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

Why I Left Rust

jntrnr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 880 posts

Re: Why I Left Rust

#771

Post by doogah »

dahart wrote: post #695
bybybyby wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Technical opinions aren’t something we’re born with, they’re not intrinsic and uncontrollable properties of a person, and technical opinions haven’t historically been subject to widespread discrimination or hate crimes or even social imbalance in terms of income, right? The protections we have for race and gender aren’t there to avoid discomfort or to avoid conflict, they’re there to avoid harmful discrimination and…

Gender isn't something someone is born with either. It's fluid and can change.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#772

Post by draw_down »

twic wrote: post #345
lyu07282 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought "rust culture" came out of this sort of super SJW/woke culture of mozilla? Nothing against that sort of mindset in theory, but it sometimes leads to a certain irrational hypersensitive intolerant mob behavior and authoritarian/anti democratic tendencies. There was also the recent easily preventable drama [1] around the trademark guidelines some people left rust over. I don't really find any of this drama co…

Also, lots of people high up in Rust have a background in JavaScript, where drama is common, which I believe has helped normalise it as a mode of social interaction.

[dead]

Re: Why I Left Rust

#774

Post by WalterBright »

ra1231963 wrote: post #727
jbaber wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Nothing against it in theory , but it leads to stuff they don't like. Did you read the whole comment?

I did. I don’t get why they wouldn’t be against the theory of something so obviously flawed that leads to exactly what they are describing. It’s like saying you have nothing against eugenics in theory , but the leap to how that can go wrong in practice is painfully obvious. Or “I have nothing against giving everyone a million dollars in theory”. Obviously that is a dumb idea, so why even say you have nothing against…

Marxism works great, in theory.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#775

Post by shrimp_emoji »

rubyn00bie wrote: post #689
rgbgraph wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair point, and one I needed to reflect on. I think in my past, whenever I've been in a leadership position over a group of people, we've all been there to achieve some goal. We were all cooperating to reach the same end -- and those with a different opinion of that "end" were excluded. I have also been on the opposite side of this: I've been a member of groups whose goals I did not agree with. And no amount of civil…

> I have also been on the opposite side of this: I've been a member of groups whose goals I did not agree with. And no amount of civility or communication would bridge that chasm; therefore my opinions and thoughts were excluded (and I voluntarily left). What if you couldn’t leave? Perhaps the cost of leaving is too high, or you’re required to for a job. Membership in many groups isn’t even a direct action, it’s a by…

Seriously? You encountered Nazis in functional programming fora? Like, more than in your typical programming fora? (Any at all is more than I've met, but then I never socialize much.)

Re: Why I Left Rust

#776

Post by dahart »

doogah wrote: post #771
dahart wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technical opinions aren’t something we’re born with, they’re not intrinsic and uncontrollable properties of a person, and technical opinions haven’t historically been subject to widespread discrimination or hate crimes or even social imbalance in terms of income, right? The protections we have for race and gender aren’t there to avoid discomfort or to avoid conflict, they’re there to avoid harmful discrimination and…

Gender isn't something someone is born with either. It's fluid and can change.

People who go through this often say that they do in fact have an intrinsic gender they’re born with that simply doesn’t match their sex. What changes is their expression, not their internal identification. Age changes too and it’s a protected class in some contexts. So, what if gender expression changes? What is your implication? Do you believe parent’s claim that gender and opinion are categorically similar, and that either opinions should be a protected class, or that race and gender should not be?

Re: Why I Left Rust

#777

Post by rTX5CMRXIfFG »

bruce343434 wrote: post #183

As a non-american I must say I don't understand where the latter half of the article comes from. Why care about race? Why must a racist reason be sought behind everything?

I mean, sometimes it’s not one’s race—sometimes it’s sexuality, gender, religion, disability, or some other variable that I missed. And people in America think along those variables because they have a history of disenfranchising and discriminating people along those axes.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#778

Post by shrimp_emoji »

rTX5CMRXIfFG wrote: post #777
bruce343434 wrote: post #183

As a non-american I must say I don't understand where the latter half of the article comes from. Why care about race? Why must a racist reason be sought behind everything?

I mean, sometimes it’s not one’s race—sometimes it’s sexuality, gender, religion, disability, or some other variable that I missed. And people in America think along those variables because they have a history of disenfranchising and discriminating people along those axes.

Unironically, Americans think like this because they're more progressive than Europeans (some, anyway; some are way less). Europe has a history of disenfranchisement too, and to the extent they don't see it much it's because they have more homogeneous societies (until recently, with refugees). The melting pot of the new world was always life on higher difficulty: you don't get to be racist while pretending you're not because you're never tested on it as a society. You don't get to outlaw slavery, posturing like you're doing it because you're just that virtuous when in reality it's because it's easy to do when your economy doesn't rely on slavery so it's an easy way to look good. In this crucible, minds are traumatized into reverse-racism and performative bullshit.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#779

Post by n8henrie »

Larrikin wrote: post #660
n8henrie wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a similarly succinct but inoffensive word or phrase you would recommend instead?

The term at this point is so twisted that your question is like asking if there a similarly succinct word one can use for the N word. Looking for an alternative that means the same thing is incompatible with it being inoffensive

It looks like your comment may have been removed(?), but I thought its last sentence or two was recommending that the parent poster search their vocabulary for something less laden with negative connotation. Based on this, I was hoping you'd have a suggestion.

I think your analogy to the "N word" makes it difficult to assume good faith, but if it were possible to do so regarding "woke," is there a way to refer to that idea without being offensive?

Perhaps just "progressive" or "left-leaning" would suffice, but my impression is that "woke" usually refers to a more extreme form that is focused on social issues. "SJW" also seems to have a negative connotation.

Re: Why I Left Rust

#780

Post by n8henrie »

dragonwriter wrote: post #662
n8henrie wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a similarly succinct but inoffensive word or phrase you would recommend instead?

While terse , “woke” is not succinct , in its current negative external use, because it doesn’t clearly communicate anything about what it describes other than that it is disliked by the speaker. It communicates more about the speaker and the identity group they affiliate with than its notional referent; its a kind of right wing virtue signalling. (The older positive use at least had something like a coherent meaning…

I hadn't realized there was a meaningful difference between "terse" and "succinct" except for the negative connotation of the first. A few dictionaries and thesauruses seem to suggest I'm not too far off, and hopefully you'd agree that one wouldn't ask for a negatively laden replacement for a word that was being discussed as being negatively laden.

It sounds like you don't think "woke" means anything and is therefore not worth replacing. Is that more or less correct?

My recollection was that the parent comment I was responding to recommended that its parent replace the word to avoid immediately having the appearance of bad faith, which is why I was asking about their suggestion for a replacement. It seemed like they might have something in mind.

Post reply on HN