4 ms·

I find it a bit absurd when I hear pundits and media types claim that liberal bias doesn't exists in silicon valley tech companies (top to bottom). As somebody

I find it a bit absurd when I hear pundits and media types claim that liberal bias doesn't exists in silicon valley tech companies (top to bottom). As somebody who lived in San Francisco for five plus years, I can firmly attest it is more than bias. It's utter disdain, hatred, and prejudice. Just look at how James Damore was handled it should be clear that diversity of thought and individualism is not accepted. It's a complete echo chamber of shaming culture who stand on a pedestal of moral superiority. Another example, Antirez has been absolutely mob shamed into changing master/slave in Redis by a Google employee. If you are against the change because it's an industry standard you are called a racist.

jayd16 8y ago
I don't think anyone claims Californians working in SF aren't liberal. What you really mean is you want to be a mildly bigoted in peace and/or demand attention because historically disadvantaged groups are getting attention without any backlash while simultaneously telling others to get over their own insecurities. When people say you have a persecution complex you think its a liberal agenda. Case in point, no one thinks caring about industry standards makes you racist. Not caring about what makes others uncomfortable so you don't have to learn a new word is what's frustrating. The appropriate response to a silly request like that is "oh, uh, sure whatever. Just update the wiki."
- spangry 8y ago
  It's not just a simple case of 'update the wiki'. You've actually got to modify the code and potentially break already established APIs (and break scripts that parse redis logs). But putting aside the fact that it's not costless to make these sorts of changes, it's also pointless. These people will never be satisfied. They're not offended; they're bullies who want to control other people and virtue signal to their bully friends. Giving in to their 'little change' just encourages more bullying, more salami-slicing, more 'little changes' (e.g. removing any reference to the word 'whitelist', instituting a code of conduct etc.). Redis is open-source: if their political sensibilities are so offended, they can fork the project (like ayojs for example, https://github.com/ayojs/ayo https://github.com/ayojs/ayo).
  - jayd16 8y ago
    By "Update the wiki" I do also mean "sure just do the work yourself." We're saying the same thing. That said, fighting against things you claim to have no preference over you're also partaking in the same control/power trip shenanigans. That's when things really go off the rails.
    - hjrnunes 8y ago
      Not really. It's not the particular choice of words that bothers people. It's the fact that they either have to submit to the frivolous power-trippers or die on a hill they don't particularly want to, in this case defending the word 'slave'. You're saying they should just submit, despite the fact that they realise the whole point of it all just is their submission. In other words, submit to the bully because, otherwise, you're just as bad as him.
      - jayd16 8y ago
        The rub is you really don't know what their motivation is. You can suspect but if they're willing to put in the all the work, it costs you nothing. Going on some crusade for no gain or loss and only to deny someone else is just whipping up drama. If you have legitimate complaints, make them. This doesn't have anything to do with politics. Any argument based around "I don't care so you shouldn't either" is bound to cause issues.
        hjrnunes 8y ago
        Yes. I don't know their motivation the same way a man is presumed innocent in a court. But people are not courts. So I do not need, not is it practical, to act like one. However, I do know the justifications their proponents present for it. And I do know that they're frivolous. They just claim it will somehow make the world better. They set up a conjecture - that abstract people abstractly suffer when they read those words - and proceed to impose a real action based on the conjecture: we have to delete the words. Notice how no actual person is presented has having suffered from reading these words in Python code, let alone questioned (like a witness in a court, btw). So no actual suffering is presented. Yet, the actions, the imposition, is concrete. It is actual. Some very actual people will have something imposed on them directly and indirectly because of this frivolous conjecture. And the conjecture is frivolous precisely because it is an extraordinary claim - that people suffer when they read 'slave' in the context of Python code - that is presented without a single shred of anecdotal evidence, let alone proof or demonstration.
- adnzzzzZ 8y ago
  >The appropriate response to a silly request like that is "oh, uh, sure whatever. Just update the wiki." The appropriate response to people being bothered by words is for them to grow a thicker skin. I want the world to be a better place, and I want that to happen by making individuals stronger. Individuals grow weaker if you coddle them in every way imaginable. So I find your request to change a word that upsets people disgusting and morally wrong, and that's why I won't change it. So no, it's not just a matter of just saying "sure whatever".
- nailer 8y ago
  > What you really mean is you want to be a mildly bigoted Please don't tell anyone else 'what they really mean'. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
carapace 8y ago
I live in the Bay Area, I grew up in San Francisco, I'm firmly left-leaning in much of my political views. I upvoted your comment because in my opinion you are right, although overstating it a bit. The "Left Coast" is biased. There is a lot of tribal knee-jerk reactivity, and there are rabid haters. (Yeah yeah the right has 'em too. There's a reason Tim Chevlier and David Gudeman were both fired. Not my point.) "Not all lefties" though, okay?
- nodesocket 8y ago
  Thank you for understanding the thesis of my comment. It's already getting downvoted unfortunately. The most absurd thing to me is how is this kind of rhetoric acceptable at a company sponsored event? It is obviously politically motivated and totally biased. One speaker nearly started crying about Hillary losing. How is that fair to employees at Google that are conservative?
  - nkurz 8y ago
    How is that fair to employees at Google that are conservative? What obligation do you think that a company should have to respect the political leanings of its employees? While it might be in a company's self-interest not to alienate talented employees with minority political beliefs, do you believe it should be forbidden for the company to "choose sides"?
    - nodesocket 8y ago
      Just as liberals like to promote social justice, I think it's not fair to conservatives that are harassed, outed, and unfairly represented. Since when is it ok for a company to hold a political rally?
      - jayd16 8y ago
        Not that I agree but certainly since the Citizens United ruling.
      - 8y ago
rixed 8y ago
mob shamed by a Google employee?
closeparen 8y ago
"Utter disdain, hatred, and prejudice" is an entirely appropriate reaction to someone trying to upend your life through immigration policy.

jayd16 8y ago

I don't think anyone claims Californians working in SF aren't liberal. What you really mean is you want to be a mildly bigoted in peace and/or demand attention because historically disadvantaged groups are getting attention without any backlash while simultaneously telling others to get over their own insecurities. When people say you have a persecution complex you think its a liberal agenda. Case in point, no one thinks caring about industry standards makes you racist. Not caring about what makes others uncomfortable so you don't have to learn a new word is what's frustrating. The appropriate response to a silly request like that is "oh, uh, sure whatever. Just update the wiki."

spangry 8y ago
It's not just a simple case of 'update the wiki'. You've actually got to modify the code and potentially break already established APIs (and break scripts that parse redis logs). But putting aside the fact that it's not costless to make these sorts of changes, it's also pointless. These people will never be satisfied. They're not offended; they're bullies who want to control other people and virtue signal to their bully friends. Giving in to their 'little change' just encourages more bullying, more salami-slicing, more 'little changes' (e.g. removing any reference to the word 'whitelist', instituting a code of conduct etc.). Redis is open-source: if their political sensibilities are so offended, they can fork the project (like ayojs for example, https://github.com/ayojs/ayo https://github.com/ayojs/ayo).
- jayd16 8y ago
  By "Update the wiki" I do also mean "sure just do the work yourself." We're saying the same thing. That said, fighting against things you claim to have no preference over you're also partaking in the same control/power trip shenanigans. That's when things really go off the rails.
  - hjrnunes 8y ago
    Not really. It's not the particular choice of words that bothers people. It's the fact that they either have to submit to the frivolous power-trippers or die on a hill they don't particularly want to, in this case defending the word 'slave'. You're saying they should just submit, despite the fact that they realise the whole point of it all just is their submission. In other words, submit to the bully because, otherwise, you're just as bad as him.
    - jayd16 8y ago
      The rub is you really don't know what their motivation is. You can suspect but if they're willing to put in the all the work, it costs you nothing. Going on some crusade for no gain or loss and only to deny someone else is just whipping up drama. If you have legitimate complaints, make them. This doesn't have anything to do with politics. Any argument based around "I don't care so you shouldn't either" is bound to cause issues.
      - hjrnunes 8y ago
        Yes. I don't know their motivation the same way a man is presumed innocent in a court. But people are not courts. So I do not need, not is it practical, to act like one. However, I do know the justifications their proponents present for it. And I do know that they're frivolous. They just claim it will somehow make the world better. They set up a conjecture - that abstract people abstractly suffer when they read those words - and proceed to impose a real action based on the conjecture: we have to delete the words. Notice how no actual person is presented has having suffered from reading these words in Python code, let alone questioned (like a witness in a court, btw). So no actual suffering is presented. Yet, the actions, the imposition, is concrete. It is actual. Some very actual people will have something imposed on them directly and indirectly because of this frivolous conjecture. And the conjecture is frivolous precisely because it is an extraordinary claim - that people suffer when they read 'slave' in the context of Python code - that is presented without a single shred of anecdotal evidence, let alone proof or demonstration.
adnzzzzZ 8y ago
>The appropriate response to a silly request like that is "oh, uh, sure whatever. Just update the wiki." The appropriate response to people being bothered by words is for them to grow a thicker skin. I want the world to be a better place, and I want that to happen by making individuals stronger. Individuals grow weaker if you coddle them in every way imaginable. So I find your request to change a word that upsets people disgusting and morally wrong, and that's why I won't change it. So no, it's not just a matter of just saying "sure whatever".
nailer 8y ago
> What you really mean is you want to be a mildly bigoted Please don't tell anyone else 'what they really mean'. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

carapace 8y ago

I live in the Bay Area, I grew up in San Francisco, I'm firmly left-leaning in much of my political views. I upvoted your comment because in my opinion you are right, although overstating it a bit. The "Left Coast" is biased. There is a lot of tribal knee-jerk reactivity, and there are rabid haters. (Yeah yeah the right has 'em too. There's a reason Tim Chevlier and David Gudeman were both fired. Not my point.) "Not all lefties" though, okay?

nodesocket 8y ago
Thank you for understanding the thesis of my comment. It's already getting downvoted unfortunately. The most absurd thing to me is how is this kind of rhetoric acceptable at a company sponsored event? It is obviously politically motivated and totally biased. One speaker nearly started crying about Hillary losing. How is that fair to employees at Google that are conservative?
- nkurz 8y ago
  How is that fair to employees at Google that are conservative? What obligation do you think that a company should have to respect the political leanings of its employees? While it might be in a company's self-interest not to alienate talented employees with minority political beliefs, do you believe it should be forbidden for the company to "choose sides"?
  - nodesocket 8y ago
    Just as liberals like to promote social justice, I think it's not fair to conservatives that are harassed, outed, and unfairly represented. Since when is it ok for a company to hold a political rally?
    - jayd16 8y ago
      Not that I agree but certainly since the Citizens United ruling.
    - 8y ago

rixed 8y ago

mob shamed by a Google employee?

closeparen 8y ago

"Utter disdain, hatred, and prejudice" is an entirely appropriate reaction to someone trying to upend your life through immigration policy.