What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code? • Hacker News Board

Re: What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code?

#31

Post by TulliusCicero » Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 2:06 PM UTC

pytester wrote: post #8

TulliusCicero wrote: post #2

> We need to applaud companies like Slack, but know that the nitty-gritty of human services—housing, health care, social support—which lots of nonprofits and public institutions are working on, the private sector has largely turned away from.” I mean, yeah? Those things sound like they’re precisely the kind of stuff that’s the domain of non-profits and the government. Why would we expect Slack or other tech companies…

>Why would we expect Slack or other tech companies to be helping random people with housing or social support? Yet they expect congratulations. Slack's selfish commercial interest is entirely aligned with hiring cheap developers, but, they put out a press release and the atlantic magazine took it up. I worked with a another charity that did a similar thing (not prisoners, but the underprivileged) and one of the compa…

They're playing the PR game and winning. I find it hard to blame them for that. Especially since they're not lying or doing anything explicitly harmful.

Re: What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code?

#32

Post by DaiPlusPlus » Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 2:07 PM UTC

traderjane wrote: post #18

jtbayly wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> convince people to either not vote - or to vote against their personal best interests. I’ve seen this on HN several times, and it always cracks me up. The condescension isn't dripping. It’s running in torrents. You think the reason they won’t vote the way you want is because they don’t know what’s good for themselves. You might want to consider an alternate: they don’t want someone like you deciding what’s good for…

Is DaiPlusPlus is forcing things down people's throats? Is DaiPlusPlus' condescension running in torrents? Are you being condescending? If I say that consumers are being tricked by ad companies, am I being condescending? How dare I make judgments on so many people? And when American Christians say that Jesus Christ is the only true way and that Islam is a false path, and that all other ways are false pathways which l…

To be fair to jtbayly - I do agree I came across as presumptuous and paternalistic to state people are voting against their personal best interests.

While I cannot, at all, claim to know what's in someone's interests, let alone their best interests - it is possible to reasonably determine when someone is voting _against_ their interests - especially when there is evidence of emotional manipulation or misrepresentation of the facts. (Though I assume we won't enter into a "debate" over specific facts here on HN).

The best example are the rural, conservative, voters in states that didn't expand Medicaid, who voted for representatives who campaigned against the ACA - and who who various reasons (unemployment, hard luck, etc) are now left without any feasible options for healthcare coverage: it's demonstrable that they did not vote in their rational best interests, even the most staunch Libertarian can agree with that statement (though the Libertarian might argue it was still their free choice to make and that should be respected - which I can agree with because at least they're being honest about it).

Re: What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code?

#33

Post by DaiPlusPlus » Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 2:08 PM UTC

abnry wrote: post #30

traderjane wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is DaiPlusPlus is forcing things down people's throats? Is DaiPlusPlus' condescension running in torrents? Are you being condescending? If I say that consumers are being tricked by ad companies, am I being condescending? How dare I make judgments on so many people? And when American Christians say that Jesus Christ is the only true way and that Islam is a false path, and that all other ways are false pathways which l…

You are missing the point. If I say, "I support X" and you say, "I support not X," that's just a disagreement. If I say, "I support" and you say, "I support not X, and if you weren't so blind you'd think that too," that's being condescending because you are assuming that someone (a) has fundamentally the same values than you but is (b) too stupid to see it. The reality is that people can value something different tha…

> The reality is that people can value something different than you (less government intervention, less restrictions on speech, lower taxes)

Why do you assume we don't value those things? Isn't that _you_ being condescending now?

Re: What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code?

#34

Post by TulliusCicero » Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 2:08 PM UTC

AlexanderDhoore wrote: post #4

TulliusCicero wrote: post #2

> We need to applaud companies like Slack, but know that the nitty-gritty of human services—housing, health care, social support—which lots of nonprofits and public institutions are working on, the private sector has largely turned away from.” I mean, yeah? Those things sound like they’re precisely the kind of stuff that’s the domain of non-profits and the government. Why would we expect Slack or other tech companies…

You live in Munich. You think like a European. Left or right on the political spectrum, doesn't matter. What you said is generally accepted as "how it works" in Europe. Not so much in other places.

I'm from the states, grew up Mormon, and have lived in Alabama and Utah, in addition to other regions. I'm very aware of how the American mindset works, thanks.

Re: What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code?

#35

Post by qmmmur » Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 2:10 PM UTC

lizardking wrote: post #19

jtbayly wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> convince people to either not vote - or to vote against their personal best interests. I’ve seen this on HN several times, and it always cracks me up. The condescension isn't dripping. It’s running in torrents. You think the reason they won’t vote the way you want is because they don’t know what’s good for themselves. You might want to consider an alternate: they don’t want someone like you deciding what’s good for…

The American political left would gain immensely and lose exactly nothing by being less condescending. The first line of argument they should abandon is telling people they are voting against their own interests. It’s remarkably insulting, and arrogantly presupposes you know know better what another person’s interests are.

You don't have to guess what a lot of people's interests are. They will tell you. In my constituency people were annoyed with our sitting member who is Labor because the train prises increased. They want lower train fares so they voted conservative. So yes, it is actually easy in some cases to say someone voted against their interest.

Re: What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code?

#36

Post by XorNot » Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 2:12 PM UTC

lizardking wrote: post #19

jtbayly wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> convince people to either not vote - or to vote against their personal best interests. I’ve seen this on HN several times, and it always cracks me up. The condescension isn't dripping. It’s running in torrents. You think the reason they won’t vote the way you want is because they don’t know what’s good for themselves. You might want to consider an alternate: they don’t want someone like you deciding what’s good for…

The American political left would gain immensely and lose exactly nothing by being less condescending. The first line of argument they should abandon is telling people they are voting against their own interests. It’s remarkably insulting, and arrogantly presupposes you know know better what another person’s interests are.

Would that change a single thing about the way you vote if they did?

Re: What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code?

#37

Post by DaiPlusPlus » Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 2:13 PM UTC

burntoutfire wrote: post #24

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK has just had an election where many people voted for the party which has been in power for nearly ten years and been an utter disaster. Because they want change. Condescension has nothing to do with it. It's empirically observable that a proportion of the electorate doesn't vote in its own best interests. It's also empirically observable there's an entire industry of media outlets, think-tanks, journalists, bl…

Isn't the majority of the UK media supporting the party that lost?

There was a lot of negativity around Corbyn in the newspapers that tend to flip-flop - only the definite left-leaning papers (The Guardian, etc) maintain their support for Labour and the LibDems.

My observation of the BBC's coverage was that while they at least didn't put a positive spin on the Tories, it felt like they were doubling-down on anti-Labour and anti-LibDem negativity. I still don't believe the BBC is in any way biased towards any particular political party, but I feel there's a feedback-loop somewhere in the media system. Once the meme "Corbyn is unelectable" becomes a meme and people don't stop to question it - or it becomes self-referential ("Corbyn is unelectable because the people believe he's unelectable") then we have a problem.

(Disclaimer: I would not actually vote for Corbyn myself - just saying).

Re: What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code?

#38

Post by TulliusCicero » Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 2:16 PM UTC

syshum wrote: post #21

TulliusCicero wrote: post #2

> We need to applaud companies like Slack, but know that the nitty-gritty of human services—housing, health care, social support—which lots of nonprofits and public institutions are working on, the private sector has largely turned away from.” I mean, yeah? Those things sound like they’re precisely the kind of stuff that’s the domain of non-profits and the government. Why would we expect Slack or other tech companies…

>>You can blame the government, I dont blame government, as it is not and should not be the governments role to do this. >Those things sound like they’re precisely the kind of stuff that’s the domain of non-profits and the government. Non-Profits yes, government no Government sole and only job should be to preserve and protect the rights of citizens. Expanding government beyond this role has always lead to disaster a…

Profit motive isn't bad. It just doesn't interface well with charity.

Re: What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code?

#39

Post by abnry » Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 2:16 PM UTC

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #33

abnry wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are missing the point. If I say, "I support X" and you say, "I support not X," that's just a disagreement. If I say, "I support" and you say, "I support not X, and if you weren't so blind you'd think that too," that's being condescending because you are assuming that someone (a) has fundamentally the same values than you but is (b) too stupid to see it. The reality is that people can value something different tha…

> The reality is that people can value something different than you (less government intervention, less restrictions on speech, lower taxes) Why do you assume we don't value those things? Isn't that _you_ being condescending now?

Why do you use the word "we"? I wasn't directing my comment to you.

An assumption isn't necessarily condescending. I assumed I was talking to someone on the left side of politics and was giving examples for the sake of an argument. If those examples do not in fact work then I can just as well pick other ones.

Re: What Happens After Prisoners Learn to Code?

#40

Post by harimau777 » Sat, Dec 14, 2019, 2:17 PM UTC

lizardking wrote: post #19

jtbayly wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> convince people to either not vote - or to vote against their personal best interests. I’ve seen this on HN several times, and it always cracks me up. The condescension isn't dripping. It’s running in torrents. You think the reason they won’t vote the way you want is because they don’t know what’s good for themselves. You might want to consider an alternate: they don’t want someone like you deciding what’s good for…

The American political left would gain immensely and lose exactly nothing by being less condescending. The first line of argument they should abandon is telling people they are voting against their own interests. It’s remarkably insulting, and arrogantly presupposes you know know better what another person’s interests are.

I'm not sure that a better solution is possible in America's current political climate. As I see it there are basically three approaches that a progressive could take in a policy debate:

- Persuasion: I think that you are mistaken as to what is in your best interest, here's why my approach would benefit you more.

- Negotiation: Here's how we can work together to find a solution that meets both of our interests.

- Zero Sum: I recognize that this isn't in your best interest but I don't care because its in my interest.

Due to the power of Fox News and the Republican party's current willingness to ignore facts, I don't think persuasion is possible.

Similarly, the strategy that Fox News and the Republican party have taken of promoting polarization, demonizing the other side, using straw-man arguments, etc.[1] Makes it impossible to have the kind of nuanced debate and compromise that would be necessary for a negotiated solution.

Therefore, it seems like all that is left is a zero sum solution. If the other side won't listen or negotiate then the only option remaining is to implement our policies whether they like them or not.

I'm not saying that's an ideal situation, but it seems to me that its the reality that we find ourselves in.

[1] To be fair, I think that progressives do this to a worrying extent as well. However, I single out the Republican party due to the degree to which they have focused on this strategy and because the fact that many Republicans get all of their news from Fox makes the strategy almost unassailable.