beatpanda

I think it's weird how very few people on HN seem to be worried about his promise to initiate pogroms against minorities in the first 100 days, like it doesn't even warrant a mention for most of you

Let me tell you why dialogue doesn't work in this case:

Now discussing Donald Trump Now Talking with nigger lyncher nigger lyncher's Description: i love to lynch niggers

That conversation is over before it can start. I'd rather fight these idiots in the streets for the next 4 years than make any type of attempt at dialogue.

This is stupid. One side is saying "we want to get rid of all the immigrants." My disagreement with that is not a communication problem, it's that that position is a red line. There's no chance of me being convinced that forcibly removing immigrants is a good idea. So why even have the conversation? What good could that possibly do?

How coul you be optimistic about someone whos main campaign promise is to unleash wave after wave of state violence against people living in the US? How could you be that sick?

"respect for American culture" always comes in the form of trashing and stereotyping other cultures and enumerating the reasons why "they" should leave. Maybe if you tried an affirmative approach, instead of saying all kinds of racist and bigoted things about other cultures, fewer people would call you a bigot or a racist.

That really depends on why they left. In this case I agree with OP, anyone who leaves the U.S. because of Trump instead of standing and fighting is a coward.

We started using this as a recruitment tool at a company I work for

(p.s. we're hiring: http://genability.com)

The Dell developer edition laptops are really excellent machines. I've used the M3800 and the XPS13 and found them both to be great.

It's a research project trying to predict Google's future trajectory. There was a lot of this kind of thing at transmediale in Berlin last year. The view of tech from outside the SF Bay Area is often unsettlingly creepy, because people not in the bubble have a more realistic view of what the tech industry actually is.

God, I know, it was so much better next year

Cool, when are you leaving? Because my friends who actually like the Bay can't find housing. You know where the door is.

There's a bigger question to be asking here, which is that once we've reached a point where labor is not required for the provision of basic needs, are we going to liberate all of humanity from labor, or are we going to let a smaller and smaller fraction of the population horde the benefits of automation?

I believe we can liberate humanity from forced labor in my lifetime. And I think that the product of that liberation, in terms of cultural production and scientific discovery, will have a bigger impact on human civilization than anything we've seen in recorded history. Because when people don't have to be baristas to pay the rent, and have the resources to pursue whatever they were really passionate about before they had a landlord, beautiful things will develop.

"Basic income" is one possible tool in the box but it's not the only one. And instead of having dumb arguments about the minutiae of handing out free currency in our economic system as it's currently constituted, I would rather see more debate about the principle.

No

We should all be embarrassed by the working conditions and biases in our industry. It doesn't have to be this way, but we all keep playing along.

> In January 2014, the FBI told Fox News that its investigation had found no evidence so far warranting the filing of federal criminal charges in connection with the scandal, as it had not found any evidence of "enemy hunting", and that the investigation continued. On October 23, 2015, the Justice Department declared that no criminal charges would be filed.

But whatever, keep grinding that axe.

Oakland passed an eviction moratorium because there is an epidemic of illegal evictions of long-term tenants from rent-controlled units, and activists wanted to force the city government to actually enforce the city's laws. Characterizing this as part of a move to "kick tech out of the city" misses the point by several thousand miles.

It is true that San Francisco's "left" is against housing construction. It is also true that San Francisco politics are an inverted world where "left" and "right" cease to even have meaning. So we need competent writers to try to sort this out. But writing articles like this that just plow through the nuance and make elementary mistakes, like apparently not even reading the language of or rational for Oakland's eviction moratorium, make it harder to get to a bargain on this stuff.

At some point, the owners of capital are going to have to just start distributing a greater share of their profit as wages. Any other solution for stagnant wages is just making excuses for antisocial behavior.

If 2 is true our politics (at least in the U.S.) haven't caught up. We have to be comfortable with the idea of simply giving money away to people who are not earning it, or giving them more than the market would otherwise bear.

One of the ways we could do that is by making university tuition free, to say "well, if you can't get a job, you can always spend your time thinking instead." Instead we're restricting access to univerisities more and more based on the idea that a university education is only about getting a job and you should have to have "skin in the game".

We've been making it harder, not easier, for people who aren't working to access the collective product of society, and we're all poorer for that.

I've always wanted to live in the Bay Area, I moved here without any plans to work in tech, and only ended up doing it because it's the best deal being offered.

If you live here and you're anywhere in this thread complaining about how it's overrated and you hate having to be here for work, please, get out. Now. My friends and neighbors are struggling to be in this place for lots of reasons you're oblivious to, precisely because there are so many people who actually hate it here but feel they have to be here for work.

You're not doing yourself or anyone else any favors by staying here. Move. Please.

The problem with all if these arguments is that it assumes there's no other work you'd rather be doing aside from whatever work you've been forced to contort your desires into in order to pay rent. I think there's probably a lot of socially valuable work not getting done because social value doesn't translate to economic value.

Have you ever tried to build a cabin in the woods? Or attempt to live a lifestyle outside of the employment/consumption hampater wheel? There are many, many roadblocks in place to prevent people from doing this. You are generally not free, at least in the U.S., to build a cabin in the woods.

Why is every other advanced economy in the world able to deal with this, but America can't? People who respond in discussions like this that the real problem must be so many greedy kids wanting things like a good job, financial stability, etc need to first confront the fact that this is a uniquely American problem.

I don't understand all the JIRA hate, my team has 0 problems with it

I don't identify with this at all. One of the first things I started asking for at my most recent job was a better, more clearly-defined process so that we knew exactly what we were building, what it needed to accomplish and what does "finished" mean. I largely got what I was asking for. Its made our engineering team a lot more focused and enabled us to deliver faster than we were before. It also makes it easy to figure out what to work on next.

Maybe the difference for me is that software engineering is my job, not my lifestyle or identity. I don't know.

Aside from the other objections raised here, this also doesn't do anything about environmental and social impacts at the site of fossil fuel extraction, which are significant. One of the benefits of transitioning away from fossil fuels is not having to pull them out of the ground anymore.

The thing that makes Silicon Valley a hotspot for tech is just a boatload of money controlled by people willing to put it into tech.

Literally any city could be "like silicon valley" if a bunch of rich people start a fund and hand out cash to people creating technology companies. Anything else is just window dressing.

Meanwhile, I was in Berlin for three weeks earlier this year and spent less than $2k, including the plane ticket and my pass to an art festival. You strike me as a person who's never worked very hard to get a deal on airfare.

What do I have to sacrifice to earn 100% more money? There's a lot more money in doing harm than doing good, and I will gladly take less money to do good.

If we're not in a bubble, we have very serious structural economic and social problems created by the tech industry that we need to solve. The (supposedly sustainable) rising tide is mostly drowning people, and if no reprieve in the form of a crash is coming, we need another solution.

So, is it time for a union yet?