I voted for Trump and I'll vote for him again. Hi HN!
why?
He Makes America Great Again
Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley
191–200 of 307 posts
Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think part of the issue is the tactics. The original post was pointing out that the way that bad ideas are being defeated is through force, not through reason. If the law says "Be happy or else" everyone is "happy". The problem being pointed out is that SV is becoming a place where you must believe the right things or else. The or else part is what makes it McCarthyistic.
It's hard for me to get worked up over this when the injustices suffered by those who are now being heard were many times worse.
Just to clarify, it is okay to treat people poorly because people were treated worse in the past?
Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re confusing the state with a private actor. Yes, private actors have a lot of power in this world, but that’s not what the law is about. The law is about the government, not private actors. If you don’t allow businesses to fire people, then you’re compelling speech. Think about it. Say you’re a restaurant and you have a waiter that habitually refers to guests with a constant stream of expitives that would make a…
I would say it is not about private vs government, it is a question of legal Vs illegal. IANAL, If my recollection is correct, all speech, except those containing immediate/imminent threat/ incitement of violence is legal. That is the protection that Constitution affords the citizens. If companies are placing further restrictions on what can be said at the threat of people loosing their jobs, then they are not afford…
I’m really sympathetic to this idea, but it’s not a really tenable. How does this solve the restaurant problem? It doesn’t. The only real solution is to have a strong government provided safety net. The government is the only counter to strong private actors.
Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley
#194It's interesting that lists of the verboten keep rising to the top of Hacker News. If this keeps happening, it would only be rational to believe these things aren't verboten and their authors (whose work keeps rising to the top of link aggregators like this) aren't writing in good faith that they were. In fact, isn't it - to a degree - virtue signaling to write that one thinks it's such a shame that these verboten th…
... it has since been modded off of the front page.
Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley
#195If a white male (the google guy) can get fired for being open about his views, imagine how tough it can be for minorities to be open about their views! It’s like everyone knows they are in an echo chamber but not daring to be the first one to speak up.
That entirely depends on the arena in which one finds oneself. In far-left circles women and minorities tend to be given carte blanche, while in far-right circles older white men receive similar treatment. It is a spectrum of acceptable norms based on implicit values surrounding group identities. e.g. if a white man offers a controversial opinion in a left-leaning arena, he is more likely to be dismissed.
Agreed.
As a brown guy (I think right of Center) my views tend to piss off the far right/left equally. And I think there are many like me who are just keeping their mouth shut listening to garbage from both the far ends.
Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wouldn’t it be far more effective (and safe) to defeat bad ideas with evidence and reason?
Utilitarianism will let you justify anything if you frame it right, including white supremacy, fascism, etc. This isn't something evidence and reason alone can handle. Ethically and morally, as a society, we have to choose what behavior is okay and what isn't. What's happening right now is that we're verbalizing the changing of those definitions to include things like "'Grab them by the pussy' and other transparent a…
What many are having an issue with is that we see some agendas pushed using techniques from totalitarian regimes.
When two sides have different solutions to a problem or opinions, but one side feel morally justified to seek the firing of the other and have the power to do so we are not talking about an abstract concept of moral theory anymore.
There is a reason why functional societies follow the rule of law instead of the rule of the mob.
Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is this related to the parent or OP?
There are some things you're not allowed to say.
You and the lawmakers opposed to that bill certainly seem 'allowed to say' whatever you want on that subject.
Let me be more clear: What does this have to do with 'What you can't say in Silicon Valley', or 'animosity towards Trump'?
Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley
#198Title could just as well be: Things you can't say on HN without being censored by an archaic down voting system.
Downvoting = groupthink enforcement
Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley
#199I can probably add a few more to this list: "Income inequality is not an actual problem" "The affordable care act was bad for America" "It would be beneficial if we got rid of all government guaranteed loans for university tuition" "People should be allowed to own automatic weapons"
Interesting. What's your thinking for #1, #2, and #4? (I'm asking genuinely).
Another I'll add from my list: "The social costs and spillover of disruption are not fairly priced today, representing a market failure; it's a problem akin to pollution in pre-regulation 19th century manufacturing."
The election of Trump and enthusiasm to "build a wall" to protect manufacturing jobs reflects a real pain felt by a large number (maybe the majority) of Americans who are scared about their future job prospects and inability to provide for their families; many tech companies today are making their problems worse. These externalities are being foisted on society and these workers, who are not involved in the disrupting technology itself, and the companies have no obligation to pay for this cost.
An assumption that disruption will "work itself out in the long run" isn't acceptable (nor is it necessarily true). I think it's like environmental pollution in the 70's, before we had the EPA to penalize the behavior. It's also accelerating, and could reach a tipping point that would put serious risks on our political system and social fabric.
Re: Stuff You Can't Say in Silicon Valley
#200I can probably add a few more to this list: "Income inequality is not an actual problem" "The affordable care act was bad for America" "It would be beneficial if we got rid of all government guaranteed loans for university tuition" "People should be allowed to own automatic weapons"
and more: "wikimedia has plenty of money" "Mozilla is institutionally focused on supporting left wing views exclusively" "all of the rich people who speak out against guns have bodyguards who carry guns. they basically don't want poor people owning guns" "fwd.us is against Trump's wall but Mark Zuckerberg wanted to buy a city block in Palo Alto to keep the masses out"
On your last one, there is also a funny story about his Hawaiian resort: https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/19/14327854/mark-zuckerberg-...