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

The web runs on tolerance

shkspr.mobi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 183 posts

Re: The web runs on tolerance

#141

Post by didgetmaster »

47282847 wrote: post #92
didgetmaster wrote: post #7

This guy lost me when he started talking about diversity issues instead of tech. I couldn't care less about the race, gender, or sexual orientation of the person(s) who created the hardware or software that I use. Does it work? Is it easy to understand and use? These are the things I am interested in. I am reminded of an early cartoon of a dog sitting at a computer saying 'On the Internet, no one knows you are a dog!…

> I couldn't care less You do care , otherwise you would not even have thought about it twice, let alone comment. The most striking argument against this line of reasoning is that there is no possibility for you not to act politically. By ignoring the issue of systemic discrimination (“don’t care don’t personally discriminate”) you actively contribute to and participate in the systemic discrimination. It’s a choice,…

I said I don't care about the backgrounds of the creators of tech that I use.

I do care when other people in tech insist that I should care, and that I should make decisions based on the identity of certain individuals.

Re: The web runs on tolerance

#142

Post by zamadatix »

account42 wrote: post #138
ktpsns wrote: post #3

The older ones among us remember when XML took over the world and everyone was supposed to use strict XHTML. It turned out that the strength of the HTML ecosystem was its fault tolerance. HTML4 was the "sloppy" answer to XHTML. It brought HTML back from a data language to a markup language. Every Markdown parser is similarly fault-tolerant as HTML parsers. However, CSS and JS are not error-tolerant. A syntax error in…

> However, CSS and JS are not error-tolerant. A syntax error in a CSS rule causes it to be ignored. This is good though as it provides a means for progressive enhancement using new features only when they are available and falling back on previous rules if they are not. It's very different from the syntax error -> RIP page nonsense of XHTML.

In the CSS half, in the JS half it's really no different. Of course that's fine because "best effort logic" doesn't provide nearly as much value as "best effort layout".

Re: The web runs on tolerance

#143

Post by liveoneggs »

hmry wrote: post #140
liveoneggs wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy smokes that is quite a page

Hmm yeah it's quite badly written. Either way, let's just say it's an example of a place where one can look stuff like this up. "Ending whiteness" does not mean "killing all white people" or "eradicating all European cultures" or whatever the parent comment was implying. (Or am I reading too much into it?) Though perhaps you can find some moron calling for that on Twitter.

It's flatly racist. I'm not sure what other meaning you could get from these words.

Re: The web runs on tolerance

#144

Post by didgetmaster »

autoexec wrote: post #52
didgetmaster wrote: post #7

This guy lost me when he started talking about diversity issues instead of tech. I couldn't care less about the race, gender, or sexual orientation of the person(s) who created the hardware or software that I use. Does it work? Is it easy to understand and use? These are the things I am interested in. I am reminded of an early cartoon of a dog sitting at a computer saying 'On the Internet, no one knows you are a dog!…

I'll gladly take the opportunity to avoid directly supporting a racist/bigot, or anyone who seeks to silence/oppress/murder entire groups of people for simply existing. I don't care if they're selling me an application, or a laptop, or a car, or a cheeseburger. The internet, and the world, are a lot more interesting and exciting when you get a lot of different people from different backgrounds participating. Genius a…

But where do you draw the line? Not buying a game that was created by the Nazi party to promote antisemitism is one thing. Shunning a text editor because one of its creators once said something you disagreed with politically, is another.

Re: The web runs on tolerance

#145

Post by Mathnerd314 »

tclancy wrote: post #11
Mathnerd314 wrote: post #4

But in contrast, web communities run on moderation, i.e. a sort of intolerance of bad content. The lesson is that technical issues and social issues really don't mix. You can't conclude anything from one versus the other. Case in point, cryptocurrency was supposed to be the anarchist's dream, but now it's being adopted by some central banks.

> technical issues and social issues really don't mix I don’t think that’s true in the least. I think it’s true there are no technical solutions to social problems, but any and all technology comes from people forming societies and seeking solutions. This comment feels the same as people saying “Stick to sports” about athletes talking politics. Everything is political. If you don’t think something is, it tends to be…

There's a clear line, and it is when it starts to involve other people. Example: reverse engineering the firmware on your thermostat so you can use it after Google shuts down - technical problem. Not releasing it because you're worried about DMCA and/or Google lawsuits - social problem.

Re: The web runs on tolerance

#146

Post by whycombinetor »

hmry wrote: post #140
liveoneggs wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy smokes that is quite a page

Hmm yeah it's quite badly written. Either way, let's just say it's an example of a place where one can look stuff like this up. "Ending whiteness" does not mean "killing all white people" or "eradicating all European cultures" or whatever the parent comment was implying. (Or am I reading too much into it?) Though perhaps you can find some moron calling for that on Twitter.

Are other phrases of the form "ending ____ness", where ____ is a racial qualifier, also acceptable, then? Someone using that term could similarly argue that they're not advocating for the eradication of ____ people - just the identity and behavior associated with ____ people.

Re: The web runs on tolerance

#147

Post by hmry »

whycombinetor wrote: post #146
hmry wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm yeah it's quite badly written. Either way, let's just say it's an example of a place where one can look stuff like this up. "Ending whiteness" does not mean "killing all white people" or "eradicating all European cultures" or whatever the parent comment was implying. (Or am I reading too much into it?) Though perhaps you can find some moron calling for that on Twitter.

Are other phrases of the form "ending ____ness", where ____ is a racial qualifier, also acceptable, then? Someone using that term could similarly argue that they're not advocating for the eradication of ____ people - just the identity and behavior associated with ____ people.

Are you arguing that calling it "whiteness" is a bad branding move by the sociologists? In that case, I fully agree. There's other similar bad branding moves like "toxic masculinity" or "racism = power + prejudice". I wish they would change those words.

Or do you mean that sociologists who speak about "abolishing whiteness" secretly mean "abolishing the behavior and identity of white people"? No I wouldn't agree with that. I think they mean what they say, and when they tell you their definition of "whiteness", that's what they're referring to. Not some other thing.

Re: The web runs on tolerance

#148

Post by bluefirebrand »

Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #108
SPICLK2 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a person, treating everyone the same is an excellent response (and even a political one, if you wish) to counteract a system of discrimination.

I am raised in hindu religion and we have a saying here basically meaning, treat others the way you wish to be treated yourself and I am sure that literally every main religion and philosophy can kind of share the sentiment and create a tolerant society overall. Shame that those same religions and people in power forget this core part I suppose. I think that the forgetfulness might be on purpose but I basically hope…

> treat others the way you wish to be treated yourself

This is often called The Golden Rule because it is one of the most common tenets of every religion and ethical framework ever made

Re: The web runs on tolerance

#149

Post by bluefirebrand »

lambertsimnel wrote: post #91
bluefirebrand wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everything is political This is such a tedious worldview Maybe everything is political, but it doesn't have to be that way

I wonder whether people who disagree about this are talking at crossed purposes. I think there's politics in a narrower sense (concerning partisanship and state intervention) and politics in a wider sense (concerning power relations and decision making). To depoliticise things in the former sense (by depolarising and deregulating) isn't to depoliticise them at all in the latter sense. In society, arguably everything…

> Presumably, what people mean when they say "everything is political" is that politics in the wider sense is both important and on this list

What they mean in my experience is "everything must be viewed as political propaganda"

Re: The web runs on tolerance

#150

Post by edent »

didgetmaster wrote: post #144
autoexec wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll gladly take the opportunity to avoid directly supporting a racist/bigot, or anyone who seeks to silence/oppress/murder entire groups of people for simply existing. I don't care if they're selling me an application, or a laptop, or a car, or a cheeseburger. The internet, and the world, are a lot more interesting and exciting when you get a lot of different people from different backgrounds participating. Genius a…

But where do you draw the line? Not buying a game that was created by the Nazi party to promote antisemitism is one thing. Shunning a text editor because one of its creators once said something you disagreed with politically, is another.

Is it?

Capitalism is about choice. If my local greengrocer is rude to me, I can choose to take my business elsewhere.

If the author of a text editor doesn't share my sentiments on whether to ban tobacco adverts, I can choose not to use their software.

People can make the choices which make them happy. I'm happy to use a slightly worse text editor if it means I am not supporting someone I don't like.

Post reply on HN