701–710 of 841 posts
What a bummer that workers are publicly demanding this, and (presumably) seeking press attention on it. I'm no fan of ICE – a very large percentage of my friends in the US are immigrants, and I generally want my country to be a welcoming one. ICE has certainly committed unethical and probably illegal acts (probably true of most federal agencies). But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a pri…
Our medium sized company created a simple policy in early 2016 - No religion - no politics in the office. I never dreamed that policy would pay dividends so profoundly. The distraction of having activists within your company trying to actively pressure the company via public channels - I mean it's almost unbelievable that this is the new norm. ...an I am so very thankful we seemed to have sidestepped it.
An explicit decision to be apolitical is itself a political decision.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
:( Then I have at least two question: 1) how much proof should I collect that someone is a nazi before I punch them? 2) how much should I believe other's people claim that someone is a nazi? Or is it a matter of court? is it a crime to be a nazi or is it simply a punchable offense? Is there an official agency that labels nazis? Or maybe it is a matter of activism, I can punch them while they are declaring nazi ideolo…
I think it's stupid as hell to have to convince anyone that nazis are worth punching, but whatever, I'll give you one response and leave it. 1) IDK, start with anyone who says they're a nazi. There are tons of people who are openly fascist, white supremacists. No need to worry about grey lines, plenty of punching to go around. If you really want to push the boundaries, go for people who are openly hateful towards min…
> IDK, depends on the nazi, and how many punches it takes to accomplish what you set out to do.
At the risk of reading too much between the lines...if it takes enough punches to kill a Nazi, are you advocating for murdering a Nazi?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Source code is a company’s Crown Jewels. Who can take the risk that their business will be shut down because an employee tweeted something 8 years ago that is now out of favour? At least Git by it’s very nature protects you but you would still have your issue tracker and CICD pipeline held to ransom.
It's GitHub. As in git. If losing GitHub makes you lose your source code, you're gitting it wrong.
Very nice. golf clap
What a bummer that workers are publicly demanding this, and (presumably) seeking press attention on it. I'm no fan of ICE – a very large percentage of my friends in the US are immigrants, and I generally want my country to be a welcoming one. ICE has certainly committed unethical and probably illegal acts (probably true of most federal agencies). But to expect that a _federal agency_ will be denied service from a pri…
Microsoft itself is denying service to police departments right now regarding face detection tech.
"Microsoft won’t sell facial recognition to police until Congress passes new privacy law" https://www.theverge.com/21288053/microsoft-facial-recogniti...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So "You're either with us or against us"? Is that the message?
There's obviously grey area, but a lot of comments in this thread come really close to the definition of complacency
It is the hallmark of extremism.
> I think if the bar is "don't kill minorities" Take this as my personal possibly wrong opinion, but this kind hyperbolic phrasing is only going to hurt your cause. The same as people defending "punch a nazi" slogans. They will give your tribe influence, but also steadily decrease your chance at long term victory. Honestly I cannot understand how many people (I don't care about sides) can believe in progress via viol…
If you are faced with an opponent that wants you dead, anything is justified, up to and including violence. Violence indeed isn't always the best way to prevent the rise of fascism, but it should always be on the table as that is easily morally justifiable. "moderate to moderate" conversation is enlightened centrism. If you are up against an enemy that will use political violence the only recourse you'll have eventua…
He asked the king for power and the king always remained the head of state, indeed he was able to remove Mussolini from power when he wished to do so. For other violence worked wonders.
> Non-violence is a myth
Gandhi disagrees, among many others.
> All politics is violence
there is a very important line between violence and non-violence. there is bad and good on both sides of that line.
> I will say that as it is right now I don't think that antifascist except in some very limited edge cases, simply because we are not at a level where it would do more good than harm.
On this we agree :)
> But there's always the risk that we could get there, and openly saying that you won't use the means necessary does harm.
To me the best way to decrease this risk by refusing compromises on violence. I do not think this is a problem that can be solved by (openly) adopting the methods of the enemy.
Look, you look like someone with a strong sense of justice, and I hope you will succeed in improving the world. I believe that my methods are more effective, but trying our best is the only thing we can do.
Still I would like to properly express my own stance: I will never condone initiating violence and I will never stop praising the unbounded power of non-violence and civil conversation. If I will ever have to discard this position one day then a good part of me will die with it.
This is my position, intrinsically I cannot prove it right and I do not demand of others to share, but it is how I decided to play this game. I understand the possibility that I might be wrong; we all need to take responsibility for our choices and this is mine.
I suspect that our dreams of a perfect society have more similarities than differences, I hope we can get there, together.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have they killed many paid products? I think there is justified wariness about building too much on top of any service given away for free.
Explain all the businesses built on YouTube, then. YT is "free" to most consumers (paid for by ads), but there are literally people who make their livings as YouTube personalities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think many of the commenters would openly embrace the label of complacency. That's part of living in a country with a diversity of views; sometimes, when you see people doing something terrible, you have to accept that they don't see it that way rather than going on a warpath to exclude them from polite society.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing
It was first used politically by Vladimir Lenin, then Benito Mussolini, and more recently by George W Bush after 9/11.
It's not surprising that modern liberals are so keen on its use.