She wasn't a "bit rude" but apparently you feel you have credibility to burn; I say otherwise but what do I know?;)
Reading the background of the story, It would be very surprising if she didn't bring a whole litany of expressions of her hatred of men to the table, and caused a lot of problems at work.
It's like getting a speeding ticket or getting caught stealing. Harrdly ever happens the first time you do it. I would bet that she was a constant source of problems, especially if her reaction to that guys post was to go batshit insane over a civil post.
A female game dev was a bit rude on Twitter and ended up getting fired after people complained to her employer. Some guy on Reddit commented that it seemed like they could get anyone fired by complaining to their employer...
So 4chan trolls got together and started doing just that, targeting random female developers. They screwd up though, because their mail merge failed and sent messages complaining about %FEMALENAME.
And the reddit dude was wrong. A normal Female developer - read that as a non-misandryst who doesn't take her misandry to Twitter as a representative of the company. isn't at all likely to be canned, especially since she'll be able to prove that she didn't do whatever she was accused from.
The 4chan crew might have been putting some mistakes in on purpose. If a female developer could get fired for a messed up email, the Reddit dude would be proven right.
You're delusional. The Electoral College doesn't violate the 14th Amendment. Somebody has been shovelling bullshit at you and you've been swallowing it.
It depends on which party is getting elected while getting less votes. If a person is a card carrying Republican, the Electoral college is a true gift form Gawd.
Then again, we'll see how their love of the EC shifts if they lose a few elections.
And this to me is what it all boils down to. At this point, if someone claims that the EC is a problem, Republicans start screaming about how it is the law of the land.
It is the law of the land. And that isn't the point. Fact is, in the computer age, it is exceptionally easy to game and allow a candidate who received less votes overall to win the Electoral college.
It is codified and legal minority rule.
That's the problem, Jane Q. The concept of a minority winning over a majority.
Who cares if you're running 32+ GB of RAM. Sucks if you're stuck on that modern new Macbook that caps out at 16 GB...
A) That’s like responding to a car analogy with “who cares if you own a private jet”? Suggesting that people should have 32GB of RAM to run a browser is preposterous.
B) The new MacBook Pros are configurable up to 32GB of RAM...
Hold on, hold on - let the guy make some non-sequitur's about systemd and Russian hacking maybe before you squanch him. Its the only way he can participate.
For months Wells Fargo has been trying to hire security professionals in my area. No thanks, I'm not interested in working in that environment. I certainly wouldn't be a customer either.
Smart move - I suspect they would demand you commit criminal acts. Or at least blame you for them when one of the suits gets caught. Again.
Both of those men gave away money to buy a better legacy. Bill Gates would be excoriated if he didnt start giving away his money. Its literally his only redeeming quality.
If a person decides to do what a good person would do, it is still a good thing.
They claim that they really believe that the general public will step forward and take care of everything the government currently does through private donations
Just like what happened in the golden age before big government.
I'll tell you another thing, women and darkies knew their place too. NGOML!
Glad I read the second sentence after reading the first.
Some folks are going to point out people like Andrew Carnegie, or even Bill Gates (though most crypto-conservatives hate him for it) as proof that people with a lot of money are generous..
But those are the very few.
I've always wondered what the modern gilded class will do after they finish with the pecuniary extraction phase and consolidate their wealth. I suspect when the rest of us have nothing more to take, they will turn on each other.
There are libertarians, and then there are Libertarians. Some people just take it too damn seriously. Increased social liberties at the same time as increased economic liberties, that sounds good. But then they start adding in lots of litmus tests, and welcome goofy theories like the gold standard with open arms. This is what political parties do, the want to attract those with the extreme views and purist ideologies, leaving moderates who think about things behind.
Libertarianism is like all other isms some ideas are good, but the ideology always destroys the idea. Its always the core assumption
Capitalism assumes that the people who are driven by greed to accumulate, are also very generous.
Socialism (real, not the socialism that crypto conservatives bandy about) assumes the government is always benevolent and honest.
Communism assumes altruism on the part of the governed.
And Libertarianism assumes everyone is smart and honest.
Modern crypto-conservatives have also damaged it by usurping the anti-tax aspects
The only way there ius no evidence is if you have no intention of believing it. That's okay - there are people who believe there was no moon landing, that 9-11 was an inside job, that Ted Cruz'z father helped kill JFK, that the Kenyan Terror baby was born in Kenya, that Bill Clinton sent his Arkansas bodyguards to be killed at wake, the Clinton's have killed 50 plus people now, that FDR ignored the radar in Hawaii, and all manner of conspiracy theories.
That's nice, except for the fact you have that completely and utterly backwards. Russiagaters have as much evidence for their theories that the Birthers do that Obama was born in Kenya and is a muslim. Facts.
The mueller investigation is about finding evidence to substantiate the unverified claims that initiated the investigation.
The gov't never had any actual evidence of trump campaign collusion with the Russians.
The only way there ius no evidence is if you have no intention of believing it. That's okay - there are people who believe there was no moon landing, that 9-11 was an inside job, that Ted Cruz'z father helped kill JFK, that the Kenyan Terror baby was born in Kenya, that Bill Clinton sent his Arkansas bodyguards to be killed at wake, the Clinton's have killed 50 plus people now, that FDR ignored the radar in Hawaii, and all manner of conspiracy theories.
You are just another member of that group. There is plenty of public information that show a whole lot of wrongdoing. Hard to believe there won't be more coming out very soon.
Trump won 2600 counties to Clinton's 500. That's 84%. How is that razor thin? You can blame the Electoral College but it is there for a reason so that voters in the middle of Kansas or Montana or Nevada or Illinois have just as a loud a voice as everyone else.
You need to up your math game. Trump won 100 percent of the votes for Trump.
As I told my family members who moved away - I'm not important enough to live near, so you're not important enough to visit. If I show up, I do, but I'm under no obligation. But I won't fly unless it's a private flight chartered by me.
I can see why nobody wants to travel to visit you.
That isn't a bad thing. Do not confuse my attitude with misanthropy. My friends and I can get together and break bread or participate in activity any day of the week. And we do - a lot. As I've said before, family is an accident of birth. I'm under no obligation to love or even like them. Any affection on my part is based on merit.
Given that 'seeing family' is one of the central part of 'being fucking human' I struggle to understand how you think that sort of comment will win you any followers.
Mistake number one is any idea that II'm looking for followers.
And family is merely an accident of birth. I love or not love bases on merit, not who pooped out of whose chute.
The rest of us have to get on with our lives, and attempt to actually change the problems rather than just passively accepting them / avoiding them like you have done.
Ah, so you don't think that if the airlines start going out of business because their screeners feeel up little girls and chain so passengers to tables, that the surviving ones might just quit treating their customers like the enemy? Interesting.
Let me help you: boycotting will do nothing to change things unless you can persuade a big group of people to join the boycott.
You're making the mistake of combining my statements. Even though I'm pretty certain that massive avoidance will go a long way towards getting TSA agents to stop their asshattery, and that would be a general good thing - in reality, I don't give a flying shit. I don't fly commercial now because I'm not going to put up with the abuse. This is a simple personal decision. Other people mightfind what the TSA is doing are indeed allowed to put up with whatever abuse the TSA agents feel like giving them - the courst have decided that it can, and that you cannot do anything about it - it is the law. It's your personal choice.
And if your opening argument is "you don't need human interaction further from your immediate neighbourhood" then you will be pretty lonely in that boycott.
You have made so many assumptions that I reckon you had some sort of mental argument with me before you put hands to keyboard.
I don't care at all about the abuse you might take. You know when you buy your ticket that you or your family members are subject to that abuse. It's your choice.
I'm not trying to make some big movement to change the situation. Even if I note the power of passive avoidance and it's effect upon profits and losses - hey, its your skin, not mine. My only real upset is the abuse children might have to take, since little kids can't really give proper consent. It's probably also a little confusing when you tell her that Uncle Louie isn't allowed to feel her up, but the person at the airport is allowed to do that. Just sayin'.
And my thoughts about family are just my thoughts on family. Accidents of birth. Maybe someone's family is the most awesome people on earth - maybe they aren't. But I'm under no obligation to love them whether they are Mother Theresa or Jeffrey Dahmer.
As I told my family members who moved away - I'm not important enough to live near, so you're not important enough to visit. If I show up, I do, but I'm under no obligation.
Wow, you are SUCH a badass. But lets say your kid goes to a university on the other side of the country and is in a nasty accident, and your employer will only let you take three days off next to a weekend. You really gonna tell Junior to go fuck himself & he's on his own, or are you going to put down the big man act for a couple of days and fly Southwest?
I'll charter a private flight, bragh. Just like I wrote in the part you must have skipped over.
What's with the bizzare sarcasm anyhow? I do spend my money on businesses that act like they appreciate my money, not treat me like an enemy. Damn guy - since when did that become a bad thing?
As for the "badass" part?
For those relatives who moved away from the family, leaving the wife and I to take care of two full sets of parents by ourselves as they went through the process of dying, well they didn't have to worry about that. Ol might be an asshole, (and I am) but at least Ol didn't abandon his and his wife's parents. The brothers and sisters in faraway parts didn't have to worry about any of that shit.
And boy were the family members pissed when the wills were read. All of which helps me charter private flights. For fun, for vacation, not to go visit relatives. Mostly I like to drive, though. There's a lot of beautiful countryside out there.
If they ban all private charter flights the rich, the powerful, & the politicians have to experience the same treatment as The Unwashed Masses, there will be changes.
Meanwhile, This will be another employment opportunity for some really skeevy types.
Slashdot Mirror
She wasn't a "bit rude" but apparently you feel you have credibility to burn; I say otherwise but what do I know? ;)
Reading the background of the story, It would be very surprising if she didn't bring a whole litany of expressions of her hatred of men to the table, and caused a lot of problems at work.
It's like getting a speeding ticket or getting caught stealing. Harrdly ever happens the first time you do it. I would bet that she was a constant source of problems, especially if her reaction to that guys post was to go batshit insane over a civil post.
A female game dev was a bit rude on Twitter and ended up getting fired after people complained to her employer. Some guy on Reddit commented that it seemed like they could get anyone fired by complaining to their employer...
So 4chan trolls got together and started doing just that, targeting random female developers. They screwd up though, because their mail merge failed and sent messages complaining about %FEMALENAME.
And the reddit dude was wrong. A normal Female developer - read that as a non-misandryst who doesn't take her misandry to Twitter as a representative of the company. isn't at all likely to be canned, especially since she'll be able to prove that she didn't do whatever she was accused from.
The 4chan crew might have been putting some mistakes in on purpose. If a female developer could get fired for a messed up email, the Reddit dude would be proven right.
Well it takes effort to spin 4channonsense into a real issue while defending a terrible person.
Well said. When you are right, you are right.
You're delusional. The Electoral College doesn't violate the 14th Amendment. Somebody has been shovelling bullshit at you and you've been swallowing it.
It depends on which party is getting elected while getting less votes. If a person is a card carrying Republican, the Electoral college is a true gift form Gawd.
Then again, we'll see how their love of the EC shifts if they lose a few elections.
And this to me is what it all boils down to. At this point, if someone claims that the EC is a problem, Republicans start screaming about how it is the law of the land.
It is the law of the land. And that isn't the point. Fact is, in the computer age, it is exceptionally easy to game and allow a candidate who received less votes overall to win the Electoral college.
It is codified and legal minority rule.
That's the problem, Jane Q. The concept of a minority winning over a majority.
Dirt doesn't vote,
i dunno - rides through the countryside show a lot of ramshackle 1960's mobile homes with a Trans-Camaro on cinder blocks and a yard full of junk.
With a Trump Maga sign prominently on display.
Its so strange that those folk think that the very embodiment of everything they claim to hate will not act in his self interests, not theirs.
Dirt doesn't vote, but Joe Dirt does.
Which Universe do you live in? If I start Chrome with no tabs open I get 7 processes.
One of those processes is using 1.5Gb and has 38 threads.
That's without opening any web pages, just an empty tab. No, I don't have any extensions installed. None.
Your answer is in your last two sentences.
Who cares if you're running 32+ GB of RAM. Sucks if you're stuck on that modern new Macbook that caps out at 16 GB...
A) That’s like responding to a car analogy with “who cares if you own a private jet”? Suggesting that people should have 32GB of RAM to run a browser is preposterous.
B) The new MacBook Pros are configurable up to 32GB of RAM...
Hold on, hold on - let the guy make some non-sequitur's about systemd and Russian hacking maybe before you squanch him. Its the only way he can participate.
Well spending the big bucks on an Apple would definitely reduce your chances of being able to afford to upgrade.
Pssst, Hey mister - that's a nice non-sequitur ya got there!
Could this thing be re-written so that it makes a bit more sense? Its like several disjointed story lines melded into an incoherent whole.
For months Wells Fargo has been trying to hire security professionals in my area. No thanks, I'm not interested in working in that environment. I certainly wouldn't be a customer either.
Smart move - I suspect they would demand you commit criminal acts. Or at least blame you for them when one of the suits gets caught. Again.
Both of those men gave away money to buy a better legacy. Bill Gates would be excoriated if he didnt start giving away his money. Its literally his only redeeming quality.
If a person decides to do what a good person would do, it is still a good thing.
Then he'll sell you on the efficacy his nutritional bone marrow protein shake.
It hasn't stopped him from playing with his poop yet.
Just like what happened in the golden age before big government.
I'll tell you another thing, women and darkies knew their place too. NGOML!
Glad I read the second sentence after reading the first.
Some folks are going to point out people like Andrew Carnegie, or even Bill Gates (though most crypto-conservatives hate him for it) as proof that people with a lot of money are generous..
But those are the very few.
I've always wondered what the modern gilded class will do after they finish with the pecuniary extraction phase and consolidate their wealth. I suspect when the rest of us have nothing more to take, they will turn on each other.
There are libertarians, and then there are Libertarians. Some people just take it too damn seriously. Increased social liberties at the same time as increased economic liberties, that sounds good. But then they start adding in lots of litmus tests, and welcome goofy theories like the gold standard with open arms. This is what political parties do, the want to attract those with the extreme views and purist ideologies, leaving moderates who think about things behind.
Libertarianism is like all other isms some ideas are good, but the ideology always destroys the idea. Its always the core assumption
Capitalism assumes that the people who are driven by greed to accumulate, are also very generous.
Socialism (real, not the socialism that crypto conservatives bandy about) assumes the government is always benevolent and honest.
Communism assumes altruism on the part of the governed.
And Libertarianism assumes everyone is smart and honest.
Modern crypto-conservatives have also damaged it by usurping the anti-tax aspects
And this is why ideologues need kept in check.
We really do need Barry Goldwater about now!
Accenture recently proposed a blockchain editing tool. Sure seems like immutable isn't what it used to be. It's only a matter of time before blockchain is easier edited than the actual books
Damn, I laughed when I read that article. Of course, the financial industry "needs" to get in there and massage the data.
That's nice, except for the fact you have that completely and utterly backwards. Russiagaters have as much evidence for their theories that the Birthers do that Obama was born in Kenya and is a muslim. Facts.
Meth is bad, mkay?
The mueller investigation is about finding evidence to substantiate the unverified claims that initiated the investigation.
The gov't never had any actual evidence of trump campaign collusion with the Russians.
The only way there ius no evidence is if you have no intention of believing it. That's okay - there are people who believe there was no moon landing, that 9-11 was an inside job, that Ted Cruz'z father helped kill JFK, that the Kenyan Terror baby was born in Kenya, that Bill Clinton sent his Arkansas bodyguards to be killed at wake, the Clinton's have killed 50 plus people now, that FDR ignored the radar in Hawaii, and all manner of conspiracy theories.
You are just another member of that group. There is plenty of public information that show a whole lot of wrongdoing. Hard to believe there won't be more coming out very soon.
The evidence presented today is massive, incredibly detailed and irrefutable.
This increasingly-shopworn piece of Russia-shill stupidity -- the bad-faith demands for "evidence" -- needs to die.
It was said best said by Macbeth:
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Trump won 2600 counties to Clinton's 500. That's 84%. How is that razor thin? You can blame the Electoral College but it is there for a reason so that voters in the middle of Kansas or Montana or Nevada or Illinois have just as a loud a voice as everyone else.
You need to up your math game. Trump won 100 percent of the votes for Trump.
Wasn't there a report recently that said that the fake news was less fake than the nominally real news?
True. Alex Jones will verify this.
This is Facebook's equivalent of those T-Shirts that read "I'm not Gay, but 20 Bucks is 20 Bucks!"
As I told my family members who moved away - I'm not important enough to live near, so you're not important enough to visit. If I show up, I do, but I'm under no obligation. But I won't fly unless it's a private flight chartered by me.
I can see why nobody wants to travel to visit you.
That isn't a bad thing. Do not confuse my attitude with misanthropy. My friends and I can get together and break bread or participate in activity any day of the week. And we do - a lot. As I've said before, family is an accident of birth. I'm under no obligation to love or even like them. Any affection on my part is based on merit.
But you need to see your family. So it's okay.
Given that 'seeing family' is one of the central part of 'being fucking human' I struggle to understand how you think that sort of comment will win you any followers.
Mistake number one is any idea that II'm looking for followers.
And family is merely an accident of birth. I love or not love bases on merit, not who pooped out of whose chute.
The rest of us have to get on with our lives, and attempt to actually change the problems rather than just passively accepting them / avoiding them like you have done.
Ah, so you don't think that if the airlines start going out of business because their screeners feeel up little girls and chain so passengers to tables, that the surviving ones might just quit treating their customers like the enemy? Interesting.
Let me help you: boycotting will do nothing to change things unless you can persuade a big group of people to join the boycott.
You're making the mistake of combining my statements. Even though I'm pretty certain that massive avoidance will go a long way towards getting TSA agents to stop their asshattery, and that would be a general good thing - in reality, I don't give a flying shit. I don't fly commercial now because I'm not going to put up with the abuse. This is a simple personal decision. Other people mightfind what the TSA is doing are indeed allowed to put up with whatever abuse the TSA agents feel like giving them - the courst have decided that it can, and that you cannot do anything about it - it is the law. It's your personal choice.
And if your opening argument is "you don't need human interaction further from your immediate neighbourhood" then you will be pretty lonely in that boycott.
You have made so many assumptions that I reckon you had some sort of mental argument with me before you put hands to keyboard.
I don't care at all about the abuse you might take. You know when you buy your ticket that you or your family members are subject to that abuse. It's your choice.
I'm not trying to make some big movement to change the situation. Even if I note the power of passive avoidance and it's effect upon profits and losses - hey, its your skin, not mine. My only real upset is the abuse children might have to take, since little kids can't really give proper consent. It's probably also a little confusing when you tell her that Uncle Louie isn't allowed to feel her up, but the person at the airport is allowed to do that. Just sayin'.
And my thoughts about family are just my thoughts on family. Accidents of birth. Maybe someone's family is the most awesome people on earth - maybe they aren't. But I'm under no obligation to love them whether they are Mother Theresa or Jeffrey Dahmer.
Wow, you are SUCH a badass. But lets say your kid goes to a university on the other side of the country and is in a nasty accident, and your employer will only let you take three days off next to a weekend. You really gonna tell Junior to go fuck himself & he's on his own, or are you going to put down the big man act for a couple of days and fly Southwest?
I'll charter a private flight, bragh. Just like I wrote in the part you must have skipped over.
What's with the bizzare sarcasm anyhow? I do spend my money on businesses that act like they appreciate my money, not treat me like an enemy. Damn guy - since when did that become a bad thing?
As for the "badass" part? For those relatives who moved away from the family, leaving the wife and I to take care of two full sets of parents by ourselves as they went through the process of dying, well they didn't have to worry about that. Ol might be an asshole, (and I am) but at least Ol didn't abandon his and his wife's parents. The brothers and sisters in faraway parts didn't have to worry about any of that shit.
And boy were the family members pissed when the wills were read. All of which helps me charter private flights. For fun, for vacation, not to go visit relatives. Mostly I like to drive, though. There's a lot of beautiful countryside out there.
If they ban all private charter flights the rich, the powerful, & the politicians have to experience the same treatment as The Unwashed Masses, there will be changes.
Meanwhile, This will be another employment opportunity for some really skeevy types.