Hacker News

points by applebottomjean 3 days ago | 0 comments

I mean, it works for the president of the US. I think this attitude is a lot more common than people would like to admit.

[–] datsci_est_2015 3 days ago

Only due to the cultural shift over the past 10 years, I would say. You also see it coming out of “streamer” culture, as well as evangelical “prosperity gospel” culture, where any means justify the ends of acquiring wealth - and no shame need be felt.

[–] Terr_ 3 days ago

IMO there's an ongoing battle between two very different concepts of what speech means.

1. I speak "X" because I believe X to be true. I am virtuous because I am correct, and honest.

2. I speak "X" because that is is the current signal for demonstrating loyalty in the in-group. I am virtuous because I demonstrate allegiance and membership.

_____

In the first case, you apologize for an error because it's how you get back to a state of being correct. (Or if you don't apologize, it's because you double-down and insist it isn't an error.)

In the second case, you don't apologize because the "error" was merely a strategic misstep of over-triggering the dirty out-group, and anyway caring about them too much is suspicious.

[–] done_lurking 3 days ago

I think this is almost at the truth. My view is that everyone values two frequently opposing things: truth and social reward. Whether you behave like (1) or (2) depends on which you value more, and how much pressure is being applied from either direction. I like to think that most people usually value being correct over social reward but this is not always the case, and frequently this difference in values results in totally unproductive arguments. There is no persuading someone who defends a position for social reward. The best thing you can do is try to make their position seem absurd and silly as a social punishment, and hopefully witnesses will think agreeing with you will result in higher social reward. I believe this is also why high profile debates are frequently just two people slinging insults back and forth. This is actually what a significant number of people find persuasive, since it determines whether their social circle will reward them or punish them for their beliefs.

[–] dexwiz 3 days ago

Tea party of the early 2010s also played by this rule. Lots of "I cannot recall"s which translates to "I won't even acknowledge wrong doing so why would I apologize?"

[–] estearum 3 days ago

MAGA is the cultural descendent of the Tea Party so yeah this tracks. The birth of vice signaling.

[–] cassepipe 2 days ago

Everyone debating a maga person now must be trained to deal effectively with the "I haven't heard about that" defense that will inevitably come up

[–] RunSet 3 days ago

It seems to me that corporate entities will also pay any amount of money rather than admit wrongdoing.

[–] sodapopcan 3 days ago

"At least you got your bag" is the saying these days.

[–] toomuchtodo 3 days ago

The president is unlikely to feel consequences for the attitude, but Langley likely will as Flock enterprise value trends towards zero.

Flock Offers Employees Buyouts as Customers Flee - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49762835 - September 2026 (45 comments)

Cities terminate Flock contracts at record pace in August - https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/08/cities-terminate... - August 28th, 2026

[–] jmcqk6 3 days ago

If there is something the president has truly shown me is that just because consequences look inevitable, does not make them so. He exemplifies the ability to avoid consequences and responsibility.

I only trust that consequences will arrive when they actually arrive.

[–] someguyiguess 3 days ago

He isn’t avoiding consequences. Only delaying them.

[–] philipov 3 days ago

If he can delay them long enough that he dies of old age first, he will have avoided them.

[–] jmcqk6 2 days ago

Wish I could have that hope. I don't believe he will ever experience consequences for the vast majority of things he's done. Even if he does finally receive some justice for one thing, it's a practical impossibility that he will experience justice for everything he's done.

And I honestly see no reason to believe he's simply delaying consequences. He was out of the presidency for four years during which time he was convicted of multiple felonies. Is that a consequence? Was that justice? It didn't end up meaning anything.

[–] R1D3R 3 days ago

No, he is avoiding them. He was found guilty of 34 felonies related to election interference in the Stormy Daniels hush money case. Judge Juan Merchan declined to sentence him to any punishment whatsoever. He was then re-elected president. He will never face any consequences for those crimes.

The Supreme Court has ruled that (Republican) presidents are above the law. Official actions can't be prosecuted, but you have to ask the court what official means on a case-by-case basis, making the ruling implicitly partisan. Trump will thus never face consequences for his crimes in office.

Trump is an admitted (Access Hollywood) and convicted (E Jean Carroll) sexual predator. He has paid several million dollars to E Jean Carroll for raping her but that is the extent of any consequence he has suffered. He continues to be president.

[–] tw04 3 days ago

I highly doubt apologizing would’ve had any effect on the outcome. He never had any intention of changing the direction of the company.

[–] someguyiguess 3 days ago

Let’s hope so

[–] digitaltrees 3 days ago

This will fade. People are tired of it and will start to ostracize this antisocial behavior.

[–] applebottomjean 3 days ago

Gosh I hope you’re right.

[–] red-iron-pine 2 days ago

not as long as sociopaths own social media

[–] digitaltrees 2 days ago

Or people get sick of it and opt out. There is lots of evidence that trend is accelerating