Live data from Hacker News

I Met Paul Graham Once

okayfail.com

381–390 of 860 posts

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#381
post #282

I'm not a target of tech's fascist turn, but my head is still spinning from the change of direction. When I entered this industry it was for hackers, nonconformists, weirdos, nerds, people who don't care about titles or clothes or what your genitals are. What particularly stings is that the vipers at the top tricked people into giving away an enormous amount of intellectual property. Zuck is removing tampons from the…

[flagged]

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t compare anything to Nazi Germany. I gave Nazi Germany as an example of how what is socially acceptable can drastically change in a short period of time. I apologize. He was found liable for sexual abuse, battery and defamation. These distinctions are extremely important. He’s not quite as bad as I made him out to be. What about him calling his daughter a nice piece of ass? The other stuff?

[flagged]

I didn’t call anyone a Nazi. Trump is not a Nazi. Most of his supporters aren’t either. I did use Nazi Germany as an example of societal views changing to the extreme.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#383
My current way of thinking about it is that we should tolerate communities that we find weird. People who cross dress are to me as weird as the religious people or the overly enthusiastic magic the gathering players. Should I hate them or discriminate against them? No. Should I let them force their community rituals on me? No as well.

I don't like someone telling me "God bless you" as much as someone forcing me to pretend they're a different gender.

Wokism was a movement against discrimination, bullies, and such. Not a movement to force you to adhere to specific communities rules

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#384
post #284
post #73

I was genuinely afraid of this post hitting HN, but thank you for the kind words.

As someone pondering the exact same sentiment of "I like women so much that I kinda want to be one" but who hasn't fully committed to it yet, I really appreciated your vulnerability and lucid writing. I hope folks are kind here in the comments. > It took me a while to remove my facial hair, I still haven’t trained my voice. The facial hair removal really does take forever, it's so annoying :sob:. And I've found voice…

[flagged]

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#386
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. It predictably didn't work, and it's good that we're turning away from it.

I don't understand any of this. It feels like you live in a different information bubble than mine.

What was the "war on hate", and who is turning away from it?

What would it mean to say that the "war on hate" worked? That there was no more hate, or that the situation improved somehow? What does it mean to say that it didn't work?

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

It became so socially unacceptable that its proponents won the US presidency and took control of Congress and globally famous business leaders are bending the knee to them without repercussion? What definition of "can absolutely" are you using?

The popular vote does not determine what is right. The US elected an incredibly racist Richard Nixon by a Landslide in 1972, but that doesn't mean society couldn't make progress on making it unacceptable to use racial slurs in public.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#389
post #107

[flagged]

He doesn’t want to let people at a big NGO give their own opinion on J. K. Rowling: https://x.com/paulg/status/1866497580466942269 Says it's Orwellian.

So he also seems outspoken, by your standard. He couldn’t stop at “Hi! This is what I think about J. K. Rowling...”

A lot of this comes down to the difference between freedom of speech and platforming. I’m sure we’ll still be arguing about it in 2050.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#390
post #253
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the word "just" in "He's not a hero. He's just a guy" indicates that he's not a hero. "Just" applies to the "just a guy" part, not to the "entered business transactions" part.

In conversational English, the phrase "He's just a guy" carries an idiomatic meaning along the lines of, "This person is no different from anyone else. He has no special power or influence or insight." And that might be true with respect to insight, but it is clearly not true with respect to power and influence. And that is why, when PG says something tone-deaf, it can hurt more than when some rando does it.

I agree in general, but not in this specific case. "He's not a hero. He's just a guy" makes it such that "he's just a guy" is applying specifically to the "he's not a hero" bit. I didn't take it as anything more than that, and I don't think the author intended it to mean they believe Graham is just an average person with an average amount of money, power, or influence.
Post reply on HN