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

Adversarial Collaboration

edge.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 224 posts

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#121

Post by leaflets2 »

AstralStorm wrote: post #115
leaflets2 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More books for you :-) Never Split the Difference. And Nonviolent Communication. Because just listening to others, and showing that you care about and understand what they're saying, can go a long way. Not always a need to actually do anything in the real world (or to say or pretend that you agree). Maybe theoretically this won't place you in their old group, still, you'll a bit form a new group where you and that ot…

Or you become a traitor to everyone and are rewarded as one deserves. These tactics are just that, they are not strategies. They are not long term successful or sustainable.

The things on your mind are misunderstandings. Not sure exactly what you think, but what you wrote made no sense to me.

It seems you haven't read any of the books.

I did use the listening technique in Never Split... and it worked well, and long term good effects too for everyone. -- When listening to the other person, one gets a bit more open oneself -- sometimes the other person does have (partly) good ideas (although not in that case) and it's simpler to find something that works.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#122

Post by dijonman2 »

lelanthran wrote: post #104
markdown wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> for those students who come to Yale, we expect them to be versed in issues of social justice. We encourage them to be vocal when they see an opportunity for change in our institution and in the world. Would you want anything less in an academic institution? That's the entire point of places of higher learning.

> Would you want anything less in an academic institution? That's the entire point of places of higher learning. Is it really "higher learning" when LITERAL groupthink is required ? (Maybe you're being sarcastic and I'm just not getting it)

I can’t make sense of it either, in fact I would consider it a negative.

A mayor was once asked what he was doing to help minorities in his city. He replied “I don’t have minorities in my city, we all are all equal”.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#123

Post by ekianjo »

nelsondev wrote: post #53
ekianjo wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> who isn't a member of a group? We're all members of a number of groups. Not everyone is brainwashed to accept group think no matter in what cirles they have to evolve in. There are individuals and then there are the parrots who mindlessly repeat what the group says.

https://xkcd.com/610/

nice strawman that has nothing to do with the point being made

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#124

Post by ZeroGravitas »

dale_glass wrote: post #118
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So they care about social justice, which is bad, and they are only pretending to care about social justice, which is bad, and they use it as cover to do the opposite of social justice, which is also bad. So, higher education is definately bad, and whether social justice is bad or not depends on whether you open the box and find out if the cat is a Republican or a Democrat?

> So they care about social justice, which is bad, and they are only pretending to care about social justice, which is bad That's P ^ !P, which is a contradiction. Your reading doesn't make any sense.

I'm pointing out the contradiction in this ongoing "political correctness/woke" backlash.

They're complaining about people doing the right thing. And they know that. So they have to complain they're doing the right thing wrong, or doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. Or the right thing is only a cover for a nefarious plot.

Which only re-inforces that it's the right thing, even before you examine the decades long track record of people arguing against it.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#125

Post by ekianjo »

lostcolony wrote: post #70
ekianjo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social justice is not an innocent word. It is charged with a political agenda.

So was "abolition". You can decide you -disagree- with the ideas of 'social justice', or the implementation, or whatever, but I think you'll need a stronger case than "it's political" to warrant the dismissal of an educational institution trying to incorporate the term.

> warrant the dismissal of an educational institution trying to incorporate the term.

Kids are supposed to be in universities to learn and develop their critical thinking, not to be brainwashed by the most fashionable ideology of the time. Sorry if this is such a provocative line of thinking these days.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#126

Post by littlestymaar »

mach1ne wrote: post #114
littlestymaar wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if they really “stand strongly” and give higher scores to such views and it's not just marketing. If they advertise about social justice, but the admission process is in fact pretty conservatives, this posture will not have a dramatic effect. But anyway, even if this is true, that doesn't mean that it's the current Elite's views, just likely to be the future Elite's views (assuming that higher education pays a s…

I think the only thing where we differ is that I consider elite university faculty (and the institution as a whole) to be part of the elite and you don't. I'm not saying either is correct, it's just where you draw the line.

There's a difference between “being part of the elite” and “being representative of the Elite as a whole”. I'm not arguing that university members aren't part of the Elite, but I'd argue that they are a narrow part of a much broader Elite and they are commonly more progressive than the rest of the Elite.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#127

Post by mach1ne »

littlestymaar wrote: post #126
mach1ne wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the only thing where we differ is that I consider elite university faculty (and the institution as a whole) to be part of the elite and you don't. I'm not saying either is correct, it's just where you draw the line.

There's a difference between “being part of the elite” and “being representative of the Elite as a whole”. I'm not arguing that university members aren't part of the Elite, but I'd argue that they are a narrow part of a much broader Elite and they are commonly more progressive than the rest of the Elite.

That we can agree on.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#128

Post by andrepd »

littlestymaar wrote: post #92
scifibestfi wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact that's how many get into the elite group and jockey for position within it. "Think about what it takes to claw your way into America’s elite strata. Unless you were born into the upper-middle class, your surest route is to pursue an elite education. To do that, it pays to be exquisitely sensitive to the beliefs and prejudices of the people who hold the power to grant you access to the social and cultural capi…

This comment is interesting because it kind of contradicts itself: At first you say sometuing akin to “to become part of the elite you need to accept the elite's point of view and beliefs”, citing higher education as a gateway for elites, and the you use the discourse “social justice” as an example of what young people must believe in to get to higher education. But “social justice” is definitely not a foundational b…

Replace "social justice" by "performative social justice" and you have a much more accurate description.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#129

Post by eloff »

sooyoo wrote: post #78
eloff wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm uncommon in this aspect, but I don't feel like I'm a member of many groups. I'm not religious, but don't really consider myself an atheist. I'm not for any particular party. I don't care about sports. I'm Canadian, but don't live there and don't feel like I belong there either. I suppose you could say I'm part of the group of Caucasian males by birth or part of the group of software engineers by trade, but…

Those with most priviledge are usually the least aware of it. I've come to realize that "white male software engineer" is one of the groups with the highest ratio of priviledge versus priviledge awareness. (Disclosure: I belong to that group as well.)

Why would you bring privilege into an unrelated discussion? Also you're assuming a lot about my background that would surprise you. I wasn't born a software engineer. I chose the field deliberately as the best way to make money, and then fell in love with it after the fact. I'm self taught, a child of immigrants. I had a typical middle class childhood.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#130

Post by eloff »

marcosdumay wrote: post #108
eloff wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm uncommon in this aspect, but I don't feel like I'm a member of many groups. I'm not religious, but don't really consider myself an atheist. I'm not for any particular party. I don't care about sports. I'm Canadian, but don't live there and don't feel like I belong there either. I suppose you could say I'm part of the group of Caucasian males by birth or part of the group of software engineers by trade, but…

> I'm not religious, but don't really consider myself an atheist. Oh, an agnostic. There is something to be said about groups of people that hold similar ideas because their similar way of thinking lead them to similar conclusions. It's a very important exception to the OP's description, where the group came first, and may even be the most common kind. (Of course, the question to answer is why do those people think i…

I probably inherited some values from the group of software engineers, but it's not a well defined group. Can you point to any values we might have in common? I would say a love of logic and the scientific method, but even that isn't universal. I don't find software engineers much more logical than other people of comparable intelligence.
Post reply on HN