The Silicon Oligarchy • Hacker News Board

Re: The Silicon Oligarchy

#71

Post by 082349872349872 » Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 1:51 PM UTC

z9e wrote: post #69

pjc50 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there aren't very many white supremacists, where is all the racism coming from? > I don’t understand how people think there’s a white supremacist base that has a ton of power in this country. The police can shoot people dead, lie about the circumstances, and not even face trial or suspension? Have you missed all the protests and the wall to wall news coverage of the past few weeks?

> If there aren't very many white supremacists, where is all the racism coming from? Where is the ubiquitous racism being seen? I am in no way trying to be facetious, but we need to be accurate here. Only reason I ask is because I see racism being thrown around at people who aren't racist, and only because they disagree with a narrative. That word doesn't really mean anything anymore. I haven't missed it, I just don'…

There are people with LE background who have ideas for how to improve it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23429390

(my current theory as to why the US military is more enlightened than US police is (a) they normally operate in situations where they have to win hearts and minds, and (b) "up or out" gets rid of bad apples)

For what it's worth, I have colleagues who have gone through police academy. It's 2 years here, which may correlate with the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforc...

Re: The Silicon Oligarchy

#72

Post by hackissimo123 » Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 1:55 PM UTC

082349872349872 wrote: post #66

golergka wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be a bit out of context of American politics, so an honest question here: how a threat to looters, who actively commit a crime, without any reference to skin color, can be racist? Seeing how violent these riots can get, that phrase is exactly what I would love to hear from authorities as black business owner, for example.

If it's the same threat I'm thinking of, the phrase apparently has a history for americans, like "Лес рубят, щепки летят" might for russians (or maybe not? is the Stalin association a purely anglophone one?). "Racially charged" is a thing in the US. I read russia freed the serfs in 1861, does anyone beyond historians have an interest in cultural influences of serfdom now? The US military doctrine differs with you on…

It has no history for Americans. It's a completely obscure reference that no-one had heard of a month ago and Trump almost certainly didn't make intentionally. Anyone who pretends otherwise is either deliberately lying or deranged.

Re: The Silicon Oligarchy

#73

Post by 082349872349872 » Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 2:09 PM UTC

hackissimo123 wrote: post #72

082349872349872 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's the same threat I'm thinking of, the phrase apparently has a history for americans, like "Лес рубят, щепки летят" might for russians (or maybe not? is the Stalin association a purely anglophone one?). "Racially charged" is a thing in the US. I read russia freed the serfs in 1861, does anyone beyond historians have an interest in cultural influences of serfdom now? The US military doctrine differs with you on…

It has no history for Americans. It's a completely obscure reference that no-one had heard of a month ago and Trump almost certainly didn't make intentionally. Anyone who pretends otherwise is either deliberately lying or deranged.

these are what a web search gives me: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/52372056/walter-everett-head... or, for general sentiment: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/52393672/the-los-angeles-tim...

as well as cause for optimism: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/18/politics/peggy-wallace-ke... (about George "segregation forever" Wallace's daughter and grandson)

I know americans who truly believe it is a colour-blind country where everyone is middle-class. I hope they can make it so.

Re: The Silicon Oligarchy

#74

Post by hackissimo123 » Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 2:10 PM UTC

z9e wrote: post #63

nix0n wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The references to skin color are usually implicit (especially after his presidential term started), but they are always there. I can understand how a non-American might miss Trump's racist phrases, but he's pandering to a white supremacist base who are sure to see them. I don't have a specific link to reference, but the tactic he's using is often referred to as a "dog whistle".

Do we have an estimate as to how many white supremacists there are in the US? I’m genuinely curious, because the popular march in VA had what, a few hundred? I realize that may not be the entire population. There’s probably more anti-vaxxers than white supremacists at this point. I don’t understand how people think there’s a white supremacist base that has a ton of power in this country.

This blog post[1] tried to figure out a number back in 2016. (Warning: that's not the only thing the post discusses; avoid if you've already had too much culture war.)

To quote: "My guess is that the number of organized white supremacists in the country is in the very low five digits." It's just the thoughts of some random blogger, not an academic study, but he lays out his methodology in detail and it seems reasonable.

Of course that was four years ago, but the estimate seems consistent with the evidence from the 2017 Charlottesville rally, which only drew a few hundred attendees despite being the biggest, most prominent and well-publicised white supremacist rally in the USA for decades.

Of course this is only talking about active, open white supremacists, not the full gamut of racism. But I find it hard to believe that the number of Richard-Spencer-style racists in the USA is anything other than tiny - far too small to have any influence at the ballot box. And by the way, does anyone seriously think that there was ever any chance of these people voting for Hillary Clinton (or Joe Biden) in the first place?

To quote the same blog post:

> Dog whistling seems to be the theory that if you want to know what someone really believes, you have to throw away decades of consistent statements supporting the side of an issue that everyone else in the world supports, and instead pay attention only to one weird out-of-character non-statement which implies he supports a totally taboo position which is perhaps literally the most unpopular thing it is possible to think.

> And then you have to imagine some of the most brilliant rhetoricians and persuaders in the world are calculating that it’s worth risking exposure this taboo belief in order to win support from a tiny group with five-digit membership whose support nobody wants, by sending a secret message, which inevitably every single media outlet in the world instantly picks up on and makes the focus of all their coverage for the rest of the election.

[1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2016/11/16/you-are-still-crying-w...

Re: The Silicon Oligarchy

#75

Post by hackissimo123 » Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 2:13 PM UTC

swiley wrote: post #5

This is why it’s so important to avoid closed software and especially avoid software that depends on network services run by individual companies.

I agree, but how? Everyone I know uses WhatsApp. If I close my Facebook account I lose my only method of contacting a great deal of people who I used to know and don't want to lose touch with. How do I get off these platforms when no-one else will?

Re: The Silicon Oligarchy

#76

Post by hackissimo123 » Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 2:15 PM UTC

hackissimo123 wrote: post #57

golergka wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be a bit out of context of American politics, so an honest question here: how a threat to looters, who actively commit a crime, without any reference to skin color, can be racist? Seeing how violent these riots can get, that phrase is exactly what I would love to hear from authorities as black business owner, for example.

Trump used the the phrase "when the looting starts, the shooting starts" as part of a longer series of Tweets about the riots. The same phrase was also said at least once before, by an obscure racist 70 years ago whom no-one had heard of before the Tweet. Some have drawn the conclusion that Trump was in fact making a deliberate reference to this obscure racist.

Too late to edit: it was actually 53 years ago, not 70. My bad.

Re: The Silicon Oligarchy

#77

Post by hackissimo123 » Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 2:20 PM UTC

082349872349872 wrote: post #73

hackissimo123 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has no history for Americans. It's a completely obscure reference that no-one had heard of a month ago and Trump almost certainly didn't make intentionally. Anyone who pretends otherwise is either deliberately lying or deranged.

these are what a web search gives me: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/52372056/walter-everett-head... or, for general sentiment: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/52393672/the-los-angeles-tim... as well as cause for optimism: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/18/politics/peggy-wallace-ke... (about George "segregation forever" Wallace's daughter and grandson) I know americans who truly believe it is a colour-blind country…

I'm not denying that the phrase was uttered at least once by someone in the US at some point in the past. I refer you to my other post in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23573675

Re: The Silicon Oligarchy

#78

Post by golergka » Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 3:45 PM UTC

oakejp12 wrote: post #58

golergka wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be a bit out of context of American politics, so an honest question here: how a threat to looters, who actively commit a crime, without any reference to skin color, can be racist? Seeing how violent these riots can get, that phrase is exactly what I would love to hear from authorities as black business owner, for example.

> that phrase is exactly what I would love to hear from authorities as black business owner If you want your fellow neighbors gunned down, you should move to China! You'd absolutely love it there! You'd love to know their government murders their dissenters. I think you'd have a little trouble being a black business owner, but the pros outweigh the cons.

> your fellow neighbors

But that phrase wasn't referring to fellow neighbors. It was referring to looters.

I would absoltely want people who were threatening me with robbery and violence to be threatened with violence back, yes. That's the function of police in any modern society.

Re: The Silicon Oligarchy

#79

Post by golergka » Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 3:50 PM UTC

hackissimo123 wrote: post #57

golergka wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be a bit out of context of American politics, so an honest question here: how a threat to looters, who actively commit a crime, without any reference to skin color, can be racist? Seeing how violent these riots can get, that phrase is exactly what I would love to hear from authorities as black business owner, for example.

Trump used the the phrase "when the looting starts, the shooting starts" as part of a longer series of Tweets about the riots. The same phrase was also said at least once before, by an obscure racist 70 years ago whom no-one had heard of before the Tweet. Some have drawn the conclusion that Trump was in fact making a deliberate reference to this obscure racist.

> The same phrase was also said at least once before, by an obscure racist 70 years ago

I have to come clean: I haven't been completely intellectually honest in asking the question above. I have already known about it.

The point is, I have a problem with the way present-day american political life has a way with meanings of words. You guys seem to put so much importance on imaginary dog-whistels and connotations, and are willing to interpret the original phrases in such bizzare and far-fetched ways.

And if we continue to play this game, the only ones who win are the people that are willingly interpret anything in the most offensive and divisive way.

Re: The Silicon Oligarchy

#80

Post by golergka » Fri, Jun 19, 2020, 3:57 PM UTC

082349872349872 wrote: post #66

golergka wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be a bit out of context of American politics, so an honest question here: how a threat to looters, who actively commit a crime, without any reference to skin color, can be racist? Seeing how violent these riots can get, that phrase is exactly what I would love to hear from authorities as black business owner, for example.

If it's the same threat I'm thinking of, the phrase apparently has a history for americans, like "Лес рубят, щепки летят" might for russians (or maybe not? is the Stalin association a purely anglophone one?). "Racially charged" is a thing in the US. I read russia freed the serfs in 1861, does anyone beyond historians have an interest in cultural influences of serfdom now? The US military doctrine differs with you on…

> If it's the same threat I'm thinking of, the phrase apparently has a history for americans, like "Лес рубят, щепки летят" might for russians (or maybe not? is the Stalin association a purely anglophone one?).

It has a Stalin association, yes - but in russian culture, this phrase would first and foremost judged in context and with intended meaning. I would never call someone a stalinist just because of the fact that he used that saying, it would be insane on my (or anyone's) part.

> The US military doctrine differs with you on how armed authorities should approach crowd control

That's a good point. Come to think of it, yes, it makes sense to me that shooting to kill all the possible looters (because you can't know for sure what's going on in a rioting crowd) is not the best approach to the problem. However, the phrase "when the looting starts, the shoorting starts" doesn't neccessarilly mean "kill all the looters".

And regardless, discussion of different ways the law enforcement should react to military seems like a good thing, and if you allow such discussions, you should allow bad ideas too.

> By the way, speaking of shooting, what did you think of "Брат 2"?

I consider this movie to be a work of genius, but I also am completelly apalled that there's a lot of my fellow citizens who seriously consider the main hero an inspiration. He's a completely broken man with clear signs of PTSD and sociopathy, a classic anti-hero, and you can absolutely admire the movie without admiring him.