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

Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

popehat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 194 posts

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#21

Post by jbigelow76 »

nkurz wrote: post #8

In case you were wondering what Curtis's talk might have been about (and whether it would have held any technical merit) this page has a link to Clark's earlier introduction to Urbit: http://popehat.com/2013/12/06/nock-hoon-etc-for-non-vulcans-... The "Exit, voice, and loyalty" terminology might seem odd if you don't know it's origins. It's from 1970 book by economist A. O. Hirschman that's coming back in popularity:…

I'm surprised by apparent predominance of support here on HN for Strangeloop's position.

Do you not recall the self-immolation of the Mozilla Community during the Brendan Eich CEO fiasco? Big overlap in the two communities.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#22

Post by topynate »

joelgrus wrote: post #16
nkurz wrote: post #8

In case you were wondering what Curtis's talk might have been about (and whether it would have held any technical merit) this page has a link to Clark's earlier introduction to Urbit: http://popehat.com/2013/12/06/nock-hoon-etc-for-non-vulcans-... The "Exit, voice, and loyalty" terminology might seem odd if you don't know it's origins. It's from 1970 book by economist A. O. Hirschman that's coming back in popularity:…

Do those who support Curtis appearing at the talk refrain from posting out of fear of career repercussion? No and yes. I have been pretty vocal about it on Twitter: https://twitter.com/joelgrus/status/606474432509394944 https://twitter.com/joelgrus/status/606673594198794240 but I've also been sitting on a 75%-written blog post that I'm hesitant to actually post. Not because of career repercussions (I have never had a…

You're getting bitten by preference falsification, as proposed by Timur Kuran.

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

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#23

Post by existencebox »

joelgrus wrote: post #16
nkurz wrote: post #8

In case you were wondering what Curtis's talk might have been about (and whether it would have held any technical merit) this page has a link to Clark's earlier introduction to Urbit: http://popehat.com/2013/12/06/nock-hoon-etc-for-non-vulcans-... The "Exit, voice, and loyalty" terminology might seem odd if you don't know it's origins. It's from 1970 book by economist A. O. Hirschman that's coming back in popularity:…

Do those who support Curtis appearing at the talk refrain from posting out of fear of career repercussion? No and yes. I have been pretty vocal about it on Twitter: https://twitter.com/joelgrus/status/606474432509394944 https://twitter.com/joelgrus/status/606673594198794240 but I've also been sitting on a 75%-written blog post that I'm hesitant to actually post. Not because of career repercussions (I have never had a…

I typically avoid posting in these sorts of threads, very little good has come from political debates on the internet that I've seen, but your last sentence pushes me to speak up.

Status-quo social thoughtcrime is rather terrifying to me. There's no "easy" way to amend laws or lobby a system to address the issue, as one would against a governmental stance.

It's also cyclical, as less "clean" people speak out against it, the "only rapists defend rapist" situation mentioned by sister posts occurs, and the entire culture of defending someone who might be distasteful, separating the issue from their broader history, diminishes.

I can't claim to judge you for your decision, I fully acknowledge the unfortunate state of things and your ability to make a choice that best serves your needs, but for the sake of putting my money where my mouth is; I think he should have been allowed to speak (espousing viewpoints I disagree with is far and beyond an offensive enough act to cause me to want to petition against someone, and even then, I would not attempt to convey that aversion as anything more than my personal stance).

The fact that I (or you, or any of us) feel any uncertainty due to fear of the repercussions for merely voicing this opinion only serves to reinforce my conviction that it needs to be voiced.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#24

Post by joelgrus »

topynate wrote: post #22
joelgrus wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do those who support Curtis appearing at the talk refrain from posting out of fear of career repercussion? No and yes. I have been pretty vocal about it on Twitter: https://twitter.com/joelgrus/status/606474432509394944 https://twitter.com/joelgrus/status/606673594198794240 but I've also been sitting on a 75%-written blog post that I'm hesitant to actually post. Not because of career repercussions (I have never had a…

You're getting bitten by preference falsification, as proposed by Timur Kuran. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preference_falsification

I mean, I feel like I'm conveying my exact preferences pretty clearly ("let Yarvin speak"), the question is more how much I want to antagonize the people who got him uninvited.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#25

Post by savanaly »

lexcorvus wrote: post #9
savanaly wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone is wondering about the actual views and arguments of Moldbug and his neoreactionaries, they were covered and responded to by economist blogger Noah Smith here. http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2014/01/neoreactionaries.... The crux of it (and something I never saw quite covered in all the essays bouncing around) is "Essentially, neoreaction is the dream of a society of mostly white people, living in a hier…

the actual views and arguments Getting the views of neoreactionaries from Noah Smith is like getting the views of Luther's 95 Theses from Pope Leo X. How about, you know, just reading Moldbug? http://moldbuggery.blogspot.com

I never claimed it was a wikipedia entry. Just that if you were interested in what the views expressed by neoreactionaries were, here's one source I read about it.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#26

Post by tjradcliffe »

amcastillo wrote: post #7
savanaly wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone is wondering about the actual views and arguments of Moldbug and his neoreactionaries, they were covered and responded to by economist blogger Noah Smith here. http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2014/01/neoreactionaries.... The crux of it (and something I never saw quite covered in all the essays bouncing around) is "Essentially, neoreaction is the dream of a society of mostly white people, living in a hier…

And I'll tack on a mention of an explanation of Moldbug and his movement from the perspective of an economish blogger Andrea Castillo. AKA me. https://theumlaut.com/2014/07/29/a-gentle-introduction-to-ne...

The neoreactionaries aren't interested in the Enlightenment as a set of fundamental ideas, but as a time in history they find congenial: after the scientific revolution, before democratic, industrial capitalism steamrolled the aristocracy.

They are like an alternative version of the Society for Creative Anachronism, re-imagining the Enlightenment historical period in ways that leave out the things they find icky but that are in fact inevitable consequences of the times. For SCA that's reimagining the High Middle Ages without the plague. For neoreactionaries it's reimagining the Enlightenment without the end of slavery, or the rise of individualism and democracy.

For those of us who pursue Enlightenment ideals rather than Enlightenment historical accidents, they are an unfortunate bunch. SCA members would feel the same way about anyone who was serious about bringing back feudalism, or reducing society to "warriors, priests and peasants."

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#27

Post by sudioStudio64 »

amcastillo wrote: post #20
sudioStudio64 wrote: post #12

Even though I'm deliciously close to 200 karma I'm going to ask this anyway... If someone has a view that is actually destructive for the forum its aired in ( I'm speaking hypothetically now ) does it have to be accommodated. By that, and I genuinely want to know what you guys think, what if a political candidate advocated the end of democratic elections? A "one man, one vote, one time" kind of thing. How is that han…

Some important context to recognize in this incident is that it was a handful of explicitly (leftist) political personalities that rose any stink to begin with. Clark more or less names them all in his piece. Most of the ones who pushed to censor Urbit from Strange Loop even admitted that they personally were not attending the conference. Most conference attendants would not have had the first clue that a member of t…

You know, I've actually heard of that as an actual racket in other industries...

That's really interesting that the most prominent voices against him aren't attending...I don't know.

I don't think that you have to imagine done kind of follow on effects...i think the US probably irreversibly stopped being a free society when it became a national security state. So, I guess what I'm saying that it doesn't seem our of character in the US. I would just add that it's actually bidirectional pressure from both the left and the right depending on the subject and the area.

I'll stop rambling... Thanks for the background info, though...

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#28

Post by Jare »

existencebox wrote: post #23
joelgrus wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do those who support Curtis appearing at the talk refrain from posting out of fear of career repercussion? No and yes. I have been pretty vocal about it on Twitter: https://twitter.com/joelgrus/status/606474432509394944 https://twitter.com/joelgrus/status/606673594198794240 but I've also been sitting on a 75%-written blog post that I'm hesitant to actually post. Not because of career repercussions (I have never had a…

I typically avoid posting in these sorts of threads, very little good has come from political debates on the internet that I've seen, but your last sentence pushes me to speak up. Status-quo social thoughtcrime is rather terrifying to me. There's no "easy" way to amend laws or lobby a system to address the issue, as one would against a governmental stance. It's also cyclical, as less "clean" people speak out against…

Thank you both. I too have a half finished post that I can't figure how to finish properly, but I now feel I don't need to.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#29

Post by Kelly2 »

To play devil's advocate, a conference is not only about the speeches, but also about the people you can meet there.

Inviting Moldbug bring not only his own person but also his followers. It's understandable if your goal is to foster a diverse crowd to not invite a group of people who constantly argue against any kind of modern society.

Re: Two Kinds of Freedom of Speech (or Strangeloop vs. Curtis Yarvin)

#30

Post by sudioStudio64 »

d9h549f34w6 wrote: post #17
nkurz wrote: post #8

In case you were wondering what Curtis's talk might have been about (and whether it would have held any technical merit) this page has a link to Clark's earlier introduction to Urbit: http://popehat.com/2013/12/06/nock-hoon-etc-for-non-vulcans-... The "Exit, voice, and loyalty" terminology might seem odd if you don't know it's origins. It's from 1970 book by economist A. O. Hirschman that's coming back in popularity:…

I for one support Curtis on this issue, but tend not to post here on the subject except under an alternate username. I do this because I do in fact fear the "social justice" crowd and their ability to mess with people and their careers when they don't follow the party line. If I were to hazard a guess, I think I'm not alone in this and I think you're not in a minority (or at least a small one). The recent HN stories…

I would say that depending on the area and subject there is also a "freedom justice" crowd that can be just as crazy and groupthink-ish.

I also find myself not posting sometimes because of repercussions at a later date....not too often, but you know...

Post reply on HN