Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Everybody List What You Think Went Wrong (Score 0) 512 512

The only claim I made was that GG has influenced ethics in game journalism because a number of sites have updated their ethics policy. A quick Google search and the first link says that kotaku and polygon will: " post public messages about how they will handle disclosure between the relationships of journalists and developers from now on."

Honestly, I don't know how to take your posts seriously... I thought the first one was a poe and then this out from left field. What is your point? What point of mine are you trying to address in your reply?

GG and women in STEM because evil white men!! Have I got it right or did I miss something when you changed subjects?


Comment Re:Everybody List What You Think Went Wrong (Score 0) 512 512

that's because Gamergate wasn't about ethics in game journalism, hilarious memes be damned. it was PRECISELY about white men continuing to be gatekeepers against gaming opening up to other people, including women. in sum, get your paranoid persecution complex out of here.

What? How did the white man keep you from playing/making games you want? No one stopped my wife. No one stopped the people in #notyourshield. So.... Please, tell me how the white man oppresses you in the 1st world video game industry through hot coffee mods and NPC's.

Like it or not, GG has influenced ethics in game journalism. A number of sites have updated their ethics policy in response to GG.

Honestly, I can't tell if this is a Poe or not.

Comment Re:Algorithm (Score 4, Insightful) 233 233

Or perhaps advertisers look at the revenue of those ads and act accordingly.

...it's not a good thing.

Why is it not a good thing? You mean, ads follow market forces which is made up of individuals that act on their own accord and interests? How in the hell is that not a good thing? individuals may act against their own interests... but are you going to be the good dictator and ensure that everybody does what is best for them?

Comment Re:Outside help (Score 1) 431 431

I never understood the contempt and hatred for the Euro. A loose economic union to facilitate trade and further diplomatic relationships with member states to ensure that another WW doesn't occur in Europe seems like a laudable goal. These goals seemed to be designed around the causes of WW1 and WW2. It may not have been perfectly implemented but what is perfect version 1.0? The USA had to rewrite the Articles of Confederation for similar issues (having the federal government assume the war debts of the Revolutionary War was a contentious topic that was addressed with the Constitution, not AoC iirc).

Could someone explain, why is the Euro seen as a bad thing? Perhaps, I am showing my age by asking this.

Comment Re:best news in a while.... (Score 1) 133 133

While I agree with the sentiment lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Fuck the federal student loan program.

As someone who used student loans (both private and federal) to get a B.S. in CS, the federal student loans were very helpful and were reasonable. Some of these changes had occurred recently, but loans that originated in 2005/6 were eligible of consolidation to take advantage of new government proposals (special loan consolidation in 2011/2012 iirc). These consolidations and proposals that passed lowered interest rates, payback amounts, possible forgiveness, etc. The private student loans however, were malicious. They knew you couldn't bankrupt out of them and they knew you were their bitch. It was one of the greatest days of my life paying those fuckers off.

The whole point of the student loans is to increase access to higher education, barring shit like UoP, that mission has been a success with record numbers of student enrollment. I would not have been able to get an education without them.

If there is another way to increase availability to higher education I am all ears. Student loans are not perfect but it's better then not having access to higher education.

Comment Re:What about low-income boys? (Score 1) 473 473

I am not denying the problems women face. We are a free society and they are free to choose their career based on what interests them. The information provided FTFA that I previously linked showed a disparity in interest. If the one of the biggest problem women have is that their friends will make fun of them? Yes, i don't have much sympathy for that. Thick skin, grow some. Society does not owe you any favors to end peer pressure or negative stereo types. Because the way to end stereo types is to not care and ignore them and change them yourself. Have some personal accountability. All of the women that are in STEM didn't let anyone bring them down or talk them out of it. That tells me there is equal opportunity. Just because it is not 50/50 does not mean it is inherently sexist.

They're not as free, socially, as boys to pursue those interests.

Are there any legal barriers stopping those interests? No? Then they are just as free. What obstacles stop a girl watching a youtube video that teaches how to code? What societal pressure will stop you from reading a technical manual? There are more opportunities now to cultivate any interest you have these days, if subtle intimidation or mean comments stop you from perusing your interests, clearly it wasn't that interesting to you. If necessary there are legal courses of action a woman can take to end that type of behavior in school or on the job.

If we, as a society, change our attitudes and prejudices and eliminate those absurd gender stereotypes women won't have to face those problems ever. They won't have to worry about sitting in a male dominated classroom or workplace. They won't have to deal with ridiculous attitudes about their competence or ability simply because they're women.

Bullshit. Ever worked in a restaurant? It makes STEM look like the Oprah Winfrey show. Male dominated classroom and/or workplace? That means quotas which mean equal outcomes, not opportunity. Also, this coddling and unnecessary affirmative action does little to help those ridiculous attitudes about their competence and abilities. did you get that job because of quota or because you earned it?

I have yet to see a compelling evidence that suggests women have less opportunity than men in STEM. STEM maybe male dominated, and some men are dicks but that doesn't mean less opportunity for women. Subtle social anxieties and stressors are not evidence of lack of opportunity. Get over it.

Comment Re:What about low-income boys? (Score 1) 473 473

The argument is that Computer Science/coding is now as core as basic numeracy and literacy,

i can agree with that. But that doesn't justify segregation. if it did, why don't we segregate all classes ( English, math, drama, science, etc ad infinitum)? Entire schools? Even the Workplace?

Comment Re:What about low-income boys? (Score 1) 473 473

Because if he did understand the issues involved, he would have to acknowledge that there are many good reasons for having a girls only class. He might not agree with them, but his original comment appeared to dismiss their very existence.

In the real world, men and women have work together. That is a very compelling reason against segregation. The good reasons for having segregation are not strong enough for that, imo.

I have not seen an acknowledgement for reasons against segregation. You appear to dismiss their very existence. Therefore, you do not understand the issues because if you did you would have acknowledged them.

Comment Re:What about low-income boys? (Score 1) 473 473

Peer influence and negative stereotypes

Yes, children/young adults have to get over peer pressure and negative stereotypes. This is not a gender specific problem. The nerd/geek stereotype is not a positive one, yet men and women overcome this "problem" all the time and pursue their interests. Segregation would solve this, how?

positive female role models

You can do this in a co-ed classroom.

an environment where it's acceptable for them to indulge in those interests

Girls can't learn in the same classroom as boys, is what you imply. Why stop at CS then? Why not gender segregated schools? Segregated workplaces? If girls can't learn with boys can they work with them? Segregation worked so well for race it should work for gender too.

This woudn't be the case in a co-ed classroom

I disagree. You can speculate all you want about gender segregation but in the real world men and women have to work with each other.

Just facing a male-dominated classroom, where they're very likely to be subjected to unwanted comments and advances, can be intimidating. It's certainly not conducive to learning.

If it is behavior that is disruptive to learning, the teacher is the arbitrator and can adjust the offenders behavior by kicking them out (for example). Unwanted comments and advances??? We are talking about K-12 right? I didn't realize kids so young were so forward... high school maybe but then, do you get that in English class? How do we stop it there? Why is CS so different?

That you can't find a single legitimate reason for 'girls only' programs tells me that you don't understand the issues at all.

To use your logic: Because you can't find a single legitimate reason for co-ed tells me that you don't understand the issues at all. You didn't address my reason for against segregation therefore you don't understand. Brilliant...

Really, it's quite simple: women and girls face significant obstacles that men and boys don't. If that's not inequality, I don't know what is! By reducing those barriers, we help to give them equal opportunity.

If it was simple, it wouldn't be an issue. yes, men and women face obstacles. Life is full of them. An ability to overcome those obstacles is a good thing, IMHO.

What you want is equal outcomes, not opportunities. Boys that have "informal opportunities", spend their own time to cultivate an interest. Yet, Girls are not. because they have different interests. FTFA, they are not as interested in working with computers, computer animation, computer programming and computer games . They prefercommunal careers.

And have chosennot to work with computers in high school.

Again, i think that growing children's interest in CS is a good thing... But I don't like it when a boy now has less formal choices because of some informal advantage that girls could have if they spent their time with it.... That is not equality. You make women sound weak.

Comment Re:What about low-income boys? (Score 1) 473 473

A better example would be shower facilities. If you offered homeless people a shower, only had room for one communal facility so decided to limit it to just women, would that be sexist?

So, the semantics of a unisex bathrooms are now the analogy? Hygiene for adults is fundamentally different than sparking an interest for an education/career for children.

The point is that there is a good reason for having a girl's only class here, merely providing extra help for girls is not detrimental to boys.

I do not see a good reason for having a girls only class. Any career or educational path a person chooses have to learn to work with people that are different from them. Teaching children how to handle diverse work fields and different educational environments is a good thing. That includes learning to work with members of the opposite sex. It may not be detrimental to boys (it could discourage them) but it certainly is unequal and unfair to a male kid that wants to learn about CS but does not have the same formal opportunities as girls because... bad analogies and equal outcomes (but he has more informal opportunities!!! whatever that is).

Comment Re:What about low-income boys? (Score 4, Insightful) 473 473

...the fact that boys have more informal opportunities to become interested in CS. That's all it is doing - allowing girls to try it out and spark an interest. Education is still done at school in a mixed environment, so there is no denying boys access to education.

informal opportunities? Could you list some examples of informal opportunities? Informal implies it is done on their own (or with help from parents). How is a boy (or his parents) cultivating interests now a data point for lack of opportunities to girls? Do girls not have access to the same internet as boys? Or games? Or technology to foster that informal experience? I like the idea of allowing children to spark their interest in CS, but limiting it to one gender to me seems wrong. Just like your soup kitchen example, it seems wrong to deny a poor white person to your soup kitchen.

So, the kid that spent time learning a computer has more opportunities than someone that didn't... Shocking.

You make an interesting argument though. If I give money to a charity for cats, am I discriminating against dogs? I only have a limited amount of cash. Should I divide my donation equally among all charities somehow?

You are changing the criteria and moving the goal post. Cats and dogs are biologically different and require different food diets to be health. That is fundamentally different than a soup kitchen for poor humans. However, sticking to your original example, If you make a soup kitchen and deny a poor person because of their race, that's racist. You may have limited cash, but your soup will be helpful to any hungry human regardless of race. Just like this program would be helpful to any child looking to learn about CS, not just girls.

Comment Re:What about low-income boys? (Score 1) 473 473

if I start a soup kitchen for the poor in some predominantly black community, it doesn't mean I'm a racist who hates white people.

Is it racist if you deny poor white people access to soup your kitchen? I don't think anyone is against engaging children in CS. The issue is actively denying interested parties by gender.

Because boys get more informal opportunities for computing experience outside of school, this lack of formal computing education especially affects girls and many youth of color.

So, because boys shown an interest in computers whether that is because of (FTFA) computer games or because of some other computer experience in high school; we should deny those kids access to education that could cultivate their interest because a kid with a different gender didn't have the same interest and we must have gender quotas??

Or did I miss something?

"There is such a fine line between genius and stupidity." - David St. Hubbins, "Spinal Tap"