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

Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 85 posts

Re: Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

#61

Post by maxxxxx »

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #54
dlwdlw wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All discrimination already is doing this, just indirectly. There's always an implication. The major one in the US is that harder working people are ethically better than lazy people. This combined with the belief that hard work equals success allows for very easy punishment based mindsets to spread.

I don't really understand this mindset. Are we supposed to treat people like there's absolutely no right or wrong way to live? How are we supposed to have a stable society when there are no standards by which to live by or strive for? Why shouldn't we discriminate against bad behavior and provide positive feedback for good behavior?

That's what laws are for. They set acceptable standards. Everything else is personal taste.

Re: Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

#62

Post by rtpg »

maxxxxx wrote: post #25
rectangletangle wrote: post #15

Incidents like this are starting to make me feel that software engineers should have a code of ethics, similar to the Hippocratic Oath. So technologies aren't abused to marginalize individuals/groups.

You have to be careful with this. Ethics can also be used to discriminate against people for religious reasons. These people think they are as ethical as you think you are.

That's a pretty vague objection

I mean sure someone can say this but you can build an ethical existence around things that we believe to be right.

This will exclude certain people. For example it might exclude arms manufacturers. It might exclude the Weinsteins of the world. But that's the point!

If your ethical standard doesn't exclude behavior it's hard for it to have much teeth

Re: Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

#63

Post by maxxxxx »

rtpg wrote: post #62
maxxxxx wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to be careful with this. Ethics can also be used to discriminate against people for religious reasons. These people think they are as ethical as you think you are.

That's a pretty vague objection I mean sure someone can say this but you can build an ethical existence around things that we believe to be right. This will exclude certain people. For example it might exclude arms manufacturers. It might exclude the Weinsteins of the world. But that's the point! If your ethical standard doesn't exclude behavior it's hard for it to have much teeth

It's hard to define an ethical standard. For some it's unethical to discriminate against gay people whereas for others being gay is unethical.

As far tech goes I think best would be to follow Stallmann's ethics. They are directly relevant to our work.

Re: Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

#64

Post by maxxxxx »

walshemj wrote: post #60
maxxxxx wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to be careful with this. Ethics can also be used to discriminate against people for religious reasons. These people think they are as ethical as you think you are.

The Hippocratic oath is not based on religion how would you discriminate against "religion"

I am worried about people discriminating because of religion not against.

Re: Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

#65

Post by Sangermaine »

maxxxxx wrote: post #63
rtpg wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty vague objection I mean sure someone can say this but you can build an ethical existence around things that we believe to be right. This will exclude certain people. For example it might exclude arms manufacturers. It might exclude the Weinsteins of the world. But that's the point! If your ethical standard doesn't exclude behavior it's hard for it to have much teeth

It's hard to define an ethical standard. For some it's unethical to discriminate against gay people whereas for others being gay is unethical. As far tech goes I think best would be to follow Stallmann's ethics. They are directly relevant to our work.

>It's hard to define an ethical standard.

This is nonsense. Attorneys, doctors, accountants, and other professions have long had ethical codes. This isn't some impossible task, programmers just don't want the responsibility.

Re: Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

#66

Post by maxxxxx »

Sangermaine wrote: post #65
maxxxxx wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to define an ethical standard. For some it's unethical to discriminate against gay people whereas for others being gay is unethical. As far tech goes I think best would be to follow Stallmann's ethics. They are directly relevant to our work.

>It's hard to define an ethical standard. This is nonsense. Attorneys, doctors, accountants, and other professions have long had ethical codes. This isn't some impossible task, programmers just don't want the responsibility.

These groups have ethical standards that are directly related to their work. So as tech people we should have standards for our line of work. Again, let's look at Stallmann.

Re: Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

#67

Post by 794CD01 »

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #54
dlwdlw wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All discrimination already is doing this, just indirectly. There's always an implication. The major one in the US is that harder working people are ethically better than lazy people. This combined with the belief that hard work equals success allows for very easy punishment based mindsets to spread.

I don't really understand this mindset. Are we supposed to treat people like there's absolutely no right or wrong way to live? How are we supposed to have a stable society when there are no standards by which to live by or strive for? Why shouldn't we discriminate against bad behavior and provide positive feedback for good behavior?

Sadly, yes. These days you cannot judge anyone by your own ethical standards, only by their own. There is no right and wrong, only consistency and hypocrisy.

Re: Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

#68

Post by ethbro »

ihsw2 wrote: post #55
KKKKkkkk1 wrote: post #3

It's heartening to see that the Chinese public will not stand for homophobia. Countries that look to China as a model (looking at you Russia) should take note.

Is there a way to oppose homophobia while still upholding family values (eg: eschew promiscuity and instead take one partner for life)?

Generalizing the gay club scene to all gay people is like generalizing Panama City Spring Break to all straight people.

Re: Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

#69

Post by TheAdamAndChe »

edent wrote: post #59
TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really understand this mindset. Are we supposed to treat people like there's absolutely no right or wrong way to live? How are we supposed to have a stable society when there are no standards by which to live by or strive for? Why shouldn't we discriminate against bad behavior and provide positive feedback for good behavior?

> Are we supposed to treat people like there's absolutely no right or wrong way to live? Yes. Modern society says that as long as your actions don't harm me, you should be able to do what you wish. There are some edge-cases, caveats, and exceptions - but that is the essence of modern liberalism. > How are we supposed to have a stable society when there are no standards by which to live You are assuming stability is a…

> Modern society says that as long as your actions don't harm me, you should be able to do what you wish.

No, modern law may strive for this ideal, but society doesn't. Society itself has a social aspect that goes beyond some modern liberalistic ideal. Since people are social and tribal, society will always have standards by which we live by. For example, people walking down the street naked will always be interpreted as crazy, regardless of any harm committed against other people.

> Progress is made through instability.

This depends entirely upon your definition of "progress." I personally don't think of the complete degradation of social standards as a good thing.

> You also assume that stability doesn't harm people. It clearly does.

Real life has winners and losers. Life is a system of inputs and outputs, and social pressure guides people into frameworks that lead to productive behavior in our society. Can they be taken too far? Sure. That, however, does not mean that _all_ social pressures are bad. For example, if a person is shamed for constant novelty-seeking through drinking, partying, and obnoxious behavior, a sense of shame may guide them into a mindset that allows for longer-term planning and goal seeking instead.

Re: Chinese Social Media Site Reverses Gay Content Ban After Uproar

#70

Post by merpnderp »

lokopodium wrote: post #35
jamesrcole wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nuclear weapons simulations, drone AI, smart bombs - all good. Why are you assuming people's positions on those topics? I've seen people bring them up.

Mostly because there are way more programmers working on weaponry of every possible kind than oppressing minorities, and you could say it causes way more harm and suffering. Also, unlike doctors, who are explicitly trusted with human health, programmers are not in any way different from anybody else and it's silly to try to impose a special moral code on them.

Fewer people die in wars today than at any point in the 20th century. As a trend, people dying from war related causes has been on a seriously downward trend.

There's an argument to be made that modern weapons help keep the peace, exactly like MAD did between the USSR and USA.

Post reply on HN