can do most of that with IRC. There's a distinction imo between static webpages / IRC / forums, and modern "social media".
I live alone, and have friends throughout the US.<p>Social media kept me from attempting suicide during COVID. It helps me feel loved and connected.<p>Yeah, there are faults, but condemning it wholeheartedly is like suggesting we should abolish ICE cars immediately.<p>And suggesting we abandon it as a comment on a social media platform is ironically self-unaware.
Homemade Dog videos. Not sure of anything else
I think it's not even that there's a benefit to it, it's that a lot of traditional communities that had their own forums are now exclusively on Facebook groups. I'm in several groups for mountain biking, for cars, for 3D printing, and those communities just don't exist anywhere else online other than small pockets with very little activity. Discord is the other one that has captured a bunch, but it's mostly centered around gaming, memes and tech.
Giants fan here. Watched the game. Even when it was happening and before knowing any of this, I could tell that Kruk and Kuip were going too far. It was starting to get super uncomfortable.<p>For those who aren't Giants/baseball fans, Mike Krukow (the Giants' color commentator) is retiring at the end of this season. He and Duane Kuiper have been the Giants' primary TV broadcast team for something like 37 years and have been best friends since they were teammates in the early '80s.<p>Krukow's mind is still sharp, but he has inclusion body myositis, and it's becoming unsafe for him to be anywhere other than at home.<p>It's just an emotional situation all around. They both thought that they would probably continue broadcasting together for at least a few more years, and now they're not.<p>So they're pulling out all of their usual schticks -- including poking fun at the fans -- and taking them really, really far because they know it's the last time.<p>I'm sure they would agree they went a little too far with that one.
Viral clip in question: <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@espnatbat/video/7688719334973230366" rel="nofollow">https://www.tiktok.com/@espnatbat/video/7688719334973230366</a><p>Article is about the impact of social media pile-ons (and has been getting praise within tech) so it is within scope for HN.
I started to notice a bit over a decade ago (about the same time as Cersei's walk of shame on GoT) that millennials as a generation were piling into naming and shaming people publicly as blindly appropriate punishment, without any consideration of what could go wrong and considering it their right and entitlement to do that. Any time a public figure gets into any kind of trouble, people demand to know all the details so they can satisfy their need to express outrage. It really is not healthy. Even if another person who was harmed comes out to express that they are satisfied with the outcome and the process that was followed, the crowd still wants to know all the details so they can feel angry.
I'm not sure this is unique to that generation. Tabloids have always been like that. It's just been "democratized" so anyone can start it.<p>Also I note that a lot of "legacy" pretexts for shaming are off the table. It's not done to shame people simply for being gay; that's now acceptable even in Conservative circles. So perhaps the total shame has just been redistributed, somewhat arbitrarily.
I think it's their frustration of other things they can't control - climate change, K-shaped economy, PFAS in everything, no healthcare, 7% and rising mortgages for $1.5 million 1000 sq ft built in 1965 shitboxes, corruption by politicians, suppressed elections, pedophile rings operating carte blanche while law enforcement casts a blind eye, presidential pardons for sale to the rich, clawbacks of longstanding LGBTQ and women's rights... culture wars against trans people to distract from class inequality.... and on and on.<p>Well, I can't make much progress on or change those things so let me distract myself checking out this shitbird who won't help his wife or hold the baby while she gets some nachos. I can be outraged at him because it's small and tangible compared to being outraged at structural inequality of our current economic reality or the looming climate crisis.
I can see where it comes from, but it is still highly dysfunctional, and a lot of millennials will use those arguments to defend that behavior.<p>I think it needs to be called out as being bad, and deconstructed properly, and that outrage needs to get redirected back onto the structural issues.<p>Which is another argument--that when people behave badly because of structural issues, that isn't an excuse.
I agree. If you feel previous social systems of justice and fairness have eroded, the only outlet that seems reasonable is "democratic" mob action.
for our parents generation, mortgage rates were 10%+
And the mean house sale price was under $96k (which is still under $250k, adjusted for inflation).<p>From roughly 1953 to 2000, the inflation-adjusted cost of the mean house was around $200k-$250k in today's dollars. Now it has nearly doubled, and mortgage rates are on the rise and headed back towards 10%.
TikTok threw up a big "login" popup that I couldn't skip, so here is a youtube link: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUwQmrEFf7E" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUwQmrEFf7E</a>
I'm Danish, but how is this terrible? I should show these people a video of my twins sleeping in a snow covered trolley outside the bar I was having a beer and a board game by the window at.
You totally should do that, as long as you can't be doxxed. I would love to see the reactions from self-righteous Americans.
When I first moved to Denmark, I marveled at the babies in unattended carriages parked outside the grocery stores.
The only terrible thing is the food they're having.
In Copenhagen I was strongly adviced not to leave my bicycle unlocked outside, for quick visit at a grocery store. Everyone I know takes their bikes home overnight.
Living in Copenhagen, I do not recognize that. I live in a city apartment on Vesterbro. We have maybe a hundred bikes parked in the backyard, nobody I know brings his bike home for the night, unless it is a really fancy racing bike. But yes, I do lock my bike when ever I really away from it.
Those comments are pure vitriol juice, my god, and they just keep coming from all angles as to why that dude is an absolutely piece of shit on very little data. Incredible stuff, and a good lesson right there.
If it was the other way around they would be saying what a hero he is lol.<p>Kinda off topic, but as a single Father I cant help but notice how much less of a support system Fathers get. When shit hits the fan its always people assuming the worst. A Fathers major support system is their Wives and Family. Good for him for having such a great Woman by his side... Im not complaining, just an observation
Yeah, it is complicated because we do live in a very misogynistic civilization with patriarchal privileges. It’s just often difficult not to overcompensate to counterbalance and resist these circumstances. Treat people as individuals instead of the archetypes.<p>As author wrote: we need to practice the benefit of the doubt. Or I like the “trust but verify” pattern
I'd argue making women do more labor by forcing them to write articles justifying their marriage is misogynistic as well. Its just in that case people see it as acceptable because they think it's fighting the patriarchy. But really the patriarchy is not disappearing because of this comments, it's just insulting a random woman based on nothing of substance. If someone tells a women to wear more clothing to protect herself from abuse that's considered sexist, I don't see how this is different. Everyone thinks it's for the best
We consider it 'misogynistic' because women have more difficulty engaging in certain pursuits (career and enterprise) while more easy engaging in others (child-rearing, family life). It's because of our own bias that career and enterprise is worth more than family life that we say the world as a whole is 'misogynistic' instead of the truth, which is that some areas of life, it's easier to be a woman and in others a man.
> If it was the other way around they would be saying what a hero he is lol.<p>I’m not so sure, I’m convinced people would not bat an eye. Or at least I don’t expect any positive compliments, only neutral or negative.
That this is something that has to be told to adults is the saddest part of humanity. No one has grown up.
Almost anyone can be seen as a hero or a zero if the right 15 second clip is captured. We love it when our best moments hit social media, but everyone also piles on when we are caught at our worst (or what appears to be bad, even if it not).<p>It is amazing how many haters emerge like in this case, when there is so much more to the story.
I was thinking of this recently. I "dogsit" for many families and had one recently that wasn't great on leash. She would do this thing where she would lay down and try to eat something off the ground (sticks, garbage, animal/dog poop, dead mice, dead birds... whatever she could find). Much of it would likely make her sick and therefore I would have to quickly pull on the leash to prevent her from eating some random thing she found. Being an 80lbs dog, I had to tug quite hard to quickly get her away from whatever she had found. If someone saw me in that moment, they'd probably think I was a terrible dog owner. Without the context that I was actually trying to prevent harm, someone could take a video, post online with the caption "Identify this dog abuser!" and ruin my reputation.
The incredible thing is the husband came in for bashing not plausibly based on his actions in the video but based on mutating narrative.<p>Go from "X great, Y OK" to "X great, Y terrible".
Everyone loves to hate right away when they see something like this. It's a good practice to try to make up a story that gives an alternate, less vilifying explanation to what you're seeing. This is a great response from Erika. Thanks for sharing.
It’s making me sad that this article needed to exist in the first place. Just leave people alone.
Quite a common thing to see online where strangers judge relationships off some small slice. You see it on reddit and relationship subs all the time.
You never know what others are going through, or what is happening in a relationship between two people, even when you think you’re close to them. So the online masses making these judgements based on a short clip is kinda insane although it doesn’t surprise me.
David Foster Wallace's This is Water speech more relevant than ever.
Part of being grounded and self aware is realizing you are not your thoughts and not everything you believe is true.<p>The brain does what it does in an attempt to help you, but not often it hits the mark, sometimes it takes a bit of a reminder to pause and unpack things more carefully.
Why someone even should explain yourself in this situation? It shows that something is broken in the society.
All other things aside, 20 dollars for a can of beer!?
That man has found a treasure of a woman!
She’s a great writer.<p>A lot of people owe this family an apology. Here’s a sampling of some of the vile comments left on Reddit.<p><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1wpll52/clip_of_a_woman_at_the_twins_vs_giants_game_goes/" rel="nofollow">https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1wpll52/clip_of_a_...</a>
[delayed]
Some of them would read this and still complain. There's no use in trying to please some very unhappy and likely single people online.
Wow, Reddit is horrible. Atrocious behavior. Leave your brains in the anteroom!<p>> Whoever sees this and it reminds them of their current relationship, DUMP HIM<p>> you can tell by the body language, lack of initiative, and lack of joy and welcome-ness for his woman and baby to be back, everything you need to know.<p>> There is a VERY good chance that when he realizes he went viral for being the *Poster Manchild* of taking your spouse for granted, of choosing to act like a parasitic blob<p>Modern Reddit provides a simulacrum of commentary. There are posts and people discusing these posts, but nobody understands or wants to know anything about the underlying topic. The lack of comprehension is crucial to the community.
> and lack of joy and welcome-ness for his woman and baby to be back<p>Damn, do these people really jump out of joy whenever their SO, parent, child, friend, or whoever comes back after a 10' chore?<p>Life is not a movie, “coming back” is a dozen-times-of-day occurrence, no one will cheer you back from the toilets.
If "she" refers to the LLM used by the author, sure. (The article is clearly mostly LLM-written/assisted)
In a way, this comment precisely demonstrates the kind of vitriol responses that the article talks about -- witch hunt without evidence, going with the trend, herd mentality.
I read it and didn’t get that impression.<p>Perhaps you could endow your claim with some evidence.
Isn't this story pretty much all about jumping to conclusions and pissing on people who you don't know?
Hmm. Pangram AI detection says the piece is “100% human written.”
Really? A comment in another thread says Pangram says it's 100% AI. I just checked with the free plan, and it told me 29% AI. What I'm learning here is that Pangram may not be a reliable checker.<p>Thing is, I also twigged it as heavily LLM written when I read it, so. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I checked again with a longer sample—the first eight paragraphs—and, this time, Pangram said 61% human. Hmm. I think your twigging may be more accurate.
I got the vibe that maybe an LLM was used for editing but the stench wasn't overwhelming.
Amused by a claim about writing composition that uses “clearly mostly” back to back.
Based on what?
Even if so, this would seem to be a positive use of LLMs. Something traumatic happened, and she wants to put her perspective into the public dialog rather than continuing to be a passive subject of the social media industry's two minute hate. I know in such a position I myself would be at a loss for words, with the perfect being the enemy of the good enough.
[dead]
The real scandal is the prices on the menu she posted.
And yet, tons of comments on Threads from women saying she's been gaslit or even that the husband must have threatened her with violence and forced her to write this.<p>You can't win with these people.
normal people -- employed, in a relationship, with chores and hobbies to occupy their free time -- simply do not participate in the gender war on the Internet. most are blissfully unaware that it's even happening. the womanosphere is a mirror image of its critically panned counterpart -- a refuge for the unhappy and/or mentally ill, an obnoxiously loud minority.
It’s great to see her setting a role model for others.
Another important story hiding in there:<p>> Six weeks before my daughter was born, my employer of 13 years laid off my entire division. Ramses had just put up the down payment on a bigger home for our growing family. My unemployment meant he was facing the mortgage payments and managing a remodel on his own, while we prepared to welcome another child.
Another side to the story is that I wonder how many of the reddit/tiktok posts pouring gasoline on the discourse were LLMs.
Algorithmic social media amplifies and promotes our basest, vilest impulses. Crowds were always worse than people, but now these "technologies" put that into turbo-overdrive, 5 billion people at a time, pushed and prodded by the engagement-maxxing machine. I don't see a bright future if we don't get a hand on this, and I don't see us getting a hand on this.
[flagged]
What I notice quite often is a sort of "LLM derangement syndrome" where people start flagging the most innocuous figures of speech and speech pattern as "clearly LLM".<p>Quite ironic when we are talking about an article which argues for extending the benefit of the doubt.
I thought the piece sounded like AI as well, so I ran it through Pangram, which reports it as 100% AI. Considering Pangram's extremely low false positive rate, I'm inclined to believe this was AI written.
These patterns aren't somehow alien to human speech. It's the quantity. In ChatGPT (and I think it must be ChatGPT specifically) the default writing voice tries for dramatic and profound by dramatically overusing these figures of speech, chaining them together one after another. But they're things most writers use occasionally, one paragraph in ten or twenty. If you're giving a TED Talk or some other elaborate, melodramatic persuasive public speaking role, you might use them one paragraph in four. ChatGPT uses them every other paragraph at least, sometimes multiple times in the same paragraph, so something like a negation comparator or a triplet is present in sentence after fatiguing sentence.<p>It's trained on the speech of online commenters like us; That's where it's getting these. I'm not gonna change just because Timmy the Zoomer has been with his LLM girlfriend for the past three years and occasionally I remind him of her. I'm not going to deliberately code switch into somebody who doesn't open a new tab to Google things as he talks about them. And you can take my bullet point lists from my cold, dead hands.
Thing is, it might be or it might not be. At some point you have to realize that some people need wheelchairs to move, some people need glasses to see, and some people need LLMs to write.<p>IMHO It's when you see someone who is paid to write/think using LLMs that you might make a value judgement.<p>I once knew a girl who wore prescription-free glasses b/c it made her feel smarter so she'd study longer. Not kidding. I made a value judgement about that. But she got the studying done. There's been other more prevalent cases of that on socials.<p>It might be worth letting some people write in any way they can.
I think we are approaching the point where collaboration with ai is going to be so ubiquitous that it becomes an unreasonable thing to criticize on its face.<p>Even before reading, I would assume a non-professional writer would lean on ai to try to figure out what points she wanted to hit and how to phrase things. The cost right now for that is the writing can be somewhat bland, but sometimes that isn't a big problem. Haven't we all seen enough incoherent ai slop to understand the value of editorial oversight by now?<p>I am working on a libretto in my free time, a hobby I've had for 15 years. Lyrics that would previously take my a week often take an evening. Nearly every suggested stanza and bar is rewritten by me still, but these models can be very helpful in explore the structure of beats to hit, imagery that may or may not land, rhyme and phonetic space etc. Maybe it's ai psychosis or cope but I think my current project is a leap between my last two plays. Isn't that what matters for creative expression at the end of the day?
Plaease don't spoil threads with comments like this. The writing doesn't come up as LLM-authored according to the tools we use (polished, perhaps, but not generated).<p>We detached this subthread from <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49858463">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49858463</a> and marked it off topic.
Everything is LLM if you want it to be
Who cares? She isn't a public figure, and she never asked to be. She has some thoughts she wants to put out there after going viral due to nothing she did.
i suspect in some time people might begin to flag every bit of text they see online as "LLM sounding", even if it's very clearly not