Don't confuse the ideal of free speech, with its legal implementation in the 1st Amendment.
705 karma · joined November 26, 2016
And how many votes did they get? While I agree it's a stretch to call the Democrats 'left', at least on economic issues, things like worker's rights have been neglected by the voters and the national conversation as well.
It starts with "I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes.", and has many suggestions on how to increase diversity (not just viewpoint diversity), all ideas attributed to the left†.
†I feel compelled to mention I find that left/right are woefully inadequate labels, and serve better as a tool to divide and conquer people so they don't unite on common interests. But they work well-ish enough in this case, and a discussion on this would be long and orthogonal to the topic at hand.
Edit: Reading your other reply, it seems you think any action at all done to increase diversity is affirmative action. That's not what's usually meant by the term.
His memo is very firmly left-wing and liberal though, hardly an 'extreme'.
More than politics, it's the present tense that's bothering me. How long since the US left has focused on worker's rights?
http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagger... seems to agree (ctrl+F 'Galkin')
I've noticed this kind of statement often: "How can you say X about group A - don't you know group A suffers from Y??", as a way to try and associate X with (the clearly bad) Y.
Going roughly by what I assume to be the GP's logic then, there should be a minefield surrounding discussions of having the government provide public services at all, since, naturally, that will lead to Soviet-style communism and the deaths of tens of millions.
I'd also be wary of ascribing to large-scale political sentiment (not even shared by all) the kind of purpose and wisdom involved in engineering decisions.
As you quoted "Without inside knowledge it's hard to distinguish stupidity from good engineering" - in this case, there is no inside knowledge.
Sounds like an interesting topic. I'd love to read some articles/literature on it.
At least until we end racism, which should be any day now...
Higher levels of programming may be composed of more work with people (coordinating a team, extracting requirements from clients, etc.), but the lower levels, and the education leading up to there, is tech focused. And it's from there that managers are sourced.
lol
P.S.: I'm sure replies such as 'lol' are frowned upon, but I think in this case it conveys the idea perfectly and concisely.
How would you know the shell itself, running on the machine you're trying to verify, isn't lying to you?
Bad example, because one goes to HN specifically for curated content.
> Would you be opposed to an airbnb clone that only rented to white supremacists?
Lets run a few variations of this, and try and find a consistent position: Would I be opposed to HN deciding what content is allowed? To a nazi Airbnb clone? To the New York Times deciding what they publish? To every newspaper in Nebraska colluding on which stories they allow? In secret? What if the top 80% of websites, by views, do so? What if Facebook does it? What if your local car dealership doesn't want to sell to communists? What if Toyota doesn't? What if an alliance of car manufacturers representing 98% of global car sales doesn't? What if a taxi service with 5 cabs to it's name refuses to drive Hillary supporters? What if it controls every cab in New York? What if Intel requires you to use their own Linux distro, and bricks your chip otherwise (they warn you before you buy)?
In all these cases, the answer is the same - it's only troublesome once the company, corporation, shadowy behind-the-scenes cabal, whatever, gets too big. Once going to a competitor is no longer viable, or very difficult, or something you don't even know you need to do (sure it's easy to go to death2amerikkka.ru/imperialistPigAggressionInSouthAmerica/latestNews/, but you don't know of the site, and have no reason to distrust the CNN/Fox talking heads parroting the government's position).
So to answer your second question - no (at least not beyond 'they shouldn't have done that, but I guess it's their right'), but only if there are viable alternatives for renters. When not using their service becomes very disadvantageous, I'd be very opposed. Of course being opposed doesn't say much - a better question is, what should be done about it? The answer is known, but neglected - fire up the dusty antitrust laws, and do what was done to Bell and Standard Oil - don't just prevent mergers, but break up the companies.
Sorry for the wall of text - I try to be concise, but failed in this case. Maybe next time ask easier questions.
I find it hard to blame Americans for all the misinformation their media and politicians feed them.
Of course things get blurry in common-carrier-like cases such as marketplaces, ISPs, postal services, etc.
Aren't they lucky - first they get their democracy subverted by multinational corporations, then they get to feel guilty about what those same corporations do.
Source: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli...
That's 'privilege', and is something to feel guilty about. It's not something to be grateful to your ancestors for providing, but something you get unfairly by 'accident of birth'. Only when it comes to guilt is your connection to your ancestors and ethnicity more than an accident.
Edit: I did not think a 'sarcasm' tag necessary.
It kind of is. He provided evidence for his claims (not your misrepresentation of them), and you get to provide counter-evidence.
> the argument was that his coworkers were biologically inferior for the job of programming
Could you point out where exactly he said that? I had trouble finding it.
Because from what I gathered, his argument was that, due to biological differences between groups of people, not all groups are on average equally suited and/or interested in all tasks, so expecting equal representation is foolish.
With the full, and, rather short, text of his available, I expect we'll clear up this difference in belief about what he said quickly.
But when white people are over-represented, it implies privilege and racism, never intelligence.
He cites quite a few sources under the "Personality differences" section. Care to refute them?
For your convenience, here is the memo in its entirety, links to sources included: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-I...
If only one could still vote for the people that broke up Bell.
Publish the name of the owner of the company who built the bridge that collapsed due to cost-cutting? Now now, he didn't want that public, that's reidentification! He even hid behind several shell companies, so you can't claim you didn't know he wanted to stay anonymous.
Where are you getting this from? I am aware of no such attempt. I thought that, in idealized capitalism, everyone gets as much as they are able to convince or legally force others to pay them, and 'value' produced is irrelevant.
There is no need for false news to shape opinion. Think of one's picture of reality as a point-cloud, each point one news report. By choosing which news they promote, and which they bury, the media can paint almost any picture they wish, without uttering a single falsehood.