Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

How does urbit, the technology, further a reprehensible political ideology? I assume you mean Moldbug's ideology, which I agree is reprehensible, but how does urbit further it?



Tlon owns about 40% of the address space (95 galaxies). Of those 24 are owned by Moldbug.


Urbit, intrinsically, is some obfuscated functional computing ideas put together in a mildly interesting way. In practice, however, it's used as a vehicle for Yarvin to get himself into events/conferences/conversations where he promulgates his views.


i saw him speak at lambdaconf, and there were no politics, not even sneakily hidden before or after the camera was rolling. Nor did he run around and do anything objectionable during other talks, or in the hallways.


Does he actually promote his ideas at tech events?


No, I'm pretty sure he doesn't, and dogecoinbase should be embarrassed for claiming that he does and that that's his motivation for Urbit.

From his personal statement about lambdaconf, at http://degoes.net/articles/lambdaconf-inclusion :

> Politics of any sort is out of scope at a functional programming conference. I pledge to treat other LambdaConf guests as if they were colleagues at a large company or fellow students at a university, and neither utter nor show any content that’s out of scope or otherwise disturbing. My pen name has been “doxed,” but professionally I behave as if it was a secret.


I didn't claim that was his motivation, I claimed it was the practical outcome of urbit, and it is. His presence prevented a great many people from attending lambdaconf because they had a legitimate fear of the racist violence he advocates, and refuses to recant. You'd have to work a lot harder apologizing for fascist bigots to make me feel any embarrassment for calling out their negative impact on communities I care about.

Claiming politics is out of scope is absurd, and is a rhetorical mechanism designed to, at a minimum, preserve the status quo. His politics are abhorrent -- accepting his declaration of them as irrelevant when they're anything but is effectively siding with them.


What racist violence does he advocate?


Most of the criticism of Yarvin is by those unable to distinguish between descriptive and normative ideas. His writing is a giant "what if" that mainly rejects the provincial notion that only today's common views are the most sound.

I'd bet that the adjacent commenter's idea of "[his racist advocacy] is well documented" comes from Twitter and Tumblr quotes taken out of context, cyclically retweeted in outrage.


That blacks are ideally suited to being slaves. His advocacy of this is exceedingly well documented.

(You might argue that this isn't technically violence in itself, but it's hard to argue it's not an explicit endorsement of a system of violence.)


The social media shitstorms raised by mere announcements of his later-cancelled attendances is enough to draw attention to his dead blog and propagate his ideas to receptive ears, without him actually doing any new political-advocacy work. This arrangement seems quite ingenious for its efficiency, but I suspect it came about accidentally.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: