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

Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

elaineou.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 307 posts

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#181

Post by Veelox »

mperham wrote: post #134
electrograv wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I 100% agree with your premise that “the more voices the better” (i.e. the fewer voices that are silenced, the better). What you describe certainly covers much of what’s happening, but something else is happening too: Voices are being silenced. And to respond to your opening sentence, I don’t mean anyone is silenced physically (who does that?), but rather psychologically, culturally, and socially. That’s not a good t…

Let's be clear here. We're not talking about where to eat lunch or controversial scientific theories, a la Galileo or Darwin. We're talking about "is race X smarter than race Y", "is gender X smarter than Y". Bigoted ideas. Some have been comfortable espousing bigoted views. Now they are forced to think about what they say and how they say it. As a white man, this has affected my own behavior (for the better IMO): I'…

>"is race X smarter than race Y"

That is one way to phrase the question. Another way to phrase the question is "what are the average IQs of the races in the USA and why are they different?" This question can be used as a starting point to help change things so that those who are below average can be helped.

The above is a question that I would not bring up in my workplace for fear of being fired. That is why there is an article called "Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley."

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#182

Post by refurb »

woodruffw wrote: post #39

For better or worse, popular society has become a lot better at detecting dog whistles. "Diversity of thought is more important than diversity of skin color" is one of those dog whistles. I don't find the discussion itself objectionable, but I also don't want to grant intellectual capital to anybody who is going to use a controversial topic in bad faith to control the discussion. I don't want to be used to legitimize…

The whole "dog whistle" thing is a part of the problem.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#183

Post by deyan »

dang wrote: post #141
superquest wrote: post #117

This post has 195 points in an hour, and it is currently #20 on the front page. Why isn't it higher?

For the usual reasons: user flags, software, and a moderation penalty. The latter can vary in weight but at the moment is a small downweight applied to follow-up discussions that don't contain significant new information. The software involved is HN's flamewar detector a.k.a. overheated discussion detector. All of these are typical responses to articles with a large heat-to-substance ratio.

Would you mind expanding on why the article has been flagged and removed from HN? The number of comments and upvotes suggests that the community is interested in discussing, so I am trying to understand better what is and is not acceptable at HN these days. I am sure others would appreciate transparency on this subject as well.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#184

Post by throwaway177171 »

The trend to refuse debating is more harmful than it looks.

Here are some defences I've seen so far

1. Debating is pointless because the person wont change their mind

On the Internet, you're not debating a person. You are also debating for the benefit of uninformed (yet potentially well meaning) bystanders that are watching and reading. Hard as it may be to imagine, a lot of these people just don't know what you know.

This is the exact time to bring out your best, most convincing material and information. Why not do it?

Its not a stretch to assume a lot of generally well meaning people will be sceptical to progressive ideas at first. After all, isn't the whole premise that we've normalised unfair behaviour so much that people can no longer easily see it from within their bubble?

Can we really afford to write off everyone that is like that completely? Why not try and give them a peak outside their bubble instead?

2. Debating will legitimise the other person's reprehensible point of view. We are taking a huge step backwards just by engaging.

Assuming no other information is available to the uninformed bystanders, here is how this looks like to them:

  * Person A makes a plausible-looking argument;
  * Person B says they're wrong, 
    * wont even dignify that with a debate
    * will continue to be enraged
    * will do everything in their power to get person A fired.
A bystander might try and find some resources on their own. Or they may conclude this is a matter of "free speech": person B, having no arguments in their favour are just trying to shut person A down.

3. I'm outraged right now. Not quite in the state to educate people. I also just debated with 50 others before this person and I'm sick of doing it over and over.

Thats understandable. Please though, if at all possible, consider the potential consequences of continuing to engage without a debate.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#186

Post by photik »

calvinbhai wrote: post #154

If a white male (the google guy) can get fired for being open about his views, imagine how tough it can be for minorities to be open about their views! It’s like everyone knows they are in an echo chamber but not daring to be the first one to speak up.

That entirely depends on the arena in which one finds oneself. In far-left circles women and minorities tend to be given carte blanche, while in far-right circles older white men receive similar treatment. It is a spectrum of acceptable norms based on implicit values surrounding group identities.

e.g. if a white man offers a controversial opinion in a left-leaning arena, he is more likely to be dismissed.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#188

Post by fmihaila »

dang wrote: post #141
superquest wrote: post #117

This post has 195 points in an hour, and it is currently #20 on the front page. Why isn't it higher?

For the usual reasons: user flags, software, and a moderation penalty. The latter can vary in weight but at the moment is a small downweight applied to follow-up discussions that don't contain significant new information. The software involved is HN's flamewar detector a.k.a. overheated discussion detector. All of these are typical responses to articles with a large heat-to-substance ratio.

> The software involved is HN's flamewar detector a.k.a. overheated discussion detector. All of these are typical responses to articles with a large heat-to-substance ratio.

This is unfortunate. The discussion has been heated, yes, but I would argue there is plenty of substance to be found. Ironically, @sama was decrying precisely the ever-shrinking social space for controversy.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#189

Post by strangecasts »

ghostcluster wrote: post #151
mperham wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be clear here. We're not talking about where to eat lunch or controversial scientific theories, a la Galileo or Darwin. We're talking about "is race X smarter than race Y", "is gender X smarter than Y". Bigoted ideas. Some have been comfortable espousing bigoted views. Now they are forced to think about what they say and how they say it. As a white man, this has affected my own behavior (for the better IMO): I'…

Evidence and scientific inquiry are not bigotry.

Conclusions can be.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#190

Post by calvinbhai »

dmode wrote: post #145
vbtemp wrote: post #67

I'm glad it mentions H-1Bs. Similarly to identity-conservatives, for whom belief in global warming is heresy and tax cuts are gospel, I believe there is a similar phenomenon with identity-progressives around immigration, in this case specifically the H-1B program. There seems to be some belief in its sacred power that is not to be questioned and not to be curtailed. As I see it, big businesses - not least the major t…

Do you know anything about H1B ? Have you checked the average H1 pay in SV for H1 before making an asinine observation that H1 is used to enslave mid range IT talent. Disclosure: I am on H1 and I know alleast a 100 people on H1

How about the ones born in India /China/Philippines on h1-b? They are not treated equally (compared to a h1-b born elsewhere), and Indians are the most abused (by law).

Basically Indians on h1-b are highly paid shackled slaves of America, because they wait crazy number of years (10-70 years) to get a green card. During that wait their options to demand better pay/raise/jobs are extremely limited.

And these shackles are the source of conscious/ subconscious abuse.

Now try saying to anyone in America who is a DACA sympathizer that those in the green card backlog are in a much worse situation. (I did to one in Bay Area and it didn’t end well)

Post reply on HN