171–180 of 183 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it's not a strength it's a necessity? I'm not sure these words mean what you think they do...
Yes, I would describe this as a liability. It costs more to implement basic html interpretation with zero benefit
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Application error: a client-side exception has occurred (see the browser console for more information). The amount of articles on HN that render perfectly, then vanish a second later and are replaced by this error message is insane. Yes, I'm using an old unmaintained Android HN reader with a questionable webview. No, that's not an excuse to delete a perfectly rendered from right in front of my eyes.
Sure. But it's not the browser that did that. You see the dialog because the app HANDLED the error condition, and application code displayed an dialog. Had the error not been handled, the browser's behavior is to log a message to the browser console (which you, as a user, never see), and carry on, pretending that the error never happened. So the page would have continued on in some non-functional, or half-functional…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You think your post is not one trying to rouse hate against specific people? It's taken me a while to understand what I find so abhorrent about this frequent rhetorical device and I finally realized it's just plain ol' false equivalence. Hating nazis for the harm they've caused is, in fact, just fine. Hating someone because they were born jewish/black/gay/whatever, is not fine. Pretending that people out here advoc…
> Hating nazis for the harm they've caused is, in fact, just fine. Sure. Where did I say it isn't? The problem is the author (and yourself) is okay with branding fully half the population, including the people you are pretending to speak on behalf off, as "having no business" being somewhere. All thoughts are welcome, unless you have different thoughts.
If you truly believe that 50% of people are full of hate, then I can only suggest you get off the computer and go out into your local community.
Most people are willing to give a helping hand to someone who needs it. Most people don't go shouting slurs. Most people don't want their neighbours to live in fear.
If truly 50% of the people you meet are filled with hate and rage against the world, I think that probably says more about the company you keep than it does about the world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see. I disagree with them if they think everything really is political propaganda, but I think in a sense everything is political (in the wider sense) in its causes and consequences, so perhaps it might as well be propaganda, even if those involved don't think of it that way. To return to your previous comment that "everything is political" is a tedious worldview, maybe there's a possible compromise. We could accep…
> To return to your previous comment that "everything is political" is a tedious worldview It is tedious specifically because of the "in the wider sense" you put in parens It is an overly broad definition of political to the point of uselessness and absurdity Edit; for example, consider the case of a child throwing a ball for their dog. The child is not political. The dog is not political. Yes, you can say that there…
I don't think it's useless or absurd, just not usually applicable. After all, each action has a specific political significance.
> It's also just tedious
Fair enough, but couldn't we say the same about many other things? For example, Brownian motion might not usually warrant our attention, but it's there for when we decide it is of interest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Hating nazis for the harm they've caused is, in fact, just fine. Sure. Where did I say it isn't? The problem is the author (and yourself) is okay with branding fully half the population, including the people you are pretending to speak on behalf off, as "having no business" being somewhere. All thoughts are welcome, unless you have different thoughts.
The author (me) we not trying to rouse hate against specific people. Indeed, I didn't mention or name anyone. If you truly believe that 50% of people are full of hate, then I can only suggest you get off the computer and go out into your local community. Most people are willing to give a helping hand to someone who needs it. Most people don't go shouting slurs. Most people don't want their neighbours to live in fear.…
I obviously don't believe that :-/.
Your PoV is that anyone who isn't joining you in your campaign "has no business being here".
What's your estimate on how many people are full of hate? 25%? 5%? 0.5%?
What's your estimate on how many people don't care to join your campaign? 25%? 5%? 0.5%?
I ask because you're painting with an awfully broad brush, implying very strongly that people who don't care to join your campaign "have no business being here".
Because from where I am, maybe 0.5% of people are filled with the hate you think they have, and maybe 50% (probably more) just don't want to join campaigns like yours.
In your writing you lump them all together, in "Us good guys, against everyone else!", not "Us, good guys, against 0.5% of people".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He talks about "throw[ing of] slurs" and "denying rights to others", "wishing violence on people because of their heritage", and that type of thing. Does not besetting people with slurs count as "diversity" now? Do you think these people will be able to do good technical work if they're constantly beset by this kind of thing? Or do you think they will retreat to somewhere where they don't have to do with that? And se…
> Does not besetting people with slurs count as "diversity" now? It depends whom you ask! There are certainly some people both off- and on-line who seem to think that uniformly slurring all white, male, cis-sexual, whatever folks as "oppressors" - and even occasionally suggesting, apparently as a serious political proposal, that "Whiteness" (whatever that means) is something that should be forcibly done away with - i…
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!…
Except there are people right on this forum who will happily talk about how dogs deserve fewer/no rights. Do you think that this makes the "dogs" feel welcome and do you think that these words have no effect? Like, it's cool and great that you personally are in a position where most of the ideologies of hate aren't affecting you, right now, personally, but is it too much to ask that you spare a thought for the people…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The author (me) we not trying to rouse hate against specific people. Indeed, I didn't mention or name anyone. If you truly believe that 50% of people are full of hate, then I can only suggest you get off the computer and go out into your local community. Most people are willing to give a helping hand to someone who needs it. Most people don't go shouting slurs. Most people don't want their neighbours to live in fear.…
> If you truly believe that 50% of people are full of hate, then I can only suggest you get off the computer and go out into your local community. I obviously don't believe that :-/. Your PoV is that anyone who isn't joining you in your campaign "has no business being here". What's your estimate on how many people are full of hate? 25%? 5%? 0.5%? What's your estimate on how many people don't care to join your campaig…
I am not able to ban people from the web. I don't have that power, nor would I want it.
As for percentages, I suggest you speak to people. Ask them if they think it is ok to be gay. You can probably look up the statistics for your country - but in most places, people are tolerant.
Ask your friends and family if gay people should be banned from studying at universities. Ask them if your city should only allow white residents. Ask if they think it is useful to build wheelchair accessible buildings.
In my experience, it probably is only the 0.5% that you experience. We agree!
But then ask them whether people who bully minorities should be welcomed in polite society.
I'd be fascinated to hear what they (and you) answer to that question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you truly believe that 50% of people are full of hate, then I can only suggest you get off the computer and go out into your local community. I obviously don't believe that :-/. Your PoV is that anyone who isn't joining you in your campaign "has no business being here". What's your estimate on how many people are full of hate? 25%? 5%? 0.5%? What's your estimate on how many people don't care to join your campaig…
Again, you'll notice that I didn't actually ask anyone to join a campaign. I rather conspicuously didn't ask anyone to become a member of a political party, sign a petition, or donate money to a cause. I am literally not organising anything. I am not able to ban people from the web. I don't have that power, nor would I want it. As for percentages, I suggest you speak to people. Ask them if they think it is ok to be g…
I don't understand this PoV; bullies aren't welcome anywhere! It's almost a tautology. What is the point of making a special exemption for bullies of minorities?
Your writing, OTOH, lumps people like me, who don't care to join this fight, in with actual bullies. We don't really care if bullies are bullies of minorities or bullies in general.
Your entire screed was not against bullies. It was specifically against bullies of minorities, which makes no rational sense.
> I'd be fascinated to hear what they (and you) answer to that question.
My experience is that the fraction of bullies against minorities is so small it's barely a rounding error.
I wanna know exactly what % of people are the bullies that your screed was aimed at. Most everyone is okay with women, minorities, gay and lesbian folk. Only about 50% of the population (including the LG and B in LGBT) is okay with the transgender movement.
So exactly how large is the % of population your screed was aimed at? The fractions of a percent that aren't welcome anyway?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again, you'll notice that I didn't actually ask anyone to join a campaign. I rather conspicuously didn't ask anyone to become a member of a political party, sign a petition, or donate money to a cause. I am literally not organising anything. I am not able to ban people from the web. I don't have that power, nor would I want it. As for percentages, I suggest you speak to people. Ask them if they think it is ok to be g…
> But then ask them whether people who bully minorities should be welcomed in polite society. I don't understand this PoV; bullies aren't welcome anywhere! It's almost a tautology. What is the point of making a special exemption for bullies of minorities? Your writing , OTOH, lumps people like me, who don't care to join this fight, in with actual bullies. We don't really care if bullies are bullies of minorities or b…
I'm not sure if my writing was unclear, but I said "Anyone who preaches the ideology of hate has no business here."
That's who my screed was against. Those who use their influence to promote hate.
I was very specific in not saying "everyone needs to agree with me" or "if you're not with me you're against me". If you took that away from my writing, I can only apologise.
I didn't mention people like you.
I said, "That's why it baffles me that some prominent technologists embrace hateful ideologies."
If you fall into that category, then, yes, I do hope you feel unwelcome.
If you don't, then I am not sure which paragraph you think applies to you.