Hijacking the top comment in this subthread to make a meta-complaint:
The comment-parents viewpoint is perfectly valid, but has been censored because of disagreement within the broader HN community.
For all the talk about "free speech" that HN does when the topic is, say, not objectifying women, or making racial minorities feel included in tech, it certainly seems to perform an about-face when confronted with... objecting to space science as a policy.
1. Doesn't it seem a little outlandish to have your priorities so far out of whack with respect to the number of non-whites in the world, versus the number of space scientists in the world?
2. Why should the comment-parent be flagkilled for expressing an unpopular opinion?
>"Why should the comment-parent be flagkilled for expressing an unpopular opinion?"
A comment shouldn't be killed for expressing an unpopular opinion and I don't think this one was.
That comment is a perfect example of how not to state an opinion, unpopular or otherwise.
It states an opinion as absolute and demands proof otherwise while providing none of its own. This is recognized as awful, trollish behavior on any forum.
Further, the opinion stated is derisive and emotional. Finally, the it begs for downvotes repeatedly.
This is exactly the sort of thing that should be killed regardless of the view expressed.
I can't speak for everybody (and I didn't personally take any action against the comment in question), but I imagine the reaction was due to the tone of the message. HN is generally a community which tolerates unpopular opinions if they are presented thoughtfully; dismissing scientific research as "playing with toys" and failing to elucidate the reasoning behind a dissenting opinion does not meet that bar.
Sorry for the double response: my previous comment still stands, but I wanted to add this as well.
The treatment of women and exclusion of minorities in this field is incredibly distressing. The thought of how many brilliant minds we could be turning away (not to mention the basic empathy I feel for their suffering) makes me sick. I look forward to a more enlightened age when these people will be welcomed with the basic respect and dignity they deserve.
...but, apathy towards education and scientific progress is also incredibly distressing - that a smaller absolute number of people are affected does not make the issue less important. Climate change denial and lack of enthusiasm for clean energy are complicated phenomena, but are (in my opinion) partially influenced by a culture that devalues science and education (in addition to outright manipulation by insidious parties). If you want proof of how dangerous this is, look at Mario Zervigon[0], a campaign-finance director for a pro-solar candidate - his house and cars were firebombed last week. This (admittedly unusually extreme) resistance to the idea that we should be taking care of our environment is mind-fuckingly insane. The library of Alexandria is still very much in peril, so to speak.
So...us freaking out about this doesn't mean we do not care about the exclusion of minorities. It's ok to be worried about multiple things; there are more than enough causes to go around. We live in a sick, sad world[1].
1. Space scientists are in many ways the pinnacle of our civilization. Of course we place a high value on them.
2. Because it's not a positive contribution to the discussion.
The comment-parents viewpoint is perfectly valid, but has been censored because of disagreement within the broader HN community.
For all the talk about "free speech" that HN does when the topic is, say, not objectifying women, or making racial minorities feel included in tech, it certainly seems to perform an about-face when confronted with... objecting to space science as a policy.
1. Doesn't it seem a little outlandish to have your priorities so far out of whack with respect to the number of non-whites in the world, versus the number of space scientists in the world?
2. Why should the comment-parent be flagkilled for expressing an unpopular opinion?