hi-im-mi-ih

I agree with this, I use plain GVim on all my machines. I'm not interested in plugins that will slow it down - it's fine the way it is.

And what political agenda is that, precisely?

I recommend against purchasing surveillance services from a company that does not have HTTPS on their landing page.

A rising tide lifts all ships.

They're not going to try to land the car and drive it - The car is going to be put into orbit around mars indefinitely, so that one day an alien species can find it, long after we're gone.

I see, thanks for the reply padseeker.

Can you provide an example of WSJ defending duopolies, or this sort of thing?

Do not execute the random, obfuscated python code linked to from this paste. This could be bait, and could PWN you. This must be audited first before anyone runs it.

> What if your "controversial opinion" harasses and alienates other people?

> as a victim you ARE entitled to share your story. You are entitled to tell people "hey this person did something bad and it hurt me."

An employee at a SV company writes on a forum that he's not a fan of diversity quotas and equity. Then, someone reads it, and claims that they feel harassed and alienated by that quote. They tweet an angry message accompanied by a screenshot of the forum post. Then, a twitter mob forms, calling the employee a Nazi. He's conflated with real racism now, though he originally was talking about diversity quotas and equity. Because his language was "harmful", the victims have their justification; by any means necessary they must remove this hateful Nazi.

The employee gets fired for PR reasons. Other employees stay away from those topics, self-silencing for fear of retaliation like the 1st employee received. Ideas are stifled; democracy is weakened.

Can you see how your chain of logic leads to this?

First off, I like your example, it embodies the core dynamic that people refer to when discussing hate speech vs. free speech.

  Does this boss really deserve a debate and an exchange of open ideas?

YES. Both the employee and the boss in this situation need to sit down and talk about it. Even if the boss is of the rough, conservative demeanor, he can be very receptive! You must simply approach the boss without a chip on your shoulder, and be very respectful. Any man worth his salt will reconsider their position after this. Express yourself fully, express your existing and continuing respect for the boss, and watch as he becomes reasonable. For this is the core tension between the liberals and the conservatives: There is no respect given to each other before both sides begin to engage.

  If you tell them you disagree and they just continue mocking gay people, what are you supposed to say or do?

Well, that depends on the outcome of the discussion you two had. Did you come out of it friends, with a stronger relationship, and mutual understanding? Then the boss probably is just being careless in his use of homophobic slurs, and dare I say the onus is on the gay person to restrain their disdain - and such restraint should be easy, because you respect and are friends with the man uttering slurs. You know that he is your boss, your provider and guide; you know that you can approach him honestly and be safe from retaliation, so why would you feel fear in this situation? You should feel nothing at all if not slight irritation.

Now, suppose you come out of the discussion about homophobic slurs, and the boss was not at all receptive. Perhaps he uttered a slur to you as you left. Then you must leave the company, and rightfully declare him a homophobe when appropriate.

Let's get to the meat of the issue. Do you pre-judge your slur-uttering boss? Do you assume him to be homophobic, and begin attacking his character in all avenues? Do you never attempt discussion, instead tweeting about how he's committing hate crimes?

Or. Do you approach him honestly with your guard down, to admit both your sexual orientation and your devotion to your job, while requesting that he try and restrict his use of the word ft? Do you listen silently while he riffs against political correctness, nodding and acknowledging, until he comes around and apologizes for making you uncomfortable?

You may take the path of the coward, or the path of the hero.

> What if your "controversial opinion" harasses and alienates other people?

So then, as the victim, are you cleared to harass and smear whoever you please?

> he's only thought from the perspective of some innovator he's perceived to have been unfairly branded a heretic

Ah, so his identity as a wealthy man invalidates his opinion, and his writing should be disregarded?

Remember that a lead dev for Node was attacked not too long ago for discussing the potential downsides of CoC's.

https://twitter.com/rvagg/status/887652116524707841 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15073022

This is the kind of thing Sam is talking about - we should be able to discuss things that are controversial without getting mobbed for it.