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

PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

jonprl.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 122 posts

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#101

Post by knucklesandwich »

teacup50 wrote: post #97
knucklesandwich wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curtis Yarvin is a software engineer, so if you want to make the analogy honest, a blacklist would be a large contingent of software companies refusing to hire him under any circumstances. Dalton Trumbo wasn't pressured not to speak at conferences because of his political allegiances, he was barred from working period (and eventually jailed!). This has absolutely nothing to do with a blacklist.

So you're saying that this mob is unhappy with him speaking, but has no issue with his being employed? Like this? https://twitter.com/justkelly_ok/status/713222987537756163 "In case you think it's just LambdaConf: Google continues to employ one of Moldbug's most devoted followers." "Tech employees: it's time to hold your execs accountable for lack of action. My tweets aren't gonna do it alone."

Some tweets and a Sam Biddle provocation piece about Google keeping this person employed (from 2 years ago) != a blacklist. Even if this amounted to action on Google's part, an employer has the right to fire an employee for actions deemed hostile to other employees (and its plausible to say its hostile for an employee to write blog posts about how certain races are genetically inferior). This is implicit in the concept of "at-will employment". I've been on the receiving end of this taken to a ridiculous extent when I was fired from a job for not going to a Christmas party. I found the reason I was fired to be pretty objectionable, but it wasn't anything remotely like being blacklisted.

There's a lot of hypothetical rabbit holes to go down with this, but ultimately this is a distraction from what's being discussed, which is a person choosing to withdraw their workshop group from a conference because of the opinions of a speaker. Boycotting, protests, or simply declining to not participate are fundamental methods of democratic action. It's laughable to me that anyone would equate what's being talked about here with a suppressive measure.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#102

Post by mchahn »

mcphage wrote: post #99
carapace wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Draw the line at pain and suffering. Go ahead and draw it right there. -------------------- I used to be really judgemental. I'm less so now. But when this blew up I knew what I wanted to stand for, and I have, in however minor and insignificant a way. (Yay me, look at all my shiny points!) The thing is, lots of people are focusing on him and the admittedly terrible idea that he should be shunned "just for his words"…

> How openly racist does a person have to be before they are no longer welcome in polite society? Apparently more openly racist than "wrote things under a pen name 17 years ago".

I don't understand why people here are granting some acceptance points because he wrote it under a pen name. How does that make him a better person?

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#103

Post by mcphage »

mchahn wrote: post #102
mcphage wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How openly racist does a person have to be before they are no longer welcome in polite society? Apparently more openly racist than "wrote things under a pen name 17 years ago".

I don't understand why people here are granting some acceptance points because he wrote it under a pen name. How does that make him a better person?

Better? Maybe not at all. But I was responding to the question of how openly racist a person would have to be.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#104

Post by jacknews »

OoTheNigerian wrote: post #22

I'm African and should be very disgusted by this person's views (I am) [1] However, the views were written under a pseudonym years ago and has no bearing on technology. Basically, these were anonymous talks jotted down somewhere. It is shocking that this person John Sterling canceling this talk thinks it's a good idea to permanently sentence a person for what the wrote UNDER A PSEUDONYM years ago and may or may not l…

I agree. They may be disgusting views, but I think the lamdaconf guys have it right; "Conduct versus belief". Assuming the speaker behaves in a manner appropriate for a tech conference, his other beliefs should not be an issue. And to sanction someone merely for their beliefs (however appalling) is itself completely disgusting; George Orwell must be turning in his grave.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#105

Post by bhitov »

jonsterling wrote: post #29
OoTheNigerian wrote: post #22

I'm African and should be very disgusted by this person's views (I am) [1] However, the views were written under a pseudonym years ago and has no bearing on technology. Basically, these were anonymous talks jotted down somewhere. It is shocking that this person John Sterling canceling this talk thinks it's a good idea to permanently sentence a person for what the wrote UNDER A PSEUDONYM years ago and may or may not l…

Curtis Yarvin still believes what he said years ago; he has written as much today on Reddit. I would not have made the decision I did if he had renounced his prior views. Lord knows, I had very regressive political views once upon a time, though never as horrid as his.

I read the entirety of his AmA and did not once see him "advocate for slavery". Could you directly link to where he does and quote him?

for reference: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/4bxf6f/im_curtis_yarv...

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#106

Post by bcook »

mcphage wrote: post #103
mchahn wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why people here are granting some acceptance points because he wrote it under a pen name. How does that make him a better person?

Better? Maybe not at all. But I was responding to the question of how openly racist a person would have to be.

(Agreeing with mcphage) Regarding "openly"... it's kinda funny that we encourage people to keep their darker thoughts to themselves. Learning is harder when you do not know you are "different".

So racism is OK if nobody is aware of it?

Somewhat related to the recent article about the CEO being fired for making honest (but offensive) statements... Silence does not seem to solve as much as an open dialogue would.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#107

Post by dpkendal »

SwellJoe wrote: post #47

It's always fun to see how "free speech" is used to defend troglodytes' right to proclaim their superiority by virtue of their race and sex, but the people who have anything to say against those opinions are told they're being too sensitive, participating in "outrage culture", infringing on someone's rights, etc. The right to be an asshole and the right to call out their assholery is the same right. In this case, an…

> Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.

“Sorry, you wrote this and we don’t like it, therefore you’re not invited to this conference on an irrelevant topic” or “… therefore we’re not going to a conference to which you were invited” is not valid criticism of an idea.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#108

Post by calibraxis »

caseysoftware wrote: post #85
etjossem wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Give me an example of a tech conference speaker who professes the belief that white guys lend themselves well to being enslaved. I certainly can't think of one off the top of my head. Is it possible this isn't a real problem faced by the software community?

If you're going to respond, please stick to what I said instead of what you imagined. Thanks!

No, they had an entirely correct response. The context is a country which notoriously acts with unusual violence against its Black population, since its "founding fathers", up to basically being a police state as far as many Black communities are concerned.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#109

Post by gaur »

OoTheNigerian wrote: post #22

I'm African and should be very disgusted by this person's views (I am) [1] However, the views were written under a pseudonym years ago and has no bearing on technology. Basically, these were anonymous talks jotted down somewhere. It is shocking that this person John Sterling canceling this talk thinks it's a good idea to permanently sentence a person for what the wrote UNDER A PSEUDONYM years ago and may or may not l…

> thinks it's a good idea to permanently sentence a person

The courts have not been involved, so there is no sentencing going on.

> This is the height of intolerance I have ever seen.

Then you haven't really seen much. See, for example, any instance where intolerance has been enshrined in the US legal system. That's way worse than somebody cancelling a programming conference.

It's almost comical that you call this "the height of intolerance", given how trivial it is to find worse examples of intolerance.

> One is an uneducated thought the other a dangerous totalitarian action.

I don't think you understand what "totalitarian" means. It means "a political system where the state recognizes no limits to its authority and strives to regulate every aspect of public and private life wherever feasible" [0]. None of that is going on here: the government isn't even involved. You're just using "totalitarian" as a vague insult, like "fascist".

In a non-totalitarian society, you are free to organize your own conference wherein you invite (or disinvite) whomever you please. The same applies to the organizers of PrlConf (or indeed LambdaConf). That's exactly what's happened.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#110

Post by masklinn »

hnbroseph wrote: post #69
masklinn wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you care so much what other people think and do? You don't care? Then don't. Other do care? Let them, since you don't care keep not caring?

this seems more like meta-caring. i may not care about what anyone writes in a book, but it can be concerning when people start burning books they dislike.

Nobody's burning books here, a number of people refuse to associate with Moldbug entirely, and one of them had a workshop at lambdaconf which they cancelled. That's about the extent of it.

And then Karunamon comes in and asserts that no, they can't have freedom of association and they must judge others by Karunamon's standards only.

Post reply on HN