This whole episode reminds me that staunch liberals are no different than religious fundamentalists AFAIK. Same nature, different nurture.
Both groups hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)
151–160 of 187 posts
Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
The system Condaleeza represents is still active and is heavily entrenched. This campaign may be a good start, but its going to take much more than that to change anything -- and that requires a strong moral consistency than extends well beyond participating in an occasional mob. Amazon is actively supporting infrastructure to an agency that supports torture. Condaleeza isn't even in power any more. It's not that you…
Does this logic apply to the workers who maintain the physical infrastructure for the CIA? The Coke guys who refill soda machines? The internet providers? Where do you draw the line? A government agency leverages services to further it's agenda- should those businesses take a moral position?
Businesses can take a moral position, and in fact, many businesses who work with the government _do_ take a moral position in doing so.
Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
They wanted a board member with international experience, as they hope to expand internationally. Including, as TechCrunch put it, to "deal with foreign governments that have blocked its use".
We know Gaddafi had a crush on her, but does she provide positive PR for international users? Certainly there is a more neutral person who could accomplish the same thing.
Dropbox isn't going to put her name or face on billboards.
Her connections and knowledge of international stuffs is what Dropbox is hoping she'll bring.
Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)
#154This whole episode reminds me that staunch liberals are no different than religious fundamentalists AFAIK. Same nature, different nurture. Both groups hypocrisy knows no bounds.
What hypocrisy are you speaking of? Why do you feel that his questioning the motivation of war makes Knuth a "staunch liberal?"
Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Out of curiosity, who is your VPS provider?
Digital Ocean. It doesn't really matter because I handle crypto myself, and don't offer trust to the VPS provider.
I've been meaning to do something like that myself. Did you use off the shelf tools for crypto, or did you write something yourself?
Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Digital Ocean. It doesn't really matter because I handle crypto myself, and don't offer trust to the VPS provider.
I've been meaning to do something like that myself. Did you use off the shelf tools for crypto, or did you write something yourself?
Yeah, I'm using gpg.
Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)
#157She has been an outspoken apologist for some pretty heinous policies. It is rational to assume she hasn't changed.
Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)
#158Amazon is building a $600 million datacenter for the CIA. The CIA did all of the bad things listed in Dropbox article as directed by Bush and Condoleezza, and they are still actively trying to cover up torture. I've never heard anyone here not using EC2 over it? The tech scenes pitchfork mobs are wildly inconsistent. I have a feeling this one hit a nerve because Condoleezza Rice is famously hated across the internet…
I hate these maximalist "unless you do X and Y and Z, you have no right to criticize ANYTHING, because I say so, so shut the fuck up" ideas. It's startlingly close to the USSR's "and you lynch negroes" response to any criticism of its policies by the USA: it brings up an irrelevancy, and it's made in bad faith. The only way to escape it would be to detach entirely from the system.
Would you have criticized MLK for only choosing convenient, media-visible targets for his protests? Hell, he ignored so many places, and even stayed in hotels that were segregated. What a fucking hypocrite.
Cesar Chavez? Loser: he only called for people to boycott some agricultural interests. Sure, anyone can give up grapes, but anyone who does that is worse than contemptible--they should have given up all food that's harvested in exploitative conditions!
Mother Teresa? Lame. She only helped people in India. What about people in Namibia?
Lech Walesa? He seemed so myopically focused on government in Poland. It wasn't even the worst communist country! If he were really freedom focused, he'd have left Eastern Europe to try to overthrow the Khmer Rouge.
Your criticism amounts to an incredibly lazy attempt to sidestep the issue. Condi Rice is a war criminal. Second only to Cheney, she is the person most responsible for the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of people. She broke numerous laws; authorized illegal torture; and engaged in illegal violations of Americans' rights. In a just world, she'd be brought before a jury, convicted, and put behind bars for life.
You have no right to criticize me for trying to reduce how implicated I am in one of the most evil acts of the 21st century.
And if you disagree, well, I can name a thousand other forums for you to post your comment in before you come here to Hacker News. Otherwise you're just being wildly inconsistent and deeply morally corrupt.
Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)
#159Amazon is building a $600 million datacenter for the CIA. The CIA did all of the bad things listed in Dropbox article as directed by Bush and Condoleezza, and they are still actively trying to cover up torture. I've never heard anyone here not using EC2 over it? The tech scenes pitchfork mobs are wildly inconsistent. I have a feeling this one hit a nerve because Condoleezza Rice is famously hated across the internet…
And your point is what? That demonstrating outrage here is in some way invalid since similar outrage was not demonstrated in every other similar situation? Do I have no moral authority to speak up in this situation if I have not before? Maybe we should boycott Amazon. Not boycotting Dropbox because we didn't do the same for Amazon doesn't get us anywhere.
I think C Rice is an disturbing figure because she appears to be a contradiction. Nobody expects much of figures such as Rumsfeld or Chaney - they come across as ruthless unprincipled technocrats who are prepared to do some extraordinary dangerous things in pursuit of their ideological convictions. But CR is obviously highly intelligent and somehow more relatable. Which makes her actions feel like a betrayal. Hence the highly emotive reaction to her apologetics. One senses she should and indeed must know better.
Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
The system Condaleeza represents is still active and is heavily entrenched. This campaign may be a good start, but its going to take much more than that to change anything -- and that requires a strong moral consistency than extends well beyond participating in an occasional mob. Amazon is actively supporting infrastructure to an agency that supports torture. Condaleeza isn't even in power any more. It's not that you…
> Amazon is actively supporting infrastructure to an agency that supports torture. Condaleeza isn't even in power any more. It's not that you shouldn't boycott Dropbox, it's that you are probably not really doing anything as a result of not doing it when it matters. That's probably true, but we have to consider the situation in the context of what's practicable in our own lives. I have a Dropbox account, and I use Am…
> I have a Dropbox account, and I use Amazon's cloud service to host my sites. I will be canceling my Dropbox account as a protest, but probably will not cancel Amazon's cloud services. Why? Because I still need my paycheck, I still need to put food on my kids' plates at the end of the night -- and I do this in part with Amazon's cloud services. I have to pick and choose, and compromise along the way when I'm making my voice heard.
This is a great comment. I'm going to challenge you to do something I suspect you'll be resistant to.
You admit that some times you have to sacrifice your values for a greater cause (in this case your family's well being).
I challenge you to look back on the things you believe Condoleezza Rice did wrong and think about them as though she was making the same sort of sacrifice. Does that change your opinion of her?