Live data from Hacker News

ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

electronconf.com

201–210 of 339 posts

Re: ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Straight to Nazis, huh? I'm not talking blood and soil here. I'm talking about benefiting from structural inequalities that favor certain groups over others. And to the degree one benefits, and takes that for granted, and perceives the calling out of those benefits as a form of persecution, then yes, there's a degree of complicity. But no one's saying (well, not anyone on HN, anyway, and not most people on Tumblr) th…

> I'm talking about benefiting from structural inequalities that favor certain groups over others. Still arguing about complicity just out of existence. Last time I'm replying to you because you won't understand, but at least now my comment is just as visible as yours. > And to the degree one benefits, and takes that for granted, and perceives the calling out of those benefits as a form of persecution, then yes, ther…

But how is saying "we want a more diverse group" a snub?

Re: ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Straight to Nazis, huh? I'm not talking blood and soil here. I'm talking about benefiting from structural inequalities that favor certain groups over others. And to the degree one benefits, and takes that for granted, and perceives the calling out of those benefits as a form of persecution, then yes, there's a degree of complicity. But no one's saying (well, not anyone on HN, anyway, and not most people on Tumblr) th…

> I'm talking about benefiting from structural inequalities that favor certain groups over others. Still arguing about complicity just out of existence. Last time I'm replying to you because you won't understand, but at least now my comment is just as visible as yours. > And to the degree one benefits, and takes that for granted, and perceives the calling out of those benefits as a form of persecution, then yes, ther…

[deleted]

Re: ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

#203
post #39

I don't buy the meritocracy BS that's so popular around here, but I do agree this seems insane, at least based on the small amount of information we have. The organizers have the right to do whatever they please, but I don't understand what they hope to accomplish by calling off the entire conference. It seems like that just hurts everyone. (I'm a white dude, just for full disclosure.) P.S.: Does anyone else wonder i…

> (I'm a white dude, just for full disclosure.)

Sorry, this thread is already over-represented by white male commenters and will be closed until more under-represented minorities comment above a specific threshold.

Re: ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

#204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I second the line of thinking, but please rein in the TSA a bit. That's literally the only thing I'm scared about going to US. All the other things seem like a purely local phenomena that shouldn't be generalized to the whole 300M country. But I am scared I'll get into trouble on the border because of my HN and Facebook posts (e.g. against US drone strikes).

Yeah, there's no way I'm going to defend the TSA's methodologies. They a pain to deal with. The good thing I'll say is that somewhere around 57 million people visited the US last year. 99.9%+ had no trouble other than long lines and the general frustration that comes with long distance travel. So your fears, while completely understandable, are also very, very unlikely to cause any actual trouble.

Those 0.1% mean absolutely nothing. There was a comment months ago right here in HN about a guy who owned a secure email provider who had his throwaway Android device confiscated, and who was interrogated for 8 hours on the topic of "give us access to your private email admin panel". He refused and was smart enough to not bring any way of unlocking his admin access with him (whitelisted IPs and/or physical keys which he left at home). He described the interrogators as very angry and that they "advised" him to immediately go back.

We get it, people who comment on sweet puppy Instagram posts aren't under threat. Sure. But the IT folk, especially people having access to sensitive information or white/black hats can definitely expect a plethora of insolent questions at the airport, asked in small creepy rooms somewhere at the back, from people who refuse to even identify themselves. Is that even legal?

Shall we also mention the looming danger of own laptops being banned on flights? Either use a Chromebook-like device (which, I have no doubt, will steal your private data, why else would they setup such a honeypot anyway) or GTFO, that's USA's policy.

I've made up my mind. I am not going to the USA for now. There's undoubtedly a huge pool of interesting people who can make some of my business dreams come true there but I am not sure being recorded in an unofficial "special target" list for life and having my devices every time I go confiscated is worth it. I'd say no.

(I exaggerate a bit of course, but to the average guy like myself losing even a $250 throwaway device is something that I will feel.)

Re: ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

#205

As a European, I keep getting baffled about how out of hand these things seem to be in the USA. I live in the Netherlands, a very open-minded country with same-sex marriage, equal rights and were women seem to me to be even slightly more dominant over men (but this is just my perception). All this without safe spaces, forced quotas at conferences, codes of conduct and people that police every word you say. There are…

So I'm a Dutch-American dual citizen that has lived in both countries. I guess I was born to answer this question :)

A big hint to the difference is that my Black American friends spell it capital-B Black. Almost all of them live in, or are from, majority black neighborhoods. The majority listen to different music, and even have different diets compared to my white friends. They speak differently and have different names and are a distinct group of people. This isn't me making this up either; this is paraphrased from a Facebook post by an American Black friend of mine. There are large parts of the country where they can't rely on help from the police, and a significant portion of the country will actively hate them if they marry a non-Black person. I do have some black American friends that aren't like this. They spell it lowercase-b black, they live in mostly white neighborhoods, and aside from the color of their skin they are indistinguishable from another white person in that neighborhood. But those are a minority. The majority of Black Americans are capital-B Black, and they have much different lives because of it.

In the Netherlands however, there are no large Black neighborhoods. (There are "black neighborhoods" to some degree, but orders of magnitude smaller.) None of my black Dutch friends would "capitalize the B" so to speak. The average black Dutch person has a pretty similar life to the average white Dutch person: there wouldn't be much of a difference in where they live, their diets, or their schools. A black Dutch person won't have to worry that the police won't help them.

That can help you understand the race tensions in the US. To a somewhat lesser degree it can help you understand our LGBTQ+ and gender tensions. Sure, there aren't "female neighborhoods", but there are LBGTQ+ neighborhoods, and both women and non-straight people face discrimination. The Dutch women I'm friends with have pretty gender-mixed friends, while I'm usually the only male friend of the American women I've been friends with. The same for LGBTQ+ people - they tend to mostly make friends among themselves in the US, while my queer Dutch friends are mostly friends with straight people.

Basically, in the Netherlands everyone is the same, but in the US people form groups. A big reason for that is that the American groups formed out of necessity. If you were going to be killed for being gay, well it makes sense to have mostly gay friends. If you're going to be lynched because you're Black, well it makes sense to make friends with other Black people. The Netherlands experienced racial tensions to a much lesser degree, so these groups never formed.

Re: ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not sure how saying that a non diverse group is inferior to a diverse group is equivalent to saying that the specific elements making up the non diverse group is inferior? That you don't see it is framed as a question. Ok, look at it harder and come back to me when you have an actual answer instead of a question on your own reading capacity. > Like, saying all-white is inferior to mixed is not the same as sayin…

>That you don't see it is framed as a question. To restate: "I'm not sure how saying that a non diverse group is inferior to a diverse group is equivalent to saying that the specific elements making up the non diverse group is inferior[. Could you please clarify]?" Thought it was implied. Sorry to be unclear. >Yes, it is, that's exactly what it is. I'd ask you which mental hoops led you to think it isn't but I know e…

> 1 + 1 = 2 1 No, no, you're doing a false equivalency. This is what you're saying:

1+1=2 but 2>2 if the second 1 is of a different race/sex/orientation/etc.

> It's not that there are more than one competing definition. There are several complimentary ones and ignoring the rest does not promote better discussion.

... According to you.

Re: ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm talking about benefiting from structural inequalities that favor certain groups over others. Still arguing about complicity just out of existence. Last time I'm replying to you because you won't understand, but at least now my comment is just as visible as yours. > And to the degree one benefits, and takes that for granted, and perceives the calling out of those benefits as a form of persecution, then yes, ther…

But how is saying "we want a more diverse group" a snub?

Postponing it because they aren't "diverse" enough is a snub.

Re: ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The concept of a meritocracy on issues like this is what most people think naturally makes sense. Except that study after study, and evidence after evidence has shown that over the long run it's a flawed strategy. That's why companies push for diversity on boards and in leadership positions because (a) it encourages people minorities/women/etc to strive for those positions and because (b) homogenous viewpoints are de…

If you're pushing to have unqualified people on your board simply because they're women, your company will die. Aside from that, why strive if I know I have a good chance of getting a position even without any kind of merit? Fucking hell, I want to be seen as more than just a disabled trans woman, I want people to look at the shit I've done and say "Wow, she's really awesome, let's hire her/accept her into our colleg…

Oh come on.

Anyone seriously espousing the idealism of pure "meritocracy" needs to put aside their gradeschool naivete. Next you'll start quoting Anne Rand back to us. It's one of those ideas that sure sounds good... I mean, who can possibly argue with the idea that they should pick the best speakers with the best content?

Until you actually think about it.

What you fail to recognize is that, unless you can find me quantitative measures that can be used to determine a person's skill, meritocracy isn't about merit. It's about convincing fallible human beings of the level of merit. And that means running up against both conscious and unconscious cognitive bias.

So the reality is, like it or not, if you want a fair shot in the professional world, you damn well do need the help of people fighting the good fight against personal and institutional bias. Hell, 20 or 30 years ago it's entirely possible you wouldn't have had a job at all if it weren't for the actions of people who came before you who understood this and fought for a more inclusive society and workplace.

But it's rather easy to rail against policies like affirmative action when you've already benefited from them. It reminds me of anti-vaxxers who argue about the rarity of diseases to justify not getting inoculated, not realizing that that situation exists because people got vaccinated.

Re: ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how is saying "we want a more diverse group" a snub?

Postponing it because they aren't "diverse" enough is a snub.

Again, how so?

Re: ElectronConf postponed until a “more diverse slate of speakers” can be delivered

#210

As a European, I keep getting baffled about how out of hand these things seem to be in the USA. I live in the Netherlands, a very open-minded country with same-sex marriage, equal rights and were women seem to me to be even slightly more dominant over men (but this is just my perception). All this without safe spaces, forced quotas at conferences, codes of conduct and people that police every word you say. There are…

It's social engineering meant to divide and weaken us, and a large portion of the country has fallen for it. Especially in Academia. We are becoming crippled by our own will. It's sad to watch and the pendulum response was the 2016 election.

My problem with claims like these is that they imply intent, which implies a coherent (and nefarious) effort behind large social trends.

Who precisely is it that's doing this?

Post reply on HN