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

Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

degoes.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

#41

Post by humanrebar »

emkk wrote: post #36

We've had a week that went from a fascist AI bot that was taken down immediately to a real fascist who is being tolerated. This person thinks the "weak" should be enslaved by "strong", nonsensical and subjective categorizations where no doubt "strong" probably includes him and means people like him in this view. There is definetly a camp of developers (not outsiders) who have denigrated StrongLoops decision and prais…

Not sure I follow all that, but MLK's theology (and the Declaration of Independence) recognize people as being special creatures. And each person is given an inherent dignity by his or her Creator. In American culture, this means limiting someone's freedom of expression (legally) has to come after some due process involving proof of real harm. The same impulse applies to social conventions, though there isn't the same bright line between tolerance and censorship.

Anyway, AI twitter bots aren't people, so they don't get the same benefit of the doubt. The false equivalence here is that "person" applies to robots as easily as human beings.

Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

#42

Post by humanrebar »

sheepdestroyer wrote: post #37
thescribe wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contex wise: This is because some many US events now have codes of conduct that play into identity politics.

Religion is not part of your identity, it's at best an opinion that you are (potentially temporary) holding now. And this is wrong for CoCs to include religions, or political views, on the same level as identity defining traits like gender and race.

Many people feel like religion is more of a defining characteristic than politics, country of origin, marital status, and even ethnicity.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/22/1473694/-Ted-Cruz-I-...

Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

#43

Post by dllthomas »

smt88 wrote: post #19
dogecoinbase wrote: post #10

I believe that “good” can only, ever mean, “I like it,” and bad can only, ever mean, “I don’t like it.” Morality, in my view, is just how we try to objectify what are inherently subjective personal preferences. This is... a ridiculously oversimplified caricature of atheistic philosophy, presumably now posted (as the original post predates the current controversy[0]) to imply the obviously incorrect syllogism that if…

> a ridiculously oversimplified caricature of atheistic philosophy It seemed to me that the author was offering an explanation of amoral atheism, which he explicitly mentioned several times.

Wouldn't that apply just as well to an amoral theism?

Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

#44

Post by wtbob »

dominotw wrote: post #21
sanxiyn wrote: post #9

I applaud LambdaConf's decision, compared to Strange Loop which caved to bullying. Neoreaction is not a powerful movement. Attacking neoreaction is not punching up.

All their sponsors are pulling out, it remains to be seen if conf is still going to happen.

Sounds like the definition of bravery to me: doing the right thing even when it hurts one.

Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

#45

Post by wtbob »

pklausler wrote: post #16
lhnz wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this particular case it's the radical left that is irate, so yes. Also, in general the radical right (when this is used to refer to neoreaction) tends to just opine with long blog posts where they capitalise words like Tradition, Civilization and Enlightenment. They don't like to angrily point fingers as they feel this is unbecoming of gentlemen/women. (I'm being honest about their pretensions here.)

Attendees at Trump rallies are not exactly known for writing long blog posts, suggestively capitalized or not.

I don't think that attendees at Trump rallies really count as right wing, but rather as populist.

Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

#46

Post by tzs »

emkk wrote: post #36

We've had a week that went from a fascist AI bot that was taken down immediately to a real fascist who is being tolerated. This person thinks the "weak" should be enslaved by "strong", nonsensical and subjective categorizations where no doubt "strong" probably includes him and means people like him in this view. There is definetly a camp of developers (not outsiders) who have denigrated StrongLoops decision and prais…

> This person thinks the "weak" should be enslaved by "strong", nonsensical and subjective categorizations where no doubt "strong" probably includes him and means people like him in this view.

Citation needed. Based on this conversation in his recent AMA that does not seem like his position: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/4bxf6f/im_curtis_yarv...

He seems to believe that some groups are better (from the slaver's point of view) at being slaves than others are. Namely, when enslaved to do agricultural work those from agricultural societies are better slaves than those from hunter-gatherer societies.

That's quite different from saying that anyone should be enslaved.

Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

#47

Post by thescribe »

sheepdestroyer wrote: post #37
thescribe wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contex wise: This is because some many US events now have codes of conduct that play into identity politics.

Religion is not part of your identity, it's at best an opinion that you are (potentially temporary) holding now. And this is wrong for CoCs to include religions, or political views, on the same level as identity defining traits like gender and race.

I'd dare say for the majority of living earthlings religion is the sole defining part of their identity.

Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

#48

Post by tptacek »

tzs wrote: post #46
emkk wrote: post #36

We've had a week that went from a fascist AI bot that was taken down immediately to a real fascist who is being tolerated. This person thinks the "weak" should be enslaved by "strong", nonsensical and subjective categorizations where no doubt "strong" probably includes him and means people like him in this view. There is definetly a camp of developers (not outsiders) who have denigrated StrongLoops decision and prais…

> This person thinks the "weak" should be enslaved by "strong", nonsensical and subjective categorizations where no doubt "strong" probably includes him and means people like him in this view. Citation needed. Based on this conversation in his recent AMA that does not seem like his position: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/4bxf6f/im_curtis_yarv... He seems to believe that some groups are better (from the slave…

Careful. Yarvin takes pains to be cryptic about his beliefs in his writing on line, but people who have spent time with him in the real world report that he's much more up front about it in person.

The popular interpretation of Yarvin's UR posts is probably not incorrect.

Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

#49

Post by sheepdestroyer »

humanrebar wrote: post #42
sheepdestroyer wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Religion is not part of your identity, it's at best an opinion that you are (potentially temporary) holding now. And this is wrong for CoCs to include religions, or political views, on the same level as identity defining traits like gender and race.

Many people feel like religion is more of a defining characteristic than politics, country of origin, marital status, and even ethnicity. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/22/1473694/-Ted-Cruz-I-...

And that may be one of the big cultural difference between the US and my country. Here the generally shared idea is that people are citizens of the republic first, before anything else. Such a comment from a politician would elicit a terrible uproar.

That being said, anything can be part of your identity, you can define yourself as punk rock if you want. What I mean and thought you understood is the difference between what is intrinsically you and not. Yes of course, to many, religion is important like veganism can be. But it remain a mere choice to keep it that way.

Apostasy is always a possibility and that makes it different in a way that equating both kinds of identities is lessening the damages one sustains when attacked on a fundamental part of its person-hood. If your race is criticized, that's an attack on your humanity. If someone criticize your belief system : meh none is challenged otherwise than on a thought level.

Re: Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

#50

Post by sheepdestroyer »

thescribe wrote: post #47
sheepdestroyer wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Religion is not part of your identity, it's at best an opinion that you are (potentially temporary) holding now. And this is wrong for CoCs to include religions, or political views, on the same level as identity defining traits like gender and race.

I'd dare say for the majority of living earthlings religion is the sole defining part of their identity.

As spiritual being maybe but not as human being, that is technically wrong. Your race is intrinsically you and being derogatory to it is lessening you as a fellow human.

Since that even in the most fundamentalist country, the most devout person has technically the possibility to personally wake up and change his mind (apostasy), religion is fundamentally an other, lesser kind of identity. As being vegan.

Giving religions more respect than they deserve is wrong and extremely dangerous. See Salman Rushdy and Charly Hebdo to see what this kind of thinking leads to.

Post reply on HN