3 ms·

If you feel so boxed into a corner that someone saying maybe, just maybe, you jumped the gun and assumed some things that weren't actually valid and could do wi

If you feel so boxed into a corner that someone saying maybe, just maybe, you jumped the gun and assumed some things that weren't actually valid and could do with some fresh eyes on the topic is attacking you, then I'm not sure what more I can say that is evidence more than that itself. Hiding behind a blanket of being "for human dignity" is no defense when your actions don't actually help that cause in any way. In fact, I think the original comment you've belittles so much does more for actually helping human dignity than anything you've said, as it outlines a real consequence to real people for others not taking into account what happens when they shirk their duties. The lip service you provide to that ideal doesn't come close to doing as much, but given your lack of evidence for your behavior, I think you know that deep down, and that's why you're attacking everyone's motivations and character (without cause). In any case, I think you'll find that attempting to win an argument through stoking people's indignity when there wasn't anything to indignant about is a losing argument here. You could try actually explaining why you think the original comment deserves your ire (that is, in more detail than something along the lines of "that's mean to people in a way that is so self-evident I refuse to explain it") rather than attacking everyone that asks you to explain it as too coldly analytical. Just because something's a feeling doesn't mean there shouldn't be a reason behind that feeling, at least if you plan to impose that behavior upon other people. > At a meta level, if our conversation doesn’t make clear the very problem I’m trying to communicate to you in regard to engineering’s relationship with humanity If by communicate you mean vilify without explanation... Put simply, the engineering discussion needs to be had. Just because you wrongly assume it means people don't have feelings on the subject doesn't mean there isn't a need for the discussion, whether you find it hard to stomach or not. People are hurt by systems all the time, and discussing how and why this happens helps those systems hurt less people. Stopping those conversations because you think it causes indignity so someone who was defined with all manner of anonymity doesn't help anyone. Not the people in question (which nobody here knows who they are), nor other people in similar situations, nor the engineers who might have ways of preventing some occurrences of the problem in the future.

aea12 7y ago
What do you want, a map? 1) Unfortunately, someone took a conversation about a purchase request as a chance to speak to [me] in a personal capacity. He’s a genuinely nice guy though and [I] like him. Just didn’t know what his role was in [my] workplace, and it wasn’t putting that story in [my] ear at that time, but I suffered through it. 2) Now that [I] live with the story, [I’ve] been waiting for a chance to share it so [I] don’t have to live with it any more. 3) What’s this? A thread about Azure? Someone finally mentioned crematoria! Yes! Gather around, fellow engineers, to dissect a Therac type of thing none of you will ever interact with, but will nonetheless defend on the grounds of “yeah, airplanes crash too” or free speech or mumble mumble. By the way, the person was half burned and fat. Sucks, right? That’s a really insidious poison to accept, understand, and rationalize for your work, in ways that are not immediately obvious (clearly), and I lobby for ethics and licensing in our discipline for exactly the reasons on evident display this thread. This industry keeps turning out large-scale systems that are harmful to humanity. Do you think that came from postgraduate studies in evil, or a detached, clinical callousness and disregard for fellow people like the one you’re trying so hard to justify? That person had a family. THEY WERE THERE. Maybe even kids. Dreams. Hopes. Aspirations. You’ve reduced them to a fat, half-burned corpse in the name of ginning up useful engineering disaster warnings or something. No, the discussion doesn’t NEED to be had. I reject your premise outright. If it’s a problem that I care about those things, then, well, we are going to disagree. There is absolutely no small measure of irony in the numerous attempts across this entire thread to put my humanity into question for challenging yours. You’re only reinforcing for me that I’m absolutely right, and had underestimated the acceptability of the problem.
- kbenson 7y ago
  It's all in how you interpret it. Let me show you some other interpretations of what you read. > 1) Unfortunately, someone took a conversation about a purchase request as a chance to speak to [me] in a personal capacity "I was checking in on different departments, to make sure everyting was running smoothly, but got drawn into a non-work discussion I didn't really expect or have a lot of time for, but that's okay, he's a nice guy." > 2) Now that I live with the story, I’ve been waiting for a chance to share it so I don’t have to live with it any more. "Now that someone mentions some software that would possibly have prevented the exact problem the person related to me, I think it's relevant to share. > 3) Someone finally mentioned crematoria! Yes! Gather around, fellow engineers, to dissect a Therac none of you will ever interact with. By the way, the guy was half burned and fat. Sucks, right? "And the implicit moral of my story is that these weird and esoteric systems the top level comment mentioned and wished there were open source versions for because they all require windows do have consequences, and do need options." Or, you could just assume the person was like "ha ha dead people and fire" and assume everyone that asks you why you're upset is trying to curry favor with some weird set of tech moguls or something. Edit: > If it’s a problem that I care about those things, then, well, we are going to disagree. Caring is not the problem, caring is laudable. Seeing those things where they don't exist, that's not. I think you're keying off some words in the post and letting that set a state of mind that colored the rest of what you read. To me, that exchange was a moment of "aw, that sucks. I feel bad for everyone involved" on the part of both parties in the conversation. Relating that itself is not bad. In any case, we've gotten to the point where I actually got to see your reasoning to some minimal degree, and it's about what I thought (a gross misinterpretation to my eyes). I've addressed that here and before, and I'll let you have the last word.

aea12 7y ago

What do you want, a map? 1) Unfortunately, someone took a conversation about a purchase request as a chance to speak to [me] in a personal capacity. He’s a genuinely nice guy though and [I] like him. Just didn’t know what his role was in [my] workplace, and it wasn’t putting that story in [my] ear at that time, but I suffered through it. 2) Now that [I] live with the story, [I’ve] been waiting for a chance to share it so [I] don’t have to live with it any more. 3) What’s this? A thread about Azure? Someone finally mentioned crematoria! Yes! Gather around, fellow engineers, to dissect a Therac type of thing none of you will ever interact with, but will nonetheless defend on the grounds of “yeah, airplanes crash too” or free speech or mumble mumble. By the way, the person was half burned and fat. Sucks, right? That’s a really insidious poison to accept, understand, and rationalize for your work, in ways that are not immediately obvious (clearly), and I lobby for ethics and licensing in our discipline for exactly the reasons on evident display this thread. This industry keeps turning out large-scale systems that are harmful to humanity. Do you think that came from postgraduate studies in evil, or a detached, clinical callousness and disregard for fellow people like the one you’re trying so hard to justify? That person had a family. THEY WERE THERE. Maybe even kids. Dreams. Hopes. Aspirations. You’ve reduced them to a fat, half-burned corpse in the name of ginning up useful engineering disaster warnings or something. No, the discussion doesn’t NEED to be had. I reject your premise outright. If it’s a problem that I care about those things, then, well, we are going to disagree. There is absolutely no small measure of irony in the numerous attempts across this entire thread to put my humanity into question for challenging yours. You’re only reinforcing for me that I’m absolutely right, and had underestimated the acceptability of the problem.

kbenson 7y ago
It's all in how you interpret it. Let me show you some other interpretations of what you read. > 1) Unfortunately, someone took a conversation about a purchase request as a chance to speak to [me] in a personal capacity "I was checking in on different departments, to make sure everyting was running smoothly, but got drawn into a non-work discussion I didn't really expect or have a lot of time for, but that's okay, he's a nice guy." > 2) Now that I live with the story, I’ve been waiting for a chance to share it so I don’t have to live with it any more. "Now that someone mentions some software that would possibly have prevented the exact problem the person related to me, I think it's relevant to share. > 3) Someone finally mentioned crematoria! Yes! Gather around, fellow engineers, to dissect a Therac none of you will ever interact with. By the way, the guy was half burned and fat. Sucks, right? "And the implicit moral of my story is that these weird and esoteric systems the top level comment mentioned and wished there were open source versions for because they all require windows do have consequences, and do need options." Or, you could just assume the person was like "ha ha dead people and fire" and assume everyone that asks you why you're upset is trying to curry favor with some weird set of tech moguls or something. Edit: > If it’s a problem that I care about those things, then, well, we are going to disagree. Caring is not the problem, caring is laudable. Seeing those things where they don't exist, that's not. I think you're keying off some words in the post and letting that set a state of mind that colored the rest of what you read. To me, that exchange was a moment of "aw, that sucks. I feel bad for everyone involved" on the part of both parties in the conversation. Relating that itself is not bad. In any case, we've gotten to the point where I actually got to see your reasoning to some minimal degree, and it's about what I thought (a gross misinterpretation to my eyes). I've addressed that here and before, and I'll let you have the last word.