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

Canceling "Hey"

chadnauseam.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 311 posts

Re: Canceling "Hey"

#191

Post by saghm »

FabHK wrote: post #142
saghm wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He is calling for the deportation of illegal immigrants who sleep in parks. No, that's what this article is calling for. The complain they have is that DHH called for deporting the entire ethnic group independent of whether they're sleeping in parks.

DHH's blog post reads: >> When gypsies take over public spaces, you deport them. Looks like some of the controversy is whether "them" refers to "the gypsies" or "the gypsies who take over public spaces". It sounds genuinely ambiguous to me. Example A) "When wolves eat too many sheep, you shoot them." seems to advocate for shooting all wolves. Example B) "When adults abuse minors, you imprison them." presumably only r…

I mean, the first example you gave is pretty much exactly what he was saying as an analogy earlier in the blog post. It seems somewhat preposterous to give the benefit of the doubt to this like it was an accident when it wouldn't be at all hard for someone who cared about the difference to express it more clearly. It's not like he's unaware that people already think that he holds views like this, so the ambiguity seems more like intentional dogwhistling/plausible deniability than an innocent mistake from someone who didn't think that anyone might read their words in that way.

Re: Canceling "Hey"

#192

Post by omnimus »

ChadNauseam wrote: post #158
flockonus wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To establish oneself in a country (for the majority if not all the western world) without an appropriate visa is already breaking the law. Not saying this is the only way, or what should be - but it's what it is, selectively breaking the law is ok - "as long as they behave". It implies that immigrants must live in the limbo and under undue psychological pressure, knowing one day their whole life may be uprooted for a…

The people DHH is taking about are EU citizens with a legal privilege by default to live in Denmark

He also means Danish citizens who might be second or third generations Danish but came from background he doesn't like. Oh and of course you can see it - their skin.

Re: Canceling "Hey"

#193

Post by saghm »

andrewflnr wrote: post #135
saghm wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is trying far too hard to be charitable. Mistake theory is great, and it's good that the article mentions it, but it then also presents sufficient evidence to prove, or at least substantiate, malice. The benefit of the doubt only exists as long as there is doubt. Once there's an overwhelming body of evidence that removes any of it, continuing to give it is pretty suspicious, like you mention.

For what it's worth, I do think the author is only guilty of being too kind. I wouldn't call it suspicious in this case.

I'll rephrase: I don't have any reason to actively think they're malicious, but I don't really trust the judgment of someone who sees a person advocate for what they describe as a racist national policy after years of similar opinions and thinks that it's important enough to stop paying a subscription to that person's service, but is concerned about whether they're going to hurt the feelings of that person by actually concluding that maybe the reason they're always advocating for racist policies is just racist.

Re: Canceling "Hey"

#194

Post by omnimus »

joshcsimmons wrote: post #180

Strange logic and strange days we live in. Typically I just spend money on software that works the best and suits my needs. I don't generally research the individual creating it. We should all know less about eachother!

It's not strange at all. For example if your money are used for political causes you don't like then you should absolutely send the money to alternatives instead.

Re: Canceling "Hey"

#195

Post by jimmydddd »

saaaaaam wrote: post #95
watt wrote: post #30

I think the author is taking umbrage with DHH using the word "gypsies" where it might have been "junkies" or just "homeless". I see it in Berlin, rise of agressive, smelly begging in U-Bahn (I witnessed a beggar actually attacking passengers, hitting a woman). People walking around having fully shit their pants. This, I presume, is tolerated in the name of individualism, that the individual is free to choose how they…

“Gypsies” are a race of people. “Junkies” and homeless people are, at an individual level, not. Homeless people and drug addicts may well be victims of circumstance or victims of society depending on your point view - or even victims of their own choices or actions - but there’s a difference between saying “this race of people is problematic” and “this class of people is problematic”.

Hypothetical: A group of people from a specific race and culture recently came into a country and make their living primarily by stealing the wallets of tourists. If you had to guess, what are the chances that they are Japanese people?

Re: Canceling "Hey"

#196

Post by saghm »

eduction wrote: post #107
saghm wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He says to deport literally an entire ethnic group independent of whether they happen to sleep in parks, which is the entire point being made by the article linked to by this page where we're commenting. The comment you're responding to also restates this, without making any claims about whether he said to shoot people, so your objection doesn't really make any sense in that regard either.

1. Comment says “shoot them” refers to Roma. Totally false and intentionally misleading. 2. Literally the only place the word deport is used in the post is here: “ When gypsies take over public spaces, you deport them” Please quote where he says to deport all Roma/gypsies.

> Comment says “shoot them” refers to Roma. Totally false and intentionally misleading.

The comment is deleted now, so I don't have any way to prove this, but it didn't say that when I read it. Maybe it did earlier and it had been edited by the time I had read it.

> Please quote where he says to deport all Roma/gypsies

You want me to quote the exact sentence you already quoted? There's only one antecedent of the pronoun "them" that makes sense in that sentence, and it's not "public spaces". If you want to pretend that the intentional repeated use of a slur and years of similar opinions are somehow immaterial to trying to understand what that sentence means, you're free to do that, but that's not what libel means.

Re: Canceling "Hey"

#197

Post by Normal_gaussian »

colpabar wrote: post #164
roughly wrote: post #16

I live in Oakland. Something I've noticed in a lot of the "THE CITY IS GOING TO HELL" commentary is that often people are pointing at visual symptoms - a homeless encampment, graffiti - as a proxy for "things are bad," and it doesn't take a lot of pulling on that thread before you get to "well just look at them," and it's real hard to cast that one in a "race-neutral" way. I've heard people complaining about hot dog…

comments like these really grind my gears. are those really the only things you can imagine people don't like about "homeless encampments"? graffiti??

What is presented is a very short list of separate issues. It could easily have said "widespread shoplifting, potholes"; it is not insinuating that one causes the others, just like shoplifting clearly does not cause potholes.

Re: Canceling "Hey"

#198

Post by saghm »

vikingly wrote: post #172
saghm wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Normal working families with kids live next to these parks and rely on them as open space, it is part of the Danish socialist welfare system and care for the working man. Defacation and open cooking plus thrash by not your own weak but foreigners has real cost to those that can’t afford to move. The article made it pretty clear that they're not arguing against deporting people who are camping in parks though, and j…

The question asked in Scandinavia is if a migrant group is a net benefit to our ability to have group solidarity, while high skill individuals are judged on individual merit. These are two very different categories, and Scandinavians do not feel an obligation towards a world collective within their borders. The group talked about here came in through mass migration and are in group conflict with working peoples inter…

This doesn't really make sense to me, You're claiming that it's fine to hand-wave the issue of deporting the entire ethnic group as a whole rather than individuals because it has no high-skill members, but that doesn't really explain why you're so convinced that there are no individuals who might be able to contribute other than from assumptions about them based on them being a member of the ethnic group in the first place (e.g. "mass migration", taking up resources, disproportionately contributing to theft). That seems bizarrely at odds with the allusion to judging people by merit rather than bucketing them by shared ethnicity at the end of your comment.

Re: Canceling "Hey"

#199

Post by adamrezich »

roughly wrote: post #177
adamrezich wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either you're willfully ignoring the American citizen's right to free movement between States, or you're actually saying that any given black person who moves to Oakland has—regardless of any life circumstances or decisions they've made, simply as a fact of their ethnicity—some arbitrary-percentage chance of ending up homeless, as some immutable localized nth-order structural outcome, regardless of any choices they m…

Oh, I see the confusion - in America, we use the word “free” to mean both “allowed to” and “doesn’t cost money,” which leads to the kinds of odd circumstances where one is “free” to do something, but that thing isn’t “free,” so if they lack the money or resources to do so, they’re not actually able to do it. It’s a confusing part of our language and our system. Similarly, we’ve got a bunch of cases where the law says…

Does anyone else here know what this guy is talking about? I think he completely misread my post. I was asking if a black American citizen moving to Oakland had some arbitrary percent chance of becoming homeless after living there for awhile, based on his ethnicity and whatever structural factors Oakland has going for it alone (as implied by the rhetoric elsewhere in the thread). He then turned it into some kind of tirade about the ambiguity of the English language, or something, rather than answering my question?

Re: Canceling "Hey"

#200

Post by OkayPhysicist »

flumpcakes wrote: post #66

I think DHH's opinion is a very common sentiment in Europe. "Gypsies" are a very European thing. I wonder if there's anything similar in the US? For context for US readers; they generally exist outside of the usual social norms, and have a pretty bad reputation because of it. This is not a defence of DHH, just providing context to his comments.

There isn't really a direct point of comparison in the US, because by and large the US is much more loosely attached to the concept of having a specific "Our culture" that others are expected to assimilate to. Rather, US culture is more of an admixture of whoever happens to be in an area. That isn't to say that it's all peaches and roses, but our racism tends towards "this group is intrinsically worse than mine" rather than "this group is trying to conquer our homeland".

This plays out with things like US culture being pretty well tolerant of ethnic enclaves (Chinatowns, Little Italies, Solvang, etc) compared to what I've seen in my travels abroad, while preferring to bulldoze those enclaves when a new freeway needs to be built, and foods emblematic of certain areas being Flanderized versions of various foreign cuisines (Take a look at California's burritos, or a Chicago style pizza, or a New York style pizza).

Post reply on HN