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

OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

okcupid.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 410 posts

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#171

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

sentenza wrote: post #151
webwright wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today, it's being anti-gay-rights is acceptable to lots of people. 50 years ago, being a racist was acceptable to lots of people. Would you work for or buy products from a CEO who was an unapologetic racist just because his beliefs were a product of his family/community? A good question to ask: If you think we will evolve to the point where gay rights are a given, what should we do right now ? Should we be respectful…

Wait. The guy is also the inventor of Javascript. Shouldn't everybody be boycotting that? I mean it has a lot more to do with him than Firefox does. After all, he's the CEO of Mozilla Corporation (not the Foundation), which is only indirectly connected to Firefox, but he _invented_ Javascript! What am I missing here?

The fact that it's realistically possible to boycott (i.e. not use) Firefox, but boycotting Javascript is - essentially - impossible. Sure, you can disable it in your browser, but that's nowhere near an outright boycott.

(BTW, this is just one difference, one that I haven't seen anyone else pointing out, whilst other, just as good - if not better - differences have been identified in this very post)

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#172

Post by ignostic »

adamors wrote: post #125
ignostic wrote: post #87

I disagree with the comments saying the CEO's personal beliefs are irrelevant. I believe OKC's message is both relevant and appropriate. I'll grant that the "8% of relationships... would be illegal" argument is a little weak, but the CEO IS paid by Mozilla. In the past he has donated to anti-gay-marriage causes, and may continue to do so in the future enabled by Mozilla's money. Firefox users help Mozilla make money.…

> but the CEO IS paid by Mozilla. In the past he has donated to anti-gay-marriage causes, and may continue to do so in the future enabled by Mozilla's money. Going by this logic, we should be vetting every person who works at a company whose product we use, because they may have contributed to some cause we don't agree with.

Yes, and I wish we could. But given the size of companies and products available, we obviously have to do the best we can. It makes sense to start with the company itself and its top leader.

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#174

Post by firstOrder »

vacri wrote: post #118
dmazin wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not that Eich's beliefs are a deviation from a norm (whether they are or not is irrelevant). His beliefs are hateful. The reason for this particular message is because it is part of a greater campaign to show Mozilla that users and producers on the internet are not in support of Eich's appointment.

Given that his beliefs in 2008 were echoed by a majority of Californian voters, it's hard to argue that they're a deviation from the norm.

Is Firefox a local project? It is a project used by the industrialized world, and by some of the non industrialized world. More than 47% of voters in California voted against this bill. Deep pocketed people like Eich were able to get that thin majority, by getting every hayseed in the central valley, north coast and Orange county out to the polls.

A thin majority of one state in fifty of one country isn't much of a norm to deviate from.

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#175

Post by sentenza »

sentenza wrote: post #151
webwright wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today, it's being anti-gay-rights is acceptable to lots of people. 50 years ago, being a racist was acceptable to lots of people. Would you work for or buy products from a CEO who was an unapologetic racist just because his beliefs were a product of his family/community? A good question to ask: If you think we will evolve to the point where gay rights are a given, what should we do right now ? Should we be respectful…

Wait. The guy is also the inventor of Javascript. Shouldn't everybody be boycotting that? I mean it has a lot more to do with him than Firefox does. After all, he's the CEO of Mozilla Corporation (not the Foundation), which is only indirectly connected to Firefox, but he _invented_ Javascript! What am I missing here?

So I'm downvoted to hell, but what about my question?

It's easy to do a boycott that doesn't hurt you. Everybody can live without Firefox.

So why not get serious about this and show people that you are willing to make an actual sacrifice as a stand against his position?

Maybe that would be inconvenient?

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#177

Post by dang »

lawl wrote: post #162
dang wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm afraid you may have missed my point. I was deliberately intervening in this submission, because the thread sucked. Edit: it might be a bit better now. All: Unthoughtful comments should be downvoted. Have at it. Edit: I've mollified my wording slightly. Please downvote judiciously.

Sorry. I wasn't talking about this. I was talking about the invitation to pitch in how to solve the general problem of hateful comments. Which I think shouldn't be discussed here, because it's not only a problem of this specific submission. Sorry if I misunderstood this invitation.

We're entering a period of experimentation where things will be in flux for a while. For now, as one experiment, I'm adding moderation comments to specific posts. I won't keep doing it, because it's tiring and tedious to write (and no doubt to read). But I want to send a clear signal to the community that we're engaged, and also address the low-handing fruit of transparency concerns, if that makes sense.

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#178

Post by milsorgen »

intslack wrote: post #156
webwright wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today, it's being anti-gay-rights is acceptable to lots of people. 50 years ago, being a racist was acceptable to lots of people. Would you work for or buy products from a CEO who was an unapologetic racist just because his beliefs were a product of his family/community? A good question to ask: If you think we will evolve to the point where gay rights are a given, what should we do right now ? Should we be respectful…

More likely his (assumed) belief that marriage can only be between a man and a woman stems from ignorance and his religion instead of bigotry or hate. And while that doesn't negate the harm that his donation caused: please stop comparing him to racists. You don't know Brendan, I don't know Brendan, nobody in previous threads comparing him to fucking racists or the Nazis knows Brendan. It's disgusting, please stop. >S…

>You should take the moral high ground and send him a personal communication detailing how his donation has caused harm.

I think there is far to much 'walking on eggshells' these days in regards to rights being infringed.

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#179

Post by ancarda »

lexcorvus wrote: post #75

This from a company that lists only "female" and "male" as gender options—fifty-four fewer than Facebook. Who's insufficiently inclusive now?

Facebook only has male or female on the signup page and you also can only change gender to male or female in the settings: http://imgur.com/OcnmwkB

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#180

Post by wwweston »

webwright wrote: post #113
gojomo wrote: post #78

And if this doesn't work, eventually when you try to message a Catholic, Mormon, Muslim, or other religiously-observant person from a denomination whose leaders publicly disapprove of homosexuality, you'll see a message from OKCupid like: Religion isn't normally the business of a website. But you've expressed an interest in dating someone whose religion denies equal rights to gay people. Sure, this person may seem OK…

Today, it's being anti-gay-rights is acceptable to lots of people. 50 years ago, being a racist was acceptable to lots of people. Would you work for or buy products from a CEO who was an unapologetic racist just because his beliefs were a product of his family/community? A good question to ask: If you think we will evolve to the point where gay rights are a given, what should we do right now ? Should we be respectful…

> Would you work for or buy products from a CEO who was an unapologetic racist just because his beliefs were a product of his family/community?

Do you mean someone like William Shockley, perhaps?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shockley

Also... for your question to be meaningful or relevant to the current discussion, I think you'd have to get more specific about what you mean by "unapologetic racist", and also weigh what other contributions they were bringing to the table as a CEO.

Post reply on HN