I don't come to Hacker News for "inclusive" technology - which these days appear to be a politically-correct euphemism for forced diversity.
I come to Hacker News for discussions on technology.
Anything that prioritizes the "inclusive" nature of technology, versus the "technology" itself, is irrelevant to me, and has nothing to do with the main interests of the site (hacking and technology) and should be downvoted. Keep politics and social politics out from Hacker News.
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2010/05/14/facebook_trust_dumb/
A random example - astronomy, my pet love, is discussed here often, yet rarely articles themselves have anything to do with 'hacking' or technology. I don't see much protests against that.
The largest problems tech faces nowadays is not spreading fake news at the speed of light, but the suppression of real and necessary political discourse in what has arguably been a significant portion the new town square for the last century.
A quote from one of the moderators:
>Intellectual curiosity is everywhere, and it’s present in all demographics,
>We want Hacker News to grow in all demographics, because there’s just intellectually interesting contributions from all of those communities—a greater diversity of content, of conversations, of topics, et cetera.
Which is just another way of stating the guidelines:
On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
The stuff you don't like is already off-topic, unless there is intellectually interesting discussion to be had.
Of course they do. Simply put: a bunch of young, rich white Western men - they never experience the insane danger that are part of the daily life of women: men stalking them using every way they can, raping them, killing them, or doxxing them just because they can "for the lulz". Both do not experience the racism and discrimination Black people go through, and neither of these have the experience of people in the Balkans, India or other countries with ethnic and religious tensions. And that's just the tip of the iceberg - discrimination runs rampant across all our societies, with technology lessening the effects of some of it (e.g. AI-generated descriptions of images for the blind), and making others exponentially worse (especially online harassment).
More diversity in anything tech automatically means more eyeballs on how a new (or existing) technology can be used by malicious actors to cause harm. For me the worst case in the last few years where this was clearly not done were AirTags - they are immensely useful, but it took over two years and uncountable reports of AirTags being used to facilitate crime of all kind to get a detection feature in Android [1].
[1] https://blog.google/products/android/unknown-tracker-alert-g...
You don't have to be raped and killed daily to have an valuable opinion. Indians, Serbians, Black Americans, rich western whites, these are all just humans who, a priori, are just as worthwhile as one another.
I get that you have in mind particular kind of harm that you want to prevent, and that this is a priority for you, but reasonable people can and do differ in their opinions on what's harmful and what they'd like to talk about.
Technology doesn't happen in a vacuum. It is made by people and for people. People who are not all the same.
YOU are being political by pretending that including people is political.
The thing is socialization: women are taught from a shockingly young age to be wary of men, dark alleys, tunnels, parks, everything. Black people to be careful around police.
Of course even if you do not belong to a group of people who face regular discrimination, you can still be mindful of the issues the groups face - but it won't ever be an as natural part of your thinking.
What exactly is there to subvert if everyone is included?
Technology is inherently apolitical and inclusive. Anyone who claims otherwise is just trying to stir up useless internet flame wars. If you want to uselessly rant about politics on the internet you can go to Reddit.
This concept that diversity is good isn't even controversial beyond the culture war. Ask any financial planner how to manage your investment portfolio and they'll tell you it's important to diversify. Ask a power grid operator and they'll tell you it's good to have diversity across different kinds of generation.
Diversifying the kinds of people, viewpoints, and experiences that participate in our little corner of the world is good for exactly the same reasons. Putting all one's eggs into a single basket is always a bad idea.
Maybe you find active attempts to make the field more attractive to - that is, more inclusive for - different kinds of people annoying. That's fine, I think HN can be inclusive of both your annoyance and my annoyance with your annoyance :)
Prior to your comment, nobody in this thread has said anything about any of this. This is all stuff that you seem to have read into things people have said that don't actually say anything of the sort.
I, for one, consider it very dishonest that you have yet to say a single word in this thread about your belief in leprechauns with pots of gold at the ends of rainbows. Why are you hiding your views? Just be honest!