411–420 of 437 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because diversity in the tech world isn't real. Just read about Brendan Eich. He got fired because he had the incorrect opinion. In my world, that is the complete opposite of diversity.
Brendan Eich worked against equal rights. Don’t you know Karl Popper’s formulation - a tolerant world cannot tolerate intolerance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mozilla is not a democracy. You donate towards their mission and you are probably not informed enough about the back-stage politics of their foundation. I like Pocket because it provides features I don’t find in other browsers. I would happily pay for it especially knowing that this is the money that may also be used for the development of the browser engine. It’s like donating to Wikipedia, but only donating toward…
Quite from the top down your comment, but okay. > Mozilla is not a democracy. Obviously not, no. But as a user and a society we can still democratically decide how to handle companies and how they do business. And we can express our opinions just like I did and some people seem to have the same opinion, that's nice. > You donate towards their mission and you are probably not informed enough about the back-stage polit…
So would you think it’s a good idea to allow people to only donate to certain parts of the stuff they do, then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps OP feels that the specific strategy Mozilla employee for helping diversity is ineffective; in the same manner that refusing to donate to ineffective anti-poverty charities, is not the same as supporting poverty. Edit: rather than trying to read OP's mind or surmise what they may be thinking, I'll give my own experience on this. I have seen companies spend money on diversity as lip-service, or targeting groups…
I agree with this. It might not be that he feels contemptuously about eliminating discrimination but rather than that he's unhappy with the way diversity campaigns are run. Sometimes it seems to me that whereas in the past we had Churches in a privileged position, telling us how to behave, that we now have NGOs doing the same thing. For example there was just last week a report in the UK about how employees in oxfam…
I mean, the government makes the laws, that's ultimately "how to behave." But the Church of England hasn't been meting out judicial punishments to non-churchmembers lately.
You're talking about social codes and social judgment.
I'm really curious what makes you think that Oxfam or any other NGO is telling you "how to behave" in any way comparable to a theocracy of a few hundred years ago.
Lots of parts of society applaud diversity and the elimination of discrimination. If you disagree and feel you're being "told how to behave," that's not the Church or the Government or some NGO bogeyman... that's social pressure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never wrote anything about being oppressed lol. I never even mentioned work, just community. A lot of open source projects utilize the same rules. If you so much as make a single dongle joke, you may be excluded. I always say whatever I believe, even if I am at work. If the company would fire me over a joke then fine I wouldn't want to work there anyway. So far I haven't met any issues on that front. Also I don't w…
> Obviously people here don't value or respect my opinion for example. While it may seem like that, people aren't valuing your opinion that involves beliefs or views that can inherinitly make groups of people feel discriminated against. A person that identifies as non-binary or gender-fluid would not feel comfortable being around your opinions. Everyone is entitled to their opinions and beliefs, but when you say what…
It's like a sect that people just seems to buy into for some reason. It doesn't make any sense, it doesn't have any scientific validity what so ever and still that is a touchy subject but calling out other silly stuff people believe aren't? Do you also believe in a flat earth perhaps? If not, why not?
I have a hard time living that hypocrisy, dislike me or not. I do not care if everyone doesn't like me as I expect everyone not to. It is ok if you have another opinion but it is pretty typical since intolerant people usually are like that, can't accept that other people do not share their worldviews. Also I actually am pretty good at making jokes, so it doesn't seem that way to me.
Maybe people like you just lack a sense of humor?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People should be held accountable for such views Well, in my country (and I think in the entire EU) what you want is very illegal and is taken very seriously. I think you choose a very fitting username. ;)
Hate speech is illegal in the EU. They haven't taken such opinions lightly when announced publicly. Edit: btw with held accountable I don't mean that is should be illegal. I meant that people have a right to react to "injustice"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He funded such a campaign, yes. With his private money on his free time. That is not discrimination. He even wrote sorry for causing hurt and pledged to promote equality at Mozilla. Your comment is a prime example of what's wrong with the tech industry in my opinion.
"private money" ... his salary, paid in small part by my donation to Mozilla, going to a cause that I definitely don't support. Seems we are full circle.
Because that is just, right? You supported the same thing as Brendan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't explicitly choosing based on their race also making the same assumptions? That there aren't enough minority candidates, and thus they need to explicitly force more of them in? After all, why would there be any bias if selections were completely merit based (that is, blind to race and sex) unless the pools being drawn from were themselves biased? The best way to get around biases in the hiring process obviously…
And the solution to not having enough qualified minority candidates is to increase their level of qualification.
Then it asked if I wanted to trust them. I answered yes, repeatedly, yet the error message reappeared over and over again. (really bad). I gave up.
A little more competence and I'm on board.
Those who want a world where Firefox has a higher market share and mind share, please consider doing the following: 1. Evangelize Firefox to people you know any chance you get and show them all the reasons why its better than Chrome (focus on privacy as an important point). Show them how great browsing can be with a few key extensions (like uBlock Origin, Containers, Privacy Possum, etc.). This does not imply that Mo…
I've given up trying to convince people of taking privacy serious. It's usually just the "but I've got nothing to hide" debate that goes nowhere. Even half of my tech friends still use chrome, got Alexa at home and whatnot. So instead with my non-techsavvy friends I usually just set up Firefox with ublock and tell them to give it a try. You don't have to mention ublock is available on chrome too, right?
Another counter is what happened with the "anonymized" NYC data set. People discovered that combining two separate data sets can be used to reconstruct the information that was censored.
I have nothing to hide is a false statement that never made sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you feel their is a difference between asking people what they want in a browser and telling people how they should live their personal lives? Because I think that is a core distinction many of the commenters are concerned about here.
Not really, Mozilla tells you to use its browser. So does every product. Why is that an issue? You're telling me you want to live a life where people aren't telling you how you should live? Just by the fact of the organization asking the people for feedback is an invitation for people to tell them what to do. If you don't want people telling you what to do, Hacker News ain't a great place to be.