As of 12:30pm EDT, this has been flagged down to #111. Some people really don't want to discuss this.
“A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”
61–70 of 443 posts
Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”
#62As of 12:30pm EDT, this has been flagged down to #111. Some people really don't want to discuss this.
I think posts with a high ratio of comments to up-votes automatically get buried. So I'm not sure that this was deliberately moderated, or it was just the automated flame-war detection being set off.
Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”
#63I recently helped organize a conference. Since it is apparently not obvious to many people, I'd just like to point out that amongst conference organizers, it is an extremely common belief that your primary responsibility is to deliver a good conference experience to your conference-goers. This is not just a belief StrangeLoop holds -- it is a belief that many beloved tech conferences have (e.g., PyCon), and if you th…
There are probably lots of people who need to hear this, and given the people who'll be attending and made it clear how much of a fuss they would make, it was obviously the right call to disinvite him. I think it's still worth briefly lamenting that our culture is heading in this direction. I see more and more echoes of the worldview and tactics that ultimately killed just shy of a hundred million people or so last c…
FWIW I only saw two twitter comments complaining before the disinvitation, and one of those was proud communist Steve Klabnik.
Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”
#64I recently helped organize a conference. Since it is apparently not obvious to many people, I'd just like to point out that amongst conference organizers, it is an extremely common belief that your primary responsibility is to deliver a good conference experience to your conference-goers. This is not just a belief StrangeLoop holds -- it is a belief that many beloved tech conferences have (e.g., PyCon), and if you th…
It would be fine to ban Curtis if his talk was about his politics. It would be fine to ban him if he did not agree to abide by the code of conduct. The conference obviously does not owe him a platform to discuss his politics. But his talk was about Urbit, not about his politics, and Urbit is a genuinely fascinating piece of technology. Even if the project fails, by studying it, I have learned a lot of ideas that I ha…
> But I hope that other conference organizers do not follow suit, and I hope that true technologists in turn shun StrangeLoop for conferences that care about technology first, and instead attend conferences that refuse to ban innovators who haven't violated the code of conduct.
This is precisely my point: other conferences already have followed suit, and they are not going to be shunned by the larger tech audience any time soon. A lot of important conferences would have done precisely the same thing. PyCon and xoxo to name two I know for certain.
In fact, to be honest, I'd go much further. If you polled the organizers of these conference, I think they would probably mostly say that if you are the sort of person who thinks that the moldbug affair is a great piece of injustice, you probably won't fit in at the conference they are trying to create. Fundamentally these measures are made to exclude people like you from the bunch, and shunning the conferences won't make that go away -- I actually think this is the goal.
Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”
#65As of 12:30pm EDT, this has been flagged down to #111. Some people really don't want to discuss this.
I think posts with a high ratio of comments to up-votes automatically get buried. So I'm not sure that this was deliberately moderated, or it was just the automated flame-war detection being set off.
That's too bad, because I'd like everyone to read your longer comment here.
Just so strange to me that this decision isn't spurring more discussion. urbit-related posts have hit the front page with 100+ up votes in the past.
Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Almost certainly not, but that is the way of people. That's a separate question from whether they are right or wrong though. I distinctly don't like the way things are going and believe me I have no sympathy for the political views of Curtis, but the talk isn't about that. If Brianna Wu could actually deliver a technical talk, I say let her. If he wanted to talk about neoreaction there are other places he can go to.
I'm not sure if you meant to imply that Yarvin wanted to talk about neoreaction, but he distinctly did not. His talk was about Urbit: https://github.com/urbit/urbit
I know, I was trying to contrast letting him speak on neoreaction with letting him speak on orbit.
Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be fine to ban Curtis if his talk was about his politics. It would be fine to ban him if he did not agree to abide by the code of conduct. The conference obviously does not owe him a platform to discuss his politics. But his talk was about Urbit, not about his politics, and Urbit is a genuinely fascinating piece of technology. Even if the project fails, by studying it, I have learned a lot of ideas that I ha…
> But I hope that other conference organizers do not follow suit, and I hope that true technologists in turn shun StrangeLoop for conferences that care about technology first, and instead attend conferences that refuse to ban innovators who haven't violated the code of conduct. This is precisely my point: other conferences already have followed suit, and they are not going to be shunned by the larger tech audience an…
You are right of course. From a business standpoint, Alex did the right thing and he will not suffer consequences. Other conferences have done the same and will continue to do so. This is part of a lamentable, ongoing trend. Individual action by people like me will not stop it.
Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it hands veto power to whoever determines what racism is and when something is 'too racist' This sounds like the function of the free marketplace of ideas. One is allowed to espouse any ideology that you wish. However, other people are allowed to respond with their own speech. They can call the idea racist if they want. They can take away speaking platforms if they want. Whether a statement is "racist" is a determi…
Similarly, if Jessitron (singling her out solely because she wrote a really good blog post today [1]) wants to talk about microservices in clojure, and folks want to keep her out because of her views on women in technology, you are ok with that also? Let me also emphasize that no one disputes that strangeloop has the legal right to do this. The discussion is simply over whether the strangeloop organizers are a bunch…
Again, a disclaimer: I know pretty much nothing about this specific instance except the linked article. I don't know the candidate speaker, their political views, or anything of that nature. No examples in this comment are meant to be reflective of this specific situation.
> "wants to talk about microservices in clojure, and folks want to keep her out because of her views on women in technology"
For me, it comes down to how they express their opinions in the public sphere.
This matters a lot. If someone develops a persona known for lobbing rhetorical grenades, making ad hominem attacks, or is unnecessarily mean or negative, then I don't have a problem holding them out of a conference — even if I agree with their viewpoints.
If they, on the other hand tend to behave in a reasonable way, and are capable of having calm and rational debates, then I would want to see them included in the conference — even if I disagree with their viewpoints.
Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure if you meant to imply that Yarvin wanted to talk about neoreaction, but he distinctly did not. His talk was about Urbit: https://github.com/urbit/urbit
I know, I was trying to contrast letting him speak on neoreaction with letting him speak on orbit.
Do you think there's now the slightest chance that urbit can win in the technology marketplace, or get any mind share?
I suppose others can copy its ideas without attribution, but if involvement in it potentially threatens your career....
Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it hands veto power to whoever determines what racism is and when something is 'too racist' This sounds like the function of the free marketplace of ideas. One is allowed to espouse any ideology that you wish. However, other people are allowed to respond with their own speech. They can call the idea racist if they want. They can take away speaking platforms if they want. Whether a statement is "racist" is a determi…
I am not suggesting that racists (however defined) be invited to advocate racism to people who find that repugnant. I'm suggesting that that racism not disqualify them in other matters. You are quite correct that people can boycott or pressure for no-platform if they want to. Who on earth would benefit from forced contact? What I'm suggesting is that people decide not to do that . Further, that when that does happen,…
> "What I'm suggesting is that people decide not to [boycott or pressure for no platform]"
I don't like how this argument generalizes.
For example, I am a strong opponent of the labor situation in Qatar as it relates to the World Cup. I want FIFA to either relocate venues or force Qatar to immediately improve their labor practices. Yet, I have no leverage over FIFA, so instead I decide to boycott FIFA's sponsors (Coke, Nike, and Adidas).
Now I'm actively punishing those companies because of their speech. And I'm doing it purely because it's my only way to attempt to change the behavior of an actor two-steps removed from them.
So, now I'd like one of two things:
- Help me find the lines for legitimate boycotts, or
- Help me determine why my boycott of Coke, Nike, and Adidas is a poor decision