Nope. They want to be entertained. They are fine with people liking them, they are fine with people being mad at them.

What they nearly always absolutely hate is when people don't like them but are entertained by them. If people react to them without hostility, but with sort of amused tolerance, like putting up with an annoying younger sibling, that will generally drive them away pretty fast.

They have a script. There's always something that's off the script and makes them no longer enjoy the game.

So, I once did some work where I was writing for Cell, and I was trying to optimize something for offloading to SPEs and all that. And I did a bunch of work, and I eventually trimmed, oh, easily 40% off my runtime.

Then I spent some time studying the code, noticed a flaw in the algorithm, and tweaked a few things. Half an hour later I had more than a factor of two improvement in runtime, and the size of the data sets I could work with increased noticably, allowing me to not have to deal with swap issues for quite a while.

People love to come up with these highly-specialized highly-optimized examples where in theory knowing how the CPU works matters. But you know what?

The CPU won't work that way next year. My code will still run.

Once OOO came along and became a common feature of CPUs, this became an almost-always-stupid idea. Not always-stupid, just almost-always-stupid.

Google "Steubenville rape". Look at the media coverage, look at a lot of the aftermath. That's "rape culture".

I think the key here is your qualifier: "seriously joke about it". Because not-serious joking about it doesn't bug you. But of course, it also doesn't bug the rapists; rather, it plays into their internal narrative that everyone thinks this is okay and sort of funny, they just don't admit it publically.

Uh, no. Even if we stick to a fairly stable legal definition of rape, we still find large and widespread patterns which are meaningfully described as "rape culture". If you just stick to "people actively defending men who had sex with someone who was absolutely not consenting", you continue to find it as a fairly widespread thing.

Remember those football player kids who went around taking video of themselves drugging girls and having sex with unconscious girls who hadn't consented? The ones who called themselves "the rape crew"? Did you see the news coverage talking about how sad it was that getting convicted might prevent them from having successful careers as football players, without addressing the question of whether it might have been better for them to not do it, rather than wishing they'd gotten away with it? Did you see the adults trying to come up with educational materials from this? The ones where they were going to teach boys that, if you are going to rape girls, you shouldn't take pictures and post them on social media?

Yeah, that's actually rape culture, it really is a thing, and I don't for a minute believe your denials to be sincere.

There isn't enough time in the world to focus on the individuals. If we reach a point where the most likely outcome of a guy openly groping a girl in front of a lot of witnesses and clearly without any consent is not people blaming how she dressed, then it might start making sense to focus only on the people doing that. But right now, it's sufficiently widespread to be a solid majority.

Nonsense. James Fallon has the same biological issues in his brain, and yet, somehow, manages to not go around killing random women. I have at least a lot of the markers for it (never done the CAT scans and such), but guess what, I generally get along fine with people and don't have those hang ups.

I can't say whether the kid was a psychopath or not, but I can tell you that the problem was not that he was a psychopath, it was that he hated women and had unrealistic beliefs about what relationships with women should be like, and people encouraged him in those beliefs.

I feel I should point out that I've never once heard the complaint about the "douchebag cheating assholes" (or words to that effect) that women date come from someone who didn't ping the creep radar fairly severely in person. Women learn pretty fast to spot that entitlement/jealousy attitude, and avoid it like the plague for good reason.

"Retroactive" withdrawal of consent is extremely rare. Sure, you've probably got a canned link or two, but it's not a thing that happens often at all. On the other hand, "something that really wasn't consent in the first place" is a pretty common problem. And that's not revoking consent retroactively, that's calling people on something that was actually out of line to begin with.

If you expand it just a tiny bit, from "stop raping" to "stop encouraging nonconsensual behaviors, stop covering up rapes, and stop other actions that enable or contribute to rape", then it's probably >80% of men that could change their behavior in a way that would noticably approach those goals.

Not every woman you meet has been raped. Every woman you meet has been sexually harassed. (I mean, theoretically, maybe, there could be exceptions. I have never met one.)

"About" equivalent. Except, you know, for the part where you can change your mind when new evidence comes along.

Don't blame C99, that was true in C89 as well, and generally for pretty carefully-considered reasons.

People who are trying to get "negative" responses are not getting negative conditioning, they're getting what they want.

The trick is to give them feedback they don't want, not necessarily obviously "negative" feedback.

I hear that a lot, but I genuinely don't buy it.

I'm a pretty good C programmer, by most accounts. I have a reasonable track record producing code that solves interesting problems, and very good reliability.

And this absolutely does not require me to understand how the processor works. In fact, it's sort of the opposite; the reason I'm good at C is that I mostly ignore the processor question and focus on how the language spec works. So I write code that's correct without guessing at what CPUs will do with it.

I've been writing C for >20 years. I've probably looked at assembly output maybe a dozen times in that time, maybe a little more but not much. I've tried to modify assembly code maybe twice tops. I don't know any assembly languages well enough to follow code in them without looking things up, and I generally can't tell you off the top of my head much of anything about a machine's addressing models or registers or whatever, unless the question came up as trivia. And I do just fine in C.

Where do you get this idea? Do you have any idea how many Samsung parts are in pretty much every Apple product? Hint: Lots.

Doctors are licensed. And in a lot of places, so are plumbers. When we got a gas line run, we didn't hire the guy and see how he did. We hired someone who had gotten official certifications of competence from another source, and then had a state inspector evaluate the work. (And heck, for gas lines, I am totally okay with this, because you really, really, do not want those being done incorrectly.)

I'm not sure I'd be any better off with a union, mind. The types of unions we have in the US are pretty worker-hostile in a lot of cases, especially for workers who don't fit nicely into pigeon holes.