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

“A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

s3.amazonaws.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 443 posts

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#411

Post by vanderleun »

chubot wrote: post #358
urbit wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"He has literally written that several of his co-speakers are genetically more fit to be slaves while he, a white male, is genetically designed to be a master." Certainly a powerful use of the word literally . Frankly, I'm actually considering recanting. Who wouldn't rather be Galileo than Giordano Bruno? But recanting is a serious matter - it's the sort of thing you need to get right the first time. To appear at fut…

I don't normally get involved in these types of discussions on the Internet, but I met you when you presented Urbit in SF a couple years ago, and thought your work was very interesting. Have you heard of "Yali's question"? [1] This is the framing of Jared Diamond's book Guns, Germs, and Steel. I believe this is a question that you think people are dodging, perhaps with politically correct wish-wash. Apparently you th…

"I think you should recant, but only if you have arrived at the conclusion honestly"

Were you home sick the day high school discussed the word "sardonic?"

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#412

Post by devalier »

yebyen wrote: post #406
lexcorvus wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His admission really is incredibly revealing, and refreshingly, even depressingly honest. He's literally saying no amount of reason or evidence could change his mind on a matter that is obviously (in principle) falsifiable. I think it's safe to say that, so far as full contact with reality is concerned, he is a lost cause.

To what ends would you change his mind on this issue? For Internet points, or for a greater good? I don't begrudge anyone with a religious devotion to the other view in this particular matter, if only because we have "known" wrong facts before, based on evidence that appeared to be sound and was considered to be incontrovertible at the time. And even true facts based on sound evidence are not always absolute, or unal…

To what ends would you change his mind on this issue? For Internet points, or for a greater good?

The "gap" between the races on matters such as income, education achievement, or the demographics of Google engineers is a source of constant handwringing.

There are two explanations that are publicly admissible:

1) You can slander and libel white people and blame racism 2) You can slander and libel black people and say it's because of "black culture", because black parents don't tell their kids to do well in school

If you take a third position, the position that thousands of years of evolving in different environments and civilization complexity levels meant that there is a different statistical distribution in different traits, which means there is a different

This third position blames no one, yet the holders of this position are called bigots and are banned from conferences if they even mention this view under a pseudonym in an unrelated context. I confronted tptacek, because he is a person that I have up until now respected, yet he called Saletan an idiot for holding this third position. So I was interested in why tptacek called Saletan an idiot, and I was also interested in the more general problem of how to convince reasonable people to stop slandering black people or slandering white people on the issue of the gap between the races.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#413

Post by kragen »

venning wrote: post #132
serf wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with your idea that other states don't have some sort of pet peeve they will 'dock you points' for. Go to Austin and look for a job while spouting off right-to-life and anti-gay marriage nonsense. Go to Houston/Dallas and espouse the opposite opinion. Go to Washington DC or Virginia and look for a job while being vocally against government involvement in your personal life and the spy state of affairs, or…

DC is definitionally composed of people carrying opinions across the spectrum. Being vocally opposed to those things you list is actually a job requirement for some places. DC's stereotype is a bit unnuanced.

In DC the unacceptable opinions don't include the things listed above, but that doesn't mean there aren't any unacceptable opinions there.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#414

Post by kragen »

amcastillo wrote: post #314
tptacek wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a way to point out that Klabnik's politics may conflict him out of this debate, but calling him a "proud communist" wasn't it. Personal attacks aren't allowed on HN. Sometimes the line between personal attack and ideological critique is blurry. The closer you get to that line here, the more carefully you need to write.

If CY's writing on Carlyle is relevant, why is noting that SK lobbies for more programmers to integrate Marx and other left-radical writers beyond reproach? http://blog.steveklabnik.com/posts/2011-12-15-marx-anarchism...

Klabnik in that post seems to be advocating anarchism, which Marx struggled for decades to expunge from the socialist movement. I'm not that familiar with Klabnik's politics, but having skimmed that piece I would be surprised to learn he was actually Communist.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#415

Post by kragen »

cwyers wrote: post #230
leereeves wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never refused to work with anyone because of their political beliefs.

Calling support for slavery a "political belief" is rather tame at best and outright misleading at worst.

If abolitionism and egalitarianism isn't political then I don't know what is. What would count as a "political belief" in your eyes?

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#416

Post by tptacek »

devalier wrote: post #412
yebyen wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To what ends would you change his mind on this issue? For Internet points, or for a greater good? I don't begrudge anyone with a religious devotion to the other view in this particular matter, if only because we have "known" wrong facts before, based on evidence that appeared to be sound and was considered to be incontrovertible at the time. And even true facts based on sound evidence are not always absolute, or unal…

To what ends would you change his mind on this issue? For Internet points, or for a greater good? The "gap" between the races on matters such as income, education achievement, or the demographics of Google engineers is a source of constant handwringing. There are two explanations that are publicly admissible: 1) You can slander and libel white people and blame racism 2) You can slander and libel black people and say…

William Saletan does not hold that position. He apologized for the series of columns he wrote, and acknowledged that he sourced them poorly. To argue that he agrees with you today requires you to argue that he wrote dishonestly. Were that the case, I'd have no reason to believe anything he wrote was in good faith. As it stands, the simplest explanation was: he was writing discursively, as an essayist; his ideas seemed good at the time; he was corrected; he changed his mind.

I also didn't call Saletan an idiot, obviously.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#417

Post by devalier »

tptacek wrote: post #416
devalier wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To what ends would you change his mind on this issue? For Internet points, or for a greater good? The "gap" between the races on matters such as income, education achievement, or the demographics of Google engineers is a source of constant handwringing. There are two explanations that are publicly admissible: 1) You can slander and libel white people and blame racism 2) You can slander and libel black people and say…

William Saletan does not hold that position. He apologized for the series of columns he wrote, and acknowledged that he sourced them poorly. To argue that he agrees with you today requires you to argue that he wrote dishonestly. Were that the case, I'd have no reason to believe anything he wrote was in good faith. As it stands, the simplest explanation was: he was writing discursively, as an essayist; his ideas seeme…

OK, apologies for the misquote. Let me apply a patch to replace "yet he called Saletan an idiot for holding this third position" with "yet he called an article idiotic that provided supporting evidence for this position." The gist of my comment still stands.

"He apologized for the series of columns he wrote, and acknowledged that he sourced them poorly"

Are you referring to this article? http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_natur... I read this as him downplaying the certainty of the genetic hypothesis, in order to get the heat off his back. It is pretty obvious he is scared at getting purged: "I don't want this role...You'll have to judge the evidence for yourself." It is not obvious that he changed his mind. And he apologizes for not disclosing Rushton's associations, not for citing Ruston. He doesn't make any claims that Rushton's studies were bad science that should not be cited. Again, sounds like non-apology apology to get the heat off his back. But I can't peer into Saletan's soul so I don't know.

I don't actually think Saletan's article is a great article. I'm lukewarm on how accurate Rushton's stuff is; I think other evidence for the hypothesis that Saletan leaves out is actually more compelling. But I don't think the article is idiotic either.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#418

Post by kragen »

dang wrote: post #93
pep888 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is not. That is flatly untrue nonsense. It is always SL's decision, that they are making with feedback It saddens me that you're making this obviously fallacious argument, because your reasoning is so transparent. You're a Zionist, who has sworn allegience to a genocidal government. As a supporter of genocide, you are concerned that someday you'll face consequences for your decision to materially support mass…

This is not an acceptable Hacker News comment, regardless of the positions it's for and against. Please comment civilly and substantively, or not at all.

It so perfectly fits the point topynate was making in another thread, though, that it's easy to imagine it's merely a sockpuppet! Because of attitudes like pep888's, it's easy to imagine a conference like Strange Loop banning speakers for being Zionists, especially in Europe rather than the US, and Al3x's decision has moved us a big step closer to that.

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#419

Post by kragen »

pep888 wrote: post #392
topynate wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much as I dislike entering into this sort of (highly off-topic) conversation, it needs pointing out that "Progressive Except Palestine" was coined by people who agree with you. Just search for it and see what comes up.

It is true that I was wrong about what PEP meant. It is also true that you are trying to police and shame entrepreneurs who decided to listen to their customers, because you happen to be a voluntary party to (and supporter of) hate crimes and genocide.

May I ask what the "888" in your name refers to?

Re: “A Statement with My View on Curtis Yarvin and Strange Loop”

#420

Post by kragen »

frou_dh wrote: post #3

> Because of this, I am sorry that I must rescind your invitation and I will not be able to accept or include your talk at the conference. My apologies if this causes you any inconvenience. At least give a straight apology without mealy-mouthed "if..."

Normally I agree with this point, but in this case it seemed like the "if" might actually be correct: because the time from invitation to rescission was so short, it's entirely possible that the invitation caused Yarvin no inconvenience; that he had not yet, for example, bought plane tickets to St. Louis.
Post reply on HN