> Disregarding genuine differences between cultures and intentially treating those cultures as identical is racist.
Just for the record, I don't think that's a widely used definition for "racism".
Also, the linked article does not really support the view that he was "disregarding genuine differences"; if anything, his prejudice made him see differences where there were none (or misattribute traits that he notice on some individual to a whole population). The article speak about his contempt for the gaelic language though, which I guess is what annoys you the most? But then the article also states that he changed his mind on that.
The article you linked goes to great lengths about Orwell's alleged scotophobia. I don't see how particularly hating scotts supports "intentially treating those cultures as identical". If that was true, then Orwell would equally hate all scots and englishmen.
Also, what's the downside of treating different cultures identical, aside from potentially offending people? As opposed to other kind of racism, where other people are treated as lesser subhumans that ultimately led to slavery. Why are both casually referred to racism when the other has more far-reaching consequences.
If he was an entirely rational being I would agree, but he clearly wasn't and he did hold both views that Scottish identity isn't worth anything and Scots are essentially identical to the English.
Let's be serious, I'm not saying Orwell would be out enslaving Scots given the chance, but saying Scottish culture IS English culture is intentionally erasing a culture and is a racist statement, not unlike the common view that all of Africa is culturally homogenous.
I really find this amazing, gives you the feeling that learning the ideograms would be enough to get the gist of most texts. Quite bright yet simple hack.
I wish HN would feature more projects like this one instead of wtv is currently on the first page.
Yea this actually has been going viral when I posted it on Instagram. Maybe I'll need to post this on HN in a different time or wait for someone else to organically post it :)
Even if 100% of owners choose to pay someone else to do it, they are still benefiting from the user-serviceable standard.
First, anything serviceable by the owner is also accessible to a local garage or independent repair shop. That means a competitive market for those owners, rather that being stuck paying extra to a local monopoly or to a rent-seeking manufacturer.
Second, it makes long-term repairability of the product much easier, things don't just suddenly become irreparable because the manufacturer closed down their "unlock codes for trusted affiliates" site. Their asset retains more of its value.
There are things which provide value even when nobody uses them.
Option 3: "Engineers have discussed this at length and all agree that the only justifications for this design are based in extremely short-term thinking."
Is rewritting old softwares into a newer language a bit like adding people to a late project?
reply