THIS. This is exactly the problem.
I don't go into a Young Fundamental Christian Females meeting, acting all Casanova and handing them How-to-be-sexy pamphlets.
YOU don't go to Defcon without any appreciable technical skills* (but lots of social skills nobody cares for), handing out dating advice.
* Pardon me if you got actual technical skills, just substitute for most of those particular women. They haven't.
I respect the vast majority of women in "normal life". But when I go to Defcon, I simply look down on anyone who wants to play but lacks the skillset. I don't look down on them as human beings, but as nerds. This is completely independent on gender, race, etc.
The point that does make a difference with gender however is that men don't usually provoke a (sometimes quite strong) desire in me to have sex with them. Women do, they know it, and that's all fine and nice as long as they don't stampede into a culture they don't understand, can't contribute to but are still welcome because I can't completely turn off the sex appeal. Men who can't keep up with us simply get laughed out of the room. Nontechnical women can stay because of that desperate hope...
I don't know what the motivation of those women is... hang out with the "cool nerds", have a "good time" without regard for the other attendees, make money (there's a few prostitutes), or simply go there for no good reason and then be proud of showing their ignorance when talking to people... but extremely few could make me believe that they actually want to learn about electronics or coding. (this is different from those women who are already capable, as most of them have my greatest respect and get treated as buddies)
So we have a mixture of me looking down upon those "dummies", their demand for some kind of recognition I can't fathom what it is, and me being sexually attracted to them, which is their only non-negative point in the specific environment of a hacker conference.
Most directions are pointing downhill from here, and while I agree that it should never amount to violence and the like, it's the women who come there with expectations of dating behaviour that are the problem.
(thinking about ticking that anonymous button right now, but hey, that's my opinion even though it seems to be unpopular... basically I'm telling you that your whole posting is irrelevant because hacker conferences is where we do away with that dating stuff)
As concluded in my other reply, my point is that you're not less safe with Google just because they don't give you unlimited insurance.
Yet your comment tried to claim that. Hence the strawman.
Contribution & steering is another topic, but we can discuss that too.
You deposit 2000 right now at MPEG-LA. Will anyone care at all about your opinion? Of course not.
Hmm, not sure where you want to go with this, as your comment doesn't particularly refute any of my points. Doesn't matter, I don't think you're going to reply, seeing how this is a tad old and you don't have actual arguments anyway
OK, I'm guilty of starting the previous comment with a teaser myself... but care to elaborate?
Prepending disclaimers to everything is cumbersome, but here you go: I'm not affiliated with Google, don't have a particular interest in seeing them dominate or anything like that. I do like pointing out obvious nonsense on the internet
What is it you're a fanboy for?
Seriously, Google starting to charge for VP8 at some point is about as likely as Microsoft opensourcing their most recent Windows and Office.
Look at the political and corporate landscape of 20 years ago and see how many ways you can begin the sentence, "...then seemed about as likely as Microsoft opensourcing their most recent Windows and Office." It takes a teenager, or someone with a teenage mindset, to look so much in the here and now.
Well, I'm obviously too young (but teenager? not so much) to have had a good overview over the corporate landscape of 20 years ago... but I think it's pretty clear that Microsoft is as likely to opensource their products now as they were then.
Besides, even just 5 or so years are half an eternity in tech, and I think my point holds pretty well for such time scales.
The other "as likely as..." things? Well, people claiming this for Linux (server), laptops, Myspace (later Facebook) just lack foresight.
Also, Windows source code. "I meant open in precisely the way I want it to be open." Of course you did.
I was just using the common knowledge standard definition. Or would you seriously claim here and now, on a tech site, that the Windows source code is open source? And then you talk about "open exactly as I want it"...
Also, of course Google hasn't promised a blanko cheque for every user of VP8. MPEG-LA hasn't done it either for h264.
Which, after a long and complicated series of technical legal arguments, allows us to conclude that you're no safer with one than the other.
Exactly what I tried to conclude. You're not less safe with Google just because they don't give you unlimited insurance.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid" -- the artificial person, from _Aliens_