I Met Paul Graham Once • Hacker News Board

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#581

Post by mindslight » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 5:24 AM UTC

lmm wrote: post #485

snowwrestler wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self-congratulatory, self-righteous prigs are all over the place within human society. When people complain about them, the substantive content of their complaint is the context in which they issue it. For example pg is complaining about the prigs who nag everyone about transgender acceptance, but not the prigs who nag everyone to reject and abuse transgender people. Matters of speech, manners, and decorum are conven…

> Self-congratulatory, self-righteous prigs are all over the place within human society. They try to be. A given social movement will be judged on how well it deals with them - whether it embraces/encourages them (or, worse, makes them its leaders), or discourages them. Bullies, grifters, and sexual predators are everywhere, but "this organisation protects/doesn't do enough against its bullies/grifters/sexual predato…

Are megachurches not still a thing? Traditional religion has had quite the assortment of bullies, grifters, and sexual predators.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#582

Post by iameli » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 5:27 AM UTC

strken wrote: post #510

djur wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How was the campaign "woke" unless you define "trans people exist and should be supported" as woke? If Graham dislikes prigs, shouldn't he be criticizing the censorious social conservatives that led the boycott?

I define "trying to market a beer that's commonly drunk by Republicans using a trans influencer" as woke because it's: A) ineffective at marketing the beer, because it prioritises a social justice objective instead (making it a political stance) B) ineffective at changing any Bud drinker's mind on trans people, because it prioritises aggressive performance (making it woke) The problem is not "oh, trans people exist,…

What social justice objective is being prioritized? By whom? Go watch the actual video — it's a flat joke about her not knowing what March Madness is but drinking Bud Lights anyway. It's completely unremarkable influencer #spon content. Her being trans isn't even mentioned.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#583

Post by intended » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 5:30 AM UTC

sien wrote: post #575

insane_dreamer wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the tech billionaires didn't give us any of that (though you might have a case with the iPhone and SpaceX); they're just the ones who monetized it It's like Carnegie setting up 2500 libraries but charging access to them and becoming an even greater billionaire in the process

Making these things make money is hard and it's really valuable. Without that people won't get to use them. There is a list of defunct spaceflight companies : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Defunct_spaceflight_c... Here is a very small list of just a few of the defunct internet companies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Defunct_online_compan... It's also worth considering how many millionaires were made…

I was going to grant this, but then thought of how VC hit rations work.

Is it really ‘hard’ to make tech firms profitable, or is it more a function of survival?

Many of the companies which enter are bought out, or acqui-hired, adding to the leaders. Tech often rewards those who survive long enough to consolidate.

And finally, enshittification is a way to make MORE money, but it’s not hard.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#584

Post by junto » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 5:32 AM UTC

anonfordays wrote: post #499

junto wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they’d named “wokeness” to be “kindness” or “considerate”, then there would be people who would still have found a way to be “anti-considerate”, and mean it as a “good” thing. In some circles, someone being gay or trans will always be a sin, and non-whites seen as “lesser beings” (both their views not mine). As it stands, these people vote more consistently for the same party and in larger numbers. We should hire…

>If they’d named “wokeness” to be “kindness” or “considerate”, then there would be people who would still have found a way to be “anti-considerate”, and mean it as a “good” thing. "If we name our religion the Religion of Peace..." This line of illogic has been memed for years: https://imgflip.com/i/67qfsz

I actually had Monty Python's Life of Brian in my mind, but yes exactly.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#585

Post by mindslight » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 5:33 AM UTC

netsharc wrote: post #47

michaelt wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It would be great if people could discuss these issues rationally, but the vast majority can't. Everyone is on a hair trigger. If only we in the tech industry could blame social media on anyone but ourselves :(

My startup idea is a iPhone/Android virtual keyboard that detects the user is writing something toxic, and refuses to cooperate. Using AI. Who wants to fund me? My other idea is a video/audio communication app that mutes the user if they become toxic. Yes, I'm only joking. I wonder how many will be triggered and foam about "But who determines what is toxic!?!". That makes me think about the joke about feminists where…

the buntings have recently changed, so you will want to update your pitch: s/toxic/woke/g

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#586

Post by pests » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 5:34 AM UTC

echelon wrote: post #481

jhp123 wrote: 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…

> When I entered this industry it [... didn't] care about titles or clothes or what your genitals are. Are we experiencing the same industry? Because as an LGBT person, I have experienced a tech industry so drunk and fixated on identity that it can't shut up about it. It's patronizing, insulting, and divisive.

I got online in about 98 and had many many friends in online games or on AIM / AOL and it took until many years, maybe even a decade, after FB for me to even discover what some of these people looked like. The standard "ASL?" and just chatting about life was what happened, so I agree with the comment you replying to.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#587

Post by djur » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 5:34 AM UTC

strken wrote: post #510

djur wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How was the campaign "woke" unless you define "trans people exist and should be supported" as woke? If Graham dislikes prigs, shouldn't he be criticizing the censorious social conservatives that led the boycott?

I define "trying to market a beer that's commonly drunk by Republicans using a trans influencer" as woke because it's: A) ineffective at marketing the beer, because it prioritises a social justice objective instead (making it a political stance) B) ineffective at changing any Bud drinker's mind on trans people, because it prioritises aggressive performance (making it woke) The problem is not "oh, trans people exist,…

The goal was not to change Bud drinkers' opinions. It was to expand the market for Bud Light to new demographics (women, younger people). We know this is true because the exec who spearheaded the overall campaign said as much before the boycott, and Mulvaney was just a small part of the strategy. I don't think most Bud drinkers were expected to even know about the campaign, since it wasn't directed at them in any way, and A-B chose one of the least confrontational trans influencers possible.

I'm not defending A-B here -- they ended up throwing Mulvaney and everyone involved under the bus in a shamefully craven display -- but I believe them when they say they hadn't actually intended to get involved in the culture war.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#588

Post by jmeyer2k » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 5:35 AM UTC

wastle wrote: post #568

jmeyer2k wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Must be hard to have to deal with that, I'm so sorry you have to use a different word when referring to someone. It's obviously much harder for you to use a different pronoun than for them to have their entire gender identity invalidated. Would you like for people to misgender you constantly and purposefully? Your life must be so hard. I feel bad for you to have to use a different word to refer to someone. Maybe have…

Oh so it does make a difference now? Well then, consider that it really is not my problem if these males are offended by the simple word "he". Have you heard of the Stroop effect? More to the point, I've no interest whatsoever in encouraging a man's fantasy "woman" identity, quite the opposite in fact. Perhaps these men would consider giving women and girls the basic decency and respect of refraining from such misogy…

[flagged]

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#589

Post by YZF » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 5:35 AM UTC

cycrutchfield wrote: post #525

YZF wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source? I thought it was the west that couldn't ramp up and is running out of stockpiles. I'll admit I'm an armchair general but I did serve so I have at least some minimal idea of what war looks like. EDIT: Also not clear how long the US is going to keep supporting Ukraine now that Trump is in power so that's another factor.

You can track Russia’s stockpiles through open source satellite imagery, here’s a recent video overview: https://youtu.be/TzR8BacYS6U Ukraine benefits from being on defense, as the attrition rates are significantly in their favor. I’m not sure what will happen after Trump does whatever it is he’s going to do, but it is clear that Russia’s current trajectory is not sustainable beyond a year or so

I agree Ukraine benefits from being on the defense. The question is what are their chances of retaking their lost territory where they need to be on the offense? Russia has higher attrition rates but also has a larger population to recruit from.

I'm not seeing Russia just crumble away under Ukrainian assault. If that's the case how does Ukraine benefit from the continuation of the war?

I would love to see Ukraine kicking Russia out as an outcome but it seems incredibly unrealistic.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#590

Post by djur » Tue, Jan 21, 2025, 5:36 AM UTC

coderc wrote: post #501

djur wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We expect people to say things that make them uncomfortable all the time. I don't feel comfortable telling my boss that I'm the one who wrote the buggy code that caused the incident, but I have a responsibility to do it regardless. I might be expected to thank everyone involved in a project, even if I don't feel personally grateful to them. And so on. Obviously there's no easy way to reason these cases from first pri…

I've never met anybody who used neopronouns either, I've only heard about it online. I wonder if there are any long term effects of forcing someone to say something that they consider to be untrue? Taken to its most hyperbolic extreme, it could be used as a form of psychological torture, like something out of 1984, where Winston is tortured for not accepting that four fingers being held up is five, or "Four Lights" f…

I don't think so. If someone shows you their baby you say "how adorable, how beautiful" no matter how ugly the baby is. If you haven't learned to accept that by the time you're an adult you're going to live a miserable life.