8 ms·
Your comment is essentially "the owners hold certain values I disagree with regarding sexuality, therefore I'm surprised their technical team is any good." I d
by unit91 8y ago
Your comment is essentially "the owners hold certain values I disagree with regarding sexuality, therefore I'm surprised their technical team is any good."
I don't see how that follows.
- psychometry 8y agoI never made any statement conflating views of ownership with technical team skills. That's absurd.
- stochastic_monk 8y agoNo, that was not what he said. He said to keep in mind the opinions of the company owners, which I imagine encourages one to not purchase from them. I do not see how one can claim a criticism of their engineering follows from his statement.
- stickfigure 8y agoPolitical values are important to point out. Companies create these tech blogs as a recruitment vehicle. You should know if the company you're considering applying to is funding bigotry (or "wholesome family values" if that's your angle).
- factsaresacred 8y ago> 'Bigotry'. noun : intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself. Surely castigating the owner of Chick-fil-A for advocating his personal beliefs is the truest example of bigotry here.
- starkruzr 8y agoNo, not really, since his personal beliefs involve advocating for others to suffer. He suffers nothing by permitting LGBT people to live as they wish.
- pvg 8y agoYou should probably not rely on Google's fairly crappy dictionary definitions.
- factsaresacred 8y agoYes, instead of relying on dictionaries, words should mean whatever you want them to mean.
- pvg 8y agoBigotry does not just mean 'intolerance towards those who hold different opinions from oneself.' It's a silly definition, not what I want it to mean.
- Fellshard 8y agoLanguage does not operate on the basis of what the speaker _wants_ it to mean.
- pvg 8y agoI don't understand what ghost windmill you are tilting at here. At all. It certainly doesn't seem to be anything I've actually said.
- Fellshard 8y agoI have a pretty personal beef with the idea that language can simply be contorted to supposedly mean whatever someone feels like it should mean, as heading down that road is basically abandoning meaning and communication altogether, and is wholly incoherent.
- pvg 8y agoYeah but... I didn't say any of that.
- jessaustin 8y agoOf course neither of those things is actually bigotry. This "oh I'm suffering" crap is disgusting. If we actually cared about suffering our freely elected government wouldn't be causing so much of it.
- nearlynameless 8y agoThere is no world in which pointing out the political beliefs espoused by a corporation should be considered an example of bigotry.
- darpa_escapee 8y agoEuphemisms like "advocating for his personal beliefs" wouldn't fly, if say, the owner was donating to organizations that fought to make interracial marriage illegal again. We'd call that what it is: bigotry.
- caconym_ 8y agoI love seeing this argument. It's like you people think you can raise any arbitrary instance of hate/intolerance/bigotry onto a criticism-proof pedestal simply by brandishing a dictionary. Like, who are the real bigots: Nazis, or the nasty people who have the gall to disagree with their racist, antisemitic, etc. views? Is the answer not obvious? Does the question send you scuttling back under your dictionary? I'm fine with a bit of pedantry but ultimately in the real world we need to show a little more intellectual maturity.
- factsaresacred 8y agoYou're missing the point. I'm not concerned about the word. I'm concerned about the definition - those quickest to cry bigot are often guilty of acting like one themselves. Case-in-point: Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey being forced to apologise for eating at Chick-fil-A during LGBT Month. What kind of bizarre intolerant nonsense is that? Another case-in-point: Boston and Chicago mayors claim "Chick-fil-A values are not [our] values" and refuse to let them open branches in those cities. Absurd.
- caconym_ 8y ago> I'm not concerned about the word. I'm concerned about the definition Come again? It seems like you're the one who's missing the point, anyway. You didn't address anything I wrote in my comment. Par for the course, I guess. Just imagine I wrote the exact same comment again, and reply to that if you feel like it.
- starshadowx2 8y agoThe paradox of intolerance[1]: being tolerant of those who are intolerant leads to less tolerance. It is completely right to call out intolerant views and actions and work towards eliminating them. [1] https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Paradox_of_tolerance https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Paradox_of_tolerance
- weberc2 8y agoThe obvious problems with 'the paradox of intolerance' being that anyone who can convince themselves of another's intolerance now has moral license to behave intolerantly to an unspecified degree. Of course, exactly this sort of thing happens all the time; notably, it was used to rationalize Google's firing of James Damore--Damore's memo allegedly contained "dogwhistles" so he deserved being fired, slandered by the media, and mobbed on social media.
- abraham_lincoln 8y agoLike IBM or Facebook?
- romwell 8y ago..who get ripped on HN for every reason possible as well (and rightfully so).
- natch 8y agoThe poster said nothing of the sort. To make the point more directly for you, I think and I’m guessing the poster thinks we ought not to normalize certain kinds of discriminatory corporate behavior by just looking away and cheerfully admiring their oh-so-efficient tech stack.
- ForrestN 8y agoThis whole post and thread are an effort to recruit engineers and accumulate good will within the HN community. Pointing out that the company is rotten is extremely important, as is anything else that can undermine the project of manipulating talented, powerful hackers into working on the project of generating profits that power an evil social agenda.
- ForrestN 8y agohttps://thinkprogress.org/sorry-marco-rubio-chick-fil-still-anti-lgbtq-083e28896fad-c27d2f72e52b-29c662a73b7c-9cd823511a46/ https://thinkprogress.org/sorry-marco-rubio-chick-fil-still-...
- romwell 8y agoFor those coming to the thread later: the parent comment pointed out a certain fact[1] about the corporate activities of Chick-Fil-A that doesn't directly relate to the contents of the article. The basis was the observation that such articles are,in essence, a "work-for-us" ads, and in that vein, informing the readers of other, broader actions of a corporation is relevant, especially when it pertains to ethics. [1]https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chick-fil-a-gay-marriage/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chick-fil-a-gay-marriage/