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

Time to Take a Stand

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 1001 posts

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#421

Post by astrange »

cderwin wrote: post #297
bratsche wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels like it's not very effective, but that may be because there needs more weight of numbers behind it. If you're in a progressive area like the Bay area I can see how it would just add extra load to officials who may not need further persuading. I'm in Texas though. A very red state. I've been calling my representative and senators to voice my opinion on all this stuff, but it's hard to tell how effective it is…

I wonder how much calling actually matters, because I feel like whether they receive 10 calls or 10,000, it's always going to be one-sided. Conservatives aren't going to call their reps and they don't have the propensity to engage in the same activism as progressives, so I would think representatives would take calls with a relative grain of salt. If a very conservative congressperson starts getting a bunch of calls…

> Conservatives aren't going to call their reps and they don't have the propensity to engage in the same activism as progressives

The last 8 years were driven by the Tea Party doing exactly this. They show up to vote more and practice local politics like everyone should be doing.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#422

Post by pcwalton »

refurb wrote: post #301
SamReidHughes wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not in Syria and thus can only repeat what other people say, but I've heard that ISIS is committing genocide against Christians, Yazidis, and Shiites. The source of this information is John Kerry.

Exactly. Doesn't it make sense to prioritize those people who are under the most persecution in those countries?

Again: Trump campaigned very specifically on a ban on Muslims. The religious minority directive is obviously an attempt to scope the restriction to adherents of Islam. It is worded in the way it is, again obviously, to make it more likely to withstand the pending legal challenges.

This isn't a tortured or biased interpretation of the directive. It is precisely the description Trump used over and over and over again on the campaign trail.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#423

Post by i_cant_speel »

akjainaj wrote: post #342
emehrkay wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the only thing that he campaigned on was hurting black/brown people and repealing the ACA. Everything else, every other policy topic was met with "I have the best people" or "I will have the best advisors." He constantly, falsely, repeated how bad black people have it in inner cities. How we can't go anywhere without the fear of being shot and killed by other black people. He touted the need for a nation-…

>How we can't go anywhere without the fear of being shot and killed by other black people. I'm not from the US but this really looks awful. I wouldn't set foot on this city even if you paid me a million dollars. http://crime.chicagotribune.com/

Yes, there's problems in Chicago. But the violence is heavily concentrated in the South and West side. I live in a nicer part of Chicago and I've never felt like I was in any danger where I live. Even walking home by myself at 2 AM.

Every city has bad and good areas. Chicago is no different.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#424

Post by stale2002 »

TuringNYC wrote: post #129
ebola1717 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exaclty. Two of his biggest campaign promises were to build a wall to keep out Mexicans and to ban Muslims immigrants and refugees. The wall was one of his earliest campaign promises. I find it amazing that we're supposed to believe that the majority of Trump voters don't support at least one of these.

Note, this is far broader than the refugee ban initially discussed. The ban truly is a Muslim ban. See quote from Reuters -- it bans permanent residents (i.e. greencard holders.) Note that permanent residents have to pay taxes even if living overseas! "It will bar green card holders," Gillian Christensen, acting Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman, said in an email. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump…

It is a ban on people coming from certain countries. Religion isn't anyone in there.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#425

Post by scarmig »

mythrwy wrote: post #355
llamataboot wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you voted for an autocratic, racist, dangerous man that is implementing policies antithetical to a free and democratic society after he openly said he would do so. I'm not interested in evaluating whether you are evil or not. I am interested in opposing everything you voted for. I don't want to change your mind. I want to keep you far away from any sort of power. Whether or not you voted for Trump because of his…

I disagree with your charges of "racist" and "dangerous". Slander is easy to throw around but it doesn't mean it's reality.

Disagreeing is entirely your prerogative. But that doesn't change the fact that most people who take racism seriously are going to think of you as a bad person.

And why shouldn't we? The worst you could do is tear families apart, watch people die, and actively participate in killing people, and you're already doing that. So yes, you're a bad person.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#426

Post by qazwsxedchac »

finid wrote: post #326
TuringNYC wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note, this is far broader than the refugee ban initially discussed. The ban truly is a Muslim ban. See quote from Reuters -- it bans permanent residents (i.e. greencard holders.) Note that permanent residents have to pay taxes even if living overseas! "It will bar green card holders," Gillian Christensen, acting Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman, said in an email. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump…

Muslims, then GC holders. Very soon, certain group of citizens will suffer the same fate. The prison walls are getting closer... By the time you're able to reach out and touch them, it'd be too late.

Quite. Historically, countries which build walls don't do so to keep people out, but to keep them in.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#427

Post by rdtsc »

Shouldn't we have been taking a stand against Obama who destabilized the region, was dropping bombs there and arming the "rebels" who had a revolving door relationship with ISIS and other such groups there.

Refugees didn't come from a vacuum and it wasn't some natural disaster. They started streaming in because the West including US has been meddling and destabilizing that part of the world.

Unfortunately it seems profiling to prevent terrorism has worked ok for Israel recently. It is not something pleasant and nice, but so far it seems there have been deadlier and more frequent terror act committed by radical Muslims in Europe than in Israel. People see the news from Europe and they don't want that here. A closer vetting of refugees from that region seems reasonable and letting them in unchecked seem irresponsible.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#428

Post by jacquesm »

mythrwy wrote: post #355
llamataboot wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you voted for an autocratic, racist, dangerous man that is implementing policies antithetical to a free and democratic society after he openly said he would do so. I'm not interested in evaluating whether you are evil or not. I am interested in opposing everything you voted for. I don't want to change your mind. I want to keep you far away from any sort of power. Whether or not you voted for Trump because of his…

I disagree with your charges of "racist" and "dangerous". Slander is easy to throw around but it doesn't mean it's reality.

> I don't appreciate being called a bad person.

> I disagree with your charges of "racist" and "dangerous".

History is a harsh judge.

People like Trump are nothing on their own, they need a large cadre of others to do their bidding for them. Note that Trump was nominated by the republican party because they figured he might help them win the election no matter what the cost to the country (maybe they told themselves and are still telling themselves that it is worth it and that he can be controlled). By voting for a person like Trump you are essentially abdicating from your position of power and handing it to them but the responsibility still rests with you.

So for every action Trump takes that hurts people you are partially responsible. And if you think that somehow what Trump is doing will benefit that United States then I really would like to know what drives that line of thinking.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#429

Post by Senji »

467568985476 wrote: post #296
cornholeconnie wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So only opinions that you deem acceptable are ok. So people are not entitled to their own opinions...

It's perfectly reasonable to kick a toxic person out of your community. Free speech means the government won't put you in prison. It doesn't mean that other people are required to entertain your opinions.

Or you could get kicked out yourself by the toxic people in your community.

Re: Time to Take a Stand

#430

Post by dragonwriter »

braindead_in wrote: post #213

I question how effective this policy is going to be in stopping the actual terrorists. Just as a determined hacker will always find a way to break into your server/network, the terrorists will find a way to illegally enter.

No 9/11 or later terrorists have come to the US as refugees or from the nations targeted for specific bans, so the idea that this is about protecting against terrorists is pretty amusing.

Its almost as if it is a set of policies designed to avoid preventing terrorism.

Post reply on HN