6 ms·
I Don't Think I Can Stay in Tech
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- slowin 1mo agoI absolutely feel this. I quit my job at Microsoft because they were too complicit with Israel's crimes against humanity (posted about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48925777 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48925777). That left me looking for a job and I have one now, with a startup I like a lot and hasn't done anything unethical to the best of my knowledge. The investors have though. Most of the VC community is straight up fascist/supremacist/genocidal... our industry is sick and while no doubt there was always this underpinning (I just didn't see it or realize my own complicity), it feels like it's ratcheted up a lot in the last 5 or so years.
- vector_spaces 1mo agoFor the record I am with you and OP in the sense that I personally would struggle with such proximity. But the reality is that even if you do what I did and give up quite a bit of salary in exchange for something so mundane as the same work in a public university-run health system, you can still often follow the money to some ugly places that are not as far away as you'd like. Regarding startups, the ones like yours are probably the best one can realistically hope for, ideological inclinations of the founders aside
- slowin 1mo agoI totally agree with you. The problem is bigger than tech. Is it capitalism? I was historically not anti-capitalist but it's hard not to lean in that direction now. I feel like the issue is somehow bigger than even that though. If we were living under communism, the same people would probably be in charge. There's something about consolidation and centralization of power and access to resources being fungible through ideologies that makes this possible. Maybe it's the existence of "states" that is the problem (i.e. a monopoly on violence). I sure have been thinking a lot about this recently as Gaza was the ultimate manifestation of where this can go. I actually think there's a movement to bring that type of violence to places like the US. Flock and fascism are steps in that direction imo.
- atmavatar 1mo ago> The problem is bigger than tech. Is it capitalism? The underlying problem is that power and wealth causes people to believe themselves above others to a degree proportional to how much more power and wealth they have relative to those considered below them. Unfortunately, we've seen unprecedented concentration of wealth occur, so it should come as no surprise that those who are running things exhibit very little humanity towards others.
- OkayPhysicist 1mo agoCongrats on rediscovering Anarchism from first principles. Hierarchy begets hierarchy. As long you have a society where some people can coerce others into acting for the master's benefit and against their own, you end up on a ratchet. Power accumulates, leading to more coercion, leading to more power. Such systems select for individuals who are the most feverishly driven to amass power at any cost and put them in the position to seize more.
- 1attice 1mo agoThe world separates cleanly into those of us who could never knowingly and freely take any money from any fascist and those who would point out the generous meal plan bestowed upon the camp guards. "Quite a bit of salary" like
- vector_spaces 1mo agoI have never been in the situation of knowingly taking salary from any fascist and would never tolerate it. I've left jobs I needed over this. My "walking away" was more about wanting to work on stuff in my day job that felt somewhat more worthwhile and tangibly useful to humanity
- 1attice 1mo agoI was working for someone who startled me with a revealed preference, and it's more common than you think. Kick the tires on any boss or employer
- nh23423fefe 1mo ago[flagged]
- Tempest1981 1mo agoI grew up believing that capitalism somehow separates business from government, with each operating independently. Same with separation of church and state. Not sure what to think of things now.
- majorchord 1mo agoI think the problem, if we're talking about the US at least, is that the conservatives running things believe a government should be small... which inevitably leads to corporations virtually running parts of the government, unless you come up with a way to explicitly prevent that. But the people in power who want to remain in power would never go along with that.
- silon42 1mo agoThey need to add to their beliefs... corporations need to be small too.
- majorchord 1mo agoThat's a great idea actually :) Personal wealth caps wouldn't hurt either.
- idiotsecant 1mo agoI think it's pretty clear that the 'small' government preference of conservative politicians is a myth. They want to make the parts of government they don't like small and the parts they do like quite large. None of that takes away from your point, but I just wanted to deflate the meme slightly.
- svachalek 1mo agoThose hypothetical "small government conservatives" are running up the Federal deficit at a breathtaking, unprecedented pace. What's actually going on is much simpler to explain as corruption.
- krapp 1mo ago
- sarabande 1mo agoSeems like an unnecessarily broad brush to paint with, as if "tech" were a monolith. Just don't work for the companies that cross your self-stated lines in the sand: > But my personal lines definitely extend to don’t give money to people who enable fascism and don’t create value for them, either.
- slowin 1mo agoI think there's a systemic problem with the investors though. It's a smallish pool of very much monocultured venture capitalists that's very easy to get blacklisted from if you don't adhere to their ideology. It's not as simple as just finding a job somewhere else, when the financing is controlled by a small group of people who are extremely vindictive.
- gen220 1mo agoFounders swim in the incentive pool of VCs, who swim in the incentive pool of LPs, who swim in the incentive pool of capital-c Capital. When you architect your industry around "number goes up" as the number one priority that everybody agrees on, and then add multiple layers of abstraction separating capital from labor, you end up with the Ouroboros-style arrangement we have today. The head forgets that it is the tail, and vice-versa. I think we used to (in, idk, the era of the Roosevelts) have a very different leadership class, with competing interests that were more complicated than "number go up", even in the corporate class. Since the Kennedy assassination(s!) in the US, I don't think we've had a single leader (corporate or political) who has publicly and sincerely questioned that narrative. At this point we struggle to imagine a civilization with alternative priorities, but history is littered with examples.
- majorchord 1mo ago[flagged]
- krapp 1mo agoWhy is this strawman such a common trope among certain walks of life? I have yet to encounter someone who actually considers everything they disagree with to be fascist.
- majorchord 1mo agoI don't consider it a strawman. Do you understand what hyperbole is? When people say "everyone is X"... they very rarely actually mean the literal definition of everyone. Words are not always used in a rigid black-and-white manner according to their definition... understanding and being able to deal with this, without getting angry or trying to "correct" people, is what makes for good social etiquette IMO.
- krapp 1mo agoHyperbole is as useless to productive conversation as strawmen and one is usually just an excuse to prop up the other. Maybe you could tell us what, specifically, the author refers to as fascist that you don't consider to be fascist?
- majorchord 1mo agoMy understanding is that they are referring to DHH lamenting that his race is becoming a minority in his home country due to mass immigration. Is it fascist to not want to become a minority based on how we see them often treated badly? I think it's normal to fear that.
- krapp 1mo agoYes, it is. Racial essentialism, xenophobia and white supremacy are all fascist. Praising and supporting right-wing extremists is fascist. Believing in ethnic cleansing and that non-whites need to be forcibly removed is fascist. Believing all non-Christian religion needs to be banned is fascist. Equating "gypsies" to dogs is fascist. When you believe the things that fascists believe, it is accurate to call you a fascist. Obviously, you will disagree with my interpretation and the interpretation of many others, and I'm not interested in having that argument, because I know it will be futile. The point is that your original hyperbolic assertion that the author had no rationale for considering DHH to be fascist other than pure arbitrary spite is incorrect. They have a rationale, you just disagree with it.
- q3aGf 1mo agoI still don't understand how these people think they can achieve ultra right wing and unemployment through AI at the same time. Even Hitler didn't manage. But the tech people have been programmed for obedience and followed their industry leaders through wokeness and now protofascism without thinking. Tech people are weak and just act as repeaters, so I guess the leaders know what they are doing and the useful idiots will carry it out, even if they live under a bridge in 5 years.
- bena 1mo agoIf he feels that way, he feels that way. However, if you don't like the creator of Brave or Ladybird, and you don't believe Google or Mozilla can be trusted to make a browser that respects privacy, giving up is just ceding to those forces. Like, make a browser. Make it with people who do share your values. That's exactly what Andreas King and the Brave people did. That's what DHH is doing. If they're right about anything, the "anti-SJW/DEI/Woke/'politics'" groups are right in that you cannot demand creators share your values. If you like Harry Potter, you have to deal with JK Rowling. There's no way around it. You have to reconcile that with your morals. You don't get to demand that she supports the groups you want her to support in order for you to enjoy her content guilt-free. So your options are, don't use those browsers, or make your own. You have that ability. And yes, you, singular you, cannot make all the software. But you can make something and you can find others with your values and eventually you can build a network and that network can build all the software. With values that you can support. * I know I talk a lot about browsers, but that's just the example. This is applicable to everything.
- croes 1mo ago> anti-SJW/DEI/Woke/'politics' groups are right in that you cannot demand creators share your values. Strange because that’s exactly what the anti-SJW/DEI/Woke/'politics' groups in the government demand.
- epistasis 1mo agoOne of the best freedoms out there is freedom of association. I don't need to associate with people I don't like or find distasteful. I don't need to join hands with the Tankies. I don't need to read JK Rowling's works. I get to choose. > If they're right about anything, the "anti-SJW/DEI/Woke/'politics'" groups are right in that you cannot demand creators share your values. I don't associate that claim with these groups, if anything they seem to be saying the opposite.
- bena 1mo agoA little bit sorta. Conservatives will come out to say that you can't force JK Rowling to be pro (or even neutral) on the trans issue. Now, they'll also say that certain people shouldn't be allowed to create. Or at the very least create based on certain properties. Which is admittedly almost a "same result, different mechanism" issue. But they will claim to allow the market decide (aka "go woke, go broke").
- thataccount 1mo agoSo the author is just now, in 2026, getting where many conservatives in tech were in around 2018. Now, though, the author wants to occupy the moral high ground while tacitly suggesting Islam is swell. Good luck with all that.
- your_pr_agency 1mo agoOf course this is flagged. From 2020-2024 anti-woke was flagged, since Trump anti-fascist is flagged. I wish China could host an HN clone so we could have free discussions.
- 1attice 1mo agoAt my end, same reasons, same conclusion. I want nothing to do with fascists, and with programmer jobs as thin on the ground as they are, I would be forced to take whatever. That's not a coin flip I feel like making. No amount of money can compensate you for severe moral injury. So, I hedge my bets and make contingency plans.
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- thevillagechief 1mo agoThe question is, where are you going to go? Finance? Farming, Logistics? Writing/Literature/Philosophy? Big Pharma? All those people are funneling funds to people you find utterly objectionable. You'll find that every career/industry is probably proportionally representative of people who share your values as those who don't. Tech is is only so visible to you because you are so immersed in it. Care less about "Tech" and more about your family/community/friends.
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- UncleMeat 1mo agoI'm slowly making my way out of tech and going into food preparation for the poor. I previously thought working at one of these companies to extract as much money from them as possible so that I could provide as many meals to the poor as possible using that money was the best thing to do. I'm less sure about that today. I'm sure that some of the people I work with at food banks are homophobic because they hold a particularly conservative version of their faith. I'm also sure that they aren't directly working with the government to cause material harm to marginalized people, which I cannot say about my current employer.
- Huarache1 1mo agoYou can disagree with someone while still treating them the best they can. A Doctor shouldn't leave a patient mid-surgery simply because he found out he's an Anti-Vaxxer or votes a certain way. Similarly I have no doubt the Food Banks have people who hold such views. But it doesn't matter if they are still willing to give food even to homeless, possibly even homeless people who are homosexual (statistically homosexual people are more likely to be in poverty or homeless). It's still a net positive action if they are giving food to those they deem as against their beliefs. Praying for your "enemies", both real or imagined, is a tenet for Christianity.
- UncleMeat 1mo ago
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- lo_zamoyski 1mo agoIf I had more time, I might elaborate on the fact that both the author and those he criticizes are children of the Enlightenment. I mention this, because it has a great deal of relevance. Neither Promethean Techno-Pelagianism on the one hand nor Socio-Voluntaristic Manichaeism on the other present a great vision of the good, whatever validity we can find in their criticisms.
- ranger_danger 1mo ago> But my personal lines definitely extend to don’t give money to people who enable fascism and don’t create value for them, either. You simply cannot use any technology at all in general while abiding by this ideology though. Just the keystrokes you used to write this already were paid for by, and continue to be used to enable, countless people to do their "fascism" as you call it.
- throwawaypath 1mo ago[flagged]
- eddhead 1mo agoI think you shouldn't have ever been in tech. You don't seem to like freedom very much. Good riddance.
- EveryonePoops 1mo agoThis isn't really a tech article, except insofar as a tech worker seems to be involved. Taking a political litmus test to people is about divisive politics, not technology. I'd flag this if my low karma account would let me.
- lemontheme 1mo agoI felt this article, minus the conclusion, perhaps. There is something profoundly rotten going on. Used to be that you had to keep the quiet part to yourself. Now you can espouse white supremacy and enjoy broad social capital. Everyone at the top appears to have agreed that, yeah, fascism-lite is actually kind of convenient from a capitalist perspective, and they’re enabling anyone who helps spread that ethos. Meanwhile half of our industry is at best apathetic. ‘You can use Omarchy without caring about DHH’s politics,’ explained one of my colleagues. And he’s kind of right. Death of the author – that sort of thing. But using it also lends credibility to the maker, who can point at their project’s popularity as an indirect sign of vindication of their ideology. Hence, as I see it, the only morally right choice is not to use it. Regarding the conclusion, I wouldn’t leave. I see it as my duty to push back, even if the effect is woefully modest. We need to start reminding each other again that, no, this isn’t okay. In the office and online.