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

111–120 of 122 posts

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#111

Post by rwallace »

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 completely. A liberal society is one in which we can work with people who hold views we disagree with, even views we find reprehensible. A society in which only one set of views is permitted to exist is a totalitarian society. We spent so many lives fighting totalitarianism when it came from the Nazis, the Communists, the Islamic fundamentalists; to smuggle it in again under a mask of liberalism is a betrayal of everything the Enlightenment once represented.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#112

Post by Karunamon »

masklinn wrote: post #110
hnbroseph wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I said nothing of the sort. I said can we please stop having knee-jerk reactions like this? Everyone who would have benefited from the conference was directly harmed by this immature, foolish decision.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#113

Post by teacup50 »

knucklesandwich wrote: post #101
teacup50 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 conce…

Not suppressive?

I won't even discuss this subject non-anonymously due to the risk of the mob setting on me by association, not because I agree with Yarvin, but because I disagree strenuously with their use of intimidation to suppress people with whom they disagree.

Attempting to paint this as anything other than intimidation and suppression strikes me as a great irony as I sit here responding, necessarily for the well-being of myself and my family, anonymously.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#114

Post by x0x0 »

mjs wrote: post #53
jonsterling wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> The program committee feel that we cannot possibly organize a workshop under the umbrella of a conference that values the free expression of racist and fascist views over the physical and emotional safety of its attendees and speakers… From reading the link, I would assume that no "racist and fascist views" will be aired or otherwise expressed at the conference: it's a technical conference, it's against the pledge…

Many (me included) consider the inclusion of such a speaker as tacit endorsement of the acceptability of such views.

One of the results of holding and espousing deeply racist views should be exclusion from society.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#115

Post by SwellJoe »

dpkendal wrote: post #107
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.

Who decides which conferences I will be forced to attend in order to avoid hurting the feelings of white supremacists?

Conferences are private entities that choose their speakers using a variety of metrics. No one is entitled to a speaking spot at a tech conference; the organizers look for speakers that will attract attendees, generate (positive?) buzz, provide good talks, etc. If the people attending the conference and helping with the conference don't want to hear someone who has written in favor of white supremacy speak at length on some topic unrelated to his white supremacist beliefs, why should conference organizers offer him a speaking spot? Who decides who gets to speak, if not the conference organizers?

And, in this case, the conference has decided to ignore the history of the speaker, and the opinions of some conference attendees, and have him speak. That is, again, their choice. I think it's gross, but I'd never suggest they should be prevented from allowing this person to speak. I would not attend a conference with this person as a speaker; not because I'm afraid he'll infect my mind with his peculiar and anachronistic brand of racism (I've read a number of his essays, it would not be exposure to some novel idea), but because I think white supremacists should be shunned. Literally. They should be ignored so hard in our communities that they opt out of them, seeking spaces more friendly to their positions.

Lambda Conf has every right to have someone who thinks slavery is a rather nice idea speak at their conference. Other people have every right to criticize that decision and opt not to participate in that conference.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#116

Post by paulddraper »

x0x0 wrote: post #114
mjs wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The program committee feel that we cannot possibly organize a workshop under the umbrella of a conference that values the free expression of racist and fascist views over the physical and emotional safety of its attendees and speakers… From reading the link, I would assume that no "racist and fascist views" will be aired or otherwise expressed at the conference: it's a technical conference, it's against the pledge…

Many (me included) consider the inclusion of such a speaker as tacit endorsement of the acceptability of such views. One of the results of holding and espousing deeply racist views should be exclusion from society.

So YOU'RE to blame...

Thanks for nothing

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#117

Post by nailer »

colin_fraizer wrote: post #93
jonsterling wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My belief (which you are free to disagree with!) is that the nature of Yarvin's public statements disqualifies him from acting in good faith with the broader community, at least until he has withdrawn them. I feel that each person is a whole human being, and I do not believe that someone can just leave something like "Blacks are suited to slavery, Europeans to mastery!" at the door. Even if he could, it wouldn't do a…

"My belief (which you are free to disagree with)". However, you are not free to express such disagreement or even discuss it. Expressing ideas with which the "right people" disagree is grounds for scorched-earth attacks on every aspect of your life until you can be brought to heel. (I find slavery and support for such reprehensible. Such ideas should be openly confronted and countered directly by expressing superior…

> the use of force inherent in slavery.

The article in question mentions agreeing to willing slavery, i.e. without the use of force:

> Once we get this far, we are almost all the way to Carlyle on slavery. We have not agreed that a man can be born a slave, but we agree that he can sell himself into slavery. That is: he can sign a contract with a master in which the slave agrees unconditionally to obey and work for the master, and the master agrees unconditionally to protect and support the slave.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#118

Post by [deleted] »

etjossem wrote: post #34

The post by Curtis Yarvin cited as cause for PrlCnf to withdraw from LambdaConf (since no one has mentioned it yet): http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.fr/2009/07/why-carl... I personally feel that LambdaConf could have reached out to the many brilliant minds in the functional programming community and chosen a speaker more reflective of their values. Yarvin's assured us all he's going to give a technical talk,…

[deleted]

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#119

Post by nailer »

masklinn wrote: post #38
jimrandomh wrote: post #36

If you're going to start a massive drama based on accusing someone of saying something bad, please quote the bad thing directly . When you call someone an "advocate for slavery", I check your accusation for links and verifiable quotes. If there aren't any, then I reflexively assume this is someone who ran over your dog, stole your girlfriend, and said nothing of the sort. Thank you. EDIT: I have been informed that Jo…

The individual in question is Curtis Yarvin aka "Mencius Moldbug". Quote: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CGr9pDjW8AA23uT.jpg Source: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.be/2009/07/why-carl... Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin

That doesn't seem to back up the assertion, unless the reader is unaware of the meaning of 'parsimonious'.

Re: PrlConf 2016 is cancelled

#120

Post by masklinn »

Karunamon wrote: post #112
masklinn wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I said nothing of the sort. I said can we please stop having knee-jerk reactions like this? Everyone who would have benefited from the conference was directly harmed by this immature, foolish decision.

That's exactly what I've written: you've decided that you wouldn't mind associating with Yarvin, and that Sterling shouldn't mind either.
Post reply on HN