I am probably working on Hubski.
Send me a PM or post with the tag #bugski if you think something is broken.
I am ignoring #thebeatles.
I do not agree with everything that I post. I hope you don't either.
Image by veen.
followed tags: 50
followed domains: 5
badges given: 198 of 198
member for: 2569 days
I don't think that Sam is muddying the waters anymore than they already are. These are muddy waters, they always have been and always will be.
All ideas have consequences, but no debate is completely rationale. We need to be ok with that.
"Hey Joe, let's hear why you think slavery is a good idea. What's your reasoning?" At the very least, Joe is going to walk away with the realization that his rationale isn't very persuasive. He'll probably also realize that his views make people doubt his moral character. He's going to have to chew on that. However, if we just say "Shut up Joe. Slavery is wrong, we all know that. Get lost, asshole." Joe is not going to have a constructive takeaway that diminishes his convictions.
Joe is ignorant. Sam is ignorant. We are all ignorant.
Sam isn't making the world worse by not having a moral litmus test for funding startups. Sam funds startups. That's his vocation. Being a misogynistic racist manchild didn't stop Donald Trump from getting real estate loans. It shouldn't.
BTW, it's been a while since we've had a good 0-share long discussion post. :)
Nuh nuh nuh can't read this yet. So curious.
Thanks FirebrandRoaring and D. Should be fixed.
Some more bug upkeep to follow.
It's interesting. I probably can't open a soul food restaurant, but I can likely open a Chinese restaurant since my wife is Chinese. But what if I opened a Japanese restaurant? I can imagine people eating their sushi thinking it was so nice that this white/asian couple opened a Japanese restaurant, but then spitting out their food in disgust once my wife spoke (That is unless they can't tell the difference between Japanese and Chinese language, then omg eat up you racist scum!).
- I agree with him that in a debate, all ideas should be discussable. But that's not his argument, his argument is that people can have horrible, destructive and oppressive beliefs and that those need to be tolerated because the people having them are smart. "I feel oppressed because I get flak for having or supporting oppressive and hateful ideas."
My grandpa took me shooting one day. Upon blowing up a gallon jug of water with a rifle, he congratulated me by shouting "You got that Jap!". I know people that exhibit anti-black racist behavior, but have black friends. Many of my Chinese lab mates in Detroit were quite racist against blacks and some against other non-Chinese Asians (Indians, Japanese, etc.). A burka is oppression to me, but I can make friends with men that see it as sacred religious observance. My feelings about sheitels are not too different. I have family members that I love that are homophobic. I am ok if someone thinks that my lack of religion makes me a sinner bound for hell. I am ok if someone thinks that I only have these views only because I am a white male.
We tolerate ideas that we feel are hateful and oppressive every day. Our governments practice them and we rarely protest, or even don't vote.
The point is, ideas are not nearly as dangerous as an the environment that doesn't allow for people to have them, because an environment like that does not diminish the power of these ideas. Instead it creates ideological warfare. At the right moments, I try to persuade those around me to change their minds about ideas that I find are hateful and oppressive. But I do not believe they shouldn't be allowed to express them a priori or conflate that with tolerance. I am tolerating their right to be ignorant. We are all ignorant.
- This is true, but there is a really big difference between 'wacky idea' and 'damaging, oppressive idea' that he completely conflates. One is a bit weird and the other is damaging. Is slavery a "wacky idea"?
Slavery was considered a reasonable idea for a long time. I don't know about wacky, but I'm not worried about it catching on in the US even if someone expresses support for it. Is the burka a wacky idea? Is banning it a wacky idea? Is permitting it in a photo ID a wacky idea?
Ideas should be allowed to compete because when they do, they are forced to create a rationale, and that's the worst thing that can happen to a bad idea.
If we all voted, congress would better reflect the popular vote, instead of the gerrymandered GOP-friendly map. The FCC would be beholden to a congress that wouldn't support this.
I don't expect we'll all start voting. I know too many people that want a representative government but don't want to vote because they don't like their choices despite the fact that abstaining makes the quality of choices worse.
I do hope we get better districting processes before we lose representation altogether.
I walked to work in the falling snow listening to Mozart. That's a wonderful way to start the day. I cut through along some railroad tracks and there's a dead coyote frozen there. Hi frozen coyote.
I'm actually home until the new year, and that's longer than I have been since last spring.
FL made a new dev hire and he's working here in the A2 office with us. I like him.
I started this painting in SF, and recently brought back to MI to get back to work on it.
It's another pond in a marsh. I'm not sure why. Recently I have been sort of attacking the painting and seeing what comes. I don't think I am technically ready for that approach, but that's what this one is going to get.