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

Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

blog.cloudant.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 279 posts

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#251

Post by [deleted] »

pg wrote: post #70
oldstrangers wrote: post #2

Fuck Monsanto, and by association, fuck Cloudant. "We’ve been working with them for a few weeks now and we couldn’t be more thrilled with the partnership." Thrilled? I guess money is thrilling. "The data & reporting interfaces will be used across Monsanto and should be instrumental in the making of key business decisions." Key business decisions like which small farmer to sue into oblivion? Or what third world nation…

It's an unfortunate sign for HN when the top comment on a thread is such a content-free rant. If the rule is, if x sells something to Monsanto, fuck x, then what you're saying is fuck the entire corporate world, because I'm sure Monsanto buys Apple computers and Chevrolets and Clorox too. It's sort of ridiculous to hold Cloudant to a standard that essentially zero other companies meet. There are frequently inane comm…

[deleted]

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#252

Post by sraut »

run4yourlives wrote: post #199
pg wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there are two separate crowds. I think HN's initial population of smart, mostly apolitical nerds has been diluted by the arrival of a lot of new users who are not as smart, and are thus more excited by shallow controversies. Politics happens to be a big source of shallow controversies. But I don't think most people who upvote comments saying "Fuck Monsanto" do it because they have a deep interest in pol…

> I think HN's initial population of smart, mostly apolitical nerds has been diluted by the arrival of a lot of new users who are not as smart, and are thus more excited by shallow controversies. Or: I disagree with you, therefore you are dumb. Outstanding. I up-voted the parent comment. I have been here for years. I consider myself to be a free market supporting, fiscally conservative and independent thinker. I have…

I normally don't comment on things.

I think a lot of people are missing the point. The nature of Company x and y is irrelevant, the issue is interchangeable.

Hacker News used to be a community devoid of emotional outbursts and when they occurred they were thought out, thought provoking and well articulated. Smart comments. Only smart comments were up-voted.

This wasn't and it was at the top. It's indicative of the direction HN is going.

(For intensive purposes x in this case is Monsanto and y is Cloudant.)

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#253

Post by andylei »

pbreit wrote: post #236
andylei wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm seeing literally dozens of comments saying that it monsanto is the most evil company that exists, and literally, not one comment giving a single concrete reason why it is. why is hitler evil? i can tell you in 8 words. he ordered the deaths of millions of people. why is monsanto evil? seriously, name ONE thing that makes them evil.

Monsanto knowingly engages in unethical activities that could jeopardize large portions of the world's food supply.

what are these activities? producing GMOs? high yield crops have enabled the feeding of hundreds of millions if not billions of people who would otherwise died of starvation.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#254

Post by [deleted] »

dasil003 wrote: post #234
nirvana wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"rather than going and educating yourself about what they do" Your assumption that I'm not educated about the issue is in error.

Then you shouldn't assume that somebody who is vitriolic about the issue is automatically a liberal wacko.

[deleted]

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#255

Post by abbasmehdi »

csallen wrote: post #240
run4yourlives wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think HN's initial population of smart, mostly apolitical nerds has been diluted by the arrival of a lot of new users who are not as smart, and are thus more excited by shallow controversies. Or: I disagree with you, therefore you are dumb. Outstanding. I up-voted the parent comment. I have been here for years. I consider myself to be a free market supporting, fiscally conservative and independent thinker. I have…

You're arguing against a strawman. Nobody said that taking a particular side of a debate makes you dumb. This isn't about what side you take, it's about how you choose to debate . HN used to be a place that cared deeply about conversing in a civil, responsible, and educational manner. Whether or not you agree with the sentiments expressed in the parent comment, the fact is that it doesn't meet those standards. Even i…

"Even if the logic wasn't childish ("fuck X by association", really?)" My point is, aiding x in its mission makes you an accomplice. You can argue that x is not bad or as bad is it is being made out to be, but being a partner makes you exactly that, a partner.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#256

Post by run4yourlives »

csallen wrote: post #240
run4yourlives wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think HN's initial population of smart, mostly apolitical nerds has been diluted by the arrival of a lot of new users who are not as smart, and are thus more excited by shallow controversies. Or: I disagree with you, therefore you are dumb. Outstanding. I up-voted the parent comment. I have been here for years. I consider myself to be a free market supporting, fiscally conservative and independent thinker. I have…

You're arguing against a strawman. Nobody said that taking a particular side of a debate makes you dumb. This isn't about what side you take, it's about how you choose to debate . HN used to be a place that cared deeply about conversing in a civil, responsible, and educational manner. Whether or not you agree with the sentiments expressed in the parent comment, the fact is that it doesn't meet those standards. Even i…

You're essentially arguing that the expression of passion/emotion via a comment is below the standards of HN. It's an interesting viewpoint, but one I don't completely support.

The problem with your stance is that preventing the expression of emotion is often a cover for elitism. Rather than being a strawman, this is exactly what Paul is doing in his comment. i.e. "I am above being emotionally attached to this argument because it isn't very important. If you think it's important, you simply aren't at my level."

All of us - being that we are all subject to emotion - will allow emotional responses to topics that we feel matter. What it all boils down to is a disagreement on what level of importance you place on a topic. This of course has nothing to do with intelligence at all in most cases.

The continued association of intelligence to apathy is a bit of a fallacy, to be honest.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#257

Post by temphn »

dasil003 wrote: post #234
nirvana wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"rather than going and educating yourself about what they do" Your assumption that I'm not educated about the issue is in error.

Then you shouldn't assume that somebody who is vitriolic about the issue is automatically a liberal wacko.

If they are vitriolic about the issue then they are likely to be a wacko. Whether liberal or otherwise is TBD.

After all, only a wacko would say "f* Cloudant" to someone's face who they just met or heard about.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#258

Post by temphn »

run4yourlives wrote: post #256
csallen wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're arguing against a strawman. Nobody said that taking a particular side of a debate makes you dumb. This isn't about what side you take, it's about how you choose to debate . HN used to be a place that cared deeply about conversing in a civil, responsible, and educational manner. Whether or not you agree with the sentiments expressed in the parent comment, the fact is that it doesn't meet those standards. Even i…

You're essentially arguing that the expression of passion/emotion via a comment is below the standards of HN. It's an interesting viewpoint, but one I don't completely support. The problem with your stance is that preventing the expression of emotion is often a cover for elitism. Rather than being a strawman, this is exactly what Paul is doing in his comment. i.e. "I am above being emotionally attached to this argume…

> The problem with your stance is that preventing the expression of emotion is often a cover for elitism.

Elitism is a good thing. HN is an elitist forum. Youtube is a forum for the mob.

There is a reason that Idiocracy portrayed stupid people as those who mindlessly cursed and raved in every sentence. Profanity has its place, but especially in comment threads it's a limbic reaction rather than an intellectual one. "F* you" adds no value, can be said by anyone, and can be heard anywhere. The more "f* you", the fewer posts by startup founders, technologists, and people who know what they are doing.

In other words, the fewer posts by elites.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#259

Post by [deleted] »

csallen wrote: post #247
zallarak wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a potential reason why some are upset. Its obvious that large corporations like Chevy, Clorox, Apple sell to Monstanto [and other corporations some could consider "bad" or whatever you want to label it]. But when startups do it [especially YC startups who I generally believe have smarter people involved relative to large corporations] it is felt because people generally hold them to higher standards [not just…

> You frequently see YC funded companies help each other out. Why do they do it? Is it just to accumulate more wealth/raise a valuation? Or is it because they've developed meaningful relationships and care for each other? Those two scenarios are not mutually exclusive. And I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but people generally act out of self-interest. There are plenty of YC (and non-YC) companies who help each ot…

[deleted]

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#260

Post by zallarak »

csallen wrote: post #247
zallarak wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a potential reason why some are upset. Its obvious that large corporations like Chevy, Clorox, Apple sell to Monstanto [and other corporations some could consider "bad" or whatever you want to label it]. But when startups do it [especially YC startups who I generally believe have smarter people involved relative to large corporations] it is felt because people generally hold them to higher standards [not just…

> You frequently see YC funded companies help each other out. Why do they do it? Is it just to accumulate more wealth/raise a valuation? Or is it because they've developed meaningful relationships and care for each other? Those two scenarios are not mutually exclusive. And I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but people generally act out of self-interest. There are plenty of YC (and non-YC) companies who help each ot…

True, agreed - they do not need to be mutually exclusive and its a wonderful thing if they do indeed align. Thanks for pointing that out.

Now maybe I'm trying too hard to make a connection here, but it is in our self-interest to not exploit people in non-industrialized nations for profit - I think America most definitely suffers from the ill treatment it inflicted on some nations in the past. Look at anti-Americanism in parts of the Middle East. Other examples include: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Salvador_Allende - the CIA overthrew him because he socialized some private assets, and installed a brutal dictator who was disastrous for Chile - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company], etc. [I think you get the idea]

I guess what I'm trying to say in this post we're sacrificing collectively as a people for the actions of some people who will do anything to profit. I know Cloudant isn't perpetrating those actions directly, but I truly wonder what the consequences of Monsanto's actions will be. Consider the farmer or person whose family will go hungry because of Monstanto - will they grow up to love America or hate it (and in turn, us, the citizens)? Will these nations breed terrorists or economic opportunities? TLDR; I think that actions like this are sacrificing long term benefits, including sustainable corporate profit for some quick short term gain.

Post reply on HN