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

361–370 of 410 posts

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#361

Post by hiddentao »

bluntly_said wrote: post #357
hiddentao wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's an idea. What if Eich had donated to a cause which stated the idea that marriage could only be between two white people. Sounds nonsensical but what if instead of it being based around sexual orientation, it was based around race? The idea of racial equality has been around a lot longer and is more generally accepted than gay marriage rights (which only recently have begun to gain wider acceptance) so I imagin…

The comparison to race still fails to make me think publicly denouncing a company in its whole because of the personal beliefs of one member is in any way justified. People will never be homogeneous in their beliefs, and I think that's a good thing. But when you're unable to interact with another person in any way at all because of their private beliefs, you're being an idiot. A person's beliefs do not define their c…

I agree with the points you've made. I was simply stating that I can see why some people are calling for him to step down. The person who leads the company - the CEO in most cases - is by default often considered to be a public face for said company and to also be a representation of the kind of company it is. I'm not saying that that's how it should be or not, just that's how it seems to be.

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#362

Post by fennecfoxen »

hkphooey wrote: post #100
fennecfoxen wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why doesn't OKCupid take a bolder stance and give a button to all their users when they sign in, asking, "Do you support marriage equality?" If they click "no", it deletes your account. I mean, as long as you've decided this is the sort of thing your business ought to be concerning itself with...

Wonderful idea! Somebody should cook up some javascript (yes, grumble grumble) and start a campaign to embed this on every major site. As clicking YES is too easy for bigots to get around, another version might require signing in to Facebook, Google or Twitter and upon clicking YES, posting a public message that you support marriage equality. Obviously any website which does not take part in this campaign is not gay…

Obviously.

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#363

Post by mkr-hn »

davidgerard wrote: post #39
mkr-hn wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A mode of expression can be petulant and abrasive even if the underlying message is good. Social justice advocacy is full of abrasive and petulant people who do a poor job of representing good causes. edit: Can you stop with the downvotes? I'm not arguing that OKCupid's message is petulant and abrasive. I was trying to make sense of what honksillet was saying.

The tone argument turns out not to be very convincing.

There's not much more frustrating than an "ally" who acts like a fool and gives bigots something to point to, forcing me to answer for them before I can make my own arguments.

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#364

Post by sliverstorm »

redthrowaway wrote: post #262
sliverstorm wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if we discriminate against him purely on the basis of his beliefs (and not his actions on the job), we are no better than he. (If his personal beliefs do pollute his work then do as you will, run the guy out of town on a rail if you must)

He materially supported a campaign to deny rights to a subset of the population. That action, not belief.

But what did that have to do with his job? Did he divert company funds to that campaign?

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#365

Post by sliverstorm »

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #231
sliverstorm wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if we discriminate against him purely on the basis of his beliefs (and not his actions on the job), we are no better than he. (If his personal beliefs do pollute his work then do as you will, run the guy out of town on a rail if you must)

"you gotta be tolerant of the intolerant" is a really shitty argument.

No, my argument is more like "Don't fight intolerance with intolerance"

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#366

Post by jebblue »

SimHacker wrote: post #340
jebblue wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Acts 8:26-40 Read it. I don't know how you conflate religion with racism. It is not the truth.

Explain that to the many religious people who used their religion to justify racism and misogony, as they now use their religion to justify homophobia. You can cherry pick and whitewash your religion however you choose, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a powerful weapon for racists and misogynists and bigots, and they use it against people they hate. Of course maybe I'm misinterpreting you. If by "it is not…

Yes we agree, it was the point of the reference I gave too. Anyone who invokes religion for _or_ against in the matter of deciding what marriage is defined as and what new term is needed, is wrong. True religion is about joining people together not separating them.

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#367

Post by SimHacker »

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #231
sliverstorm wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if we discriminate against him purely on the basis of his beliefs (and not his actions on the job), we are no better than he. (If his personal beliefs do pollute his work then do as you will, run the guy out of town on a rail if you must)

"you gotta be tolerant of the intolerant" is a really shitty argument.

Philosopher Karl Popper asserted, in The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1, that we are warranted in refusing to tolerate intolerance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

Michael Walzer asks "Should we tolerate the intolerant?" He notes that most minority religious groups who are the beneficiaries of tolerance are themselves intolerant, at least in some respects. In a tolerant regime, such people may learn to tolerate, or at least to behave "as if they possessed this virtue". Philosopher Karl Popper asserted, in The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1, that we are warranted in refusing to tolerate intolerance. Philosopher John Rawls concludes in A Theory of Justice that a just society must tolerate the intolerant, for otherwise, the society would then itself be intolerant, and thus unjust. However, Rawls also insists, like Popper, that society has a reasonable right of self-preservation that supersedes the principle of tolerance: "While an intolerant sect does not itself have title to complain of intolerance, its freedom should be restricted only when the tolerant sincerely and with reason believe that their own security and that of the institutions of liberty are in danger."

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#368

Post by na85 »

jebblue wrote: post #281
na85 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>from ignorance and his religion instead of bigotry or hate I am not one of the fedora-tippers, and I have no problem with individual faith, but it's been my experience that organized religion (of any sort) tends to discourage critical thinking and encourage ignorance. A byproduct of this is prejudice which leads to the dark side. I don't believe you can quite so easily separate religion from discrimination.

Acts 8:26-40 Read it. I don't know how you conflate religion with racism. It is not the truth.

Did you read what I wrote? I don't think you read what I wrote.

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#369

Post by lexcorvus »

MichaelGG wrote: post #323
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's no rational way to arrive at same-sex marriages not being allowed, if heterosex marriages are // There are plenty of rational ways to do that. I'm guessing you'd primarily disagree with the axioms on which they're founded. How about "state recognition of marriage is primarily about supporting the family unit as the nucleus of society - as same-sex union can't create children, long-term partnerships engender…

Silly axioms are usually included when someone says something isn't rational. Given modern human rights, there's no way to arrive at a no homo-marriage stance. Your example statement isn't useful either, as plenty of same-sex couples are unable to create children. By the same logic, infertile people should also be excluded. If that was the point (marriage only for people seeking to reproduce), at least it'd be consis…

If you want to see how quickly they'll turn on one of their own, explain to your progressive friends that you support "homo-marriage". I predict they will prove less tolerant than advertised.

Re: OkCupid urges users to abandon Firefox

#370

Post by Havvy »

qdpb wrote: post #111
Todd wrote: post #26

Why doesn't OkCupid take a bolder stance and remove all JavaScript from their site? Brendan invented it. I guess that wouldn't be convenient. Better to ask users to inconvenience themselves. This really isn't fair to all of the people who have worked so hard to make Firefox what it is today.

Does he have any control over future development of javascript and how this future development will affect a wider community? I don't think he does. But he is the CEO of the company, and what the company does going forward does depend on him a lot. I think this is the key difference between boycotting the browser and boycotting the language.

He's quite active on the ES-discuss mailing list. Though he expressively said he'd tone down his involvement on it with this appointment.
Post reply on HN