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

Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

degoes.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 205 posts

Re: Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

#161

Post by randomname2 »

swampthinker wrote: post #3

Sorry, I guess I've been living under a rock. What's the context for this?

Inc reporting on this: http://www.inc.com/tess-townsend/indiegogo-campaign-funding-...

Also at http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/04/11/ot47-openai/ "And a very different kind of campaign – computer science conference LambdaConf uses a blind review process to select topics for presentation. This year one of their selections was a talk on weird-namespace-software Urbit by Curtis Yarvin (aka Mencius Moldbug). A group of Twitter activists demanded that he be excluded from the conference for his political views. When the conference refused to capitulate, the activists started pressuring sponsors to pull out of the conference in the hopes of making the conference financially unviable. After some preliminary success, anti-censorship blog Status 451 launched a counter-campaign to get people concerned about freedom of opinion in tech to donate to LambdaConf and help make up the difference. This is usually where I’d ask you to donate, except that they reached their $15,000 goal within the first day of their campaign, they’re now 146% funded, and the only reason to give any more at this point is to give an even louder FUCK YOU to the people involved. Since that actually sounds pretty good, you can take a look at the campaign here. See also ESR’s take."

Re: Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

#162

Post by tomp »

kafkaesq wrote: post #91
tomp wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to hear a speech by Hitler. Regardless of his actions, he was a master persuader and accomplished (affected the world) in a decade more than most people couldn't in 1000 years! We could all learn a lot from him - which of course doesn't mean that we would have to use the skills for the same means he did.

That's the thing -- the kind of persuasive talents Hitler had... can pretty much only be used for the kinds of destructive ends he sought.

I'm pretty sure that Steve Jobs had a comparable talent. He used it to lead a great many people to create a great many products instead.

Re: Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

#163

Post by McGlockenshire »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #149
McGlockenshire wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The endorsement is implicit, not explicit. Conf: "We're giving person A a presentation slot because they have a compelling presentation on topic W." Possible Attendee: "Are you aware that person A has said things X, Y, and Z, which taken together can make people reluctant to associate with them?" Conf: "We are aware of that but do not wish to make our conference about anything X, Y, or Z. The presentation is topical.…

The endorsement is implicit, not explicit. This is totally wrong. To take a trivial example, criminal defendants (even obviously guilty ones) are allowed to speak in court. You're saying that this is an "implicit endorsement" of their crimes by the court? Are you really claiming that?

False equivalence. A trial isn't a conference.

That said, you should know as well as I do that judges will often restrict media coverage of hearings and trials in various ways because they know that the people involved (lawyers & otherwise) can and will attempt to grandstand and make a show of it, using the media as a platform for their message.

Re: Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

#164

Post by calibraxis »

tomp wrote: post #159
calibraxis wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you want evidence of him... shivving someone? (But then again, how is stabbing someone with a knife relevant to a talk's quality?) (But then again, how is a talk's quality relevant to free expression of views?) Professional conferences "censor" speakers who don't provide what their audiences want. And have codes of conduct censoring harassing speech. You too: does everyone get to deliver speeches in your home? Vis…

> But then again, how is stabbing someone with a knife relevant to a talk's quality? It's not. I find no reason to exclude an ex-convict that has been charged and served his jail-time. Including them back into the society is the only way we can at least hope to combat recidivism.

It'd be great if you have evidence that Moldbug is an ex-con who underwent rehab for his racism!

If not, would you really invite someone with a record of stabbing people at conferences? Who writes literature advocating murder, etc?

(In the real world, Moldbug leverages society's obvious violence against African-Americans. He's therefore complicit in that systematic violence. That's why Lambdaconf's racist supporters are so desperate to support him, no matter how clumsily. That's why all these people were targeted on sjwlist.com for speaking out against violence: http://statement-on-lambdaconf.github.io/ )

Re: Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

#165

Post by mikeash »

calibraxis wrote: post #126
mikeash wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've followed this saga with much confusion and I wonder if you could explain why you'd avoid a conference with a speaker like this. For me, if I'm evaluating a conference speaker, all I care about is: 1. Is the topic useful or interesting? 2. Is the speaker well informed and the content correct? 3. Does the speaker present the material well? I couldn't care less about them otherwise, and especially not their politic…

Moldbug's political views aren't the issue, it's his political action . He has a record of going to conferences and advocating racism: working to exclude. And one of Lambdaconf's sponsors is a racist political blog, which sounds unprecedented. (Evidence in my comment history.) (The context is a country which kills and incarcerates blacks, post-slavery. Racism is political action which directly impacts the lives of co…

That's the first I've heard of it if so. For example, this statement which appears to have a lot of supporters in the community says nothing about hallway conversations, and merely objects to him being chosen as a speaker:

https://statement-on-lambdaconf.github.io

If it was, "this guy keeps harassing conference goers and holding unofficial mini sessions on how awesome racism is" then I might reconsider my position, but that's not what I've seen anybody (besides you, here, anyeay) say.

Re: Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

#166

Post by saryant »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #148
danharaj wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I being unclear here? I don't believe in free speech . It's an inconsistent, dogmatic belief except as a legal principle, and governments purporting to honor that legal principle almost never respect it when they feel threatened by speech. I'm not claiming a moral high ground here. I'm exercising my speech, and I fully accept the consequences of my speech. It is precisely that my speech has consequences that makes…

Am I being unclear here? I don't believe in free speech. No, I think you're being perfectly clear. I, and many others, find your disbelief in free speech threatening (frankly, this attitude scares the hell out of me). That would make it okay for us to prevent you from speaking in public or holding gainful employment? Yes? No? If not, why not?

His attitude frightens me too. Can we get him banned from conferences now?

/s

See the problem?

Re: Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

#167

Post by renaudg »

danharaj wrote: post #50

This is an open letter of people protesting LambdaConf's decision: https://statement-on-lambdaconf.github.io/ I invite anyone to peruse that list and tell me these aren't some of the brightest professionals and integral community members in functional programming (subtracting me of course). I welcome anyone to make the claim that these individuals haven't come to their positions through reason and deep consideration…

Let's assume everyone on this list is indeed here out of sincere and disinterested belief (I wouldn't underestimate peer pressure, or even more cynically : the subtle but real career brownie points one can earn at some organizations, for openly displaying one's allegiance to social justice causes)

But then how does being a "bright professional and integral FP community member" equate to undisputable authority on a completely unrelated moral topic ?

"Bright professionals" doesn't necessarily imply "thought leaders that have given this particular issue more careful consideration than anybody else". Heck, it doesn't even necessarily imply "good people".

This is the very fallacy Yarvin describes as "IQism" here : https://medium.com/@curtis.yarvin/why-you-should-come-to-lam...

I knew nothing about him or this controversy until know, but approaching it with an open mind I found the above clarification quite sincere, and way more articulated than that 3 paragraphs long open letter that features all of the familiar, easy rhetoric...

Re: Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

#168

Post by kafkaesq »

tomp wrote: post #162
kafkaesq wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing -- the kind of persuasive talents Hitler had... can pretty much only be used for the kinds of destructive ends he sought.

I'm pretty sure that Steve Jobs had a comparable talent. He used it to lead a great many people to create a great many products instead.

In degree, yes - but in kind, not.

Re: Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

#169

Post by tomp »

calibraxis wrote: post #164
tomp wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But then again, how is stabbing someone with a knife relevant to a talk's quality? It's not. I find no reason to exclude an ex-convict that has been charged and served his jail-time. Including them back into the society is the only way we can at least hope to combat recidivism.

It'd be great if you have evidence that Moldbug is an ex-con who underwent rehab for his racism! If not, would you really invite someone with a record of stabbing people at conferences? Who writes literature advocating murder, etc? (In the real world, Moldbug leverages society's obvious violence against African-Americans. He's therefore complicit in that systematic violence. That's why Lambdaconf's racist supporters…

> It'd be great if you have evidence that Moldbug is an ex-con who underwent rehab for his racism!

Unlike violent crime, racist speech isn't immediately dangerous. But in any case, if you believe he's a criminal, rally to have him arrested; him being a free man means that he has nothing to go in rehab for.

> society's obvious violence against African-Americans

You mean, African-American's obvious violence against African-Americans?

http://www.amren.com/news/2015/07/new-doj-statistics-on-race...

Re: Final Statement on the LambdaConf Controversy

#170

Post by philwelch »

antifasci wrote: post #144
mmmnop wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that you created a new anonymous account to do nothing more than name call stands as a simple enough way you discredited...you. McCarthyism was intolerance, not an intolerance of intolerance. It's ironic to have to explain simple type theory here. Or maybe not.

And yet, the 'intolerance' that you're so intolerant of goes without citation, without explanation, without discussion. Strikes me as blatant McCarthyism. Perhaps my account is anonymous because the comment should stand on its own? The discussion surrounding this issue shouldn't require personal reputation. The facts should be sufficient.

I thought the McCarthyists were the ones blacklisting people over their political beliefs?
Post reply on HN