13thLetter

10 ms·

1.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
"I'm implying that De Goes seems to have done everything he possibly could have to synthesize drama out of this decision short of (just barely, at the point) actually endorsing Yarvin's Moldbug posts." That sounded awful
2.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
That's, uh. Wow. Quite the accusation. For starters, how does De Goes benefit from generating this drama? Most of the sponsors pulled out and he's been smeared as a racist from one end of the Internet to the other, in an era where
3.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
> The whole thing seems calculated for maximum drama. We live in a culture where people have been primed to go nuclear, not just at the tiniest slight against them, but at the faintest media-driven rumor that some other person somewhere,
4.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
> The main difference is that all of those phenomenon were unidentified: the pilots never had sufficient detail to match their evidence to a real-world experience. There were no real-world experiences of UFOs, but it's not correct t
5.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
> If any of what's happening here is wrong, so was the apartheid divestiture movement. Those actions by themselves are not necessarily right or wrong; it's the reason for the action which makes the difference. It was right to m
6.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
I'll give you Point 1, of course, but points 2-4 apply just as well to the UFO reports. Many of them were from experienced professional pilots, reported immediately after the incident and with great detail. UFO skeptics wrote a number
7.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
> So I guess I don't share the principle that you seem to have, that if I don't like a conference I should simply shut up and not attend If you want to complain loudly about the conference as you don't attend, go for it. B
8.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
It's true that a problem could happen, and I'm glad the risk is being taken seriously, but a lot of these reports (if not the overwhelming majority) feel like pilots' UFO reports from the '60s. There are no photos, there
9.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
> Similarly, it is legitimate for others to publicly express market preferences for avoiding conferences that feature him. If the anti-inclusion folks were merely "publicly expressing market preferences" they wouldn't be s
10.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
> Ads are fine when they help people. It's really easy to forget this. Ads can be a good thing! Anyone ever pick up Computer Shopper magazine in the '90s? It was a giant phonebook full of practically nothing but ads for compute
11.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
Well, that's the interesting question, isn't it. Google offered a high quality service for free. (Well, "free" as in they're selling eyeballs to advertisers, but, you know. Internet free.) They aggressively promoted
12.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
What do you think you're gaining by walking up to a white homeless man freezing on the street and explaining to him how much better his life is because of his "privilege"? If you think that was an unfair summary, well, a) it
13.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
Just imagine the screaming if someone made a post about this about Muslims.
14.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
The "punching up is okay!" excuse is only useful to people who are in it for the punching. How about if nobody gets punched. Don't roll out demeaning stereotypes against any groups; instead, treat people like human beings. Wh
15.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
All the fascists I know are in favor of allowing people they disagree with to freely speak without risking their livelihoods.
16.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
If the stories of people missing out on job offers and so forth are true, Google did real damage to their lives and should make amends somehow. I'll freely grant that I don't know what, specifically, they should do, but "sorr
17.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
I agree that it would make it less funny, but the takeaway from that conclusion is that they simply shouldn't do this prank at all. A joke isn't worth harming gmail's UX like this.
18.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
"Brogrammer"? Where did that come from?
19.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
> There's always at least a bit of racist motivation for complaints about NBA players' "egos and attitudes". Oh, is there? That's quite a harsh accusation -- it can get people instantly fired nowadays -- so I&#x2
20.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
"Either person B or C, depending on whether or not they are enforcing laws for the government." If there's no problem with B's behavior, the takeaway is that no one can say anything that anyone would take offense to, bec
21.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
Is it okay to allow a speaker who believes that capitalists should be put into labor camps?
22.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
> At exactly the point where you think this actually fucking matters when evaluating the value of those people. In that case, you must believe that Yarvin is not a racist, because he has stated at great length (not that he's capable
23.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
It is so weird to see an organization handling this kind of situation in a rational and professional manner instead of instantly caving in to the mob. I'm not used to it. I keep waiting for the punchline.
24.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
There is an astonishing amount of self-importance going on in essays like this. People who believe they are striking a blow against fascism by not attending a functional programming conference that an obscure former blogger is going to as w
25.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
Especially considering that most of the people grumbling about this now are going to obediently vote the Secretary of State on whose watch it happened into the Presidency in November. Nothing's going to change.
26.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
> If I can't have a quiet chat with friends in public making clear I'm a gay, atheist, muslim, vegan, witch, then I'm not free. Or, for that matter, if you're a fundamentalist Christian, Trump supporter, gay marriage
27.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
Yep, you can see that happening right now in various tech fields. The scope of opinions that one can publicly hold without risking doxxing and mob harassment has been narrowed tremendously, with the result that while many have been bullied
28.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
Since you're so concerned about tolerant people being taken advantage of, may we also assume that you'd oppose LambdaConf having a speaker who was a revolutionary Communist? You don't get a much more destructive and intoleran
29.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
I was curious about the Ramirez aerial surveillance HQ described in the article and managed to find what looks like the spot on Google Earth: https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0469559,-118.2309557,926a,20...
30.
by 13thLetter 10y ago
> What else do you want them to do? Compromise their values? Who are you to demand that of them? If their values are "we cannot interact in a professional manner with people who hold views we dislike," their values are bad and

More ›