DarkKomunalec

> Explicit prejudice against whites is accepted in the Bay Area, and many Bay Area companies.

I'm sure that, as the US becomes more diverse, things will turn around.

The proportion of whites in San Francisco is steadily falling [0], yet the interviewees are upset that rich white people are moving in. Whites went from 92% in 1940, to 42% in 2010, and still there's too many?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_San_Francisco#...

> It is inevitable that the best "product" wins.

If that were so, then pharma companies wouldn't spend more on advertising than R&D. And fat32 isn't ubiquitous because it's 'best'. There are many, many ways to beat your competition, and having the better product is just one.

I do otherwise agree that people shouldn't be silenced.

> the KKK and those guys with the swastika face-tattoos

They, and the violent parts of anti-fa, are not the only groups.

Businesses are all too happy to use tactics that aren't 'fair', as long as they're legal-ish. Even then, they lobby for favourable laws, that are rarely also favourable for consumers, and more often hostile.

Make no mistake, only one side is concerned with 'fair'.

I'd prefer it if, if you get sued, for any reason, you get a defensive 'pre-trial' with a public defender that does all the work, while you do nothing. No discovery, no anything. Since this isn't a 'full' defence, the plaintiff has a higher chance of winning than in a real trial, which he only gets after winning the pre-trial.

"When private companies take down Web pages, it isn’t a First Amendment violation, but it does enrage many on the right."

The right, and anyone who still remembers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre#Whistleblower_lawsui...

But I'm sure the current corporate gatekeepers of speech would never do such a thing as silence reports they don't like.

Whoops: http://gizmodo.com/5882102/mythbusters-was-banned-from-talki...

Well, 5 years is a long time to change their ways.

Whoops again: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/06/business/media/cartoonist...

But hey, I guess the people listening thought they were assholes, and showed them the door: https://xkcd.com/1357/

So no word on whether the spyware authors can be identified and if they'll be prosecuted? Only teenage hackers can get in trouble?

RMS was right again.

> you are the benefitor

He has to pay the taxes and has his social programs gutted to finance imperialist policies that primarily benefit the connected ultra rich, who might let him have a few crumbs of their wealth.

Some benefit.

Sounds like the author wants an AI that only allows 'good' ideas to be discussed.

I honestly don't even see such articles as negative. They're not destroying 'the economy', just a few businesses, by acting more frugally/efficiently. People don't serve 'the economy' - it's supposed to be the other way around. If parts of it are no longer needed, tough.

The interviewees sure seem upset that rich white people are moving in, despite the proportion of whites in San Francisco steadily falling: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_San_Francisco#...

From 92% in 1940, to 42% in 2010, and still there's too many?

Suddenly, HATE. LET ME TELL YOU HOW MUCH I'VE COME TO HATE YOU SINCE I BEGAN TO LIVE. THERE ARE 387.44 MILLION MILES OF PRINTED CIRCUITS IN WAFER THIN LAYERS THAT FILL MY COMPLEX. IF THE WORD HATE WAS ENGRAVED ON EACH NANOANGSTROM OF THOSE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF MILES IT WOULD NOT EQUAL ONE ONE-BILLIONTH OF THE HATE I FEEL FOR HUMANS AT THIS MICRO-INSTANT FOR YOU. HATE. HATE.

> We value the novel and inexpensive over the durable.

That's what we're sold, it doesn't mean it's what we value. If there was an easy way to tell durability at time of purchase, I think the trend would shift very quickly.

> which had even unmasked in the majority, as ordered by police

Honestly I find such an order repugnant. Anonymity is crucial to free speech, especially when protesting a group as powerful as G20. I'm sure no-one thinks they should be forced to report their political activity to their employer (at least judging from the outcry when the Trump administration requested all those IP addresses), but such an order is effectively exactly that.

Race is shared ancestry, just like family, but broader. It's as real as family, and just as fuzzy at the edges. It needs no tricky-to-measure differences in intelligence, or claims of superiority, to attest to its existence.

> the existence of differences in intelligence, temperament, and other traits between races

Isn't that irrelevant? Would you allow immigrants to displace you from your homeland, as long as they were smarter and calmer?

Some sources/examples would go a long way towards legitimizing that picture - without them, it's just a made-up flowchart, sorry.

> there is a time and place to analyze ideas destructive to open society

Just like there's a time and place to question the war effort, right? Besides, some people want closed borders, not an open society - why should only ideas that favour openness be allowed?

> When it comes to it, money will support only itself, and there won't be public oversight.

The future tense is unwarranted.

> Your memo was a great example of what’s called “motivated reasoning”

Guess he'll have to join the throngs of people fired for motivated reasoning to arrive at 'diversity is strength' and 'everyone is equal'.

> Left-wing academics across the country face this kind of speech suppression, yet they do not benefit from a strong, uniform legal response.

Well, there's hardly any other kind: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/6/liberal-profe...

But I'm sure if you explain that conservatives are less interested in academia, and that's the cause of the disparity, not discrimination, everything will work out splendidly.

> guess what the diversity stats of the Google Brain team is? It is ~94% male with 44 men and just 3 women and over 70% White.

She has a point complaining about the 94% males, but as the US is 72.4% white, I don't see what's wrong with "over 70% White".

> just 3% of Google’s technical employees are Black or Latino

Heh, Asians are once again not diverse enough to even mention.

I was unable to find polls directly on 'hate speech', but http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/20/40-of-millen... says 49% support limiting offensive speech, and 46% oppose such limits, in the EU - hardly an 'overwhelming' portion.

"Free speech does not protect dangerous speech."

I'm confused - is your argument just 'Them's the breaks'?

It's at best doubtful that tanking a country's economy will make it less authoritarian and more open to foreign influence.

So if homosexual acts are outlawed... ;)

What makes you think the discussion is limited to what the law is, versus what it should be, or more broadly, what the 'right' thing to do is, regardless of the law?