6 ms·

Brendan Eich donated money with the sole goal of denying equal rights to people based on their sexuality. There's nothing wrong with having an unpopular opinion

by thenmar 12y ago

Brendan Eich donated money with the sole goal of denying equal rights to people based on their sexuality. There's nothing wrong with having an unpopular opinion, but I think there is something wrong with that. And I suspect you would too if it were you whose rights were being taken away. Edit: Eich supported Proposition 8 which was _ruled unconstitutional_ for violating the Equal Protection Clause. Yes, his support was non-criminal, but he was fundamentally supporting something wrong, both morally and legally.

angersock 12y ago
Eich participated in a public system in an approved way at a political level, did so without letting his politics get in the way of his personal or professional life, and made functional programming ubiquitous. There's nothing wrong with what he did given that he didn't let that view (in the abstract) color his personal interactions. And, let us note, it's all speculation on this point as to what or why he did it, because the man himself hasn't said anything on the matter--mostly because of the gay hate brigade rallied against him. By contrast, Tim Cook continued contracts with Foxconn with the sole goal of minimizing production costs by using underpaid overworked labor--and if you look at Apple close enough, yeah, there's some nastiness there. He's a solid operations guy (clearly!), but has directly supported policies that have harmed both our industry and workers abroad. I'm likely going to get downvoted into oblivion (again, and in hilarious underscoring of my point).
- dreamweapon 12y ago
  That's an incredibly muddle-headed sequence of arguments you've just made, for sure. But no, we're not going to hate you for it.
  - DanBC 12y ago
    Your inability to respond to any of the points has been noted.
    - dreamweapon 12y ago
      Oh, I'm "able." I just don't find them particularly interesting, or worth responding to in detail.
      - Karunamon 12y ago
        Then next time, kindly just don't post.
        dreamweapon 12y ago
        I'd kindly prefer that people not litter HN with puerile, psychologically baiting lines of argumentation from out in left field (c.f. "the gay hate brigade", up above) in the first place.
        Karunamon 12y ago
        Trolls and willful fools are cured by the same medicine: downvote, ignore, and flag if they broke the site rules.
- notjackma 12y ago
  > Tim Cook continued contracts with Foxconn with the sole goal of minimizing production costs by using underpaid overworked labor I'm going to upvote you for this. Just because Tim Cook is gay doesn't make him Mother Teresa. He seems quite happy in promoting brutal Victorian style work-houses because it's "over there". Out of sight, out of mind. He's quite the hypocrite. He's also no better or worse then the operations guy at Dell, Samsung, Lenovo, etc. who are all churning out products from the same manufacturers and assembly lines in China and South-East Asia. I don't know why people keep promoting the myth that he is some amazing operations guy when everything is outsourced anyway, and recent products have suffered from manufacturing delays and raw material supply issues.
  - jshevek 12y ago
    > Just because Tim Cook is gay doesn't make him Mother Teresa. He seems quite happy in promoting brutal Victorian style work-houses because it's "over there". Out of sight, out of mind. Yes, yes, and yes. Many of my more naive, young gay friends and acquaintances actually DO seem to think that 'being a powerful gay person', onto itself, makes him worthy of worship. > He's quite the hypocrite. Did he actually say that its wrong to promote brutal Victorian style work-houses?
  - dreamweapon 12y ago
    Just because Tim Cook is gay doesn't make him Mother Teresa. It's also completely irrelevant to the subject of Brendan Eich's support of bigoted TV ads. Which is why I found the arguments made by the poster above you to be not really interesting, or worth responding to.
    - Crito 12y ago
      Actually, exploiting the poor is one thing that Tim Cook and Mother Teresa could find common ground on.
      - praneshp 12y ago
        This. I used to live in Kolkata (then Calcutta), where she had setup her place, and it was sick to see people being asked to pray to the Christ when they needed food and medicine instead.
- haberman 12y ago
  > There's nothing wrong with what [Brendan] did given that he didn't let that view (in the abstract) color his personal interactions. Strom Thurmond filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1957 for 24 hours and 18 minutes. After that he continued to serve in the US Senate until 2003. Yes, his actions were a lawful expression of his power. But I think there is something deeply wrong with using your power, even lawfully, to deny the rights of people who are less powerful than you. Even if you are nice to those same people in personal interactions.
- Tyrannosaurs 12y ago
  > by using underpaid overworked labor Underpaid in what way? Are there many other jobs those people could be doing which pay them better? They're not paid much by US standards but the alternative is subsistence level farming. Is anyone who puts their production into China (and let's remember that's basically everyone in hardware before we single out Apple) being nasty by offering people a better income than they can get anywhere else? It's the market rate, something incidentally most people in tech in the West are pretty happy about when it's driving massively above average salaries for programmers and the like. In terms of overworked - Foxcon workers recently went on strike because the amount of overtime they were being offered had been reduced. If they're overworked it would be very odd behaviour to strike to demand more. Essentially Foxcon workers get to choose between two things - a shitty life working at Foxcon and a really shitty life not working there. That's unfortunate, but it's not Tim Cook's fault, it's in part the fault of the Chinese government, in part the result of them having been dealt a shitty hand and a consequence of global capitalism which most of us are in some way complicit in. To place this at the door of Cook is pretty naive.
  - hiou 12y ago
    The reason this is placed at the door of Cook is because he's very likely one of, if not the most responsible person for those choices at Apple. He played a very large role in operations at Apple. He also sits on the board of Nike, partly because he is very well regarded in supply chains and operations. Are you going to sing Nike's praises as well for worker treatment? Whether or not those choices are moral is certainly up for debate. Whether or not Time Cook was largely responsible for them is not. And as for the "market rate" you are talking about a country that does not allow it's currency to float on the exchanges, heavy subsidizes or outright controls much of the industry and denies workers access to information online about working conditions and pay. Playing into a regime that intentionally abuses workers to ramp up their industrial output wouldn't be something I would be particularly proud of and most definitely would not be something I would consider controlled by market forces.
    - Tyrannosaurs 12y ago
      Sorry, I wasn't clear. Cook is clearly a prime decision maker in where Apple operate but the poor situation for Chinese workers can't reasonably be laid at his door. The wages are controlled by market forces, even if the market is being manipulated by the Chinese government. But Cook isn't responsible for Chinese economic or fiscal policy and pulling Apple out if China would hurt the workers who may have shitty jobs but at least have jobs. As it is Apple face higher scrutiny than most of their competitor in the same situation and as a result actually behave marginally better when it comes to worker treatment. It's not something to be particularly proud of but the overall plight of Chinese workers, even those at Foxcon, is not a situation for which Cook can realistically be held significantly responsible or categorised as nasty (nasty being the original characterisation I was refuting). It's the consequence of a capitalist economy which Cook may be a small part of but is neither the creator nor the controller.
- benihana 12y ago
  >By contrast, Tim Cook continued contracts with Foxconn with the sole goal of minimizing production costs by using underpaid overworked labor Do you have any proof of this or citations on it? Everything I've seen about Apple regarding its supply chain is that it goes above and beyond the minimum needed to be in compliance, and they seem to genuinely care about the well being of their employees in China.
  - phaemon 12y ago
    > goes above and beyond the minimum needed to be in compliance Awesome. I need that line added to my CV. Something like: "Conscientious worker, who often goes above and beyond the minimum needed to be in compliance."
- bdcravens 12y ago
  > Tim Cook continued contracts with Foxconn As does Sony, Microsoft, Amazon, Nintendo, and more
- rmc 12y ago
  > it's all speculation on this point as to what or why he did it, because the man himself hasn't said anything on the matter--mostly because of the gay hate brigade rallied against him. When the controversy broke he was literally asked what his views on SSM were, and he didn't give an answer. That strongly implies he doesn't think SSM should be legal.
downandout 12y ago
So you're saying that stifling political discourse by firing people (or forcing them to quit) - as long as you really, really, disagree with them - is acceptable. Got it. For the sake of yourself and your loved ones, I hope you never voice an unpopular opinion.
- thenmar 12y ago
  Please don't respond to me with disrespectful and disruptive snark. Nobody was fired. Nobody went to jail. There was no "stifled discourse". If you'd like to elaborate specifically, then please do.
  - downandout 12y ago
    Ok, forced out. Is that more palatable? He was, for all intents and purposes, fired. For expressing a political opinion. In a country that prides itself on being a democracy. If that isn't stifling political discourse, what exactly is it?
    - agildehaus 12y ago
      Nobody kicked him out of the country. He was "forced" by the community that thought his views intolerable out of a company that is community driven.
      - ArtDev 12y ago
        Just the same if he was a racist or a Nazi. Simply unfit for leadership.
    - theseoafs 12y ago
      Murdering someone or throwing them in a prison because they spoke out against the regime is stifling political discourse. Having to step down as CEO of a company because your unpopular political opinions resulted in a vast number of people boycotting your company's products is just a consequence of the way the free market works.
    - deleted 12y ago
danielweber 12y ago
supported Proposition 8 which was _ruled unconstitutional_ What does this have to do with anything? Lots of people supported things that later get ruled unconstitutional. Using "constitutional" as a synonym for "good" is a bad idea.
neurobro 12y ago
Eich shares the same moral ground with gay marriage supporters. Anyone supporting government-issued marriage licenses with associated privileges and entitlements is hateful and bigoted toward individuals who aren't marriage material for various reasons beyond their control.
wtbob 12y ago
> Brendan Eich donated money with the sole goal of denying equal rights to people based on their sexuality. You know, I'm sick and tired of this lie. A homosexual has exactly the same right to marriage as a heterosexual: a gay man is exactly as free to marry any unmarried consenting woman as a normal man and a lesbian is exactly free to marry any unmarried consenting man as a normal woman. The essential confusion regards the nature of marriage. It's not about a couple (or group) and their feelings towards one another; it's about the formation of a family and the production of a new generation.
- mkr-hn 12y ago
  > The essential confusion regards the nature of marriage. It's not about a couple (or group) and their feelings towards one another; it's about the formation of a family and the production of a new generation. I bet you're hard at work trying to deny infertile couples the ability to marry. Even if you were right, which you aren't, tradition is not a compelling argument. We've done away with a lot of stupid traditions, like slavery and dowry. Even if you were right, which you aren't, gay couples can adopt. I could go on, but why? Your arguments are tired and baseless.
  - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
    And how about older couples, past the childbearing age? Should they not be allowed to marry? Should couples be forced to divorce after 50? This preposterous argument about 'its about producing a new generation' is sophomoric and lazy. It doesn't stand up to a few seconds of reflection. Yet I hear it again and again - its even part of the Mormon official line.
  - beauSD 12y ago
    Once we get to the point of calling basic human anatomy 'baseless', we've definitely gone off the deep end as a society. This is not about infertility due to medical conditions or age and it's not about tradition - it's about the fact that a man and a woman having sex is the way that human beings are produced. Everything else is an attempt to ignore reality to suit our our personal desires.

by thenmar 12y ago

angersock 12y ago

Eich participated in a public system in an approved way at a political level, did so without letting his politics get in the way of his personal or professional life, and made functional programming ubiquitous. There's nothing wrong with what he did given that he didn't let that view (in the abstract) color his personal interactions. And, let us note, it's all speculation on this point as to what or why he did it, because the man himself hasn't said anything on the matter--mostly because of the gay hate brigade rallied against him. By contrast, Tim Cook continued contracts with Foxconn with the sole goal of minimizing production costs by using underpaid overworked labor--and if you look at Apple close enough, yeah, there's some nastiness there. He's a solid operations guy (clearly!), but has directly supported policies that have harmed both our industry and workers abroad. I'm likely going to get downvoted into oblivion (again, and in hilarious underscoring of my point).

dreamweapon 12y ago
That's an incredibly muddle-headed sequence of arguments you've just made, for sure. But no, we're not going to hate you for it.
- DanBC 12y ago
  Your inability to respond to any of the points has been noted.
  - dreamweapon 12y ago
    Oh, I'm "able." I just don't find them particularly interesting, or worth responding to in detail.
    - Karunamon 12y ago
      Then next time, kindly just don't post.
      - dreamweapon 12y ago
        I'd kindly prefer that people not litter HN with puerile, psychologically baiting lines of argumentation from out in left field (c.f. "the gay hate brigade", up above) in the first place.
        Karunamon 12y ago
        Trolls and willful fools are cured by the same medicine: downvote, ignore, and flag if they broke the site rules.
notjackma 12y ago
> Tim Cook continued contracts with Foxconn with the sole goal of minimizing production costs by using underpaid overworked labor I'm going to upvote you for this. Just because Tim Cook is gay doesn't make him Mother Teresa. He seems quite happy in promoting brutal Victorian style work-houses because it's "over there". Out of sight, out of mind. He's quite the hypocrite. He's also no better or worse then the operations guy at Dell, Samsung, Lenovo, etc. who are all churning out products from the same manufacturers and assembly lines in China and South-East Asia. I don't know why people keep promoting the myth that he is some amazing operations guy when everything is outsourced anyway, and recent products have suffered from manufacturing delays and raw material supply issues.
- jshevek 12y ago
  > Just because Tim Cook is gay doesn't make him Mother Teresa. He seems quite happy in promoting brutal Victorian style work-houses because it's "over there". Out of sight, out of mind. Yes, yes, and yes. Many of my more naive, young gay friends and acquaintances actually DO seem to think that 'being a powerful gay person', onto itself, makes him worthy of worship. > He's quite the hypocrite. Did he actually say that its wrong to promote brutal Victorian style work-houses?
- dreamweapon 12y ago
  Just because Tim Cook is gay doesn't make him Mother Teresa. It's also completely irrelevant to the subject of Brendan Eich's support of bigoted TV ads. Which is why I found the arguments made by the poster above you to be not really interesting, or worth responding to.
  - Crito 12y ago
    Actually, exploiting the poor is one thing that Tim Cook and Mother Teresa could find common ground on.
    - praneshp 12y ago
      This. I used to live in Kolkata (then Calcutta), where she had setup her place, and it was sick to see people being asked to pray to the Christ when they needed food and medicine instead.
haberman 12y ago
> There's nothing wrong with what [Brendan] did given that he didn't let that view (in the abstract) color his personal interactions. Strom Thurmond filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1957 for 24 hours and 18 minutes. After that he continued to serve in the US Senate until 2003. Yes, his actions were a lawful expression of his power. But I think there is something deeply wrong with using your power, even lawfully, to deny the rights of people who are less powerful than you. Even if you are nice to those same people in personal interactions.
Tyrannosaurs 12y ago
> by using underpaid overworked labor Underpaid in what way? Are there many other jobs those people could be doing which pay them better? They're not paid much by US standards but the alternative is subsistence level farming. Is anyone who puts their production into China (and let's remember that's basically everyone in hardware before we single out Apple) being nasty by offering people a better income than they can get anywhere else? It's the market rate, something incidentally most people in tech in the West are pretty happy about when it's driving massively above average salaries for programmers and the like. In terms of overworked - Foxcon workers recently went on strike because the amount of overtime they were being offered had been reduced. If they're overworked it would be very odd behaviour to strike to demand more. Essentially Foxcon workers get to choose between two things - a shitty life working at Foxcon and a really shitty life not working there. That's unfortunate, but it's not Tim Cook's fault, it's in part the fault of the Chinese government, in part the result of them having been dealt a shitty hand and a consequence of global capitalism which most of us are in some way complicit in. To place this at the door of Cook is pretty naive.
- hiou 12y ago
  The reason this is placed at the door of Cook is because he's very likely one of, if not the most responsible person for those choices at Apple. He played a very large role in operations at Apple. He also sits on the board of Nike, partly because he is very well regarded in supply chains and operations. Are you going to sing Nike's praises as well for worker treatment? Whether or not those choices are moral is certainly up for debate. Whether or not Time Cook was largely responsible for them is not. And as for the "market rate" you are talking about a country that does not allow it's currency to float on the exchanges, heavy subsidizes or outright controls much of the industry and denies workers access to information online about working conditions and pay. Playing into a regime that intentionally abuses workers to ramp up their industrial output wouldn't be something I would be particularly proud of and most definitely would not be something I would consider controlled by market forces.
  - Tyrannosaurs 12y ago
    Sorry, I wasn't clear. Cook is clearly a prime decision maker in where Apple operate but the poor situation for Chinese workers can't reasonably be laid at his door. The wages are controlled by market forces, even if the market is being manipulated by the Chinese government. But Cook isn't responsible for Chinese economic or fiscal policy and pulling Apple out if China would hurt the workers who may have shitty jobs but at least have jobs. As it is Apple face higher scrutiny than most of their competitor in the same situation and as a result actually behave marginally better when it comes to worker treatment. It's not something to be particularly proud of but the overall plight of Chinese workers, even those at Foxcon, is not a situation for which Cook can realistically be held significantly responsible or categorised as nasty (nasty being the original characterisation I was refuting). It's the consequence of a capitalist economy which Cook may be a small part of but is neither the creator nor the controller.
benihana 12y ago
>By contrast, Tim Cook continued contracts with Foxconn with the sole goal of minimizing production costs by using underpaid overworked labor Do you have any proof of this or citations on it? Everything I've seen about Apple regarding its supply chain is that it goes above and beyond the minimum needed to be in compliance, and they seem to genuinely care about the well being of their employees in China.
- phaemon 12y ago
  > goes above and beyond the minimum needed to be in compliance Awesome. I need that line added to my CV. Something like: "Conscientious worker, who often goes above and beyond the minimum needed to be in compliance."
bdcravens 12y ago
> Tim Cook continued contracts with Foxconn As does Sony, Microsoft, Amazon, Nintendo, and more
rmc 12y ago
> it's all speculation on this point as to what or why he did it, because the man himself hasn't said anything on the matter--mostly because of the gay hate brigade rallied against him. When the controversy broke he was literally asked what his views on SSM were, and he didn't give an answer. That strongly implies he doesn't think SSM should be legal.

downandout 12y ago

So you're saying that stifling political discourse by firing people (or forcing them to quit) - as long as you really, really, disagree with them - is acceptable. Got it. For the sake of yourself and your loved ones, I hope you never voice an unpopular opinion.

thenmar 12y ago
Please don't respond to me with disrespectful and disruptive snark. Nobody was fired. Nobody went to jail. There was no "stifled discourse". If you'd like to elaborate specifically, then please do.
- downandout 12y ago
  Ok, forced out. Is that more palatable? He was, for all intents and purposes, fired. For expressing a political opinion. In a country that prides itself on being a democracy. If that isn't stifling political discourse, what exactly is it?
  - agildehaus 12y ago
    Nobody kicked him out of the country. He was "forced" by the community that thought his views intolerable out of a company that is community driven.
    - ArtDev 12y ago
      Just the same if he was a racist or a Nazi. Simply unfit for leadership.
  - theseoafs 12y ago
    Murdering someone or throwing them in a prison because they spoke out against the regime is stifling political discourse. Having to step down as CEO of a company because your unpopular political opinions resulted in a vast number of people boycotting your company's products is just a consequence of the way the free market works.
  - deleted 12y ago

danielweber 12y ago

supported Proposition 8 which was _ruled unconstitutional_ What does this have to do with anything? Lots of people supported things that later get ruled unconstitutional. Using "constitutional" as a synonym for "good" is a bad idea.

neurobro 12y ago

Eich shares the same moral ground with gay marriage supporters. Anyone supporting government-issued marriage licenses with associated privileges and entitlements is hateful and bigoted toward individuals who aren't marriage material for various reasons beyond their control.

wtbob 12y ago

> Brendan Eich donated money with the sole goal of denying equal rights to people based on their sexuality. You know, I'm sick and tired of this lie. A homosexual has exactly the same right to marriage as a heterosexual: a gay man is exactly as free to marry any unmarried consenting woman as a normal man and a lesbian is exactly free to marry any unmarried consenting man as a normal woman. The essential confusion regards the nature of marriage. It's not about a couple (or group) and their feelings towards one another; it's about the formation of a family and the production of a new generation.

mkr-hn 12y ago
> The essential confusion regards the nature of marriage. It's not about a couple (or group) and their feelings towards one another; it's about the formation of a family and the production of a new generation. I bet you're hard at work trying to deny infertile couples the ability to marry. Even if you were right, which you aren't, tradition is not a compelling argument. We've done away with a lot of stupid traditions, like slavery and dowry. Even if you were right, which you aren't, gay couples can adopt. I could go on, but why? Your arguments are tired and baseless.
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  And how about older couples, past the childbearing age? Should they not be allowed to marry? Should couples be forced to divorce after 50? This preposterous argument about 'its about producing a new generation' is sophomoric and lazy. It doesn't stand up to a few seconds of reflection. Yet I hear it again and again - its even part of the Mormon official line.
- beauSD 12y ago
  Once we get to the point of calling basic human anatomy 'baseless', we've definitely gone off the deep end as a society. This is not about infertility due to medical conditions or age and it's not about tradition - it's about the fact that a man and a woman having sex is the way that human beings are produced. Everything else is an attempt to ignore reality to suit our our personal desires.