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

201–210 of 307 posts

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#201

Post by cpitman »

chasing wrote: post #160
cpitman wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The White Nationalist march on Charlotte is actually an example of voices being silenced. Photos of people there were distributed, their names were found (sometimes incorrectly), and their places of work contacted. Then they were fired. If people see that people who share the same views are losing their livelihoods, they are more likely to be silent. Only the independently wealthy wouldn't consider losing their job r…

That's a good point to bring up. I don't think those people were silenced. They went to a public protest in a public place to make a statement. That statement was broadcast across the country and the world. The opposite of being silenced. Now, they faced consequences for what they said. But that's what happens when you say things. Words have meaning and you can say words which will cause people to no longer want to a…

It is not just those people being silenced though. It is people who stayed home, maybe their views are not quite as radical as someone who would protest, or maybe they tend to be more politically apathetic (ie most people).

When those people watch Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/08/14/twitter-users-identif...) and see what is happening to those people for their speech and actions, they are being silenced.

These are also probably the people more amenable to changing their views. It's got be pretty hard to swing someone with a tiki torch marching down the street, but someone who feels sympathetic to their views could maybe be reasoned with if they would talk about it.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#202

Post by strangecasts »

BRAlNlAC wrote: post #173
strangecasts wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you shouldn't extend this animosity towards the people that support that candidate, and you shouldn't convince yourself that there aren't two sides to every issue, because there are. That doesn't mean those sides are equal . Take anti-vaxxing and young-earth creationism: do they offer any truth or useful insights for policy proposals? e: Another point: why should I not hold animosity towards hucksters who hamper…

No, but those people get to have a say in our government. So in some ways yes, they are equal. If you want that to change, be a missionary and convince them, but to deny them representation is violence upon a class.

I'm not "denying representation", I'm saying that there aren't two sides to every issue, there are ideas which have been proven false and offer no gain from discussion.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#204

Post by rectang »

Veelox wrote: post #192
rectang wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard for me to get worked up over this when the injustices suffered by those who are now being heard were many times worse.

Just to clarify, it is okay to treat people poorly because people were treated worse in the past?

Many people continue to be treated worse today. But those who are accustomed to dominance cannot tolerate even a single setback without screaming bloody murder. Their endurance is paltry compared to that of the historically oppressed, and their empathy and perspective even more lacking.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#205

Post by asabjorn »

rectang wrote: post #178
Veelox wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think part of the issue is the tactics. The original post was pointing out that the way that bad ideas are being defeated is through force, not through reason. If the law says "Be happy or else" everyone is "happy". The problem being pointed out is that SV is becoming a place where you must believe the right things or else. The or else part is what makes it McCarthyistic.

It's hard for me to get worked up over this when the injustices suffered by those who are now being heard were many times worse.

Two wrongs does not make a right. For instance, I fail to see how you can fix things like racism, bigotry and sexism with more of the same.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#206

Post by electrograv »

chasing wrote: post #109
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…

> Voices are being silenced. I think we've got to be cautious in defining what "being silenced" means. Because I see a world in which people are saying all sorts of things out loud. There was a protest with a bunch of people waving Nazi flags in a public park in Virginia a few months ago. I don't think people are being silenced. I think community norms are shifting quickly in many parts of the country and, again, it'…

“Silenced” here means any manner of active suppression (shaming, ridiculing, verbal abuse, social bullying, even physical violence, etc) of an idea, rather than simply (1) ignoring it on a personal level, or (2) responding to it with argument via evidence and reason.

If an idea we disagree with is rare or harmless, we often ignore it. If an idea we disagree with is more common and worth refuting, we should respond to it with debate. If all parties involved in a debate are reasonable, consensus is possible. In aggregate, humans are capable of being reasonable, thus society progresses over time (amortized).

Sadly, there is often difficulty reaching consensus immediately — especially with deeply entrenched viewpoints. However, given time, history has proven over and over that truth prevails though patient use of rational argument. It is only through presentation of evidence and calm, rational argument that society progresses.

Other, more heavy-handed means of ideological conquest have more often than not made the world a much worse place. In fact, more than just a few million deaths have resulted from what we could call “non-rational ideological conquest” (which inevitably manifests in progressively more violent ways).

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#207

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

ender7 wrote: post #103
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…

On the contrary, silencing voices is a necessary thing. All societies have to determine what speech is allowed and what isn't. There are lots of things you can say in general American society that will get you censured. Claiming that black people are biologically inferior to white people, for example. Claiming that women are biologically inferior to men, though? Some still seem fond of that one. This all boils down t…

> On the contrary, silencing voices is a necessary thing. All societies have to determine what speech is allowed and what isn't. There are lots of things you can say in general American society that will get you censured.

In the 1950s, during the Red Scare, saying or doing things that showed that an indivdual was a socialist or Communist, including labor union activism, would have been enough to cost a person their job and get them ostracized from society. Quite a few were even jailed. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism)

Had you been a member of the left in that era, would you have have agreed that the loss of your job / jailing was a, in your own words, "necessary thing"? Would you have agreed that leftist positions were, again in your own words, "not really defensible"?

I mean, honestly, I don't get it. Do modern liberals really think McCarthyism was a good idea that just happened to be aimed in the wrong direction?

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#208

Post by publidat »

mcguire wrote: post #129
publidat wrote: post #94

I feel like it’ll take another dozen years before some people are ready to admit that “Liberal McCarthyism” is exactly what emerged around 2017. And in the meantime, as someone who’s not interested in waiting on the current power-brokers in SV to admit to it, I think it makes sense for those who are the primary target of this new McCarthyism to engineer a way to preseve their rights. Depending on SV’s prevailing powe…

Personally, I wouldn't start worrying about "Liberal McCarthyism" in the United States until liberals have control of the presidency, the congress, and at least a fair majority of the states.

The fact that this post, and the Sam Altman posts, have been made invisible on this site is the millionth depressingly predictable example of why it's well past time for the people who are endlessly silenced to engineer their own solutions and not rely on the infrastructure of the current power-brokers.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#209

Post by ageofwant »

chasing wrote: post #160
cpitman wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The White Nationalist march on Charlotte is actually an example of voices being silenced. Photos of people there were distributed, their names were found (sometimes incorrectly), and their places of work contacted. Then they were fired. If people see that people who share the same views are losing their livelihoods, they are more likely to be silent. Only the independently wealthy wouldn't consider losing their job r…

That's a good point to bring up. I don't think those people were silenced. They went to a public protest in a public place to make a statement. That statement was broadcast across the country and the world. The opposite of being silenced. Now, they faced consequences for what they said. But that's what happens when you say things. Words have meaning and you can say words which will cause people to no longer want to a…

Some of those that do not want to associate with the unpopular kid genuinely dislike him, or the way she acts or thinks. But most ostracise the bullied in fear of being bullied themselves. I have not learned much in highschool, but I do remember that.

Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley

#210

Post by rdtsc »

afpx wrote: post #155
rdtsc wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I had a nickel for every time someone told me that they were not allowed to say these things shortly after saying one or more of them ... You'll have a few dollars for sure. However you probably also won't hear from people who couldn't say it. Because well, they ... didn't say it. The idea I think is that those who mention it claim they speak for some larger group who couldn't. Don't know how true that is, but t…

You’re probably right to some degree, but remember that your argument is bi-directional. (I’m sure someone can explain this better, but I’ll give it a shot.) As a silly example, let’s say 85% of an area believes that carbonation is harmful to health. 10% are indifferent, and 5% believe that it’s good for health. One carbonation lover happens to be bold enough to drink carbonated beverages in public. Many bystanders w…

That's a good example, I can see how in general it is a bidirectional thing. In this case I think the outcome is that the carbonation lover who drank in public is then fired from their job (Denise Young Smith or D'Amore, not that I personally agree or condone what they said or did, just using them as examples here). Not only that even discussing carbonation at all is swept under the rug and covered up quickly (for example, this whole thread is already flagged). They probably expect to be able to say they like carbonation or even drink it in public and even argue and face criticism for it. What they don't expect is to be attacked, fired or punished for it.
Post reply on HN