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

I Met Paul Graham Once

okayfail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 860 posts

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#71

Post by natch »

JDEW wrote: post #19

> Are “identity politics” just a status game that economically advantaged elites play? Yes. But it's a disgrace that we're throwing the baby (genuine progress, like the slow acceptance of non-binary people) out with the bathwater.

Huge pretending going on though that we are doing this. We are not throwing away the baby.

There is nuance and people are pretending there is not. I support trans people but also support safety for all people. There are some nuanced details when you get to reality, and we can’t just pretend those away.

The symptoms or pretending are things like not finishing the essay, or not even reading far enough to uncover PG’s definition near the beginning, so it had to become a footnote later when someone told them about it.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#72

Post by Arainach »

slibhb wrote: post #41

I thought this was better than most essays in this vein. I do fundamentally disagree with the author. People can think poorly of you for whatever reason they want. If someone hates trans people, they can, and you can't stop them. The whole "war on hate" thing was a bad idea; you can't forbid hatred. It predictably didn't work, and it's good that we're turning away from it. Adding on, the trans issue isn't simple. The…

>The whole "war on hate" thing was a bad idea; you can't forbid hatred

You can't forbid it but you can absolutely make it socially unacceptable. "Free speech" doesn't mean letting people spew hate and doing nothing; choosing not to hand them a megaphone, support their business, etc. is entirely valid.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#74

Post by gedpeck »

mecsred wrote: post #57
gedpeck wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be curious. Be courteous and respectful. Be a normal, nice goddamn human to human across the table from you. In general I wholeheartedly agree. But if the person in front of you has done or advocated for things that cause harm or is themself a horrible person then I disagree.

Then you don't agree at all. Every single adult in the world has "done or advocated for things that cause harm". It's inescapable.

Great harm then? I’m not morally obligated to to treat Putin with respect. Most people agree that there are people who are so reprehensible that they don’t deserve respect.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#75

Post by vasilipupkin »

"why go out of your way to remove them" in principle, it's fine to have them. But really, they are just a symbol of the fake performative substance free dei culture. A reminder of it. Transgender employees should not be discriminated against, should have all the protections and respect like any other employees. But do we really need tampons in mens' bathrooms, really?

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#76

Post by giraffe_lady »

slibhb wrote: post #41

I thought this was better than most essays in this vein. I do fundamentally disagree with the author. People can think poorly of you for whatever reason they want. If someone hates trans people, they can, and you can't stop them. The whole "war on hate" thing was a bad idea; you can't forbid hatred. It predictably didn't work, and it's good that we're turning away from it. Adding on, the trans issue isn't simple. The…

The author isn't talking about abstract "hatred" in the sense of people's internal, personal experiences. They are talking about hate speech, a specific concrete act with external material consequences.

> Adding on, the trans issue isn't simple.

It really kind of is though.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#77

Post by femiagbabiaka »

mecsred wrote: post #57
gedpeck wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be curious. Be courteous and respectful. Be a normal, nice goddamn human to human across the table from you. In general I wholeheartedly agree. But if the person in front of you has done or advocated for things that cause harm or is themself a horrible person then I disagree.

Then you don't agree at all. Every single adult in the world has "done or advocated for things that cause harm". It's inescapable.

It’s like.. incredibly escapable. Nihilism makes for a weak argument

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#78

Post by asabjorn »

There are two key aspects here: the nature of work and a critique of woke narratives, which some argue deny recent developments by framing them as a simple desire for acceptance. Specifically, transgender individuals are seen as being elevated through diversity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, with accusations that these efforts sometimes prioritize activism over qualifications and invade female only spaces that are there for a reason.

While I understand the personal challenges you’re navigating regarding identity and humanity, it’s important to maintain boundaries between personal matters and professional life. In Silicon Valley, the focus is on achieving ambitious goals that deliver exceptional results, similar to the performance expected in professional sports. Success depends on everyone concentrating on their work, regardless of personal beliefs or identities. Therefore, keeping personal issues like sexuality and the woke religion separate from the workplace ensures a productive and diverse viewpoint inclusive environment where all qualified individuals can contribute effectively and help companies thrive against odds.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#79

Post by James_K »

It's interesting to see how tech bros are slowly sliding to the right. The first thing I ever read from Paul was his thing about lisp, and I almost instantly disliked him. There is an intense ego that radiates from his ilk. You see a similar thing with some small business owners. Owning and running a business gives them a feeling of superiority. They feel that they are affluent thanks solely to their own efforts (and perhaps some negligible work from their employees), and seeing that others are less wealthy they conclude themselves to be superior [1]. I think it's an inevitable fact of capitalism that the people who rise to the top are the ones who are greedy, who confuse profit with virtue. It's really no surprise that they are easily influenced by the winds of fashion; you don't get rich by taking a stand.

[1] Footnote 12, https://paulgraham.com/superlinear.html#f12n

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#80

Post by gedpeck »

hnthrowaway6543 wrote: post #60
gedpeck wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be curious. Be courteous and respectful. Be a normal, nice goddamn human to human across the table from you. In general I wholeheartedly agree. But if the person in front of you has done or advocated for things that cause harm or is themself a horrible person then I disagree.

> But if the person in front of you has done or advocated for things that cause harm or is themself a horrible person then I disagree. the current conflict in the middle east shows why this doesn't work in the long run. despite what a generation that grew up consuming Marvel films was led to believe, not every conflict is a clearly defined superhero-vs-supervillain, good-vs-evil affair. eventually, you will be the on…

Most definitely. Each person decides for themselves where the lines are drawn.
Post reply on HN