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

Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 187 posts

Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

#111

Post by dec0dedab0de »

detokaal wrote: post #76
dmix wrote: post #13

Amazon is building a $600 million datacenter for the CIA. The CIA did all of the bad things listed in Dropbox article as directed by Bush and Condoleezza, and they are still actively trying to cover up torture. I've never heard anyone here not using EC2 over it? The tech scenes pitchfork mobs are wildly inconsistent. I have a feeling this one hit a nerve because Condoleezza Rice is famously hated across the internet…

This is a cover up to hide the real motivation: she is a woman and black, and none of you want her involved in a tech company. Disguise this all you want as opposition to the war or Bush or whatever. It is really opposition to her gender and race. This is how you do in silicon valley where blacks and women are considered token employees hire to look good. So make up stuff about her and move her out. Now you have your…

I would have expected the same outrage if it were Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld

Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

#112

Post by samstave »

detokaal wrote: post #76
dmix wrote: post #13

Amazon is building a $600 million datacenter for the CIA. The CIA did all of the bad things listed in Dropbox article as directed by Bush and Condoleezza, and they are still actively trying to cover up torture. I've never heard anyone here not using EC2 over it? The tech scenes pitchfork mobs are wildly inconsistent. I have a feeling this one hit a nerve because Condoleezza Rice is famously hated across the internet…

This is a cover up to hide the real motivation: she is a woman and black, and none of you want her involved in a tech company. Disguise this all you want as opposition to the war or Bush or whatever. It is really opposition to her gender and race. This is how you do in silicon valley where blacks and women are considered token employees hire to look good. So make up stuff about her and move her out. Now you have your…

This is the lamest, most ignorant comment I have ever read on HN.

Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

#113

Post by [deleted] »

samstave wrote: post #112
detokaal wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a cover up to hide the real motivation: she is a woman and black, and none of you want her involved in a tech company. Disguise this all you want as opposition to the war or Bush or whatever. It is really opposition to her gender and race. This is how you do in silicon valley where blacks and women are considered token employees hire to look good. So make up stuff about her and move her out. Now you have your…

This is the lamest, most ignorant comment I have ever read on HN.

[deleted]

Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

#114

Post by bduerst »

vinhboy wrote: post #52
bendoernberg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better to be inconsistently principled than consistently unprincipled.

I like your quote. It reminds me of a buddy of mine who says I am a hypocrite for buying local fruits and vegetable, because I buy toilet paper made by a Koch-owned company. For some people, unless you live in a cave and refuse all modern technology, you are not allowed to have any moral authority.

I think it's more of an appeal for validation for your [more] consistently unprincipled friend's part.

They've decided that the effort is futile, so why can't you?

Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

#115

Post by arjie »

powera wrote: post #78
sheri wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And your point is what? That demonstrating outrage here is in some way invalid since similar outrage was not demonstrated in every other similar situation? Do I have no moral authority to speak up in this situation if I have not before? Maybe we should boycott Amazon. Not boycotting Dropbox because we didn't do the same for Amazon doesn't get us anywhere.

Yes. Selectively demonstrating a ridiculous amount of outrage at the hate target of the day is absurd. The fact that you couldn't possibly do it in every similar situation shows why it is absurd.

Very Kantian. But there are other things for which the argument is successful. Take feeding a starving man, for instance. You cannot feed them all. That's absurd. Therefore, it is also absurd that you can feed the man starving in front of you.

That argument follows the same structure.

For what it's worth, I'm not talking about Ms. Rice here. It's the argument that bothers me. Seems shaky.

Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

#116

Post by sitkack »

res0nat0r wrote: post #90
sitkack wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sound really sure of yourself, yet cite nothing. http://gigaom.com/2010/12/07/has-wikileaks-actually-done-any...

https://aws.amazon.com/message/65348/ There have been reports that a government inquiry prompted us not to serve WikiLeaks any longer. That is inaccurate. There have also been reports that it was prompted by massive DDOS attacks. That too is inaccurate. There were indeed large-scale DDOS attacks, but they were successfully defended against. Amazon Web Services (AWS) rents computer infrastructure on a self-service bas…

What you cite and what you said are different. Wikileaks did not break the LAW by publishing classified documents.

Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

#117

Post by eik3_de »

dmix wrote: post #13

Amazon is building a $600 million datacenter for the CIA. The CIA did all of the bad things listed in Dropbox article as directed by Bush and Condoleezza, and they are still actively trying to cover up torture. I've never heard anyone here not using EC2 over it? The tech scenes pitchfork mobs are wildly inconsistent. I have a feeling this one hit a nerve because Condoleezza Rice is famously hated across the internet…

AFAIK dropbox uses ec2 and s3, so dropping dropbox is a double win

Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

#118

Post by koevet »

pavelrub wrote: post #110
koevet wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we all ignorant? http://marthiemombergblog.com/2014/03/30/i-have-one-child-th...

Yes. Drawing conclusions based on isolated events, without attempting to understand the reality or the context in which those things happen, and without hearing the other side of the story, is a good indicator of ignorance.

isolated events? I can keep on posting links for the next few days, if you want me to...

Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

#119

Post by [deleted] »

001sky wrote: post #69
bendoernberg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better to be inconsistently principled than consistently unprincipled.

Better to be inconsistently principled than consistently unprincipled. That's some Jim Crow logic right there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws Or perhaps its just psychopathy: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10737827/Psychopath...

[deleted]

Re: Knuth: Open Letter to Condoleezza Rice (2002)

#120

Post by 001sky »

001sky wrote: post #69
bendoernberg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better to be inconsistently principled than consistently unprincipled.

Better to be inconsistently principled than consistently unprincipled. That's some Jim Crow logic right there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws Or perhaps its just psychopathy: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/10737827/Psychopath...

Or, maybe you just got your quote wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_is_the_enemy_of_good

Post reply on HN