4 ms·

Non-twitter link, in case that would have been useful for anybody else. https://pluralistic.net/2020/11/05/gotta-be-a-pony-under-there/#jack-ma https://plurali

Non-twitter link, in case that would have been useful for anybody else. https://pluralistic.net/2020/11/05/gotta-be-a-pony-under-there/#jack-ma https://pluralistic.net/2020/11/05/gotta-be-a-pony-under-the...

SECProto 6y ago
Thanks, I had originally seen it on twitter or else I would've sent the blog post directly. Iirc it's something like 60 tweets so the post is definitely better!
kortilla 6y ago
How can people stand this kind of writing? It assumes conclusions for all kinds of things that are not agreed on. It’s intellectually lazy even for people who agree with these views (“heavy slant towards finance being optimally a utility”, “Uber/Lyft ‘misclassifying’ workers”, etc). This is Fox News level opining.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
  It is an opinion. And it is interesting precisely, because it is not common and it forces you to reconcile your currently held beliefs and opinions with the authors. Frankly, I read much worse.
  - kortilla 6y ago
    It’s treated like an accepted fact though, not an opinion. That’s intellectually lazy.
    - SECProto 6y ago
      > It’s treated like an accepted fact though, not an opinion Hope you've never read the "opinions" section in a newspaper! Or the comments in the thread above mine. This one actually cites a lot more references/sources than a typical editorial. I specifically linked it as "here is Cory Doctorow's take on [the situation]". I don't endorse it wholely, but I found it very interesting. > That’s intellectually lazy. Doctorow's take is much, much, much less intellectually lazy on the causes behind Ant's IPO shutdown/Alibaba's antitrust fine/Jack Ma's withdrawal from most public facing activities than comments I was responding to (ie "[the CCP is being so capricious!]" <1> or "Look how small his offense was!" <2>) <1> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26766726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26766726 <2> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26766748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26766748

SECProto 6y ago

Thanks, I had originally seen it on twitter or else I would've sent the blog post directly. Iirc it's something like 60 tweets so the post is definitely better!

kortilla 6y ago

How can people stand this kind of writing? It assumes conclusions for all kinds of things that are not agreed on. It’s intellectually lazy even for people who agree with these views (“heavy slant towards finance being optimally a utility”, “Uber/Lyft ‘misclassifying’ workers”, etc). This is Fox News level opining.

A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
It is an opinion. And it is interesting precisely, because it is not common and it forces you to reconcile your currently held beliefs and opinions with the authors. Frankly, I read much worse.
- kortilla 6y ago
  It’s treated like an accepted fact though, not an opinion. That’s intellectually lazy.
  - SECProto 6y ago
    > It’s treated like an accepted fact though, not an opinion Hope you've never read the "opinions" section in a newspaper! Or the comments in the thread above mine. This one actually cites a lot more references/sources than a typical editorial. I specifically linked it as "here is Cory Doctorow's take on [the situation]". I don't endorse it wholely, but I found it very interesting. > That’s intellectually lazy. Doctorow's take is much, much, much less intellectually lazy on the causes behind Ant's IPO shutdown/Alibaba's antitrust fine/Jack Ma's withdrawal from most public facing activities than comments I was responding to (ie "[the CCP is being so capricious!]" <1> or "Look how small his offense was!" <2>) <1> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26766726 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26766726 <2> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26766748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26766748