Comment by esperent
17 days ago
I partially agree, but as a non-US user of the English speaking internet, the issue is with specifically US politics and social issues being everywhere. It drowns out all attempts at discourse for anything else, and Americans, including people here, seem uniquely incapable of nuance in their thinking when it comes to politics.
So, while I fully agree with your stance that banning political discourse is support for the status quo, I also think that it's reasonable to ask for it to be toned down a bit, especially when the politics and social issues of one country is basically drowning out everything else.
All that said, I'm talking mostly about HN or other community forums here. The owner of Notepad++ has the right to put whatever they want into their software, and if we're discussing that here on HN then it's an occasion where discussing politics is valid.
> the issue is with specifically US politics and social issues being everywhere. It drowns out all attempts at discourse for anything else
Unfortunately, US politics also drives tech issues elsewhere like the EU. For example, local data control is a big thing that some of us have been screaming about forever but nobody paid attention to--until US politics made it a hot button issue.
And, to be honest, if the EU would get off its ass and at least try to foster some alternatives, even those of us in the US would benefit. EU alternatives would mean that people in the US could finally vote against the megajillionaires with their wallets.
> Americans, including people here, seem uniquely incapable of nuance in their thinking when it comes to politics.
Bullets and beatings don't leave much room for nuance regardless of country.
The EU is trying but these things have to happen bottom–up. The EU Council or EU Parliament isn't a software development shop. They allocate funds to groups like NLNET who allocate them to a selection of the projects they get proposals for. NLNET can only allocate funds to something an individual or small group proposes. If you want to propose something, please go ahead.
Capitalists can also start software businesses and sell their software, but those are all in Silicon Valley because the money is there because the US has a privileged financial position.
> NLNET can only allocate funds to something an individual or small group proposes. If you want to propose something, please go ahead.
Well, gee, let's look at the sponsorship page for KiCad: https://www.kicad.org/sponsors/sponsors/
I see a couple EU companies, but no EU governments. It takes a paltry $15K to be a Platinum sponsor.
I picked KiCad because PCB design is critical military infrastructure, the alternative programs are almost all under non-EU jurisdictions and could be pulled, and KiCad is both open source and local desktop to top it all off. This is exactly the kind of quiet, unflashy toil that desperately needs support from a government entity.
Lots of areas need support for open source alternatives that are controlled by proprietary software that might vaporize. I picked PCB design because it's an easy target. Cadence and Synopsys have locks on VLSI design domains that could get yanked from the EU. VHDL tooling is still disastrously poor. Everybody could use an alternative 3D modeling kernel (the EU is a little better here because the dominant proprietary kernels are from Dassault Systèmes and Siemens). I'm sticking to software as the domain because the purpose of the funding is obvious (pay developers, duh), but it also applies to things like small manufacturing and maintaining domestic supply chains (but the purpose and focus becomes a lot messier).
And yet, everywhere I look, any project I pick, crickets.
I don't expect the EU to front run, but something like KiCad is 3 bloody decades old.
> those are all in Silicon Valley because the money is there because the US has a privileged financial position.
And yet you had the rise of Akihabara as an electronic parts mecca which then later got eclipsed by Shenzhen. And that's not even talking about the fact that the modern computing sits atop a mountain of stuff developed out of the VLSI Project (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VLSI_Project).
All of those occurred because their respective governments threw money around.
Sure, maybe you won't create another Silicon Valley hare, but, perhaps, just perhaps, you might create a relentless, open source EU tortoise that slowly displaces the proprietary software. The EU is good at slow--relentless, not so much.
Sadly, a continual state of inertia and sclerosis and failure around tech seems to be historically European: https://www.phenomenalworld.org/analysis/the-eurochip/
2 replies →
>And, to be honest, if the EU would get off its ass and at least try to foster some alternatives, even those of us in the US would benefit.
What exactly do you want the EU, the Brussels based institution, to do here? Because AWS didn't come into existence because Uncle sam came in and twisted Bezo's hand telling him to invent a hyperscaler that will conquer the world.
EU's lack of comparable domestic alternatives is a consequence of the failure of its entrepreneurship and free market in the SW private sector, and nothing that EU institution can do about it to magically fix this since the solution is not MORE regulatory interference form government bureaucrats who don't know how the internet works.
You might be able to force innovation if the governments can throw money at the problem if the VC sector is lacking, but they can't force economies of scale and mass adoption without a China style great firewall, in which case you'd then have even bigger issues.
I am an American and I make a very conscious effort to appreciate social and political nuances. And I go out of my way to point out nuances to others who, in my opinion, oversimplify their statements. It could be argued that the expression of stereotyping Americans as lacking nuance, itself lacks nuance. I believe really most people are similar in that we have our biases, differences in context and experiences. We can all try our best to be as nuanced as possible.
What really do Americans know about Ukraine or Taiwan? E.g. can even 1% of US population show Ukraine on the world map (without using Google Maps)? Could they do it before 2022? Before 2014? Do they know anything about Ukraine or Taiwan history? How many Americans know a single foreign language?
If tomorrow there would be a war or protests in, say, Burundi. Will Americans stay with Burundi or against it? Or with the country the media will tell them is "good" because their interests align with US interests?
I think answers to all these questions are obvious.
To be fair, lack of knowledge of other countries is hardly uniquely American. As an Irish person travelling around the non western world, there's a lot of people who don't know that Ireland is a country separate to the UK, or even that it exists.
I would say it's statistics, rather than stereotyping. I'm glad you're capable of nuance though, maybe you can teach that to some of your compatriots?
I think that the stereotype of Americans lacking nuance around political issue is valid. Obviously, like all stereotypes, it’s not 100% true but Americans seem to feel obliged to pick one side of an issue, most of the time aligned with the worth of their choice, and then to view everything that’s happening through that lens.
Try to point out to a democrat that Trump is doing something right or to a Trump voter that Biden did something right. Most of them can’t accept that. The “other” side has to all bad. I don’t see this to such an extreme in other countries I know like Germany or Spain.
Saying Americans lack nuance is like saying Germans are bureaucratic or British have shit food. It's not true 100% of the time but it's true enough broadly enough to be a valid statement.
My personal take is this is a consequence of the two-party system. In the US you can "identify" as a democrat or republican. Once you do that, you don't _have_ to think, you can let tribalism guide you.
If in another country I vote for these guys or sometimes those other guys, and once this little party that got a seat, but not really those ones, and I really hate these ones, then your "political identity" already has a lot of nuance. In Australia with preferencial voting, a single vote has a lot of naunce.
What can you get in America? Green Party supportors who "strategically" vote for a democrat? Not much else...
1 reply →
> to such an extreme in other countries I know like Germany
could you remind me what country is the afd based out of thnx
2 replies →
This is a good point. What would people think if there was constant political discussion here about, for instance, South Sudan and things happening there now? I'm sure there's bad stuff going on there and it's unfortunately, but if we had constant references to and discussions about the internal politics of South Sudan, I think a lot of people would get annoyed about issues that don't affect them at all in their day-to-day lives, esp. when they're coming here for discussions about technically- and computer-related topics. That must be how it seems for American political discussions.
Do you think it's socially acceptable to ignore everything that doesn't affect you personally? Many activists would certainly have you think otherwise. As far as I can tell, fighting that habit is a huge goal of activism.
Yes. Activists also don’t focus on all causes, not even most. They cherry pick whatever topic is hot in that moment. Sorry, I don’t care about that when I’m browsing something about software.
When I care about politics I’ll deal with actual politics. Reddit won’t change my mind nor the world.
2 replies →
>Do you think it's socially acceptable to ignore everything that doesn't affect you personally?
No one has the time to pay attention to every little injustice in the world. For all the people crying about Gaza, how many of them are dedicating as much energy to the wars in Sudan, Yemen, or Myanmar, or the abuses by Russian security services (like imprisoning a guy for holding up a blank card)? This isn't to say that we should just ignore Gaza or Ukraine or ICE in the US, but we need to make a choice: either we spend ALL our energy addressing every injustice in the world, until there is no more injustice left (and this means we need to stop everything else we're doing now, including keeping society running, making food, etc.), or we need to choose when and how much attention we'll devote to various issues.
1 reply →
That may be a huge goal of activism, but activists do not get to control what other people want to do.
Activists wanting something is not synonymous with that thing being a good idea. It just means that someone wants something out of you could be good, could be very bad. No different than a sales person trying to get you to buy something.
> Do you think it's socially acceptable to ignore everything that doesn't affect you personally?
Yes, yes, and yes again.
> Many activists would certainly have you think otherwise. As far as I can tell, fighting that habit is a huge goal of activism.
That's their problem. As soon as you start contributing to them, you will not pursue your own goals, living your own life, but those imposed by activists or their supervisors.
It's convenient for them, you give them a political resource. But why do you need it?
A huge chunk of activism is pointless and annoying. Especially when every cause is lumped together into Activism (TM) and the Omnicause.
I don’t agree with them and I don’t think they should be in my software, or dealing with anything they don’t understand (for instance crime, homeless people, geopolitics, or really anything outside of overpriced vegan coffee shops). All they really do is end up getting Fox News people to vote for fascists like Trump out of spite
3 replies →
People on HN are happy to talk about the internal politics of distant nations, so long as the name of the distant nation is Israel or Palestine.
[flagged]
To be clear, this is a Frenchman of Chinese descent advocating for Taiwanese independence and your complaint is about Americans.
> I partially agree, but as a non-US user of the English speaking internet, the issue is with specifically US politics and social issues being everywhere.
I mean, yeah. Most major social media services used in the West are based in the US. The single largest English as a first language population is in the United States.
Given how many users from outside the US are oft wont to opine on our state of affairs even during the good times - often without even being asked - I like to think they'll endure our discourse.
best solution to this is a closing of borders and fragmentation of the internet to local regional segments. i know it sounds backwards but it seems thats where we're headed
We're already there, but not geographically aligned. We talk in isolated forums, mostly on Discord. Big public melting pots like Twitter have failed.