Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

degoes.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 243 posts

Re: Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

#141

Post by zahmahkibo »

ubertaco wrote: post #128
TabAtkins wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, okay, maybe, but that just means that they'd be hosting a conference about "nazis suck" and hey, I'm okay with that. That's a message I can get behind.

So what you're saying is, you're cool with discrimination, so long as it's not against you. So when someone decides to hold a dev conference but chooses to disallow any gay/lesbian developers, is that also totally okay?

Yes, I am perfectly okay with discriminating against Nazis.

Since when is ALL discrimination bad? I discriminate against shitty people all the time, and so do you. Don't even pretend you don't, no one will believe you.

Re: Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

#142

Post by zahmahkibo »

There is an extremely simple test for such arguments: would anyone make this argument if the person in question was Osama bin Laden? Suppose old Osama was a Haskell wizard. Would anyone argue he should still be at the talk? No.

But Nazis? Who make bin Laden's terrorism look like a rounding error? They're A-OK!

And people wonder about why there's a diversity problem in tech.

Re: Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

#143

Post by tragic »

kevinburke wrote: post #96
jmspring wrote: post #69

The choice quote is here -- "In the end, we all converged on the same opinion: that LambdaConf should focus on the behavior of attendees, rather than their belief systems." What you believe in, in everyday society, shouldn't matter either. It is how you treat others and if you do so with politeness and respect, you should expect the same in return.

Curtis Yarvin is a professed fascist who has written about his belief that some races are more suited to slavery than others. That _does_ matter; it makes large swaths of the potential talk audience (and other attendees) feel unwelcome. How can you engage in polite, respectful discussion with someone who believes that you're more suited to be a slave than a free man?

> How can you engage in polite, respectful discussion with someone who believes that you're more suited to be a slave than a free man?

Well, if the discussion is about technical matters, that's easy. (As long as CY is willing on his own part to talk politely and respectfully to people he considers his racial inferior, of course, which is not a given.)

Even on the actual matter of contention: yes, that's harder (albeit utterly irrelevant to Lambdaconf). But why should even that be impossible? CY's 'contribution' to politics seems to consist entirely of taking the vulgar prejudices of certain degenerate corners of the internet and giving them a superficially erudite and sesquipedalian form, without actually strengthening the intellectual content. His arguments are laughable. I'd probably pay good money to see someone politely, respectfully leave the whole edifice in smoking ruins.

Re: Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

#144

Post by tragic »

zorpner wrote: post #57
lhnz wrote: post #50

I think "conduct vs beliefs" is the right metaphor by which to make these sorts of decisions. After all, we talk about a 'Code of Conduct' and not a 'Code of Belief' (the latter, in my opinion, would edge too close towards totalitarianism.) As long as Curtis stays professional and speaks only on Urbit [0] he is doing the right thing and should be allowed to speak. [0] http://urbit.org/

At what point does someone's routine vocal endorsement of racial superiority and advocation of violence become problematic? Or are we obligated to welcome these people into our conferences (workplaces? homes?) so long as they confine their exhortations to speech and only work to encourage others to perform the actual violence? The idea of a "Code of Belief" is a strawman -- the issue at hand is the expectation not of…

He already has a platform for those views. What, is they guy's very presence at a conference going to make other people more racist by osmosis? Come on now.

And frankly, I am of the view that it's better for views like Yarvin's to be out in the open where they can be challenged, rather than left to fester. That means - yes - that his speech must be allowed "without consequences" for his employment, etc.

Re: Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

#145

Post by moldbugisvile »

zahmahkibo wrote: post #142

There is an extremely simple test for such arguments: would anyone make this argument if the person in question was Osama bin Laden? Suppose old Osama was a Haskell wizard. Would anyone argue he should still be at the talk? No. But Nazis? Who make bin Laden's terrorism look like a rounding error? They're A-OK! And people wonder about why there's a diversity problem in tech.

But Marxists, they're cool right? Edgy even! If you want to hold these standards and exclude someone like Moldbug, fine by me. But if you do that there, do it consistently.

Newsflash: Che Guevera executed blacks, gays, nuns, and more in cold blood; his face is now considered a bland apparel decoration. Mao and Stalin and Pol Pot and Mengistu and many others killed and caused the deaths of 10s of millions of human beings, far more than Nazis could hope for. Marxism has never gone out of fashion on the left, and prominent tech speakers display their Marxist colors proudly.

Who will boycott them and stand for the memory of the millions killed in Marxist suppression, genocide, and famine?

Re: Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

#146

Post by norea-armozel »

Personally I believe there's a place for CoCs in any large organization or group but I think the content of CoCs should never include any political ideological opinions. If professionalism, respect, and separation of one's political and/or religious beliefs from a project/event is impossible for some then they shouldn't be part of it. Honestly, I wouldn't know or care if one programmer was a devout Mormon that donated to Prop 8 if all my interactions with said person (obviously mentioning Brenden Eich here) were purely within the confines of a project or convention regarding programming of some sort. Nor would that person ever have to know that I'm a Christian Gnostic, Georgist, bisexual, trans woman (the last part would probably be obvious but immaterial still) in the same context. We're two programmers coming together in common cause to produce something cool (I hope).

Yet it seems there are those on the left (and to some extent on the right) that demand ideological purity in all things. "You must be the right kind of [ideological stance/trait], lest you offend someone..." Seriously, I've seen flaps over Laura Jane Grace's book being titled Tranny (she's trans) over the last week. It's just as bad when you look at how fellow libertarians go at each other (see Jeffrey Tucker's essay on Libertarian Brutalism and the resulting fallout).

It's absurd how bad things have gotten in this regard and I honestly am concerned we'll see ideological puritanism infect various F/LOSS projects and events. Just keep the CoC to the absolute essentials (don't be a perv/jerk/stalker/etc and don't have sensitive topics in conversations...).

Re: Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

#147

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

f0code wrote: post #22

"That I shall not talk or act in ways that could make minority groups feel bullied, harassed, intimidated, stalked, stereotyped, or belittled; examples of minority groups include women, people of color, lesbians, gays, and people who are disabled, bisexual, transsexual, asexual, intersex, transgender, and gender-variant;" So as a member of the majority, I'm expressly the only person bound by these rules of behavior i…

Are you aware of the concept of "intersectionality"? ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality )

Re: Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

#148

Post by maradydd »

calibraxis wrote: post #47

From one of Moldbug's many vocal supporters at a "Founders Fund-sponsored retreat": "It was really quite lovely. Later that day, in the jeep to the ranch house where everyone was staying, he started up with the casual racism, and everyone ignored him." ( https://twitter.com/maradydd/status/606799534983770112 ) The status quo: highly funded white people in a ranch house, obsessive dreams of white supremacy floating in…

Hi. That's me you're quoting.

> The status quo: highly funded white people in a ranch house, obsessive dreams of white supremacy floating into the night...

Were you there? If not, then you're projecting. As it happens, the participants were at best plurality white. And no, the PoC weren't all Asians either.

Also, because Twitter requires short statements, there are multiple readings of "ignored" there. I see you're taking the least charitable one, i.e., "everyone let it slide." That interpretation is incorrect. People stopped talking to him. Isn't shunning what you progs want?

Re: Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

#149

Post by erics32 »

zahmahkibo wrote: post #139

Not all views are equal. Some views are so horrendous it is our moral duty to ostracize their believers.

How right you are! Let's ostracize and noplatform all the wrongthinkers. How about we start by banning those horrendous muslims whose beliefs are homophobic, sexist, calls for the death of apostates and atheists etc. Or maybe those sexist homophobic christians?

Re: Wrestling With Inclusion at LambdaConf

#150

Post by kevinburke »

xmj wrote: post #104
kevinburke wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curtis Yarvin is a professed fascist who has written about his belief that some races are more suited to slavery than others. That _does_ matter; it makes large swaths of the potential talk audience (and other attendees) feel unwelcome. How can you engage in polite, respectful discussion with someone who believes that you're more suited to be a slave than a free man?

> Curtis Yarvin is a professed fascist who has written about his belief that some races are more suited to slavery than others. Having read a good deal of his unqualified reservations, I wonder if you can source this quote for me please?

Search Google, Twitter, or send me an email. I'm not going to link to hate speech here.
Post reply on HN