Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Transformative Platforms! (Score 1) 182

by martas (#47906305) Attached to: Oculus Rift CEO Says Classrooms of the Future Will Be In VR Goggles

Television, in addition to carrying on the benefit of radio, shows students the world rather than simply referring to points on a map. Different cultures and environments can be described in full color with fluid video, rather than hoping the student understands a short text description that too often seems absurd due to its foreign context.


Comment: Re:All funded by you, the American taxpayer (Score 1) 29

by martas (#47900415) Attached to: DARPA Funds Harvard's Soft Exoskeletal Suit
Thus helping the economy and overall quality of life. That has been the federal funding model for American academia for decades, and I for one think it's a much better idea than the state trying to get ideas off the ground themselves. Would you really be happier if the government had a "department of 'neat' gaming and 3D devices" hiring engineers and marketers and designers? Making annual product announcements like the Apple Special Event? Or would you rather the government not fund science and engineering research at all, leaving it up to Lockheed Martin and Microsoft to compete with the rest of the world?

Comment: Re:correlation, causation (Score 1) 387

by martas (#47595689) Attached to: Ancient Skulls Show Civilization Rose As Testosterone Fell
I didn't say I have no opinion, I said I didn't care enough to express one, so you didn't think my post was meant as an agreement or disagreement with the rest of your arguments, which I don't feel like getting involved with.

whether society is unfair to approximately 50% if its members

You wouldn't happen to be talking about women when you say "approximately 50% if its members", would you? Careful, someone might take that the wrong way.

Gay people shouldn't need to hide the guy bare-ass in chaps and a cowboy hat, and nothing else, to be respected and have equality before the law. Feminists shouldn't have to hide the bra-burners to have the same rights and opportunities as men.

"Shouldn't have to" is a pretty non-informative statement. Children shouldn't have to die of malaria, but they do. I was telling you what approach I think has the largest chance of neutralizing the venomous effect of radical feminism/Islam/atheism/etc. It's a matter of tone, really. There's not a huge difference between what is meant when one says "feminism isn't about hating men" vs. "I am a feminist, but I don't hate men and the things I fight for are good for both genders", but one of them leads down a rabbit hole of accusations of "no true scotsman" and links to tumblr pages, while the other one has a slightly better chance of getting at least one person to think "hey, maybe I shouldn't be afraid of feminists?" Your claim that it's all men's fault that the term feminism has been poisoned isn't helping, either.

I have, unfortunately, seen enough Internet arguments to know how those things go. Fear and mistrust are too powerful. A single story about someone getting fired over saying "dongle" is worth a thousand people like you arguing what feminism "actually" is and who it's good for. Being a little more proactive about counteracting that effect can't hurt.

Comment: Re:correlation, causation (Score 1, Interesting) 387

by martas (#47595397) Attached to: Ancient Skulls Show Civilization Rose As Testosterone Fell

This is the problem right here: the term feminist has been poisoned intentionally. Its similar to the right-wing hit job on 'liberal'; the only way to defeat an idea that most people already accept is to reframe and demonize that idea as something objectionable.

I don't care enough to express an opinion on the rest of your post and the debate you're in, but this part strikes me as very false. A conspiracy theory is completely unnecessary to explain the "poisoning" of the term feminism. It's entirely believable that, as radical elements of feminism naturally arose (and they did arise naturally; there's no way in hell that's a false flag operation), both non-feminists and those with actively anti-feminist inclinations lumped those radical elements with the less extreme versions of feminism. That's a story as old as time, same has happened with Islam, atheism, race relations, LGBT issues, etc. People are really bad at ignoring threatening extremes. It's a natural impulse, no deliberate poisoning necessary. As far as I know, the only viable means of fighting this trend is for the more moderate (but still similarly aligned) elements to actively, loudly disavow the radicalization of their views. Defensiveness won't get you anywhere, it'll just legitimize the suspicion surrounding the issue further.

Comment: Re:Pft (Score 1) 962

by martas (#47516127) Attached to: The Daily Harassment of Women In the Game Industry
It is relevant when the focus is placed on sexism rather than fuckwadism. The use of sexist insults is incidental. You could convince every person on the planet that sexism is bad and they shouldn't be sexist, and people who are trying to be hurtful would still use sexist insults because they're effective.

And I wasn't ridiculing anti-anti-trans sentiment, I was ridiculing the fact that these sort of discussions so often center around a specific set of attributes (LGBTQQIAAP+) that do not reflect the absolute (i.e. non-relative) prevalence of abuse which centers on them. OP's assertion was that anyone who is "different from a straight, cis, white man" is attacked. Well, Gabe Newell is all of those things, but how much bullshit do you suppose he's had to deal with because he's obese? "Straight cis white man" has just become a moniker for "evil" in certain circles, which is why I'm sure OP didn't even give any thought as to how informative/useful/relevant each modifier was to the discussion.

Comment: Re:Pft (Score 2, Insightful) 962

by martas (#47514343) Attached to: The Daily Harassment of Women In the Game Industry
His point is that they're not fuckwads because they're "sexist, racist, homopobic, tranphobic", but that they're "sexist, racist, homopobic, tranphobic" because they're fuckwads. Also, I think it's pretty funny that in the list of "teh patriarchy" adjectives, "cis" has become so standard despite referring to about 0.3% of the population. I guess the more victim classes you have, the stronger your case sounds. In which case, here are some other classes you could have used, thank me later: mentally ill, physically ill, young, old, bald, poorly endowed in the genital area, ugly, pretty, skinny, fat, redhead, bucktoothed, swole, hairy, flat-chested, less-than-fluent in the language being used, cross-eyed, far or near sighted, and virgin. And that's just off the top of my head, I'm sure I could come up with more.

Comment: Re:CERN, not just Brits, and SGML,GIF,JPEG (Score 1) 340

by martas (#47395767) Attached to: On 4th of July:

there were people who got that the big win was content description, not format description, and many of the problems we have today are because too many people lost sight of that and wanted authors to control presentation instead of readers, forcing us to deal with flash and Javascript and lots of other brokenness

Sounds like someone needs to invent the InTeXnet

Comment: Re:Creating emotional response is not the issue (Score 1) 219

by martas (#47350121) Attached to: Facebook's Emotion Experiment: Too Far, Or Social Network Norm?

People use facebook with the expectation that they are seeing a (reasonably) objective representation of what their friends are trying to express or convey. Facebook is the equivalent of the telephone in a telephone call.

That claim would make sense if people commonly held telephone conversations with hundreds of people simultaneously who say things continuously all day long. There are plenty of forums on the Internet that display information based on simple rules like "most recent post at the top". But as long as you, your family, and just about everyone else in the country are using Facebook instead of one of those forums, then the only thing you're complaining about regarding this story is that they, for once, decided to share the results of one of what has to be hundreds or thousands of similar experiments they've already performed to come up with the IR algorithms they have running now.

Comment: Re:This is not advertising (Score 1) 219

by martas (#47349935) Attached to: Facebook's Emotion Experiment: Too Far, Or Social Network Norm?

"Everyone else is doing it" is a juvenile argument that little kids make to justify behaviors that they shouldn't be engaging in.

Ugh, didn't you disgust yourself while typing that out? There was a lot more to OP's argument than that, as you very well know. And that's on top of the Olympian leap it must have taken to claim that a private company tweaking the information filtering algorithms for their entirely optional leisure service can constitute a violation of personal sovereignty, which is a concept more commonly reserved for discussions on issues like indentured servitude...

Error in operator: add beer