dracht

Replace the word "tube" with "pak" in the URL. https://www.youpak.com/watch?v=S4LOyi3EMWU

Tell that to (most) EU governments. They are selling mass-immigration as a solution to an aging population.

Are you suggesting competitions such as this one should be rigged or simply not held because the outcomes don't conform to your fantasy of an ideal world...?

The demonization of "white guys" in tech is getting rather appalling.

So the government should ignore the concerns and wishes of the people (or "people" as you refer to them), because they know what is just better than anyone. When, for instance, the government decides to engage in war despite lacking public support, you would of course approve of that. Or should they only concern themselves with democratic principles when you disagree with their decision?

Who is "Europe" in this case? I can tell you it was not idea of the European population to follow the US into a war based on wrongful information. So who should be taking responsibility?

I (me) am not a soul that was that "lucky enough" to be "born into" a body in a decent environment. I am the product of my ancestors. There is no luck or unfair process involved. I can't even really address the other part because it's so outrageous. Accusing someone of feeling entitled to the fruits of their labour and their parents' labour and their grandparents' labour? Repulsive.

Will you let a homeless stranger sleep in your bed if one comes knocking on your door? Assuming you don't, why not? Just because you were lucky enough to be born in a situation where you can afford a house and not end up with a drug addiction, you feel like you are entitled to such luxuries?

Germany lost a significant amount of territory that has not been given back.[0] East Germany (and the whole of rest of Eastern Europe) to this day is much poorer than western parts thanks to half a century of Soviet occupation. I never hear anyone make demands for restitution regarding that bit of very recent history. Any way, the argument I was making was that at some point the blood clearly does wash off, and where you draw the line is arbitrary. Why should a white Australian feel guilty for the Frontier Wars but a German shouldn't feel guilty for the holocaust?

[0] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/60/Ge...

>That's why I don't believe that thought policing, "forced tolerance" or 'safe spaces' will amount to anything. We should think pragmatically and find a way to live non-violently, in a not-necessarily-tolerant world.

Interesting, I believe exactly that but I've never heard anyone else express it before. The idea of social constructivism, the notion that everything is a mere social construct, has been so ingrained in (western) societies that people assume every problem is one to be solved through social engineering. It just puzzles me why anyone would be so adamant to put naturally conflicting groups together. What is the goal? What are the benefits that are worth the hassle and friction? Maybe it's nothing but a naive attempt to achieve some utopian fantasy, or perhaps there is a less innocent agenda behind it. I honestly don't know. If you wish to expound on the subject or have any literary recommendations, I'm all ears.

At what point does the blood wash off? Are the Britons entitled to reparations for the viking raids? Should Mongolia make right Khan's conquests? Should Germany get back the land that was taken from them through the Treaty of Versailles? Or does this eternal sin only apply when whites did something to non-whites?

Indeed. Getting rather tired of these American-centric, white guilt/saviour bloggers that feel the need to inject their social agenda into everything. I don't browse HN to read about how it's my "duty" to repent myself of the eternal sin that is my race. Asians are over-represented in academia and the tech industry, yet this is never brought up as a problem that needs solving (as it shouldn't). This social justice movement is toxic, contradictory and insidious.

The Swedish left has gone completely off the rails, to the point where merely addressing a demographic shift gets you accused of spreading "racist propaganda". When the Swedish authorities cover up mass sexual assaults because they were committed by a particular group, that's not propaganda, that's just good work - we wouldn't want those imaginary SS divisions to take advantage of such inconvenient realities.

You are the only one bringing up race here and steering the conversation towards it. To me it seems obvious that the problem is their culture (islam included). It just doesn't lend itself to blending in with a liberal western society. The multicultural dream is that you can put people of completely different backgrounds in one place and they will naturally form a progressive utopia. The reality is less ideal - thus far I have yet to see the mutual benefits from all this needless friction.

I don't see the problem with making the statement that most of the terrorists in Turkey are Kurds, when that is the case. It's not an irrelevant statistic, it's indicative of some problem somewhere. The Moroccans in the Netherlands are nothing like the Kurds and Turks though - there is no (historical) feud, they simply came here and never changed their ways. In my opinion the responsibility to adapt lies with the immigrant, not the host. The only things I fault the native Dutch people for in this case are their naivety and short-sightedness.

>So you are suggesting that they have it in their genes?

Don't put words in my mouth, I said no such thing. You offered no rebuttal to what I said, only slander. Explain to me why Moroccan immigrants have not assimilated and why they are so grossly overrepresented when it comes to crime. To say this is all the result of the natives being racist towards Moroccans in particular, that they are forced into this bad behaviour by us, is absolutely ridiculous. They are problematic in France, Belgium and other countries as well. Any negative views towards them are the result of their own actions rather than some grand conspiracy to keep them down.

>That's because Turks are treated in Germany the same way Moroccans are in Netherlands.

Despite being here for decades they have made no effort to assimilate, in contrast to some other groups. 40% (!) of Moroccan youths has a criminal record. They speak poor Dutch. They don't consider themselves Dutch. Let us not pretend the effect was the cause.

That's quite genius, getting people to write trading algorithms for you for free.

>The reaction ensures even more innocent people will die.

What reaction and how will it kill innocent people? Be concrete. You are speaking of a vague hypothetical as if it were a fact.

>And this time, the blood will be on our part.

I know it's trendy to be self-loathing, but I would rather have blood on my hands than someone else having my blood on their hands. An innocent civilian dying due to coalition forces' attempt to combat terrorists is not the same as a civilian being killed by said terrorists.

If I said I'm worried about people voting for politicians that will facilitate the spread of islam in Europe, I'd get downvoted for it in this progressive echo chamber. The US has engaged in useless conflicts both with democratic and republican presidents at the helm. The notion that Trump could and would start deadly wars on his own accord is highly speculative, bordering on baseless propaganda, and moot at this point. I don't have a dog in the fight since I'm not from the US, but it's appalling how pervasive and slanderous the American left is (perhaps my perspective is skewed through the internet, maybe the American right has no significant online presence). People getting killed in Belgium is not a chance for you to inject some US presidential campaign bullshit.

It's grotesque to divert attention and create the narrative that the real tragedy here is not the ever-increasing number of victims of a sickening ideology, but the fact that the reaction to these events (as if fear and anger are inappropriate emotions to an attack) will drive people to a politician you oppose. If people voting for Trump makes you "just as sad" as people getting blown up, there is something seriously wrong with you.

Why should I, as a man, applaud sentiments such as "If there are no men, nobody can get harassed by men"? Replace the word men with any other group and tell me if you think that sounds acceptable. The Geek Feminism list of incidents[0] she links to is a joke, which is very much representative of the movement in its current form. Some examples of the horrors women go through in the tech industry:

  -Lena Söderberg's photograph is first used in image processing experiments. 
  -CeBIT booth babes (Technology industry) 
  -Julian Assange arrest (for Sexual assault) 
  -libuv gendered pronouns patch dispute
  -Sqoot posts a blog article that includes a photo of a topless woman

[0] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents

Society at large is mandating the lives of everyone in ways that are much more serious and inhibiting than the inability to get married, so that's moot. Someone else's willingness to perform a religious ceremony on you is not a right. You could make the argument that married people receive benefits that unmarried people do not and that particular unfairness should be done away with, which is a very valid concern, but that was never the point. You stop caring about "rights" and "bigotry" when it no longer affects you or where it is deemed socially acceptable to do so - the single, the polygamous, the incestuous, they can get stuffed.

Here's a gay man, which I would think gives him some authority, sharing his opinion on the matter of same-sex marriage, and here you are telling him his nuanced views are apartheid-enabling. These kinds of exaggerated reactions, false accusations and radical rhetoric is why I do not want to be associated with the self-proclaimed "progressives". To put it in your own terms: your type of demonizing slander has been used to support [insert horrible event].

Are you really equating "being against gay marriage" to "being a KKK supporter"? How are/were families separated due to not being able to get married?

How many women can physically dominate an average man?

>This logic is infuriating.

Not nearly as infuriating as the demand that accusations of serious offences require no evidence when they are made by a woman against a man. Either come forward with your desires for special treatment, or stop preaching equality.

>If a woman close to you were to suggest she were raped or coerced into sex, would your first response be "Show me the proof!"?

What a weak straw man. If my friend said his neighbour attacked him, I would believe him without question, too. It's absurd to expect a stranger, and especially the law, to take the side of the accuser merely because they made the accusation, or because of the type of crime or gender of the victim.

Very progressive indeed. These kinds of expressions show their veil is thin and their agenda nefarious.

>Well to be fair, a white man's opinion on racism or sexism is sort of like a Pacific Islander's idea of how cold it is in Siberia.

I hope the irony is not lost on you. What a despicable (and sadly typical) comment.

There is a lot of overlap between the HN user base and the delusional SJW ilk that is running Github into the ground. People here are defending the blatantly racist sentiments mentioned in the article. They are performing some serious mental gymnastics to both hold the belief that race is an irrelevant social construct and that too many people of one race (cough whiteys cough) in one place is bad.

>it might also just be political play to get some douchebag rightwing parties over the line

Who is the real "douchebag" in that case?

>But let's not think that being born into the "same" culture or ethnic group gives anyone some kind of password to share in some achievement.

Why not? He is a contributor to the culture that produces a disproportionate amount of successful computer scientists. If these walls were artificial, there would be no disparity.