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

Shame on Y Combinator

marco.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 1001 posts

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#451

Post by wybiral »

dlss wrote: post #428
wybiral wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know if you followed what happened to the Atheist community in the US, but its downfall was essentially the kind of witch hunt you're trying to incite. Personally I must have missed this. How did the downfall of the Atheist community in the US happen and who was hunting witches?

Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and Dennett wrote books, participated in debates, and basically reimagined atheism as a political movement. Then the question of social justice's role in atheism split the community in two via progressive purging. Splitting the community resulted in movements with significantly less political capital, and the main thinkers moved off to other projects. It's fairly political, so even though a…

conservapedia.com seems mildly biased on this subject, in the sense that it's entirely biased from a creationist perspective.

For instance: http://www.conservapedia.com/God

> "Other than creation itself, God is revealed in several ways, including conscience and special revelation (the Bible, and prophets). Most importantly though, God is revealed in Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God."

I don't expect them to paint a friendly portrait of Richard Dawkins.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#452

Post by ThomPete »

fisherjeff wrote: post #378
hueving wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They compare Donald Trump with a fascist dictator. A bit childish, considering the slot the candidate is running for is not in a dictatorship. If you think Trump could convert the US to a dictatorship, I would like to see the evidence supporting this.

No one has the influence to convert the US to anything overnight. However, I do think that normalizing the language of authoritarianism can have long-term negative effects on our democratic process.

The same thing can be said about the normalization of globalization and technological progress which allowed the politicians and the companies who pay for their campaigns to trade jobs for cheap flat screens.

Ignoring one just because the other is more obvious isn't any better in my book.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#453

Post by genericpseudo »

anondon wrote: post #391
tptacek wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you do not believe that Trump is an existential threat to American democracy, then, while I implore you to reconsider, I am content to agree to disagree. But you might take that disagreement up first with Paul Graham and Sam Altman. They do not agree with you. They aggressively don't agree with you. They compare Donald Trump with a fascist dictator. I think they're right about Trump, and therefore that they're ver…

> I think they're right about Trump, and therefore that they're very wrong about continuing to endorse Thiel. I think it's a very slippery slope to base endorsement on a person's political actions. It raises some important questions: -Do you stop endorsing and associating with everyone who supports Trump? Where do you draw the line logically? -Why can't people with opposing views work together and agree to disagree o…

> I think it's a very slippery slope to base endorsement on a person's political actions.

What exactly else do you propose? Endorsing people based on their actions (all actions are political; no actions are apolitical; that's just how it works, you can't quit the game) is the only ethical position which makes any sense at all.

This has gone far enough. The only effective response is to judge by actions and refuse to work with any Y Combinator company until Thiel is fired (and Altman resigns).

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#454

Post by jshevek »

fisherjeff wrote: post #378
hueving wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They compare Donald Trump with a fascist dictator. A bit childish, considering the slot the candidate is running for is not in a dictatorship. If you think Trump could convert the US to a dictatorship, I would like to see the evidence supporting this.

No one has the influence to convert the US to anything overnight. However, I do think that normalizing the language of authoritarianism can have long-term negative effects on our democratic process.

This is exactly why the anti-Trump hyperbole is dangerous.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#455

Post by bbayles »

tptacek wrote: post #222
apsec112 wrote: post #158

Posts like this play directly into Trump's hands. The entire Trump ideology is based on a belief that "real Americans" are being oppressed by a sinister "global elite". Demanding that Trump supporters be fired tells everyone that the "elites" are a) scared of Trump, b) can't win through arguments and have to resort to intimidation, and c) are a powerful, dangerous group which is hostile to average people, who need so…

Trump supporters believe in a batshit conspiracy theory. That doesn't mean reasonable people should change their behavior to mitigate those concerns.

One concern with this line of argumentation: reasonable people shouldn't have to change their behavior, but rational people might want to.

That is, suppose you believe (as I do) that D.T. and his supporters are quite dangerous. If they are using my behavior to gain strength, it behooves me to change my behavior!

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#456

Post by tptacek »

abecedarius wrote: post #418
tptacek wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you think this was a snappy response, but I'm simply paraphrasing John Rawls. If you prefer Karl Popper, you might look up "the paradox of intolerance". You could also take it back to John Stuart Mill, if you'd like.

OK, Mill, On Liberty , chapter 2: > But I deny the right of the people to exercise such coercion, either by themselves or by their government. The power itself is illegitimate. The best government has no more title to it than the worst. It is as noxious, or more noxious, when exerted in accordance with public opinion, than when in or opposition to it. If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person…

There's no philosopher you can't enlist in the support of any view if you quote them out of context (also: you could have done far better in finding a quote to deploy here; try searching On Liberty for the word "opinion").

The part you haven't come to yet is the Harm Principle.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#457

Post by twelvechairs »

tptacek wrote: post #429
twelvechairs wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly societal segregation is part of freedom of speech. John stuart mill is a key refefence to this. His general principle is that government should only step in to prevent harm but sometimes segregation based on belief can be that harm (his 'tyranny of the majority') Now nobody we are talking about is struggling to survive based on their beliefs but whether its right to start segregating people for their views…

John Stuart Mill did not believe that people should be shielded from criticism, even massed criticism, for fear that they might be victimized by their own bad feels. In fact: Mill believes that the preservation of free society and ordered democracy with equal access by citizens was one of the few reasons society has to limit freedom . As luck would have it, we're here today debating the very real candidacy of a perso…

Im certainly not saying criticism is wrong but 'having to fear the repercussions' goes further - i assume from all sides this meant the articles reference to YC potentially severing ties with thiel. All im pointing out is that this is a freedom of speech issue - whatever side you want to weigh in on. Broadly i agree with your views on Trump and interpretation of Mill

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#458

Post by drakonandor »

dpark wrote: post #417
digler999 wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sound just like the republicans in 2008 when a gasp black president was elected. Oh dear, the world is ending, the end times are coming! What's the world coming to! We are doomed. A socialist Kenyan Muslim is in the whitehouse! What actually happened? Nothing. If you looked at the country for the last 8 years you wouldn't be able to tell whether a republican or democratic was in the whitehouse. Same thing will ha…

You really think that opposing Obama because he's black is comparable to opposing Trump because he incites violence and encourages racism and xenophobia and speaks highly of dictators and brags about sexual assault? You want to rethink that?

> brags

I think that if any other celebrity said what he said, you'd think it's a little off color, but not bragging about criminal actions. His statements verbatim do not imply anything criminal, unless you fill in extra words yourself.

If you don't hate the guy, you could easily fill in extra words the other way, that is, to make it sound like he's saying something less ambiguous and more reasonable.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#459

Post by nightspirit »

dpark wrote: post #417
digler999 wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sound just like the republicans in 2008 when a gasp black president was elected. Oh dear, the world is ending, the end times are coming! What's the world coming to! We are doomed. A socialist Kenyan Muslim is in the whitehouse! What actually happened? Nothing. If you looked at the country for the last 8 years you wouldn't be able to tell whether a republican or democratic was in the whitehouse. Same thing will ha…

You really think that opposing Obama because he's black is comparable to opposing Trump because he incites violence and encourages racism and xenophobia and speaks highly of dictators and brags about sexual assault? You want to rethink that?

Yes, it is equivalent. The fact that you are deluded to think that you can change anybody's mind by repeating this "racism xenophobia sexual assault" mantra which literally everybody has already heard million times by now just shows that you are equally stuck in your ways and irrational as the people you oppose. It's knee jerking on both sides.

And, speaking of Obama, you guys reminded me of this beauty created during the previous campaign:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/

So we can have Trump-o-meter.

  1. start World War 3
  2. legalize rape
  3. eradicate Islam
  4. enslave Blacks
  
  ... any ideas?
We'll track his progress and see how far he goes.

Trump is a joke. A level 666 troll. If I were you, I'd be more worried about the number of pissed off people who just waited for someone like him.

Re: Shame on Y Combinator

#460

Post by dlss »

wybiral wrote: post #451
dlss wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris and Dennett wrote books, participated in debates, and basically reimagined atheism as a political movement. Then the question of social justice's role in atheism split the community in two via progressive purging. Splitting the community resulted in movements with significantly less political capital, and the main thinkers moved off to other projects. It's fairly political, so even though a…

conservapedia.com seems mildly biased on this subject, in the sense that it's entirely biased from a creationist perspective. For instance: http://www.conservapedia.com/God > "Other than creation itself, God is revealed in several ways, including conscience and special revelation (the Bible, and prophets). Most importantly though, God is revealed in Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God." I don't expect them to paint a…

Yeah, I wasn't trying to recommend them. They just did the leg work of digging up the quotes and putting them on a single (huge) page for linking, which I thought was what you were asking for.
Post reply on HN