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

Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

indybay.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 296 posts

Re: Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

#281

Post by g333k »

ceph_ wrote: post #202
tomp wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of the protest isn't to destroy a person's life, the point of the protest is to (1) make Google's employees reluctant to continue being Google's employees and as a result (2) make Google rethink their official and unofficial policies, in order to (3) make the world a better place. AFAIK, they haven't really hurt anybody (this time). They are just pressing the points that (they think will) hurt the most.

I really can't believe people are trying to justify bullying like this. The points they're trying to smear him on are outlandish like saying he's personally responsible for NSA surveillance, or because he made an app for construction blueprints he's personnally kicking people out of their homes? Are you really defending this shit?

They are passionate ideologues. Reason, facts, and fairness have nothing to do with it.

Plus, isn't it obvious that envy DOES have a lot to do with this?

Re: Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

#282

Post by yapcguy »

acslater00 wrote: post #111

Welcome to Berkeley, I guess. Honestly, it was only a matter of time before the dissident left decided that the software community was just another monied enemy for them to hate. The good news is that nobody really takes them seriously, so if you can tolerate the occasional impotent protest and the (very) occasional WTO-style near riot, you can proceed with your life and ignore them.

Define "software community".

Not every software developer is working for a large corporation or venture-backed start-up.

Re: Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

#283

Post by g333k »

walls wrote: post #144
tomp wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of the protest isn't to destroy a person's life, the point of the protest is to (1) make Google's employees reluctant to continue being Google's employees and as a result (2) make Google rethink their official and unofficial policies, in order to (3) make the world a better place. AFAIK, they haven't really hurt anybody (this time). They are just pressing the points that (they think will) hurt the most.

You'd have to be completely insane to believe #3 is in any way related to #1 and #2. I personally feel the world is a much better place (certainly Oakland is) with highly skilled employees flushing out the trash.

The people taken in by this movement are worse then insane, and they are worse than morons. They are articulate enough to be dangerous.

However, comments like the one you make here just strengthens their movement. "Trash" ? No one is trash! If you refer to criminality, know that good hearted and decent poor people are also adversely affected.

Please, do not call anyone 'trash'.

Re: Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

#284

Post by g333k »

anExcitedBeast wrote: post #106
jasonkester wrote: post #51

Absolutely horrifying. More so because there are actually people here in this thread defending the crazy person who's trying to destroy somebody's life because they don't like the company he works for.

Let's pretend Google isn't causing very real problems for the poor and lower middle class in the Bay area. Let's also pretend that we can blame an inorganic "corporation", but never the individuals who design it, steer it, and totally embody it.

No, "google" most definitely is NOT causing these problems. Apple is!

Re: Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

#285

Post by g333k »

droopybuns wrote: post #224
jasonkester wrote: post #51

Absolutely horrifying. More so because there are actually people here in this thread defending the crazy person who's trying to destroy somebody's life because they don't like the company he works for.

Right. It is important to cast this protestor out rather than try to understand their perspective. Thats the kind of response that has no consequences. No defense is possible for the truly evil and nonviolent behavior of that sinister protestor.

Wait, what? I'm not sure which levels of sarcasm you are applying to which parts of your post. Do you think there are real negative consequences to casting out this moron?

Morons are going to find things to protest. Some address real issues, others invent issues, or build them out of poor research.

It's generally a good thing to ignore the latter.

Re: Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

#286

Post by chillingeffect »

walshemj wrote: post #263
diydsp wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> threats Can you please tell me where they threatened? I'm curious to know if they overstepped the boundaries of peaceful protest.

err do I need to "tell" you that being blockaded into my home and having flyers with threatening language abut me handed to my neighbors woudl make me feel threatened - it's perception that matters here.

You have repeated your belief that if you /feel/ threatened then you /are/ threatened. But threatened feelings are not enough to convict. Feelings are not facts.

But, let's suppose you /were/ right for a moment. What conclusions would that lead us to? If you were right and gaius (the poster above) or I felt /threatened/ by google's actions of photographing our houses and slurping our wifi credentials, would that mean that google had indeed threatened us?

After all, he /felt/ threatened. In your words, the perception of being threatened matters, right? So, if you're to be believed, google _has_ threatened /me/, because /I/ feel threatened by their taking pictures in public and slurping my wifi. If this is true, then according to you, what they have done /is/ tantamount to mob rule and harassment, and Google /is/ guilty of same, as it follows all the way back up to Bahamat's post above.

But of course this is not true. Google is not guilty of mob rule and harassment. Or do you believe that Google is guilty of mob rule and harassment?

If there is a threat, there must be evidence of a threat. Above posters and I have requested evidence. Evidence of a crime, not evidence of feelings. To back up the charge of a threat, can you articulate:

1. A statement to inflict pain, injury, damage, etc.

2. The event for which retribution is sought?

If you have those two, you have a threat. Otherwise, I'm very sorry for the feelings you feel, but the protestors have acted no worse than Google. I'm grateful my country allows us to communicate our grievances to one another.

Re: Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

#287

Post by ericd »

moocowduckquack wrote: post #258
kenrikm wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife is from Cuba, I've witnessed first hand what "applied" marxism creates, misery and strife. Let alone places like North Korea etc.. Honest question, how do you cope with the reality vs the ideal?

A friend of mine calls this "The Horror". It is in the very application of Marxism that the whole thing falls to pieces. I think Marx was great at analysis, however he didn't understand work or the layers of design and engineering that lies behind the means of production. Also, he was a theorist whose ideas got applied while he was still tinkering with them and pretty much all of his ideas of how to solve the problem…

I've heard Marx described as having been great at diagnosis, but terrible at prescription.

Re: Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

#288

Post by dragonwriter »

ericd wrote: post #287
moocowduckquack wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend of mine calls this "The Horror". It is in the very application of Marxism that the whole thing falls to pieces. I think Marx was great at analysis, however he didn't understand work or the layers of design and engineering that lies behind the means of production. Also, he was a theorist whose ideas got applied while he was still tinkering with them and pretty much all of his ideas of how to solve the problem…

I've heard Marx described as having been great at diagnosis, but terrible at prescription.

> I've heard Marx described as having been great at diagnosis, but terrible at prescription.

Marx and Engels weren't all that bad at prescription -- a substantial portion of the 10 key concrete policies for "advanced countries" in the Communist Manifesto have been widely and successfully adopted in the modern, developed, "capitalist" world.

Lenin's rewriting of Marx's program to a very different one, with notionally the same end state and, in many cases, similar near term policy changes to be applied in very different contexts, that was supposed to work in conditions which had neither the specific problems Marx's program was designed to address nor the foundations from which Marx's program was designed to address them, hasn't worked out very well, but that's a different issue.

Re: Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

#289

Post by cafard »

anExcitedBeast wrote: post #97
shoeless wrote: post #45

How is protesting in a residential neighborhood allowed? Did this group have a permit? Is the SF Bay area different in this regard - no permit allowed?

"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble...."

"peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for redress of grievances". Is Levandowski in any meaningful sense the government, and if so what grievances is he in a position to redress?

Re: Demonstration at Home of Google Developer. Google Bus Blocked in Berkeley

#290

Post by nollidge »

aaronem wrote: post #270
pnathan wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI, there is a certain branch of thought that believes that passion and anger increase validity of argument.

I'm a former partisan of that sort of thinking, so I'm well aware of it -- from the inside, as it were. The trouble with it is that it only works on people who already substantially agree with you. When you're talking to people who don't, at best it does nothing, and at worst it actively impairs your efforts. Failure to acknowledge this fact is taken as a sign of commitment, I think, in certain quarters, but I've lat…

> When you're talking to people who don't, at best it does nothing

Citation needed. As I said above, and you apparently did not read, I personally find conviction and fire far more compelling than dispassion. You may differ, but do not mistake the subjective for the objective.

Post reply on HN