| ▲ | The Ruby community has a DHH problem(tekin.co.uk) |
| 52 points by eowyn 8 hours ago | 42 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | akagusu 8 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| Why was this flagged? |
|
| ▲ | Fire-Dragon-DoL an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I find insane that somebody did deep research on another person at this level,even if the information is public. He is making software available for free. Feel FREE not to use it. |
|
| ▲ | lawgimenez 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So, what exactly is wrong with UK having only 1/3 native brits? I’m Asian, I don’t get why the West is so concerned. If half of my country are expats immigrating, hell yeah. I don’t see the problem as long as everyone is contributing for the overall community and welfare of the country. |
| |
| ▲ | tw_wankette 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | >>1/3 native Natives have rights to their homeland. | |
| ▲ | motbus3 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Where did you get that number from? | | |
| ▲ | flowerbreeze 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It was in the article, although referring to London, not to the entire country. | |
| ▲ | lawgimenez 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > 2000s. Chiefly because it's no longer full of native Brits. In 2000, more than sixty percent of the city were native Brits. By 2024, that had dropped to about a third. A statistic as evident as day when you walk the streets of London now. From DHH’s linked blog? | | |
| ▲ | motbus3 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yeah..
About that ... What is a "native Brit"?
A white person? Isn't a 2nd or 3rd generation Londoner from Muslim or catholic background with non white skin a British? I can't see how it was calculated but if you check government numbers, legal migrants are less than a 1% and illegal are not even close to that. If you are worried about how much they cost, I'm sure they are less than the war in Russia, or many of the electoral campaigns for sure. Are you sure this info is unbiased and well curated? | | |
| ▲ | cap11235 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | They are just responding to the post about the quotation. What's your problem? | |
| ▲ | lawgimenez 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I’m not worried about anything. I ain’t even sure if DHH is correct in his tone. It’s more like something similar from the book I read about biker gang’s white supremacist. |
| |
| ▲ | graemep 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | London, not the UK. White British plus white Irish make up 82% of the population of the UK. It is slightly complicated because the Irish are a native population in Northern Ireland and and immigrant one in Great Britain and there were slightly different ethnicity options in the census in Scotland to in England etc. | | |
| ▲ | motbus3 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Even if it was the case, which by merely impression of being there for few days recently, but even if it was, are the folks he referring slaughtering white people? attacking them? Curbing their right for their beliefs? Taking all the jobs deeming a class, race or group segregated? I don't think so. If anything, i don't think "native Brits" as he called, not wanting to do any of the low-end jobs. I get why people are frustrated, but it feels like anger's just being used for political gains.
There is no easy answers to the current economic problems. This is exactly the same Brexit maneuver, done by the exact same people trying to rise a political party that has no true solution rather than blame people. After the EU nothing has improved in the UK. There was no money for the NHS anyway. It is just a political trick IMO | | |
| ▲ | graemep an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | > I get why people are frustrated, but it feels like anger's just being used for political gains. There is no easy answers to the current economic problems. I have a more cynical cynical variation on that take. its being used to distract attention from the need for real economic (or any other) change. Politicians want business as usual (i.e. the Blair/Cameron "centrist" consensus). I do not think the EU is relevant to this. They have the same problems. | |
| ▲ | jajahabav 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > but even if it was, are the folks he referring slaughtering white people I don’t want to sound like Elon musk (he’s corrupt like the rest), but white people aren’t really reproducing at a rate to keep them going. There’s other ways for a race to die out. You think a majority asian Britain is going to be favorable to whites? > i don't think "native Brits" as he called, not wanting to do any of the low-end jobs. Because they’re awful jobs. The elites running the country opted to import cheap, exploitable labor instead of improving the working conditions of their countrymen. And this is ultimately the problem with immigration. It’s done by an elite that hates their people. The elites profit while the common people suffer. > It is also a habit of tyrants to prefer the company of aliens to that of citizens at table and in society; citizens, they feel, are enemies Aristotle said this thousands of years ago. The behavior we’re seeing isn’t new, and the response of “we want people that look like us in power” isn’t anything new either. Race is an extension of family, and a ruler who views the people as an extension of their family will rule much better than one who views the people as cattle. The ultimate problem is the rich hate the natives and have too much money. They push immigration because it cheapens their bottom line and ensures the people will remain divided. They refuse to use their wealth to better their nation. > There is no easy answers to the current economic problems There is an extremely easy answer. The levels of corruption are so astronomical that simply installing rulers who aren’t corrupt would turn things around overnight. Unfortunately, the elites have done a good job conditioning the people to view good elites as “far right racists” simply because they’ll prioritize family over foreigners. And until we can unwind that conditioning, things are going to continue getting worse at a time when we have technological miracles. | | |
| ▲ | graemep 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > You think a majority asian Britain is going to be favorable to whites Yes it will be. Most British Asians are culturally British and become more so with each generation. Secondly, there are multiple different Asian cultures in the UK, so the most substantial common ground different groups of Asians have is our Britishness. The dominant culture is very much British because each minority culture is individually small. Also, there is a long, long way to go for the 9% of the population who are Asian to become a majority. > There’s other ways for a race to die out Races (in that sense) always die out. I cannot see many Angles or Jutes around in England. > Because they’re awful jobs. The elites running the country opted to import cheap, exploitable labor instead of improving the working conditions of their countrymen. That much is true. > Race is an extension of family That is BS. I can define who is family. How do you define race? Shared culture? I have dealt with that idea already. Genetics? It does not map well to usual categories of race. You can only make sense of this by selecting a few inherited attributes (primarily skin colour) and classifying people by a literally skin deep difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | motbus3 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| We all have been tricked to be sick of "social justice" as it has been purposefully exploited to exhaustion until no one cares any more.
This is the same method and rhetoric applied through history. No one measures how far megariches are getting from common folks and just point the guns where they can see because they are led through mediatic misformation campaigns. It does not need to be a convoluted plan, but it is an opportunity where those same ones are using to sell their guns (oops I mean AI). You all be killing each other very soon because you are believing in such campaigns for creating "the enemy". There is no "enemy" who is worried if they'll be able to feed their kids tomorrow.
You are being manipulated. Once more. You are being manipulated. Wake up. |
| |
|
| ▲ | throw5t4323rt an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I’m surprised DHH made the blog post on the hey.com domain, since it’s also the domain of their email service. If I was a customer I would be canceling my service because I really don’t want my emails to be associated with any type of controversial topic. Why doesn’t he post it under his own domain, rather than a company one? I’ve used Basecamp in the past, and actually considered signing up for hey.com. Good thing I didn’t waste my money on it. Would be such a pain to have to switch my email address. |
|
| ▲ | phoobahr 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Ah yes. Complaining about brown people in the capital of a decayed empire that spanned the globe. The sun never sets on this crap. |
|
| ▲ | 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | rubzah 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| DHH has great instincts when it comes to programming and technical projects, but he is not a very smart guy about anything else. Further, he is a bit of a low class buffoon. So just use his stuff and ignore whatever else he rants about on his own time and property, this is the only way to get by in life. You couldn't read a book, watch a movie, or enjoy any music, if you constantly had to vet the authors against your own political views. |
| |
| ▲ | edu 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Totally agree, you can respect the quality of someone’s work without needing to buy into everything they say or do outside of it. I also don’t get where this purity test comes from, but it’s definitely not a good thing. | |
| ▲ | eowyn 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | In this case it's hard to separate the art from the artist. DHH wields significant power in the community and industry. Shopify is likely to back him and they are a major ruby / rails sponsor. He also has immense influence. |
|
|
| ▲ | tietjens 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't know why I'm surprised, but this blog does link to DHH actually complaining about the present-day ethnic makeup of London ("demographic nightmare") and contrasting it with Copenhagen. London is apparently too brown for DHH and he is clearly saying that you can't be a native Brit if you're not white. Repugnant and willfully idiotic. |
| |
| ▲ | graemep 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | As a non-white British person i have no problem with native meaning certain ethnicities - after all, no one would call a white American a native American. What is very, very troubling is his idea that London of all places should be an ethnically white city. London has been multi-ethnic since the 70s or 80s, if not earlier. It is very much a world city. The other thing is that he is Danish and seems to be projecting his feelings about Denmark onto Britain. He does not really understand how British people feel. The organiser of the march he praises is such as toxic figure for his blatant bigotry that the Reform Party (the most right wing party that has seats in Parliament) turned down a $100m donation from Elon Musk rather than allow him to join the party. e ethnic makeup does not bother any white Londoners I know (I grew up in London, so I do know a lot of people there). In fact, the only person I can recall complaining about it in real life was also foreign European. The march was not actually that big. There have been many larger protests in London. From protests against the Iraq war (about five times the turnout), against the ban on huntings with dogs (nearly three times as many) and both pro and anti Brexit. It was by far the largest the far right has been able to organise, but they only managed that by labelling it a march for free speech (I do think there is a genuine problem with free speech in the UK, and I wish we had the sort of protections the US does). | | |
| ▲ | triceratops 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > As a non-white British person i have no problem with native meaning certain ethnicities It's not actually ethnicity he's talking about, it's skin color. Ethnicity is cultural. Why exactly aren't people of any skin color who live in the UK, speak English, and believe in the full package of "Western values" (equality, freedom of speech, religion, rule of law etc) and "English behaviors" (queueing, tea, whatever) considered English? How many generations is enough to become "native"? He thinks calling his views "far-right" and "racist" and "nazi"-adjacent is going too far because the Social Democrat Prime Minister of his country said the same thing (I actually don't know because the linked interview with Mette Fredriksen was in Danish). But that's how this stuff always begins. It's extremely worrisome. | | |
| ▲ | mytailorisrich 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "Native Brit" as used by DHH does refer to an ethnicity. He uses data for London from the 2021 official census: 54% "white" but only 37% "white British" (and arguably "native Brits" might be an even smaller group). There is also a difference between being "multi-ethnic" and being minority "native". | |
| ▲ | graemep 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > It's not actually ethnicity he's talking about, it's skin color. Ethnicity is cultural. DHH says people are not "native Brits". The literal meaning of that is ethnicity, not skin colour. Of course DHH might be using this as code for white, but it is not the literal meaning, and (as another comment points out) the statistic he quotes is for the total of the ethnic groups that are considered white British - it excludes white people who are not ethnically British. If he is, then he is, again, projecting his own views onto a culture he does not really understand. Some people from European countries (e.g. an Albanian illegal immigrant) are far more likely to face hostility than some non-white people (e.g. a professional affluent South Asian with a British accent). Someone recently commented that a racist who they know well would not mind my (brown) family because we "sound posh" so would prefer us to people like Poles. > How many generations is enough to become "native"? Define native! Are white Americans native in the US, and are Afrikaners native to South Africa, etc.? It is an ambiguous word. The problem disappears if you drop the adjective native and just say "British". > Why exactly aren't people of any skin color who live in the UK, speak English, and believe in the full package of "Western values" (equality, freedom of speech, religion, rule of law etc) and "English behaviors" (queueing, tea, whatever) I think the problem with that definition is that lots of people how have never even lived in the UK believe in those values and drink tea and even queue. I know plenty. Also, English or British? British is a nationality, English is arguable an ethnicity (as are Scottish and Welsh). > It's extremely worrisome. I agree there, and it is very disappointing to see DHH spouting this. | | |
| ▲ | triceratops 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Define native! That's why I put "native" in scare quotes. > I think the problem with that definition is that lots of people how have never even lived in the UK That's why I wrote "live in the UK" first. |
|
| |
| ▲ | defrost 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > London has been multi-ethnic since the 70s or 80s, if not earlier. It is very much a world city. Leaving aside the Bronze Age structures around the London area and river, The archaeologist Leslie Wallace notes, "Because no LPRIA [Late pre-Roman Iron Age] settlements or significant domestic refuse have been found in London, despite extensive archaeological excavation, arguments for a purely Roman foundation of London are now common and uncontroversial."
The city of London itself grew from a multi-ethnic kernel: Londinium was established as a civilian town by the Romans about four years after the invasion of AD 43. London, like Rome, was founded on the point of the river where it was narrow enough to bridge and the strategic location of the city provided easy access to much of Europe.
It's been multi-ethnic for at least two thousand years.above quotes sourced from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_London |
|
|
|
| ▲ | whatarethembits 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is disappointing from DHH. He tends to carry a lot of criticism online, and based on my exposure to his ideas in long form media, I tend to agree with him more than not. However, in his linked post on this issue, it strikes me as being written by someone whose understanding is largely based emotions evoked by provocative news headlines. But, I'm going to refrain from attempting to psychoanalyse an individual who I know very little about (further than the previous sentence). OP's post, I think, correctly points out that DHH appears to believe that British == White. Wish he'd be clear on this point, as he's often claimed and indeed has been in the past regarding other issues. Dancing around it shows a lack of respect for the audience and/or a sign of weak conviction. If you believe in something strongly enough to want to have an impact on its discourse, why not be clear about it? Here's an example of a clear statement regarding this particular issue: "I believe that our country ought to aim for demographics where 80% of the people on our streets look like us [whatever that happens to be]". What's so difficult about that? A clear demand/objective easier to vote on/measure/debate....everyone knows that, then why do the proponents of such ideas always dance around being specific? |
|
| ▲ | 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | unixhero 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I have removed the reply to this post |
| |
| ▲ | skavi 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This post was written by an individual, not “Libre Open Source”. It seems fair and within “the spirit of complete freedom of speech” for one individual to criticize another. It also seems reasonable for one person to question another’s leadership position given their expressed views. | |
| ▲ | tao_oat 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | if a framework has a BDFL, and that BDFL starts getting increasingly political in a polarizing way, then surely it's fair for the community to respond to that. | | | |
| ▲ | nixosbestos 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What on Earth does that even mean? "Freedom of speech" only extends to thinly veiled racism, but not criticism of the thinly veiled racism? I'm sorry, but what? |
|
|
| ▲ | jajahabav 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I don’t really understand the authors point of view. If I moved to Japan and got citizenship, I’d know full well I’m not Japanese and never will be. I’d behave like a guest for the rest of my life (though obviously be grateful for any kindness the locals show me). I certainly would not make posts about how the locals are the real problem and they’re evil for not accommodating me. It’s also odd the article is trying to paint Tommy Robinson as “far right”. He’s deeply in bed with the Israelis, who last I checked don’t get along with the “far right”. He’s pushing anti Muslim sentiment to garner support for the genocide in Gaza. |
| |
| ▲ | triceratops 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > I’d behave like a guest [If I moved to Japan and got citizenship] for the rest of my life Why would you want to be a guest in your own country for the rest of your life? > I certainly would not make posts about how the locals are the real problem That's not what the post said. > they’re evil for not accommodating me. What does "accommodating" mean? From what I can tell they just want to not be treated like a guest in their own country. Not a crazy request. Taking citizenship in another country is comparable to being a new convert to a religion. Is it acceptable for people born and raised in the faith to treat new converts differently? | | |
| ▲ | graemep 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I really like your last point. its not a prefect analogy but it is pretty good. Another comparison that occurs to me is joining a club. | | |
| ▲ | triceratops 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Another comparison that occurs to me is joining a club. I think it's a bit more profound than that. Club membership doesn't change most people's identity. They aren't defined by it. On the other hand citizenship is one of the first descriptors used about a person formally. Check out how any Wikipedia article about a person from the last couple centuries begins - "<Person name> is/was a <nationality or citizenship> <profession or thing they are notable for>." "Steven Allan Spielberg is an American filmmaker." [1] "Sir Mohamed Muktar Jama Farah (born Hussein Abdi Kahin) is a British former long-distance runner."[2] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Spielberg 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mo_Farah | | |
| ▲ | graemep an hour ago | parent [-] | | I agree. It is more profound than joining a club, but conversion to a religion is primarily about beliefs. Analogies are never perfect. |
|
|
|
|
