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

Boycott IETF 127

boycott-ietf127.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 412 posts

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#351

Post by ben_w »

user3939382 wrote: post #346
dragonwriter wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only problem with the rock solid consensus on this forum is that pesky landslide victory. A 1.47% margin — the third narrowest since 1972, the two narrower both being negative margin wins, including Trump's first — is not a “landslide”.

He won every single swing state. Under his leadership his party got the house and the senate. You’re in denial picking an arbitrary metric that doesn’t reflect how elections are won.

While it indeed "doesn’t reflect how elections are won", that is only relevant to the fact that Trump lawfully occupies the position of President. It matters very little to issues related to e.g. "public support" (which can change dramatically even with larger margins) or, pertinently in this case, "are the members of this group at risk if they attend this event in the USA?"

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#352

Post by Kim_Bruning »

no_time wrote: post #314
Freak_NL wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that mean you actually approve of banning something like a Pride event? 'Gender ideology' as a term is awfully vague and not really a thing outside of extreme-right politics. For some this appears to even include homosexuality and expressions of a non-binary gender identity, in addition to acknowledging the concept of gender dysphoria and transgenderism. The way the right-wing Hungarian political parties are usi…

I'm personally not in favor of pride but I don't feel THAT strongly about it to be in favor of banning it either. This is how I imagine most of the country feels. What I was getting at with my first comment is that if our opposition fully owns up to being pro-gender that would torpedo their chance of defeating FIDESZ (which I think is ultimately more important than anything else in country level politics). >'Gender i…

> I, and most people I know just flat out don't believe that you can transition into being a woman as a man or vice versa.

I think I see where you're coming from. To be fair, I don't think many people actually believe in a magic fairy who turns men into women or vice versa.

But : In the playground, have you never looked at some kid at a distance, squinted, and gone 'I wonder if they're a girl or a boy, it's hard to tell'?

I know I've had that experience myself back in the '80s, before there was this much debate.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#353

Post by [deleted] »

no_time wrote: post #314
Freak_NL wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that mean you actually approve of banning something like a Pride event? 'Gender ideology' as a term is awfully vague and not really a thing outside of extreme-right politics. For some this appears to even include homosexuality and expressions of a non-binary gender identity, in addition to acknowledging the concept of gender dysphoria and transgenderism. The way the right-wing Hungarian political parties are usi…

I'm personally not in favor of pride but I don't feel THAT strongly about it to be in favor of banning it either. This is how I imagine most of the country feels. What I was getting at with my first comment is that if our opposition fully owns up to being pro-gender that would torpedo their chance of defeating FIDESZ (which I think is ultimately more important than anything else in country level politics). >'Gender i…

[deleted]

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#354

Post by cmurf »

leftcenterright wrote: post #230
oefrha wrote: post #7

Reminds me of [1] from 2013, and [2][3] from 2017. This is not new at all, just affecting more people, and more importantly, more Western people now. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/05/us-scientist... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14643467 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24369233 Clarification: the “not new” part is foreign attendees not being able to attend conferences in the U.S…

Being detained is way worse than being denied entry. > I was then placed in a real jail unit: two levels of cells surrounding a common area, just like in the movies. I was put in a tiny cell alone with a bunk bed and a toilet. > The best part: there were blankets. After three days without one, I wrapped myself in mine and finally felt some comfort. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/19/canadian-det... How i…

People aren't blind to the abuse. They want plausible deniability, permitting them to opt out of the duty and responsibility attached to citizenship. Therefore the metaphor is flawed: blind suggests an inability. People are capable of understanding what's happening, and are choosing to be a spectator, and not a citizen.

What are they waiting for? To see if they will come out ahead. It's classic rebel's dilemma.

Eventually the truth will catch up to us all. We'll undeniably realize this is a tyrannical movement that intends to replace the Constitutional order without the consent of the governed.

In no universe is the election of a dictator equivalent to 3/4 of the state legislatures ratifying an amendment to the Constitution.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#355

Post by dragonwriter »

user3939382 wrote: post #346
dragonwriter wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only problem with the rock solid consensus on this forum is that pesky landslide victory. A 1.47% margin — the third narrowest since 1972, the two narrower both being negative margin wins, including Trump's first — is not a “landslide”.

He won every single swing state. Under his leadership his party got the house and the senate. You’re in denial picking an arbitrary metric that doesn’t reflect how elections are won.

It was neither a popular nor an electoral landslide (it was a below-average electoral margin for a US presidential election, the 17th narrowest of 60 elections).

Yes, the party won a trifecta, but that's a completely separate thing from a landslide.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#356

Post by ifyoubuildit »

eqvinox wrote: post #350
fastball wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you can't put words in his mouth. He said Adderall, not ADHD. Yes he said SSRIs, but SSRIs are not for ADHD, so that has no bearing on whether or not he said "people with ADHD should be sent to camps", which he just... did not say. This shouldn't need to be stated, but I personally think RFK Jr. is a nutter. That doesn't mean you can stick words in his mouth or imply things he didn't actually say. Be better than…

That's all nice and well, but he also did say "psychiatric drugs", as if those were somehow generally bad and appropriate to reference in the same breath as illegal drugs. Maybe, had he not said that bit as well, I'd agree with you. He could be talking about Adderall purely in a sense of misuse. But he included psychiatric drugs, and that (and the SSRIs) makes his statement ambiguous enough that I'm comfortable inter…

I think you and plenty of other people on this thread are missing the point. As I understand it, it's not "round up people with certain conditions and stick them in camps" (is this not obvious?)

It's to provide people a path for getting off of all manner of drugs that are difficult to get off of. That could be heroin, or it could be Ritalin or some SSRI. It's basically socialized rehab based on some model that RFK seems to favor.

From what I've read (and seen in friends and family), the system is really good at getting people on pharmaceuticals. It doesn't seem to give much of a shit about helping them get off when they choose to do so.

I'm not sure why, but there seems to be a focus on misuse or abuse. Someone could have used the drugs exactly as directed and now doesn't want to use them anymore, and is running into an inability to do so on their own.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#357

Post by andy-p »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #320
andy-p wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AllSides correctly lists The Guardian as 'Left'. By adding 'far' to your characterization I can only assume you wish to advertise your own biases and / or denigrate the publication. It is a reputable newspaper with a long history of journalism awards - an appropriate example being this: https://www.theguardian.com/gnm-press-office/2023/jun/23/gua...

Left on all sides is far left. It’s as left as their categorization goes. Unless you also agree that breitbart is not far right just because it is classified as right.

I do agree. AllSides does not reference 'far' on any of their ratings [1] and I see no value in introducing it as a pejorative term.

[1] https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/ratings

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#358

Post by q3k »

_2d30 wrote: post #335
q3k wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The inefficiency of American institutions is nearly limitless. Don’t put too much stock in the glacial pace of our bureaucracy as being malicious when it happens everywhere else out of broad incompetence. The purpose of a system is what it does.

This is one of the dumbest things people say constantly. Remember this the next time you ship a bug! You built a system whose purpose was to have that bug in it.

If my system regularly ships bugs, then yes, it's purpose is apparently to regularly ship bugs. If my system ships rarely bugs, then yes, it's purpose is apparently to rarely ship bugs.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#359

Post by _2d30 »

q3k wrote: post #358
_2d30 wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of the dumbest things people say constantly. Remember this the next time you ship a bug! You built a system whose purpose was to have that bug in it.

If my system regularly ships bugs, then yes, it's purpose is apparently to regularly ship bugs. If my system ships rarely bugs, then yes, it's purpose is apparently to rarely ship bugs.

> If my system regularly ships bugs, then yes, it's purpose is apparently to regularly ship bugs. If my system ships rarely bugs, then yes, it's purpose is apparently to rarely ship bug

The purpose of Linux is to ship bugs: https://www.cvedetails.com/product/47/Linux-Linux-Kernel.htm...

Genius stuff here. Crazy how many people use an operating system whose literal purpose according to you is to ship bugs.

Re: Boycott IETF 127

#360

Post by dang »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #328
Jolter wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"compensatory actions", is that how you refer to Trump's executive order regarding gender identity? As if it was "provoked" by something? Do you know there is a word for someone who is "provoked" by others gaining access to basic human rights?

[flagged]

Since you've continued to use HN primarily for ideological battle after we asked you repeatedly to stop, I've banned the account.

We don't care what ideology you favor but we do care about accounts repeatedly abusing HN and ignoring moderation requests.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Post reply on HN