badwulf

That's a historically ignorant characterization. De jure discrimination existed long after slavery ended. Had Bill Gates been born a black kid in the south, he likely would've gone to a segregated school.

This is an ignorant reply that overlooks what I have said in my full comment. I was referring to slavery explicitly and I did say at the end of my comment that education is still the biggest problem.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

Here, that's likely north of $300 billion per year (assuming all of the black-white wage gap is explained by discrimination).

You only have to pay it out once and then everyone could move on with their lives.

That's like saying you don't fix an infection by cutting out the infected tissue

No, it's like saying, you don't fix an infection by infecting something else.

Or that you don't fix cancer by collaterally poisoning a bunch of perfectly healthy non-cancerous cells. That's exactly how you fix disease!

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-texas-sharpshooter

The idea that the harms caused by federal and state governments' laws protecting slavery and segregation will go away simply because you get rid of those laws is like believing that a paperclip will unbend itself. Fantastically naive.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman

I suggest actually reading and understanding my points. You are not going to convince anyone with verbal gymnastics.

Nevertheless, you can't deny that white people have advantage over blacks due to historical reasons.

If everyone strongly believes that black people are still feeling the effect of slavery(despite not being alive when that was a thing), give them reparations and conclude that the playing field is level.

What we as a society are truing to do is to undo the harm, in a way - to make chances equal, because we feel it's the right thing to do.

You don't undo harm by harming others, you don't fix racism by introducing racism against others.

The main flaw I see in your thought process is you are trying to fix a perceived inequality of opportunity by introducing equality of outcome.

If you really want to fix the lives are black people, fix the root cause, not the end result, it's too late at that point. I personally would start by fixing education.

Yes, because each one of us is an island, and we're not influenced by society at all as it is.

You know what else we are influenced by? Biological traits, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism

Did you think about what if she would have a happier life as a ballerina than an astronaut?

There is also the fact that those who truly want something will go get it despite the headwinds.

Are you saying that every tech circle treats women badly? Are men just inherently evil?

There are also less women in the military, construction works etc. Women tend to also live longer, should we cook up some conspiracy theories related to these facts as well?

Seeing sexism everywhere is not helping the fight against remaining actual sexism.

The right to tell somebody else to shut the hell up is an important part of free speech.

Woah, you better be careful with that double edged sword, because you might cut yourself.

So according to you: any angry mob that is large enough is allowed to shut down any speech they disagree with?

I find it amusing that so called liberals are so keen to silence people they disagree with them, yet they accuse the other side of being fascist, ohhh the irony.

This has always been the logic of the strike as a means of protest - sure, it's unfair, but its also the way labor politics works.

Except this has nothing to do with labour politics, the controversial "Muslim ban" had nothing to do with taxi laws. Using a labour union to push a political agenda is basically abuse of power. Imagine if pro-Trump police would start striking...

And honestly, with a strike lasting only an hour, it feels much more symbolic than a real hardball days-long strike.

If you are visiting the US for the first time, you probably won't know that, and you might not even be able to get off the airport.

They could have had their protest in an area where people would have noticed them and in a way that does not harm innocent bystanders.

Because it's the biggest way to show power the taxi drivers have.

Any amount of power they have, the state has more of it. The only way they can achieve something is if they get the public on their side.

So people visiting the US need to feel the vendetta of the people who don't like Trump's latest policies? Is that the moral high round? Ends justify the means?

So if I'm negatively affected by something happening in the world, I'm allowed to channel my anger on anybody?

What do the people flying into the airport have to do with the Muslim ban?

The taxi industry is sickening, they feel no empathy towards the people travelling, then why should I feel any empathy towards them?

If angry taxi drivers want to do protests, there are ways to do it without harming innocent people travelling in. If they resort to such a thing, how can they claim moral high ground?

This is a tech community, we aren't supposed to deal with politics.

What tragedy are you talking about? I think what's happening is great, Europe should start embracing a similar policy(assuming you are talking about the refugee ban).

Here is a tip: whenever you feel overly sensitive about something in politics, ask yourself the question: why did this happen? how did we get here? and look up people who have an opinion opposite to yours, not just the ones who feel like you.

You should care about the message itself not who is saying it.

There are SJW mobs who downvote every comment that hurts their narrative. You can write factually correct and appropriate comments, they will still downvote it if they disagree. If you don't want to lose your HN points, you either self censor, and let the SJWs win or you make your statement from a throwaway account.

What Orbán has done, for example in his takeover of the media, undermines democracy itself.

Those of us who actually lived in Hungary know that the media needs to be regulated to prevent the media from picking our next president.

Orbán was the first politician who had the balls to call out the West on their irresponsible immigration policy, while everyone else was too busy being politically correct. The Austrian media blasted him, however when Austria started doing the same exact thing, they reported it differently.

Look at the Buzzfeed "reporting": they knew the document was most likely fake, yet they decided to publish it anyway.

Landlords are able to charge more, and long-time rental residents get displaced when they can’t afford the new prices.

So just because you rent a place somewhere for a couple of years you are entitled to be able to stay there forever? even if everything around you changes?

What if I have more money, and I want to move in as well, but can't because you are still renting the place you are entitled to for cheap?

That’s what’s happening in Fort Hill, a traditionally African American neighborhood that is whitening every year as black residents who’ve rented there for decades are replaced by high-turnover college students willing to pay the ever-higher market rates for apartments.

I find it disturbing that this article throws in race despite this being a purely economic situation.

Trump got caught on a hot mic. It's just plain stupid to say dumb things in front of a microphone.

It's just plain stupid for the DNC to use Wordpress and get hacked.

The Russians were implicated well before Hillary lost so continuing to mention now is not "blaming their loss on the Russians"

The Russians were implicated during the cold war as well, the US-Russian rivalry is not a new thing, which also means, it doesn't really prove anything.

The DNC emails leaks were some secret and top secret info, completely different ball game.

I'm pretty sure Trump did not intend to disclose his conversation.