5 ms·

Just a reminder: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

sctb 10y ago
Please don't drop flamewar-style comments into unrelated threads like this.
- tptacek 10y ago
  I'm not sure this qualifies as that. IBM's role in politics has been historically fraught. Is everyone here really aware of IBM's role in the Holocaust? That really happened. The whole thread is problematic. I dug into some of the claims --- for instance, I'd like to see IBM's "15 ideas" for saving 900 billion in healthcare costs (I was unable to find anything other than anti-Obamacare spam sites suggesting IBM had offered to foot the bill for the whole system in exchange for running it on IBM hardware). I'm not sure there's much to this story, and so I don't think there will be much to the thread.
  - sctb 10y ago
    If it doesn't qualify as entirely unrelated, I think it still qualifies as flamewar-style (“Here—fight!”). The story might be different if the commenter had something to say, as the guidelines ask when broaching these topics.
    - hackuser 10y ago
      Scott - Is this comment appropriate?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12962658 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12962658 I understand it's tricky. I certainly don't want to start a flamewar, but I do think that these issues are critically important and should not be ignored. I'd appreciate your feedback if you think it could be improved somehow.
      - sctb 10y ago
        One thing in that comment that could be stronger is the connection between IBM's behavior then and now ("connect the dots" as a prominent commenter might say). It's perhaps enough to just be reminded of past behavior of the same corporation in order to warrant asking the question in the present context, but saying so may have addressed the objection that you've received.
        hackuser 10y ago
        Fair enough. I want to find ways to address these issues and get people thinking, not flaming.
  - arcticfox 10y ago
    Politics in general has been historically fraught: go back a century and almost every player has taken some terribly unseemly positions or actions. It's pretty irrelevant to single out IBM mostly because they've happened to exist for that long, unlike the majority of other tech companies.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      I'm not singling IBM out, I'm singling this story out: it is nearly content-free and volatile given the company behind it and the context of the election.
- waterphone 10y ago
  It wasn't intended to provoke a flamewar, and it wasn't unrelated to the subject. IBM, who provided technology to the Nazis to track the Jews for the holocaust is now cozying up to a President-elect who promised to create a database to track Muslims.

sctb 10y ago

Please don't drop flamewar-style comments into unrelated threads like this.

tptacek 10y ago
I'm not sure this qualifies as that. IBM's role in politics has been historically fraught. Is everyone here really aware of IBM's role in the Holocaust? That really happened. The whole thread is problematic. I dug into some of the claims --- for instance, I'd like to see IBM's "15 ideas" for saving 900 billion in healthcare costs (I was unable to find anything other than anti-Obamacare spam sites suggesting IBM had offered to foot the bill for the whole system in exchange for running it on IBM hardware). I'm not sure there's much to this story, and so I don't think there will be much to the thread.
- sctb 10y ago
  If it doesn't qualify as entirely unrelated, I think it still qualifies as flamewar-style (“Here—fight!”). The story might be different if the commenter had something to say, as the guidelines ask when broaching these topics.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    Scott - Is this comment appropriate?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12962658 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12962658 I understand it's tricky. I certainly don't want to start a flamewar, but I do think that these issues are critically important and should not be ignored. I'd appreciate your feedback if you think it could be improved somehow.
    - sctb 10y ago
      One thing in that comment that could be stronger is the connection between IBM's behavior then and now ("connect the dots" as a prominent commenter might say). It's perhaps enough to just be reminded of past behavior of the same corporation in order to warrant asking the question in the present context, but saying so may have addressed the objection that you've received.
      - hackuser 10y ago
        Fair enough. I want to find ways to address these issues and get people thinking, not flaming.
- arcticfox 10y ago
  Politics in general has been historically fraught: go back a century and almost every player has taken some terribly unseemly positions or actions. It's pretty irrelevant to single out IBM mostly because they've happened to exist for that long, unlike the majority of other tech companies.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    I'm not singling IBM out, I'm singling this story out: it is nearly content-free and volatile given the company behind it and the context of the election.
waterphone 10y ago
It wasn't intended to provoke a flamewar, and it wasn't unrelated to the subject. IBM, who provided technology to the Nazis to track the Jews for the holocaust is now cozying up to a President-elect who promised to create a database to track Muslims.