Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Women even better off in industry (Score 2) 445

Outside of Silicon Valley women are usually treated well and as equals

Meh, I've witnessed awful treatment of women in the industry and never worked anywhere near SV.

Remember that stat, that 25% of women in colleges have been sexually assaulted? How initially it seems unbelievable because, hey, you wouldn't, and I wouldn't, and most men you know wouldn't, so how can that be?

The reason it's likely true is that it doesn't a huge proportion of men to be assholes for a disproportionate number of women to be affected. If, say, 2-5% of men in college think it's OK to touch women inappropriately and non-consensually in environments in which they can get away with it, and you assume each of them gets away with it, and so assaults multiple women, then, wow, you're up to 25% of college women being sexually assaulted pretty quickly.

And the same is true in businesses. Leaving aside institutional and structural problems - which exist everywhere - it doesn't really take a lot of male employees to be assholes, showing a level of disrespect for women they'd never show to men, for women to be disproportionately affected.

One office I worked for had such a person. As in every male member of the programming team knew he hated women, and that the extremely qualified, hard working, smart woman working with him was being treated like shit solely because she was a woman, and neither young nor blonde enough to make him at least be chivalrous to her as compensation.

To my and my coworkers shame we never did anything about it. We didn't talk to him about it, we continued to treat him as a - distant, perhaps - friends. We didn't talk to management about it. "G is strong", we told ourselves, "She doesn't put up with his bullshit", and, well, yeah, but bullying is bullying, and working in that environment wears down the strongest of all of us.

It's getting a lot of press in SV right now because SV is the hub of the tech industry, and has sizable number of progressives involved in it. But the idea it's limited to SV is absurd, that'd be to assume either that base human behavior (because there'll always be sexism) somehow is under control elsewhere, or that management skills have developed to a remarkable level outside of SV.

Comment Re:Lies? (Score 2) 445

I honestly can't remember the last time I used an explicit GOTO. That said, exception handling in most programming languages seems to actually be worse and I've used that.

Some time ago, someone proposed a spoof programming language, whose name temporarily escapes me, that included just about every bad idea possible. This included a "COMEFROM" structure that replaced GOTO - instead of marking where you wanted the jump at the location of the jump, you instead marked at at the location you jumped to.

Guaranteed unreadable. Worse than GOTO. And, hey, guess what, that's pretty much what exception handling is in 99% of implementations. The only way around it is to put one statement, and one statement only, in your try { ... } block, and who does that?

Comment Re:So to sum up (Score 1) 626

No, it wasn't. He was kicked out because his sexual proclivities include the domination of women, specifically. To quote Buytaert word-for-word:

Then he's a fucking moron, and he's going to be in for a shock when he gets condemned by the wider social justice community. Acting out Gorean fantasies doesn't mean you believe, in real life, in the subjugation of women any more than acting out Star Wars fantasies means you believe in The Force.

You are correct that traditionally it'd be conservatives making a stink about someones sexual proclivities. That has changed, and is no longer true

Conservatives still seem to be where the majority of attacks on sexual activities, especially non-"normal" sexual activities, comes from.

Do liberals do it? You'll find one or two, just as you'll find any large community has its outliers. But in reality, it's telling that the major schism that lead to the end of Second Wave Feminism and the birth of Third Wave was sex, and the degree to which Second Wave leaned towards prescribing right and wrong sexual behaviors, something unsustainable given human needs. Third Wave is known as "Sex positive", and it was the result of a sizable amount of debate involving everyone from sex workers to the BDSM community that drove Third Wave in that direction.

To put it another way: it's always been the case that the two groups have had people within them that want to control other people's sex lives. Liberals have traditionally done that less than Conservatives. And Liberals are less prescriptive than they were, not more.

Comment Re:So to sum up (Score 1) 626

Except if you are into BDSM involving fantasies of sexual slavery of women

That's right. Women and men acting out fantasies which are entirely consensual and, by definition, involve no real transfer of power, in private, are entirely fine, because nobody is subjugating anyone else.

Or you're a muslim

I've yet to hear a single so-called SJW argue that Muslims are right to subjugate women.

What almost everyone on the left believes is that simply being a Muslim doesn't mean you're deserving of hatred, that you should be dehumanized, that you should be blamed for terrorism, that you should be attacked, or that you should be forced to live in countries governed by extremists.

Kinda like we'd defend conservatives too if we were told they all inherently support terrorism, or that they shouldn't be allowed in this country if they're trying to escape a fascist regime.

Comment Re:While its not my cup of tea (Score 1) 626

Bondage, Discipline & Domination, Submission & Sadism, Masochism. (The "&"s are where the same letter is shared, not any linking of the two concepts.)

It's a generic name for all that stuff where something resembling power is exchanged in the context of a sexual relationship, in much the same way as LGBT(*) is a generic term for sexual relationships where gender/sex norms are unusual.

Within the BDSM communities, you'll find they usually use the letters "SSC", which stands for Safe, Sane, & Consensual - essentially do what you want with one another, but make sure everyone consents and that lines of communication remain open so if consent is withdrawn it can be communicated, practice safety at all times (it's relatively easy to accidentally injure or even kill someone if you restrain them, for example), and, well, snuff scenes are probably not sane.

Contrary to the grandparent's assertion, there's no opposition to BDSM from the majority of people interested in social justice - in fact, attempting to suppress someone else's sexuality is generally frowned upon by social justice types.

Comment Re:While its not my cup of tea (Score 1) 626

The term SJW proves, yet again, to be meaningless. You'll find precious few people who believe in social justice - which once upon a time were the "SJ" in "SJW" - agreeing with the notion that other people's private, consent based, sex lives are justification for discrimination.

If the article is a fair description of what happened (and that's a big if) then this is an example of puritanical conservatism run amok. Discriminating against people for what they do in private, behind closed doors, involving consenting adults only, should have no place within the development community.

Comment Re:Self-contradictory (Score 2) 118

I suspect by physical interface they mean something you interact with physically, rather than directly - ie you push buttons with your fingers on a keyboard, you receive images via a monitor that converts them into photons, etc. It's awkward language, but I'm not sure there's a "correct" way beyond calling the brain link something awful like "really, really, direct."

Comment Re:You don't want this to succed (Score 1) 342

Leaving aside the fact it's rarely the case you can just sign away liability..

The GPL only applies if you decide to accept its conditions. Just installing Ubuntu doesn't mean you've agreed to the GPL and, as such, Canonical has anything to point at if your Nuclear Reactor has a meltdown because a bug in Unity swapped the "Drop fuel rods/Raise fuel rods" buttons by accident.

Sure, you might give up your right to sue if you subsequently redistribute Ubuntu to others. But even then... like I said, it's rare you can just sign away liability.

Comment Re:Wow (Score 1) 342

Scrollwheels used to work fine. Then some idiots at Canonical and GNOME decided to redesign the scrollbar, on the grounds we don't need it any more because we have scrollwheels, despite the fact that, actually, no, quite often we don't, and in the course of effing up the scrollbar they managed to eff up the mousewheel at the same time.

I still don't know why they didn't just revert to how things were. They fixed a problem that doesn't exist, and appear to be too stubborn to admit they made a mistake.

Comment Re:Crime is falling with lead levels from gasoline (Score 1) 131

From the article: "The gasoline lead story has another virtue too: It's the only hypothesis that persuasively explains both the rise of crime in the '60s and '70s and its fall beginning in the '90s. Two other theories -- the baby boom demographic bulge and the drug explosion of the '60 -- at least have the potential to explain both, but neither one fully fits the known data. Only gasoline lead, with its dramatic rise and fall following World War II, can explain the equally dramatic rise and fall in violent crime."

Yes, it's always good to be cautious about correlations and what they prove. But it is also widely accepted that lead is harmful.

Comment Crime is falling with lead levels from gasoline (Score 1) 131

http://www.motherjones.com/env...
"So this is the choice before us: We can either attack crime at its root by getting rid of the remaining lead in our environment, or we can continue our current policy of waiting 20 years and then locking up all the lead-poisoned kids who have turned into criminals."

Comment Google's mistake: ignores pyramid of users (Score 1) 265

"Odds are, people who use advanced features are more likely to turn data harvesting off. Thus making those metrics questionable. Then again, anyone who is opposed to being monitored is not part of the Google's target audience."

Sounds likely, AC. But here is Google's mistake. There is a sort of hierarchy or pyramid of users for many application. In rough percentages:
* 1% of users might become superusers making plugins and doing all sorts of fancy things with an application.
* 10% of users might become knowledgeable about what you can do with an app and provide support and encouragement for their friends (and also rely on the 1% for support and new features like plugins).
* 89% as all the rest just use the app and ask the 11% for help.

If you decide to design your platform for the 89%, you alienate all the people up the pyramid who provide free support and evangelism for the product and who guide the product in new directions. As Eric von Hippel at MIT has done studies showing that most (like 80%) of innovations are customer suggestions; so, you also cut yourself off from customer-led innovation.

I'm really going to miss "close tabs to the right" which I use frequently (and yes I have telemetry turned off too). If there is not a plugin possible for that, removing that feature is definitely going to reduce my liking of Chrome (which I use on a Chromebook). Now, maybe by itself that one change won't make me abandon Chrome (as if there are many great alternatives with Firefox/Mozilla fiascos) -- but, add up enough of these misguided decisions, and the odds will continue to change.

Slashdot Top Deals

Quark! Quark! Beware the quantum duck!

Working...