151–160 of 170 posts
Isn't this ironic. Basically saying, Your disobedience must be obedient to our criteria of ethics. Isn't every disobedience unethical to someone?
Typical 'better than you' attitude of elites, we know what the best kind of disobedience is, based on our narrowly defined ideals.
The winner is almost guaranteed to be a conformist, given that the organization selecting the winner is part of the dominant, mainstream power structure. So expect the winner to be, paradoxically, someone who is completely obedient.
Yup. I submitted my application based on the FashionTech wearable I designed, built and wore to protest the lack of inclusion of any local women at a Western tech event here in Shenzhen. http://i.imgur.com/2D8dESV.jpg I ended up stomping around a mainland Chinese tourist attraction half-naked in it, giving speeches to massive Chinese crowds about an inclusion issue. http://i.imgur.com/9Dz9M9N.jpg Anyone who knows any…
The President is the most deserving winner of this award. Please vote for Donald Trump now.
Someone down voted me because that person is a hater, if you are a hater have courage to give logical reason for any down votes.
I've nominated Alexandra Elbakyan of sci-hub and encourage everyone else to do the same. I'd also be happy if Aaron Swartz won!
I've already wrote about that on HN, but I believe it's worth reiterating. Alexandra Elbakyan is not an example of disobedience. In fact, she is very obedient to the rules of society she lives in (she is an avid Putin's supporter), it's just those rules are different from the West. Her risks over SciHub project is negligible while she lives in Russia, and given her views, I think it's unlikely she want to live somewh…
How ironic that the page won't open because I'm running Privacy Badger on my browser.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Joi Ito, the current director of the Media Lab, highly praised Aaron during the memorial held at the Media Lab in 2013: http://tech.mit.edu/V133/N12/swartz.html The rest of MIT might deserve shaming, but please don't punish the Media Lab.
It's not my intention to "punish" Media Lab, I like the work they do. But from the article you just posted: > The mood changed later in the memorial when speakers began criticizing MIT’s involvement in the Swartz case. Swartz’ partner, Taren Stinebrickner-Kauffman, asked MIT to consider whether it considered itself a “scientist” or “bureaucracy” and expressed skepticism about the Abelson report. It's clear from the d…
What does "ossification" means in this context?
I just nominated Donald J Trump. He has disobeyed all political conventions in regard to his election campaign and especially in regard to his relationship with the media. In fact, many people believe he has disobeyed the supreme law of the United States: the Constitution with regards to the emoluments clause and not having a religious test with regards to his immigration ban executive order. He has taken personal ri…
> disobeyed all political conventions One can't disobey "conventions". One disobey laws, and in particular, laws that are enforced, and the breaking of which carry real threats to their freedom. Also, you can't be disobeying if you're the boss and decide who gets tried and who doesn't. So since DJT has been president he can't disobey no more. Not sure if your comment was ironic; if yes, fine, if not, you're very wron…
You are playing a semantics game. Replace disobey with ignore, and the intent is the same.
> you can't be disobeying if you're the boss and decide who gets tried and who doesn't
The United States is a constitutional democracy, not a fascist regime. In the past, presidents have indeed disobeyed, and one was consequently impeached.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you even read the context of the comment you originally replied to? It refers to people , not an organization. >Aren't these the people that failed to defend Aaron Swartz? So no, these aren't the same people. However, it is the same parent organization, but I don't think anyone is disputing that even though that's the strawman you are attacking.
> Did you even read the context of the comment you originally replied to? It refers to people, not an organization. Organizations consist of people. There is some more stuff beyond that -- just some legal documents, buildings, and other assets, but the thing that actually has the agency to drive an organization is people. > So no, these aren't the same people. However, it is the same parent organization, but I don't…
So nobody has left or joined MIT since the Aaron Schwartz case?
Even ignoring that detail, I have a lot more respect for people that change an organization from within rather than quit immediately anytime something disagreeable happens. If everyone operated the way you are suggesting, we would essentially have institutions that would never change because nobody with different viewpoints could join.