7 ms·

I continue to use Dropbox and I'm pro the appointment of Condoleezza Rice as for the sake of our industry it is wise for us to have better political links to th

by lhnz 12y ago

I continue to use Dropbox and I'm pro the appointment of Condoleezza Rice as for the sake of our industry it is wise for us to have better political links to the US government. (Politics is irrelevant to me, but power is not. The government can already twist your arm; being on first name's basis with somebody important will be invaluable.) Edit: I thought we could openly state our opinions, but it seems I am getting punished with downvotes. Editing again because it's now going the other direction, but my point still stands: don't downvote or upvote just to normalise your own political beliefs.

tomasgonz 12y ago
If power is not irrelevant to you, then politics either.
- lhnz 12y ago
  I meant political persuasion as-in this isn't about right/left or good/bad for me.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - sebular 12y ago
    At least for me, that's why you don't get an upvote (you'd get a downvote if I could give one). You keep painting this as a political issue, when it isn't. The point is not that Rice is controversial, or a republican. The point is that by international standards, she's a WAR CRIMINAL. So you're not interested in politics. Fantastic. In 1930's Germany you'd be the idiot with his head in the sand, talking about how the Nazi party is really energizing the manufacturing sector and how great that is for the economy. I am so sick of hearing people like you taking pride in how ignorant they are of the world around them.
    - lhnz 12y ago
      She's in a board position at Dropbox which has nothing to do with Nazi Germany. She's probably not going to commit war crimes from this position... And in all honesty I don't think you have any clue what my perspective would be if I had been there in the 1930s. I think it's quite likely that I'd be anti-genocide, anti-authoritarian and quite willing to stand in front of the persecutory masses and tell them what I believe. What I'm trying to say quite nicely to you, is can you quit slandering me?
aaronem 12y ago
I like your reasoning; it's always nice to encounter someone who doesn't confuse "ought" with "is". (Also, anent voting patterns, anecdotal but perhaps still of interest: I've noticed, when expressing on HN political opinions which don't accord with the local consensus, that there will generally be a few slow downvotes early, followed by a quick spike of upvotes bringing the comment up to a net positive score, followed eventually by a few more scattered downvotes, with the net result being usually positive but not as much so as the initial spike would suggest.)
- jnbiche 12y ago
  >when expressing on HN political opinions which don't accord with the local consensus This is the case not only with unpopular political opinions, but anything mildly or even vaguely controversial. I'm convinced that it's mostly the same few individuals who sit on HN all day and downvote away. I've also wondered about the possible existence of a bot or bots that downvote comments with certain keywords, in a misguided effort to avoid any Reddit-like dilution of HN's usual quality. What makes me think it might be bots is the consistent speed with which mildly controversial posts get downvoted once or twice. It seems too regular to be human-mediated (and if it is, then I worry for the mental state of said human).
  - memonkey 12y ago
    I am certain I've seen Communist sentiments scattered around HN but with actual discussion. The same goes for Libertarian sentiment, however I think OP's comment seems flippant at least and reddit flair flippant at most. He contributed nothing by stating his opinion and seemed to be asking for a retort.
sspiff 12y ago
What makes you think down/upvotes are related to political beliefs? It could be that people think you are making a good/bullshit argument, regardless of their political inclination.
- lhnz 12y ago
  1. The poll was framed in a way that did not make my opinion available. 2. Nobody else had expressed my position so I thought that it was uncommon. 3. I assumed the poll was meant to try to force Dropbox to drop her from the board. 4. I expressed a position that wasn't that political but that I knew would anger or confuse political witchhunters. 5. It is quite common for people to downvote information that does not agree with their ethical aesthetics. I think those are good reasons and I think they're quite common. However if you think you can argue beyond a mouse-click go ahead.
  - supersystem 12y ago
    Your "argument" wasn't that good to begin with, since you don't say why political links to the US government would be a good thing nor why she in particular would be a good choice for making/maintaining those links.
    - lhnz 12y ago
      Well I didn't have long to type it so sorry if it wasn't great, but I would say that with regards to principles like Net Neutrality your idea that the tech industry doesn't need better political links to the US government is not well-grounded. I couldn't possibly speculate on who the best people to make or maintain political links are, but my speculation is that the more connected to government you are the more you will be able to affect policies affecting the tech industry.
      - supersystem 12y ago
        "with regards to principles like Net Neutrality your idea that the tech industry doesn't need better political links to the US government is not well-grounded." I said no such thing. Seems like you're the confused one now.
shapov 12y ago
You make a claim that, it is wise for us to have more political links to the US government. but you fail to explain why. Perhaps that's the source of some downvotes. You also write, Politics is irrelevant to me which demostrates that your 'opinion' comes from a place of indifference, perhaps another reason for downvotes.
- lhnz 12y ago
  > You make a claim that [...] but fail to explain why Actually I did: "The government can already twist your arm; being on first name's basis with somebody important will be invaluable." I think it will create more opportunities for the tech industry to influence big politics. > demostrates that your 'opinion' comes from a place of indifference, > perhaps another reason for downvotes. No, and in the next four words I very clearly explained to you what I am not indifferent about.
kordless 12y ago
> but power is not It should be. Irrelevant, that is.
cryoshon 12y ago
"Politics" is discrete from ethics. Condi is a pariah, ethically speaking-- a war criminal walking free. Political links to the US govt are also a bit of a hazard-- the more you willingly approach them and enable them, the more they will take from your pocket and the more they will push you around. The Snowden leaks have painted a bad picture of the US companies as a result of their compliance with ridiculous government policy, and these companies are being scrutinized fiercely as a result.
- snowwrestler 12y ago
  The question is whether it is possible to run a significant business in the United States without interacting with the federal government. I don't think that it is. It's not like ISPs and tech companies went to the NSA and offered up their data--there is no proof at all of that. What the evidence shows is that the government used its force of law to compel cooperation from these companies. The people's tool for controlling the force of law is politics. So, being politically connected is an important part of playing defense against government action. Whether Condoleeza Rice is the correct person to fulfill that role is in the eye of beholder. I certainly don't fault people for opposing any connection to her. But I would fault anyone who thinks that that is a universal sentiment. There are quite a few people (in government and out) who still respect and perhaps even like her.
  - api 12y ago
    "The question is whether it is possible to run a significant business in the United States without interacting with the federal government. I don't think that it is." That may be true. It probably is true once you reach the numbers-beginning-in-B level. Nevertheless, there are lots of political operatives, former officials, and other contacts you could find without stooping as low as a former member of the Bush administration.
- azinman2 12y ago
  I'm certainly no fan of hers but "war criminal" is a label that's thrown around way too often with no basis or grounding. It's too often used to describe someone who engaged in some kind of war someone else doesn't like, so they're labeled as such. The actual term stems from The Hague conventions, which were not violated by her or the U.S. in this case.
Multics 12y ago
Without support, governments have no power. In the past, it may have been rational to overlook deeds, such as war crime, to reach a Nash equilibrium which results in a net positive outcome. And it may still be the rational move to cuddle up with a metaphorical Hitler. However, there's a strong argument to be made in changing the dynamic, and spurning people/companies who think it's justifiable to optimise for power, regardless of the human cost! The costs are lost lives, devastated lives, and the tearing apart of 'other' nations. Don't care? That's for each person to decide. It's not like anyone can 'legitimately' come and rip Dropbox from your devices... other than your government, of course.
- sliverstorm 12y ago
  I'm a little lost. Are you suggesting Dropbox, perhaps through new-found political might, is going to end lives and destroy nations?
jeangenie 12y ago
> us to have better political links to the US government. Us? Are you on Dropbox's board? Why is wedding corporate power to political influence wise for this industry? Astonishing naiveté. > don't downvote or upvote just to normalise your own political beliefs. What a meaningless statement. Post on your blog if you don't want your opinion torn apart like a piece of meat. All the comments I've seen thus far are civil. EDIT: It's too bad OP is unwilling to engage in any real dialogue on this issue. Other comments make excellent points which lhnz also ignores and dismisses.
- lhnz 12y ago
  Yes - if you work in the tech industry you are affected by policies which affect the industry as a whole. Wedding corporate power to political influence is wise for the industry because that is exactly what we are up against already: corporate power has been wedded to political influence for a very long time and one can easily point out attempts that have already been made to protect previously established industries. See, it's easy, I was able to argue back without resorting to name calling.
  - jeangenie 12y ago
    > exactly what we are up against already There's that pesky collective noun again. Again, you labor under a delusion of a shared struggle. > one can easily point out attempts that have already been made to protect previously established industries. Such as a company that's raised over a billion dollars seeking to protect its position in a lucrative market by appointing politically well-connected board members? No way! > I was able to argue back without resorting to name calling. And so was I. What's your point?
    - lhnz 12y ago
      > I was able to argue back without resorting to name calling. And so was I. What's your point? You use words like "naiveté", "delusion", "meaningless" which are clearly derogatory so you are wrong again. Hilariously your comment "all the comments I've seen thus far are civil" completely rung true until you got involved.
discardorama 12y ago
I'm against Condi because she is partially responsible for the deaths of at least 100,000 (that 100 thousand) Iraqis. It was her job as NSA to temper Dubya's intransigence, but she did not. Such a person should be shunned and not given positions of status.

by lhnz 12y ago

tomasgonz 12y ago

If power is not irrelevant to you, then politics either.

lhnz 12y ago
I meant political persuasion as-in this isn't about right/left or good/bad for me.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- sebular 12y ago
  At least for me, that's why you don't get an upvote (you'd get a downvote if I could give one). You keep painting this as a political issue, when it isn't. The point is not that Rice is controversial, or a republican. The point is that by international standards, she's a WAR CRIMINAL. So you're not interested in politics. Fantastic. In 1930's Germany you'd be the idiot with his head in the sand, talking about how the Nazi party is really energizing the manufacturing sector and how great that is for the economy. I am so sick of hearing people like you taking pride in how ignorant they are of the world around them.
  - lhnz 12y ago
    She's in a board position at Dropbox which has nothing to do with Nazi Germany. She's probably not going to commit war crimes from this position... And in all honesty I don't think you have any clue what my perspective would be if I had been there in the 1930s. I think it's quite likely that I'd be anti-genocide, anti-authoritarian and quite willing to stand in front of the persecutory masses and tell them what I believe. What I'm trying to say quite nicely to you, is can you quit slandering me?

aaronem 12y ago

I like your reasoning; it's always nice to encounter someone who doesn't confuse "ought" with "is". (Also, anent voting patterns, anecdotal but perhaps still of interest: I've noticed, when expressing on HN political opinions which don't accord with the local consensus, that there will generally be a few slow downvotes early, followed by a quick spike of upvotes bringing the comment up to a net positive score, followed eventually by a few more scattered downvotes, with the net result being usually positive but not as much so as the initial spike would suggest.)

jnbiche 12y ago
>when expressing on HN political opinions which don't accord with the local consensus This is the case not only with unpopular political opinions, but anything mildly or even vaguely controversial. I'm convinced that it's mostly the same few individuals who sit on HN all day and downvote away. I've also wondered about the possible existence of a bot or bots that downvote comments with certain keywords, in a misguided effort to avoid any Reddit-like dilution of HN's usual quality. What makes me think it might be bots is the consistent speed with which mildly controversial posts get downvoted once or twice. It seems too regular to be human-mediated (and if it is, then I worry for the mental state of said human).
- memonkey 12y ago
  I am certain I've seen Communist sentiments scattered around HN but with actual discussion. The same goes for Libertarian sentiment, however I think OP's comment seems flippant at least and reddit flair flippant at most. He contributed nothing by stating his opinion and seemed to be asking for a retort.

sspiff 12y ago

What makes you think down/upvotes are related to political beliefs? It could be that people think you are making a good/bullshit argument, regardless of their political inclination.

lhnz 12y ago
1. The poll was framed in a way that did not make my opinion available. 2. Nobody else had expressed my position so I thought that it was uncommon. 3. I assumed the poll was meant to try to force Dropbox to drop her from the board. 4. I expressed a position that wasn't that political but that I knew would anger or confuse political witchhunters. 5. It is quite common for people to downvote information that does not agree with their ethical aesthetics. I think those are good reasons and I think they're quite common. However if you think you can argue beyond a mouse-click go ahead.
- supersystem 12y ago
  Your "argument" wasn't that good to begin with, since you don't say why political links to the US government would be a good thing nor why she in particular would be a good choice for making/maintaining those links.
  - lhnz 12y ago
    Well I didn't have long to type it so sorry if it wasn't great, but I would say that with regards to principles like Net Neutrality your idea that the tech industry doesn't need better political links to the US government is not well-grounded. I couldn't possibly speculate on who the best people to make or maintain political links are, but my speculation is that the more connected to government you are the more you will be able to affect policies affecting the tech industry.
    - supersystem 12y ago
      "with regards to principles like Net Neutrality your idea that the tech industry doesn't need better political links to the US government is not well-grounded." I said no such thing. Seems like you're the confused one now.

shapov 12y ago

You make a claim that, it is wise for us to have more political links to the US government. but you fail to explain why. Perhaps that's the source of some downvotes. You also write, Politics is irrelevant to me which demostrates that your 'opinion' comes from a place of indifference, perhaps another reason for downvotes.

lhnz 12y ago
> You make a claim that [...] but fail to explain why Actually I did: "The government can already twist your arm; being on first name's basis with somebody important will be invaluable." I think it will create more opportunities for the tech industry to influence big politics. > demostrates that your 'opinion' comes from a place of indifference, > perhaps another reason for downvotes. No, and in the next four words I very clearly explained to you what I am not indifferent about.

kordless 12y ago

> but power is not It should be. Irrelevant, that is.

cryoshon 12y ago

"Politics" is discrete from ethics. Condi is a pariah, ethically speaking-- a war criminal walking free. Political links to the US govt are also a bit of a hazard-- the more you willingly approach them and enable them, the more they will take from your pocket and the more they will push you around. The Snowden leaks have painted a bad picture of the US companies as a result of their compliance with ridiculous government policy, and these companies are being scrutinized fiercely as a result.

snowwrestler 12y ago
The question is whether it is possible to run a significant business in the United States without interacting with the federal government. I don't think that it is. It's not like ISPs and tech companies went to the NSA and offered up their data--there is no proof at all of that. What the evidence shows is that the government used its force of law to compel cooperation from these companies. The people's tool for controlling the force of law is politics. So, being politically connected is an important part of playing defense against government action. Whether Condoleeza Rice is the correct person to fulfill that role is in the eye of beholder. I certainly don't fault people for opposing any connection to her. But I would fault anyone who thinks that that is a universal sentiment. There are quite a few people (in government and out) who still respect and perhaps even like her.
- api 12y ago
  "The question is whether it is possible to run a significant business in the United States without interacting with the federal government. I don't think that it is." That may be true. It probably is true once you reach the numbers-beginning-in-B level. Nevertheless, there are lots of political operatives, former officials, and other contacts you could find without stooping as low as a former member of the Bush administration.
azinman2 12y ago
I'm certainly no fan of hers but "war criminal" is a label that's thrown around way too often with no basis or grounding. It's too often used to describe someone who engaged in some kind of war someone else doesn't like, so they're labeled as such. The actual term stems from The Hague conventions, which were not violated by her or the U.S. in this case.

Multics 12y ago

Without support, governments have no power. In the past, it may have been rational to overlook deeds, such as war crime, to reach a Nash equilibrium which results in a net positive outcome. And it may still be the rational move to cuddle up with a metaphorical Hitler. However, there's a strong argument to be made in changing the dynamic, and spurning people/companies who think it's justifiable to optimise for power, regardless of the human cost! The costs are lost lives, devastated lives, and the tearing apart of 'other' nations. Don't care? That's for each person to decide. It's not like anyone can 'legitimately' come and rip Dropbox from your devices... other than your government, of course.

sliverstorm 12y ago
I'm a little lost. Are you suggesting Dropbox, perhaps through new-found political might, is going to end lives and destroy nations?

jeangenie 12y ago

> us to have better political links to the US government. Us? Are you on Dropbox's board? Why is wedding corporate power to political influence wise for this industry? Astonishing naiveté. > don't downvote or upvote just to normalise your own political beliefs. What a meaningless statement. Post on your blog if you don't want your opinion torn apart like a piece of meat. All the comments I've seen thus far are civil. EDIT: It's too bad OP is unwilling to engage in any real dialogue on this issue. Other comments make excellent points which lhnz also ignores and dismisses.

lhnz 12y ago
Yes - if you work in the tech industry you are affected by policies which affect the industry as a whole. Wedding corporate power to political influence is wise for the industry because that is exactly what we are up against already: corporate power has been wedded to political influence for a very long time and one can easily point out attempts that have already been made to protect previously established industries. See, it's easy, I was able to argue back without resorting to name calling.
- jeangenie 12y ago
  > exactly what we are up against already There's that pesky collective noun again. Again, you labor under a delusion of a shared struggle. > one can easily point out attempts that have already been made to protect previously established industries. Such as a company that's raised over a billion dollars seeking to protect its position in a lucrative market by appointing politically well-connected board members? No way! > I was able to argue back without resorting to name calling. And so was I. What's your point?
  - lhnz 12y ago
    > I was able to argue back without resorting to name calling. And so was I. What's your point? You use words like "naiveté", "delusion", "meaningless" which are clearly derogatory so you are wrong again. Hilariously your comment "all the comments I've seen thus far are civil" completely rung true until you got involved.

discardorama 12y ago

I'm against Condi because she is partially responsible for the deaths of at least 100,000 (that 100 thousand) Iraqis. It was her job as NSA to temper Dubya's intransigence, but she did not. Such a person should be shunned and not given positions of status.