This is weak, blunt comparison that isn't even very compelling when steel-manned. It's a disappointingly un-thoughtful thing to see on HN so commonly.
Possibly for some things and possibly not for others. It's hard to say. The upsides and downsides are very apples-and-oranges. The point isn't that the world would be objectively better in every case, but rather that…
I appreciate when people write things like, "this is an advertisement for the author's product, X." Why stay silent? If the commenter's accusation smells fishy, I'll read the article myself. Otherwise, they helped me.
"Novel" is not a prerequisite for something to be worth pointing out. Lots of bad things happen repeatedly, and don't quickly become not worth caring about or knowing about. People have strong spirits and curious minds…
Is "quietly" an LLM tell? It was always certainly a human writer trope commonly seen in journalism. Though I guess it does appear five times in the body of the post, and a human writer would probably not go that far…
Why would they need to differentiate? You're implying those arguments were wrong? The argument usually isn't "I believe X will not happen," it's usually either "I believe X should not happen" or "I believe we should…
What the fuck? Edit: Sorry, you're suggesting that it's OK to disallow a bathroom break that would inconvenience customers or cause a fellow employee to be unable to progress? That category of work culture should be…
>Let's take this out of the heated debate. Why? It's an emotional subject. We can debate it heatedly without becoming irrational.
"Picking" is not the same as "declining to acknowledge a change to". You can make your argument perfectly well without pretending otherwise.
Both things are problematic.
There's a line. It's pointless to pretend "legality === nobody is allowed to disrespect you for complying". Regardless of which side of the line you land on, this is a fundamental truth. "They're just using its legal…
Probably "is flawed" is closer to reality than "fails abysmally", in contrast to most modern implementations of DEI.
It's going over my head, too. I don't understand what the implication of the sentence is in context.
> we need to sympathize with employers in situations like this, at times Of course, at times, yes. Not at this time in American history, clearly. > When their business is crucial to society and can't function without…
Of the two-dozen or so technical people whose lives I am familiar with, three are doing well (not at all wealthy, just comfortable). Two got there with good jobs, the third gets everything from wealthy parents. The rest…
Utterly hideous. I hope to live to see the day this mentality is once again absent from the United States of America.
I disagree. Enough people disagree that "blatant" is probably, by definition, not an appropriate adjective. But at the same time, I don't hold that position passionately. Maybe it is fascism. It's not "blatant", but…
I don't think this is helpful if somebody is trying to learn English subtleties. Responding to a person's thought with "You don't understand", and that's it, implies hostility/rudeness. People tend to read certain…
I share your concern about the effects of white supremacy, but in this case it looks like there is no lesser or greater "evil'. Just a guy who expresses his opinions without delicacy.
You are not responding to the same commenter.
Right, I see what you mean. It's not entirely Microsoft's fault - I'm just taking a shot at them.
I completely agree that he was unnecessarily prickly/political in his response. I only disagree that it validates xgulfie's implication that he is in the "so bad we should disparage whatever he does" category.
I don't follow, especially since this is a reply to your own post. Can you clarify?
In the 2020's, this is just another genre of petty hatred. As time goes on, one type of person's historical privilege becomes less and less valid as a reason to reduce them in any way, as compared to anybody else…
That looks within the realm of reason? (not that you must agree with it)
This is weak, blunt comparison that isn't even very compelling when steel-manned. It's a disappointingly un-thoughtful thing to see on HN so commonly.
Possibly for some things and possibly not for others. It's hard to say. The upsides and downsides are very apples-and-oranges. The point isn't that the world would be objectively better in every case, but rather that…
I appreciate when people write things like, "this is an advertisement for the author's product, X." Why stay silent? If the commenter's accusation smells fishy, I'll read the article myself. Otherwise, they helped me.
"Novel" is not a prerequisite for something to be worth pointing out. Lots of bad things happen repeatedly, and don't quickly become not worth caring about or knowing about. People have strong spirits and curious minds…
Is "quietly" an LLM tell? It was always certainly a human writer trope commonly seen in journalism. Though I guess it does appear five times in the body of the post, and a human writer would probably not go that far…
Why would they need to differentiate? You're implying those arguments were wrong? The argument usually isn't "I believe X will not happen," it's usually either "I believe X should not happen" or "I believe we should…
What the fuck? Edit: Sorry, you're suggesting that it's OK to disallow a bathroom break that would inconvenience customers or cause a fellow employee to be unable to progress? That category of work culture should be…
>Let's take this out of the heated debate. Why? It's an emotional subject. We can debate it heatedly without becoming irrational.
"Picking" is not the same as "declining to acknowledge a change to". You can make your argument perfectly well without pretending otherwise.
Both things are problematic.
There's a line. It's pointless to pretend "legality === nobody is allowed to disrespect you for complying". Regardless of which side of the line you land on, this is a fundamental truth. "They're just using its legal…
Probably "is flawed" is closer to reality than "fails abysmally", in contrast to most modern implementations of DEI.
It's going over my head, too. I don't understand what the implication of the sentence is in context.
> we need to sympathize with employers in situations like this, at times Of course, at times, yes. Not at this time in American history, clearly. > When their business is crucial to society and can't function without…
Of the two-dozen or so technical people whose lives I am familiar with, three are doing well (not at all wealthy, just comfortable). Two got there with good jobs, the third gets everything from wealthy parents. The rest…
Utterly hideous. I hope to live to see the day this mentality is once again absent from the United States of America.
I disagree. Enough people disagree that "blatant" is probably, by definition, not an appropriate adjective. But at the same time, I don't hold that position passionately. Maybe it is fascism. It's not "blatant", but…
I don't think this is helpful if somebody is trying to learn English subtleties. Responding to a person's thought with "You don't understand", and that's it, implies hostility/rudeness. People tend to read certain…
I share your concern about the effects of white supremacy, but in this case it looks like there is no lesser or greater "evil'. Just a guy who expresses his opinions without delicacy.
You are not responding to the same commenter.
Right, I see what you mean. It's not entirely Microsoft's fault - I'm just taking a shot at them.
I completely agree that he was unnecessarily prickly/political in his response. I only disagree that it validates xgulfie's implication that he is in the "so bad we should disparage whatever he does" category.
I don't follow, especially since this is a reply to your own post. Can you clarify?
In the 2020's, this is just another genre of petty hatred. As time goes on, one type of person's historical privilege becomes less and less valid as a reason to reduce them in any way, as compared to anybody else…
That looks within the realm of reason? (not that you must agree with it)