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

241–250 of 860 posts

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#241

Post by Suppafly »

ethbr1 wrote: post #218
Suppafly wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their associations are their works and words. You can't just handwave that stuff away as being irrelevant because you like the parts of their works and words that don't touch on anything you deem to be an association.

I know people of the political party I tend to disagree with who are saints and dedicate the majority of their time to others. I know people of the political party I tend to agree with who are insufferable selfish pricks and treat others terribly. Works and words aren't always associations.

>I know people of the political party I tend to disagree with who are saints and dedicate the majority of their time to others.

Except for the part of the time that they are devoting to supporting a political party that is actively harming you and people you love.. you can't just wave that off as not being important just because they are nice the rest of the time.

>I know people of the political party I tend to agree with who are insufferable selfish pricks and treat others terribly.

And they should be negatively judged for the latter behavior.

Both examples should be negatively judged for their behavior, you're just choosing to ignore some of the behavior of the first person.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#242

Post by spokaneplumb »

inglor_cz wrote: post #223
diffxx wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This does not feel like at all a good faith reading of the situation. Hardcore anti trans-activists on the right would like to make life so miserable for transpeople as to essentially eliminate them from public life entirely. That is the context in which these supposedly hysterical responses emerge. I say supposedly hysterical because transgender people of all ages do commit suicide at a higher rate than other groups…

"Hardcore anti trans-activists on the right would like to make life so miserable for transpeople as to essentially eliminate them from public life entirely." You may be right, but the anti-trans backlash in the context of the anti-woke backlash is much wider than just a few hardcore anti-trans activists on the far right. And it mostly revolves around two issues: a. Very young kids being treated in invasive or hard-to…

Those two things already barely exist. I’m skeptical it’s possible, in a nation of hundreds of millions, to get them much closer to not existing than they already are.

So if those are the parts really bothering people… it sure seems like a case of looking for something to be upset about, in which case attempting to address their grievances won’t help. Or, a case of being told by people who are exaggerating the situation that these are actually really big deals, then not bothering to check whether that’s true. And in that second scenario, I don’t think making reality even closer to what they prefer than it already is will convince them of anything, so again, why bother to try to address their concerns?

Their perception is out of phase with what’s actually going on, that needs to be fixed before any useful discussion about some nugget of a point they may hypothetically have or helpful nuance their perspective might provide can meaningfully be engaged with.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#243

Post by sillyfluke »

spacechild1 wrote: post #231
sillyfluke wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't downvote you, but I'm not sure there is anyone in the American VC class that shared the harrowing plight of Palestinians as much as Kamala-voting pg did. Not to say he does it alot, but in the VC feeds that I normally check out once in a while it's virtually non-existent. Hell, Musk even attended and applauded Netanyahu's speech in Congress. ...By that metric that would make pg a radical leftist. You know what…

> Kamala-voting pg Oh! I didn't know he spoke out against Teump and endorsed Harris: https://x.com/paulg/status/1851200055220306378/photo/1 That's a pretty strong statement. Hats off! Since then, PG seems to have gone silent on Trump. Instead he decided to post that essay about wokeness, right after major SV players publicly sucked up to Trump. Didn't he - or the people who read the draft - realized that it would mak…

I think Musk called pg a retard and released the right-wings trolls on him by doing so after pg pushed back on Musk's UK interference when he shared a UK poll showing a dislike for Musk across party lines. He's stated his preference for Kamala over Trump on multiple occasions ("I don't agree with xyz, but on the whole Trump is worse." being the gist of it). Right-wing trolls also went after him after this anti-woke essay, claiming he was late to the party. though he had been consistent on that point for quite some as well.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#244

Post by CivBase »

AlexandrB wrote: post #238
whack wrote: post #42

I appreciate the author and this article. As an immigrant and person of color, the author's concerns resonate with me. I don't think people like PG or Andreessen are evil bigots. But they are underestimating and enabling a movement that is cruel and exclusionary by design. A movement that they seek to tame and harness, but not understanding that the movement is fundamentally untameable. I miss the days when the Repub…

> I miss the days when the Republican party was led by a President like Bush, who told America that Islam is a religion of peace. He said this as he invaded a majority muslim country causing the deaths of tens of thousands of muslims. It was perception management, not a genuine concern for muslims. Words are not more important than actions.

Far be it from me to defend GWB, but in fairness he didn't invade them because they were muslim. There were many (poor) reasons for the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, but their primary religion was not among them. If it were, many other Middle Eastern countries would have also been invaded.

Words are not more important than actions. But words can inform us of the intentions behind the actions - which must be considered when casting judgement.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#245

Post by gedpeck »

snowfarthing wrote: post #236
gedpeck wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Herein lies the crux of the matter in my view. The jump from 2 to 3. When Bob Dole ran for President I wholeheartedly agreed with the position about being respectful to those you disagree with. Politics was still normal in the U.S. at that time. But now we in the U.S. elected a known rapist. A felon and a con man. He can’t run a charity in New York due to his misdeeds. He lusts after his own daughter. We have entered…

Do you realize the exact same things can be said about the President we had for the last four years? It's really hard to worry about your own guy being a scumbag, when the opposition supports a scumbag too (and then lies about it).

Biden hasn’t been convicted of felonies. He’s not an adjudicated rapist. He doesn’t refer to his daughter as a nice piece of ass. He isn’t banned from running a charity. He hasn’t bribed any porn stars. He hasn’t accepted $30 billion in bribes. He hasn’t taken secret documents to illegally keep in his bathroom. He hasn’t met with Putin alone without an interpreter or any other U.S. official present. He hasn’t made fun of a reporter’s disability. He didn’t appoint his son-in-law to be an advisor who then accepted bribes from Saudi Arabia. He hasn’t engaged in Twitter feuds with 15 year old kids from Sweden. He didn’t threaten to withhold disaster aid to states that didn’t vote for him.

Nothing I’ve said against Trump is about his politics. He, as a person, is narcissistic, self centered, selfish, boorish, infantile, incurious, lustful, and greedy. He’s a despicable person and those who support him are terrible people.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#246

Post by coderc »

skyyler wrote: post #178
Gothmog69 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup but still a poor attitude to have. I feel this way often times as a white male in tech, that they would rather hire literally anyone else if they can add some much desired "diversity" but I'm sure you would disagree that this is the case. Better for me to try anyways and have the best possible outlook even if I believe the cards are stacked against me.

>I feel this way often times as a white male in tech Wait, you feel like you face structural oppression as a white man in tech? Could you explain what challenges you face as a result of your gender identity and race?

The person you're replying to mentioned it in the post you quoted:

> "they would rather hire literally anyone else if they can add some much desired "diversity""

He feels like his applications are automatically deprioritized in favor of minorities.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#247

Post by vasilipupkin »

Angostura wrote: post #108
vasilipupkin wrote: post #75

"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?

If someone was born biological any male and is transitioning and still has periods, it seems useful, so why not?

how many people like this did meta have who had this issue and also had no access to a tampon, so that having it in mens' bathroom specifically was really important? what if I am a forgetful guy and I have socks with holes in them and I forget to buy new socks. Should meta bathrooms stock those socks? at some point this just becomes a bit absurd, no?

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#248

Post by axiomo »

tokioyoyo wrote: post #239
axiomo wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But do we really need tampons in mens' bathrooms, really? More to the point, do we really want men like the author in the women's bathrooms? Just because they desire to be women. We all need to take a step towards respecting women's boundaries by collectively telling these men: No.

I’ve always been baffled about people who care about it. Just for a hot second sit down, and think how many times you’ve even talked to a trans person in your life. Like it’s such a tiny percentage of people that extreme majority of people will literally never have a conversation with one in their entire lives. But for whatever reason it occupies the minds of a good chunk of people throughout entire political spectru…

In my social and professional circles I personally know several individuals who have a trans identity. Getting to know them a bit was actually what shattered the gender identity illusion for me.

If you consider the issue as a whole from a women's rights perspective, it should hopefully be less baffling.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#249

Post by snowfarthing »

Arainach wrote: post #72
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.

There is a danger to hating something so much, that it goes underground. A major reason why President Trump won the first time around was because hatred against Trump and his supporters was so strong, that many people being polled were afraid to tell the pollsters who they were really voting for, for fear of being destroyed. This is a major reason why Trump outperformed his polling.

In the meantime, when people are lied to by every avenue of culture, they are convinced everyone else believes in the lies, so they feel alone and in the minority, even though they may very well be in the majority. So long as this spell can be maintaned, the dictator can hold his grip on power.

But what happens when that spell was broken? When something happens, and all of the sudden, everyone realizes they've been in the majority all along? This is how dictatorships topple -- and the toppling can happen very swiftly, as Ceausescu discovered in Romania.

Elon Musk acquiring Twitter and taking out the censorship is what initially cracked the spell this time; and when Trump was elected not just by Electoral College, but by the Popular Vote, the spell was broken completely. It's why we're seeing so much change now, and why it's so rapid.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#250

Post by ethbr1 »

Suppafly wrote: post #241
ethbr1 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know people of the political party I tend to disagree with who are saints and dedicate the majority of their time to others. I know people of the political party I tend to agree with who are insufferable selfish pricks and treat others terribly. Works and words aren't always associations.

>I know people of the political party I tend to disagree with who are saints and dedicate the majority of their time to others. Except for the part of the time that they are devoting to supporting a political party that is actively harming you and people you love.. you can't just wave that off as not being important just because they are nice the rest of the time. >I know people of the political party I tend to agree…

I'd say what a person chooses to put their time and energy into is more important than their political affiliation.

Otherwise, all we'd have to do to be good in life would be to support political parties on internet forums. ;)

Post reply on HN