code_sardaukar

In my high school they had a lot of words for this attitude, including "faggot", "square", "nerd" and "nerd faggot". As someone who grew up in this environment, I'm very interested in the critiques of people such as myself who allegedly held these attitudes.

So if you vote democrat, you have to pay your workers whatever they ask for?

So why do you think that other employees will become less productive when they get their Appalachian Trail leave?

You say that it's very sad for people to lose their jobs, but how sad is it if a business does not grow as fast as it might have, and so doesn't employ those people in the first place?

>They perceive (correctly, BTW, from a statistical perspective) that if you're born poor, there isn't much you can do.

How can you blithely state this "fact" given that the article itself shows that a poor person who graduates college has a better-than-average income distribution (every percentile is better off than the population as a whole).

It's really frustrating to me that people like you don't make any honest effort to distinguish between objective "lack of hope" where poor people actually cannot improve their situation, with subjective "lack of hope" where people for whatever reason are unable to be motivated to take actual opportunities that could help them. Clearly these are different phenomena and conflating them is irresponsible and dangerous.

While I don't agree with everything you said, you are right that modern economics puts a lot of emphasis on the bond market.

Their reasoning is that the bond market is like a giant, distributed bank. Bondholders borrow short-term, and invest long-term, thus providing liquidity for businesses that need to make long term investment.

The problem is, we have no idea what the actual economics of liquidity provision is. The standard Diamond–Dybvig model is used to justify bailing out the banks (and also the "shadow" banks, i.e. the bond market) when things go bad. But if the Diamond–Dybvig model is correct, then liquidity provision is a mechanical process that could be done just as well by the government, and the bond market is just a way to get the free market to do this at exorbitant cost.

We need better theories to understand liquidity. I think the best work in this area is by Holmstrom and Tirole. Holmstrom's nobel price should help raise the profile of this work.

I guess the comment triggers me in the same way as reading "you don't have to be effeminate or gay to be a male ballet dancer" might trigger some people.

While it doesn't directly paint gay or effeminate men in a negative light, it also doesn't do enough to distance itself from the negative stigma men who don't follow traditional male roles face.

As someone who was bullied for being a nerd, your statement is very triggering. Do you think there is a way we can encourage all people to explore tech without denigrating people with certain personality types/interests?

I think most of the people making these comments would identify as anti-racist. Furthermore, they would be shocked by similar comments addressed to students from Africa, the Middle East or Latin America.

Personally I think everything said about Asian students is true, I just wish we could be as open and realistic when discussing other cultures, rather than simply blame "racism" when people from other cultures encounter difficulties.

It's a general pattern that comments that would be considered "racist" when applied to any other non-White culture, are ok when applied to Asia (see the constant flood of orientalist articles about Japan on HN).

It's only natural to feel more empathy for people in situations we've been in, but this isn't the entirety of morality. I've never been a cow but I go out of my way to avoid causing suffering to cows and other animals.

Rich people haven't necessarily experienced much hardship, so they need to have a more abstract kind of empathy, but this doesn't make them worse people. Indeed, if a rich person felt that had done enough by paying taxes, I wouldn't blame them. From a utilitarian perspective, I would rather have another person who pays $100,000 in taxes and gives $0 to charity than someone who pays $20,000 in taxes and gives $1,000 to charity.

I read the whole article and it's very hard to judge the correctness of most of the article's claims. Most importantly, it's hard to judge the most important thing: the author's own research.

However, I can say that there are different ways to interpret things. The author sees tenure as a way to establish obedience to the unwritten rules of the department. Based on my knowledge of academia, including friends who were granted tenure, the process is mostly fair, but of course most people are going to want to do everything they can to maximize their chances. What the author interprets as proving obedience, I interpret as not wasting time on things the committee can't measure objectively, or doing things that might piss off people on the committee.

As someone in industry, I see academia as somewhere where people can make immense contributions to human knowledge, that cannot be done elsewhere, but they have to jump through certain hoops to do so. Outside of academia there is very little opportunity to do research. Industry is conservative, and prefers to implement and refine known techniques.

At least people should recognize the symmetry of hiring and firing. At some point, Bombardier hired each of those 7,500 people. Did this make the news? Were there HN posts praising the management for creating those jobs?

I think you're missing the implication in the original comment, that the NSA has put a backdoor into NIST and the Russian equivalent has put a backdoor into GOST, but neither can use the other's backdoor.

As a former "left-anarchist" I'm familiar with this sort of story. We had similar stories of left-anarchist utopias from (1) pirates (2) partisans in the Spanish civil war and (3) various "workers collectives" throughout history. None of them lasted and most collapsed due to internal problems not being crushed by the nation state.

What has been shown to work in the long run, is Western democracy.