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

E Pur Si Muove

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 853 posts

Re: E Pur Si Muove

#141

Post by alien_at_work »

ak_yo wrote: post #108
throwaway8766 wrote: post #64

I'm extremely aware of this as someone who is socially conservative in terms of abortion, gay marriage, trans issues, etc (seriously not trying to start a flame war). It's weird knowing that a large portion of the country has similar values to me, but in a major city I can never mention these things or I'll immediately become unemployable. It doesn't matter that these things have zero impact on my behavior at work; y…

From my perspective, I don't want to work in an environment where people are voicing their opinion that (e.g.) gay marriage is illegitimate or wrong. How am I supposed to work with someone who thinks a huge part of my life is immoral? I would have an incredibly hard time believing that that person was taking me seriously, really wanted to work with me, wasn't going to undercut me, or trusted me. It's not that you can…

>How am I supposed to work with someone who thinks a huge part of my life is immoral?

So everyone needs to ensure they hold no oppinions you might find offensive or be homeless? It goes both ways: how am I supposed to work with someone who thinks it's ok to ostracize people for personal beliefs?

Re: E Pur Si Muove

#142

Post by slededit »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #83
Cyberdog wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The worst you'll get is a tongue-lashing?" Not even close. It is quite ordinary for SV employees to be fired or "resign" after being caught participating in wrongthink. Eich is the most famous example, but Apple's former chief of diversity is a more recent one. No, this is not quite as severe as being arrested and imprisoned for thinking the wrong things. But career-wise, at least, it can be almost as disastrous.

Okay but how do you solve that? You take away the right of companies to fire people for speech? I see no way to increase freedom from the status quo here.

In Europe companies can't fire you for legal activities done while not working. It's not such a crazy idea.

Re: E Pur Si Muove

#143

Post by alehul »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #13
InTheArena wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or conversely, maybe we should listen to people who are pointing out that we arn't as free as we think we are, and people who we think are more constrained may not be. It's a good thesis to try and prove.

It would be a funny assertion to say that you're less free to speak in SV where the worst you'll get is a tongue-lashing vs China where the worst you'll get is quite a lot worse. How would you even fix this freedom? Somehow constrain people to not speak their mind when they disagree with you? Constraining them through government would obviously make us less free so that's out. Constraining them through culture is no…

The beauty of the U.S. is in its freedom, and as such, individuals cannot be constrained.

That's why we have an appeal from Sam who is suggesting that people willingly open their minds to debating ideas and not demonizing the people espousing them.

This is a freedom that could be fixed only through the people's choice to acknowledge it and fix it.

Re: E Pur Si Muove

#144

Post by tclancy »

rb808 wrote: post #5

Next time he's in China maybe he should think about donating some money to a local union and see how free the speech is there. I'm no fan of the Bay Area but comparing to China freedom of speech is a bit weird.

Yes, the argument really lost me by mentioning feeling more comfortable in Beijing than SF. I am sure it's not intended that way, but one of the things it reminded me of is the bimonthly "Why are all these homeless people in front of my startup when I pay taxes?" posts from Valley success stories. 100 floors up in Beijing isn't exactly my idea of grounded in reality.

Re: E Pur Si Muove

#145

Post by Cyberdog »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #83
Cyberdog wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The worst you'll get is a tongue-lashing?" Not even close. It is quite ordinary for SV employees to be fired or "resign" after being caught participating in wrongthink. Eich is the most famous example, but Apple's former chief of diversity is a more recent one. No, this is not quite as severe as being arrested and imprisoned for thinking the wrong things. But career-wise, at least, it can be almost as disastrous.

Okay but how do you solve that? You take away the right of companies to fire people for speech? I see no way to increase freedom from the status quo here.

In most of these cases, I don't think the company itself really wants to fire the employee. But the wrongthink the employee has done gets so notorious among a certain group of people that it becomes a face-saving measure.

Re: E Pur Si Muove

#146

Post by amsheehan »

junkscience2017 wrote: post #39

Tech liberals created this dictatorship, so enjoy sleeping in a bed of your own making Sam

Though it may be true that some liberals who work in technology argue about pronouns, that doesn't mean the entire set of liberals working in technology did anything.

Re: E Pur Si Muove

#147

Post by btilly »

http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html is very relevant about how we got here.

As Paul Graham said then, the biggest threats to free thought and speech come from people who have just enough power to enforce taboos, and not enough to be confident in their power. In this case the political ideology that is stifling thought is one that has nationwide lost Congress, the Senate and the Presidency. Which naturally results in a strong "us vs them" mentality, and stronger incentives to require that everyone prove that they are part of "us".

The result is, as I've heard it put, Liberals are tolerant of anything except being conservative.

This is not, of course, one-sided. If you lived in a deeply religious part of the country you'd find similar levels of intolerance towards liberal ideas as a result of feeling like they are on the receiving end of years of losing the culture war. That won't be the problem that you experience in the Bay area. But it is two sides of the same mentality that you are either with us or against us.

Re: E Pur Si Muove

#148

Post by throwaway34689 »

Of the places I've lived (not necessarily in order):

- Deep South (18 years - born + raised) - Boston MA (5 years @ college then job) - NYC (6+ years) - Los Angeles (1yr @ startup) - San Diego (1yr @ startup) - Bay Area (6 years, including 4+ at household name tech company)

I found the Bay Area (and SF in particular) to be the most intolerant, rigid and inflexible culture I've ever lived and worked in. I've never encountered such a self-righteous, smug and viscerally hostile attitude to other parts of the country, especially the South and Midwest (where I grew up). Someone literally told me once that "people from the South eat their children" in a half joking tone.

I don't think you can call it "racism" per se, but definitely the most oppressive form of prejudice I've ever encountered, by far, was found among people I worked and came in contact with in the SF Bay Area.

EDIT: Of course, I met (and stayed friends) with really amazing people in SF Bay Area. People with different viewpoints than mine that really expanded my horizons along a lot of different axes. And the raw intelligence of most people I interacted with - technical and otherwise - is off the charts. But the attitudes I mentioned above were expressed frequently enough to leave an impression on me.

Re: E Pur Si Muove

#150

Post by nilkn »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #138
nilkn wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An example that comes to mind is that Apple's chief of diversity (a black woman) was recently fired and replaced by a white woman for the following comment: > "There can be 12 white, blue-eyed, blonde men in a room and they’re going to be diverse too because they’re going to bring a different life experience and life perspective to the conversation." I find this to be a pretty mundane statement, and it's fairly spect…

1) That's very different from the example Sam gave. 2) Is that a problem of speech or a problem of the authoritarian nature of corporate power?

Sam gave an example of someone feeling sufficiently ostracized that they left the region. I don't see how that's very different. Feeling forced out of the city or region is very similar to being fired from a corporate job.
Post reply on HN