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

What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

meghanboilard.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 416 posts

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#251

Post by NDizzle »

_gabe_ wrote: post #103
fabian2k wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plain old racism/xenophobia and sexism was very common and still is to some extent, though it is not as socially acceptable as it used to be. So I find it odd to only consider anti-white bias you encountered while ignoring any discrimination in the other direction. I strongly doubt it does not exist. There is certainly stuff under the diversity banner, especially when done primarily with PR/image concerns that reason…

Quoted post unavailable.

"In other words, people who are racist against white people just have an anti-white bias. People that are racist against black people are actual racists."

This is such an insane statement I don't even know how to reply on a site like HN. Do you personally believe this, or are you just pasting what the (recently modified, I'm sure) current definition of "racism" is?

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#252

Post by namdnay »

romwell wrote: post #91
namdnay wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> being forced to profess beliefs you don't hold I don't understand what beliefs you're referring to? I thought they were asking people to promote diversity, what "belief" is there in that?

"Belief" that there's something wrong with the fact that you might spend your entire career in academia and never see a Black mathematics professor who was born and educated in the US. It's a very radical concept for many people, including Scott Adams.

that's just basic human decency, no? are we now to respect someone who believes it's completely normal not to see any black professors in a country that's 15% balck?

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#253

Post by jacquesm »

swalls wrote: post #230
NeonVice wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny how you criticize someone who pokes fun of people who fall into their own version of reality (and a giant corporate structure who encourages everyone to fall in line) as the one who is sinking into his own version of reality.

His actions are definitely of someone who is strongly connected to reality. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Scott_Adams (Of particular note: the "Predictions from a stable genius" where he goes truly off the deep end.)

Some of those quotes...

"But if you take away my access to hugging, I will probably start killing, just to feel something"

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#254

Post by jacquesm »

the_doctah wrote: post #248
jacquesm wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that would not be a rephrasing of my comment. But you probably already knew that.

Then your reality is different from mine. Do you see how that works?

No. Look, you can go around and try to persuade people that you are very clever but all you are doing is making yourself look silly. Maybe give it a rest?

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#255

Post by jacquesm »

danaris wrote: post #206
jacquesm wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have a pretty weird political case here in NL around a guy called Thierry Baudet who is clearly unhinged but still gets voted into parliament. Apparently there is a segment of the population that responds sympathetically to things that make no sense at all. They're not even trying to make sense or connect to reality, they just keep repeating all kinds of nonsense and whatever results in a response gets promoted fu…

> They're not even trying to make sense or connect to reality, they just keep repeating all kinds of nonsense and whatever results in a response gets promoted further. You just described Trump's campaign strategy to a T.

That's probably where Baudet got his ideas.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#256

Post by AinderS »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #119
AinderS wrote: post #4

Simple. Workplace complaints and management priorities have changed, and Dilbert followed. When Dilbert started, the government wasn't yet training employees how to "interrupt whiteness" [1], or Coca-Cola how to "be less white" [2], or Cigna simply forbidding hiring whites [3], nor did academia require mandatory diversity pledges for new hires and promotions [4]. Dilbert is doing what we are told art is supposed to d…

I want to call out your sources. City Journal is a propaganda outlet (George Soros conspiracy takes should not lead your top stories if you want credibility), The Washington Examiner is also openly biased and prints bullshit, and the story you mentioned has two unproven, unattributed, anecdotes. Newsweek... is Newsweek. The WSJ opinion section is a bad place to look for unbiased facts, as would be the NYT opinion sec…

Here is more information on the City Journal story, which is attributed to public record requests: https://legalinsurrection.com/2020/07/seattle-trains-white-e...

They shared these public record documents with Fox News, which I'm sure you dislike, but they nonetheless count as independent confirmation: https://www.foxnews.com/us/seattle-chop-segregated-training-...

News sources you like seem simply unmotivated to check this story.

The Coca-Cola story was confirmed by Snopes (read Coca-Cola's statements carefully - they never claim the slides were not shown as part of training, though they make every effort to imply it): https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/coca-cola-training-less-wh...

I cannot find a good secondary source on the Cigna story, though the alleged facts are an entirely predictable result of diversity hiring goals.

The WSJ Opinion story is confirmed by Berkeley's own report (https://ofew.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/life_sciences_...). The opinion story itself was written by Professor Abigail Thompson, an American Mathematical Society vice-president, and in her open letter (https://www.ams.org/journals/notices/201911/rnoti-p1778.pdf) she links directly to the requirements on Berkeley's own website: https://ofew.berkeley.edu/recruitment/contributions-diversit...

But isn't it convenient how no "trustworthy" media bothered to report any of these stories, or even any similar stories? Shall we also call them out for giving us such a slanted view of the world?

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#257

Post by leephillips »

Rand4ObvReasons wrote: post #231
ravenstine wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really makes me wonder what the common experience is for others not just in tech but Corporate America in general. I myself have run into anti-white and anti-male phenomena, unconscious bias pseudoscience training, diversity pledges, and so on, as have now others in my peer group. Dilbert's commentary has so far been entirely appropriate based on my experience, hence it's puzzling to me when people think there's s…

I work at FANG. My manager had director level approval to hold out job openings to women only. They same manager complained that they were sick of “men and Asian women” making up the team. They asked me for resumes but said they only wanted non-male, non-white or LGBTQ resumes. They were recognized as a diversity champion in the company.

If this is in the U.S., surely this is a violation of federal law. And if you complied you are an accomplice. I would document everything and report it to the feds promptly, to cover your ass.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#258

Post by objectivetruth »

the_doctah wrote: post #148
muglug wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh I think you’re wrong about Hollywood: the big-name actors generally don’t spend their time talking politics. Most big actors understand that the more they talk politics, the less bankable they are, and the dollar wins out most of the time.

Are we talking about the same Hollywood? This is sheer denial.

No post body was provided.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#259

Post by ravenstine »

jrockway wrote: post #132
ravenstine wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really makes me wonder what the common experience is for others not just in tech but Corporate America in general. I myself have run into anti-white and anti-male phenomena, unconscious bias pseudoscience training, diversity pledges, and so on, as have now others in my peer group. Dilbert's commentary has so far been entirely appropriate based on my experience, hence it's puzzling to me when people think there's s…

I've taken unconscious bias training. I thought it was very good. I remember catching myself in some meeting talking over a quiet woman who had probably been wanting to talk for quite a while. My brain remembered the training, I shut up, and let her participate in the meeting as an equal. Without the training, I would probably be silently making people miserable. Now I don't do that, as much. You use the word "pseudo…

> You use the word "pseudoscience" to describe the training, so it's unlikely that you're receptive to this anecdote

Au contraire... I wish I had time to rebut this but I've got some interviews slated for the next 3 hours. I appreciate your perspective, though.

I guess the only argument I can come up with of at the short moment I have left is that similar arguments are made about religion in general, even ones that the mainstream would consider to be "cults." This doesn't actually debate the point you made about my pseudoscience claim, but what I'm saying is that I might agree with you in that sense you were describing regardless of whether unconscious bias training is scientifically valid or not. (although I think there are other problems with it even if some good can come of it)

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#260

Post by hanifc »

jacobolus wrote: post #208
cat_plus_plus wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was considerate of you to do that, on the other hand adults also need to learn to be assertive to succeed in social aspects of work. If you were cutting her off or not paying attention to a raised hand, sure try to change that. But otherwise you are not doing her any favors for her long term career growth, where she will have to participate in meetings with confident, knowledgeable and busy people focused on work…

“Other people in the world are inconsiderate assholes, therefore I should be an inconsiderate asshole to help my coworkers prepare for the inevitable. And if they can’t handle it, too bad.” By the same token do you cheat at every game with your children to teach them the cold truth about society?

This is a very uncharitable and needlessly aggressive take.
Post reply on HN