weberc2

43 ms·

391.
by weberc2 7y ago
> On the one had you have permanent negative cultural discrimination that is keeping some people down who don't deserve it, and on the other you have an attempt to counter that with visible positive visible/out-in-the-open affi
392.
by weberc2 7y ago
It’s not deplorable to try to end discrimination, it’s deplorable to discriminate on the bases of race and sex, even if you believe that you can fight racism and sexism by way of more racism and sexism. And it’s as ridiculous to think that
393.
by weberc2 7y ago
I use VS Code too, but dynamic typing means I have to deal with this sort of thing every day: https://mobile.twitter.com/weberc2/status/118275131245637632... Compared with, say, Go where I just hover the cursor. A
394.
by weberc2 7y ago
I would not advertise Python as a language with good IDE support nor package management. I fight with both of these regularly. Also, Python is reasonably suited for gluing together other high performance systems, but not everything in the w
395.
by weberc2 7y ago
You missed my point—the original comment argued that the software industry is in such great need for performance that functional programming is unacceptable (apart from niche use cases). If that we’re true, then Python and other slow langua
396.
by weberc2 7y ago
I’m all for mechanical sympathy, and I’m sure that some programmers legitimately need their language to map neatly to assembly, but that isn’t the norm as evidenced by the overwhelming popularity of interpreted and VM languages. Lots of com
397.
by weberc2 7y ago
I genuinely can’t tell if “misogyny” means “sexual harassment” or “men having mildly nonconforming political views” a la Damore. If the former, no one would object to said “cleanup”, so that’s pretty clearly not what we’re discussing.
398.
by weberc2 7y ago
It’s discrimination either way. The subjectivity is just about whether or not it is deserved. Some people think certain races or sexes deserve it, which is deplorable but technically subjective.
399.
by weberc2 7y ago
> If it's illegal, we'll take it down. Give us a court order. Otherwise we don't touch it.
400.
by weberc2 7y ago
These are the _only_ kinds of politics that are acceptable in many workplaces. We have diversity departments and minority groups and women's groups and consultancies and recruiting agencies advertise their ability to find minority cand
401.
by weberc2 7y ago
The opposite of progressive intolerance is not intolerance toward progressives. One can (and should) object to both.
402.
by weberc2 7y ago
The health of the democracy is independent of discussing politics in the workplace. There are plenty of other opportunities to discuss politics and otherwise tend to the democracy.
403.
by weberc2 7y ago
Yes, 'influence' is a question of degree and there is no neat threshold at which one company's influence is too great. Just like there is no neat threshold at which a company is "too monopolistic", yet we still have
404.
by weberc2 7y ago
Whoa, I've had this idea kicking around in my mind for a looong time (specifically something for dynamically generating Go code). Was wondering if anyone actually built this out, but could never find anything. Thanks for sharing!
405.
by weberc2 7y ago
Of course, they don’t have the practical effect of preventing blacks from voting. Can we stop conflating abuses in the US with the same system that works uncontroversially all over the world? I’m not arguing it’s the most important thing to
406.
by weberc2 7y ago
Is that inherent to voter ID systems, or could you imagine a world where ID issuing authorities are required to keep better hours? Perhaps we could check out Europe’s model to see how they keep their voter ID systems from regressing into a
407.
by weberc2 7y ago
Cool, so we agree? Twitter’s moderation is completely opaque. All sides of this debate acknowledge this much.
408.
by weberc2 7y ago
Then you misunderstand the debate. Russia’s attack model isn’t guns and wars, it’s subverting our democracy by influencing who sees what via Twitter et al. If the Russians can change our laws by using social media to covertly influence elec
409.
by weberc2 7y ago
I think we’re mostly in agreement. Clearly today’s Twitter has a legal right to do what they want with their platform. I think it’s hypocritical to be concerned about Russians manipulating our Democracy indirectly, but not concerned at all
410.
by weberc2 7y ago
So to be clear, we can’t have common sense non-racist voter ID laws because the Republicans won’t allow it (and defeating entrenched interests is hopelessly intractable, so why bother), but somehow there will be more political will for n
411.
by weberc2 7y ago
Right. These are simple, tractable problems, and there are successful models the world over. That people fight so adamantly against something as straightforward as voter ID indicates ulterior motives.
412.
by weberc2 7y ago
Then we shouldn’t fret about Russians manipulating it.
413.
by weberc2 7y ago
It’s not a conflation; the point is that if Twitter _as a communication channel_ holds so much away that Russians can upvote or retweet things to manipulate our democracy, the _how in the world_ are we okay with a private company having the
414.
by weberc2 7y ago
Why does it matter that it’s a state compromising our democracy vs a private company? Anyway, I maintain that Twitter and other major social networks represent such an overwhelming volume of our speech that they are not simply “private comp
415.
by weberc2 7y ago
Sure. Let's strike that shit down. Make sure ID requirements are even across the board. Seems like a pretty tractable problem.
416.
by weberc2 7y ago
> This wouldn't solve the problem of too many inner city residents voting and messing up your legislative majority. I'm not a Republican, and I'm not advocating for a legislative majority for any party. You're not par
417.
by weberc2 7y ago
So require ID-issuing authorities to keep certain hours. This is a trivial problem; I don't understand the compulsion to paint this as a dichotomy--there's lots of middleground between Evil Racist voter ID requirements and no vote
418.
by weberc2 7y ago
I can't tell what the "straw man" argument you're referring to. Could you clarify?
419.
by weberc2 7y ago
I'm totally fine with requiring an ID _and_ making it easy for legitimate voters to get one. I don't understand why there are people who are opposed to voter ID requirements (full stop), as though they are inherently racist.
420.
by weberc2 7y ago
> 10% of households don't have a computer Does this include smart phones? Seems like percent of people with Internet access would be more relevant. I would think public libraries would also provide a lot of coverage here. > 15% o

More ›