Of course! Because when there are hundreds of unexplained medical conditions to choose from, researchers will be rushing in droves to pick the one that has already proven itself to be a toxic minefield where activists decide which research is allowed and which one is bullied into silence. I can absolutely see that happen.
I work in healthcare but do not have a horse in this particular race. After skimming over publications by the researchers named so far I can only shake my head over your comment. CFS is real, and it has a predominant somatic factor, but like many somatic diseases it also has psychiatric components, treatment of which can help alleviate symptoms even if a somatic cure is still a long way off. If this bullshit did not hurt uninvolved patients I would say 'Then let them suffer!', but those activists are willingly jeopardizing the development of treatments for a condition we may well never be able to cure. And that pisses me off.
Every software project, Linux included, has a limited amount to volunteers donating a limited amount of time [...]
The Linux kernel has not been a volunteer-run project for many years. The last survey I remember from 2015 had volunteers at 16% or so, the rest was paid. Frankly, looking at the Linux landscape the chance that some genius will pop up unexpectedly as a volunteer as opposed to come in on a company's payroll looks pretty slim to me. Kernel evolution happens in the hardware companies and the distributors.
Read Linus' comments in context. There are very few instances where he blasts the person instead of the patch, and in those cases there usually has been a long prologue in which the other party proved immune to feedback or reason. And I have yet to find an instance of Linus going nuclear on a new or inexperienced contributor. The people he blasts usually are seasoned kernel developers, often years-long maintainers – people who really ought to have known better, and they mostly say as much themselves afterwards. Strong leadership also means holding people accountable. And this is what he does.
That you think a software development project has the same needs and concerns as a group where [...] failure to obey orders can result in other people dying, [...]
You clearly have no idea how many lives depend directly or, much more importantly, indirectly on software. I absolutely agree with PP: Much more of the software world should be run in the explicit understanding that every bug, every breakage has the potential to devastate a company or kill a person. Especially in FOSS you never know who uses your code for which purpose.
Oh, and btw:
[... C]oders who claimed no company affiliation, or for whom an affiliation could not be determined, accounted for just 16.4 per cent of the total number of contributions to the kernel. Independent consultants made up another 2.5 per cent. The rest all came from coders working on behalf of companies large and small. [...]
These are numbers from 2015, I would be surprised if the corporate percentage was not much higher today. The Linux kernel has not been a volunteer project for many years, and I for one believe that it shows in the increased quality. (nVidia and Intel notwithstanding)
You are not wrong in your description of the state of the OSM ecosystem, and of course I would love to see well-designed easy to use tools to bring its magic onto as many platforms as possible. But the responsibility of OSM itself ends at the API. OP was comparing openstreetmap.org's map with Google Maps as if it was meant as a 1:1 replacement – which it is not. Frankly, I would rather they removed the map from the front page and put it onto a different website, because it detracts so much from what OSM is: a database. OP was essentially complaining that the Linux kernel does not look as nice as Windows 10's desktop.
Google Maps is mostly the opposite: a visual map with some services spun around it, but with little to no access to the underlying data. And it is a commercial product engineered to generate money for Google. We could very well found a company or a foundation, stuff it with cash, hire developers and have them create an interface to OSM that rivals Google Maps. But this has nothing to do with the OSM project itself.
You are mistaking the tip for the iceberg. The map on openstreetmap.org is a nice gimmick, but it is not OSM. OSM is the data behind it. Front-ends like OsmAnd (for Android) are what makes OSM useful. And depending on coverage and local mappers' degree of fanaticism in the region you are interested in, OSM can be anywhere on the scale from terrible to decent, and in some rare cases it can even blow expensive specialist geodatabases out of the water. This, the terribly uneven coverage, is its fault, not the lack of shiny images on the frontpage map. FOSS UAV mission control systems do not care about a StreetView clone. They care about precise up-to-date geodata.
Of course, I would love to get an OSM web frontend that can compete with Google Maps. But this is not a component of OSM that belongs into the project, it is a use case for its data and – especially if it is to bring in completely unrelated features like images, traffic data, restaurant suggestions etc. – could and should be developed outside of it.
A significant portion of those who contribute to OSM do not use or care about the web map at all. They are in it for the data itself.
People needing huge multi-monitor setups & tall screens are just bad at organizing their desktops.
I envy you if someone pays you money for looking at a desktop all day long. As opposed to, you know, using applications that display data and need a large screen real estate. Like, say, GIS, or CAD, or academic writing using digital sources and literature.
It's funny that Microsoft is willing to fight trademark trolls but they seem to show little sincere interest in fighting piracy. Windows is widely used for illegal streaming services, and there doesn't seem to be much progress by Microsoft to ensure that it is used for lawful purposes. This seems like karma to me. When you create a product and don't care whether it's used to break the law, I have a hard time finding sympathy that you also have to deal with trademark trolls. The name Windows is becoming synonymous with piracy, and Microsoft needs to step up and prevent this.
Before you say that Windows has legal uses ad [sic!] there the piracy doesn't matter, let me point out that there are plenty of legal uses. This doesn't mean, however, that car manufacturers and dealers shouldn't take steps to try to avoid selling cars to speeders and design their cars to make it less likely that they will be used for criminal purposes. Likewise, Microsoft should take steps to prevent their software from being used for piracy. And piracy isn't defensible, either. If you don't want to pay the prices for films that don't meet your standards, the appropriate thing to do is simply don't watch them. Your criticisms of the film industry do not justify theft, no matter how much you pretend otherwise.
my CS classes in high school and university between 1990 and 1997 were easily 95% men. In later years, maybe 90% men, so my experiences of a pre dot-com utopia for equality in tech is the opposite of hers.
She did not say that there were more women in IT then than there are now (although I understand most statistics to confirm this). She said that the field had less male assholes in it. And from my temporally limited experience since the late 90ies I would tentatively agree. How is your perception? How were those 5 to 10% of women in your classes treated by the male participants?
The money argument is something that I cannot confirm but also would not dismiss entirely. IT has indeed changed significantly – from a purely academic field to an exotic adventure park for nerds and misfits to a serious multi-billion dollar cut-throat industry with enough economic leverage to blow most nation states out of the water. And its culture has changed with it.
A thousand times this. The argument from population composition requires two underlying assumptions:
that every group within the population has an identical distribution of skills, or even more stupid: that every member of the population is capable of doing any job, and
that every group within the population has an identical distribution of interest in specific jobs.
I am all for removing barriers to entry, but it is incredibly sexist/racist to demand that every gender/racial group shall choose jobs in equal proportions. If women as a group have a higher affinity for social occupations, then that is perfectly fine. The sexist thing to do is to tell those women: "Being a nurse, family lawyer or office assistant is not good enough! Go get a job in IT!"
With racial groups I would acknowledge that there ought to be a rather uniform distribution under equality of opportunity, with the caveat that a culture isolated to a certain race may well legitimately skew the distribution slightly.
all of this is pseudoscientific bs backed by nothing.
Is it really? All the studies I could find confirm that neuroticism is more prevalent in women than men, and most studies found a statistically significant effect. The difference between the sexes is not dramatical, but it is noticeable. A cursory search confirms the other claims.
And all his claims are confirmed by the incessant demands for tailoring technical courses towards women by making them more about people and less about abstract concepts and cold machines. If there was no difference between men and women, we would not need those to attract more women into STEM, would we?
Diverse teams are more productive than homogeneous teams. Exact numbers are tough to find [...]
Exact numbers are impossible to find if you want to be able to generalise from them in any meaningful way. From what I have seen so far in both industry and academia, diverse teams have an advantage in horizontal (creative or problem-solving) tasks but have a disadvantage or can even fail spectacularly in vertical ('do one thing to perfection') tasks. Sometimes you need to look at a problem from many sides to find the best solution. Sometimes you need a number of brains that think in unison, undisturbed by distractions.
But none of this has any bearing on the Google memo. And if it had, then in the case of technical positions I would intuitively lean towards the brains-in-unison scenario being the more productive and profitable.
Do you get to fill up your car for free? Do you get free replacement batteries for your gadgets, or free electricity to charge them?
Email, web hosting etc. are services, and services need to be paid for, one way or another. I run my own mail server and cloud storage, using my own domains, to the tune of about € 100 per year. The machines are overpowered for my modest needs, to be honest, and they still cost me less than what I spend on chocolate annually.
"[...] everyday objects in outdoor environments -- whether it's posters or street signs or even the shirt you're wearing -- can 'talk' to you [...]"
Sure. If I can have a backchannel directly into Gollakota's ears through which the shirt I am wearing automatically sends a hearty "Go fuck yourself!" whenever one of these 'smart' objects tries to annoy me.
[...] Arming yourself is the best way to have a fighting chance against anyone who's trying to kill you in a country where access to firearms is so ubiquitous, cheap and simple that every punk and their dog have one. [...]
FTFY.
From a European perspective, the US is just a tiny step up from, say, Mogadishu when it comes to gun-related violence. Over here, shootings usually make national news. That is how rare they are.
[...] the petty squabbling over insignificant details? [...]
The burden of proof is an insignificant detail to you?
[...] After all, there are far fewer women in certain jobs than there ought to be, when you take into account the number of women with the skills and the talents that are available [...]
Absolutely! Whenever I come by a construction site or happen to see the waste collection crew doing their rounds or when I see combat units deployed to war zones I wonder where all those qualified women are. Must be that damn patriarchy suppressing them.
Yes, that was sarcasm, obviously. There is a scarcity of women in certain professions. As there is an equal scarcity of men in other fields – I work in the humanities, so I know first hand how it feels to be the minority gender in a field. Have you ever heard of a high-profile campaign to get more men into literature or Jewish history or pedagogics, complete with scholarships, mentoring programmes, gender-segregated courses? Didn't think so. Do you know how many male secretaries I have encountered in close to a decade at university? Take a guess.
I am all for removing obstacles, giving everyone a fair and honest chance at success. And I am happy to throw away gender roles for a more open and free society – my fiancée is an Army doctor, I will take the lion's share of parental leave with the kids so she can stay on track with her career. But I will not let myself be brainwashed into feeling guilty for other men's success. Especially when this brainwashing revolves almost exclusively around getting a few women into one very narrow field, namely that of the highest paying jobs. We need women in hands-on lower to mid-level tech, production and construction jobs, we need men in lower to mid-level positions in the social professions. We need a fairer gender distribution throughout the whole job pyramid. But mysteriously the focus lies almost exclusively on getting a few more women into the tiny tip.
[...] were not part of the wider, social context that should have taught us the skills and mindset that go with relating well to the other sex [...] we don't have all the tools to judge whether complaints about misogyny are real or not [...]
I don't even know where to begin here. As someone rather 'nerdy' working in the humanities: No, you are wrong. Horribly wrong. About both us nerds and about the non-nerds.
[...] Offending is often a result of lack of education [...]
Apparently you have never had to deal with upper management or higher ranks at research institutions. Any peasant can throw expletives around, but it takes a well-trained mind to weaponise passive-aggressiveness to the truly astounding degree that I have witnessed in professors and heads of departments.
[...] it's, unfortunately, fairly common behaviour among geek/techie personalities. Go to a forum dealing with, say, gardening or pets or childcare and you'll very rarely see this sort of thing, the standard response there is sympathy and advice. [...]
From experience I have to disagree. I have seen different communities focusing on the same issue behave radically different. And frankly, for the most part I found geeks to be quite productive. The tone may not be the most empathetic, but geeks seem more open to solving a puzzle even if they do not see a useful application in it themselves. They are more open to telling you in your face if an idea actually is stupid, but for me that also is a valid and often helpful reply. YMMV, of course.
And I have seen highly toxic communities around non-tech issues like cooking, parenting (Oh boy, hell hath no fury like a parent criticised.), emergency medicine, Lego, cosplay, whiskey...
“Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.” - commonly attributed to Edsger Dijkstra, but disputed.
[...] Mastery of the advanced studies of your discipline will make you a better than merely someone who can just get the job done.
The caveat being here that a good portion of what goes for CS at universities is essentially "How to use the vast resources of a supercluster as a glorified pocket calculator". I had the dubious honour of suffering through four semesters of so-called CS at my uni, and I can attest that you can be an incredible computer scientist and still be unable to program even modestly simple applications. And that is said without even touching upon the vast difference between CS and software engineering (and the equally vast difference between software engineering and programming, to be fair).
All three disciplines have their place. But CS is not exactly the 'advanced study' of programming.
For the protective eyewear scenario, this is a minor issue, there you often have contraptions that make even slightly heavier gear comfortable to wear. For everybody else, just wait a few iterations. We didn't exactly start with pocket-sized 'mobile' phones either.
In Germany, a third of the population wears correction glasses (or contact lenses) permanently. More than 60% wear correction glasses or lenses at least part of the time. More than 60% wear sunglasses. And that is just the consumer market.
I could not find numbers on the actual use of protective eyewear in the workplace, but just looking at the most obvious industries, ie. anyone dealing with chemicals, sparks, dusts, body fluids and excrements and so on, there definitely is a market for such a thing. Aircraft mechanics alone would probably form a profitable market, if the value provided is high enough. It could be a real boon in healthcare or construction.
While I agree that this will never reach the ubiquity of smartphones or even MP3 players, I would not discount it so broadly.
What did you expect? That people laud her wisdom? She was somewhere between 30 and 31 years old when she sent a sex video of herself to her then ex partner to hurt him and to other people. She harassed her ex, and by sending it to (I assume) mutual friends she also humiliated him within their social circle. She is not really a victim here. If she could not handle the heat, she should not have lit the fire. No sympathy. Really, none.
To the other commentator who mentions rape culture: Do you have even the slightest idea what you are talking about?
True. The signal-to-noise ratio makes organised planning so hard. Half the people who sign up for attacks never show up. And don't get me started on those "Maybe Going" types.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course! Because when there are hundreds of unexplained medical conditions to choose from, researchers will be rushing in droves to pick the one that has already proven itself to be a toxic minefield where activists decide which research is allowed and which one is bullied into silence. I can absolutely see that happen.
I work in healthcare but do not have a horse in this particular race. After skimming over publications by the researchers named so far I can only shake my head over your comment. CFS is real, and it has a predominant somatic factor, but like many somatic diseases it also has psychiatric components, treatment of which can help alleviate symptoms even if a somatic cure is still a long way off. If this bullshit did not hurt uninvolved patients I would say 'Then let them suffer!', but those activists are willingly jeopardizing the development of treatments for a condition we may well never be able to cure. And that pisses me off.
Every software project, Linux included, has a limited amount to volunteers donating a limited amount of time [...]
The Linux kernel has not been a volunteer-run project for many years. The last survey I remember from 2015 had volunteers at 16% or so, the rest was paid. Frankly, looking at the Linux landscape the chance that some genius will pop up unexpectedly as a volunteer as opposed to come in on a company's payroll looks pretty slim to me. Kernel evolution happens in the hardware companies and the distributors.
Read Linus' comments in context. There are very few instances where he blasts the person instead of the patch, and in those cases there usually has been a long prologue in which the other party proved immune to feedback or reason. And I have yet to find an instance of Linus going nuclear on a new or inexperienced contributor. The people he blasts usually are seasoned kernel developers, often years-long maintainers – people who really ought to have known better, and they mostly say as much themselves afterwards. Strong leadership also means holding people accountable. And this is what he does.
That you think a software development project has the same needs and concerns as a group where [...] failure to obey orders can result in other people dying, [...]
You clearly have no idea how many lives depend directly or, much more importantly, indirectly on software. I absolutely agree with PP: Much more of the software world should be run in the explicit understanding that every bug, every breakage has the potential to devastate a company or kill a person. Especially in FOSS you never know who uses your code for which purpose.
Oh, and btw:
These are numbers from 2015, I would be surprised if the corporate percentage was not much higher today. The Linux kernel has not been a volunteer project for many years, and I for one believe that it shows in the increased quality. (nVidia and Intel notwithstanding)
You are not wrong in your description of the state of the OSM ecosystem, and of course I would love to see well-designed easy to use tools to bring its magic onto as many platforms as possible. But the responsibility of OSM itself ends at the API. OP was comparing openstreetmap.org's map with Google Maps as if it was meant as a 1:1 replacement – which it is not. Frankly, I would rather they removed the map from the front page and put it onto a different website, because it detracts so much from what OSM is: a database. OP was essentially complaining that the Linux kernel does not look as nice as Windows 10's desktop.
Google Maps is mostly the opposite: a visual map with some services spun around it, but with little to no access to the underlying data. And it is a commercial product engineered to generate money for Google. We could very well found a company or a foundation, stuff it with cash, hire developers and have them create an interface to OSM that rivals Google Maps. But this has nothing to do with the OSM project itself.
You are mistaking the tip for the iceberg. The map on openstreetmap.org is a nice gimmick, but it is not OSM. OSM is the data behind it. Front-ends like OsmAnd (for Android) are what makes OSM useful. And depending on coverage and local mappers' degree of fanaticism in the region you are interested in, OSM can be anywhere on the scale from terrible to decent, and in some rare cases it can even blow expensive specialist geodatabases out of the water. This, the terribly uneven coverage, is its fault, not the lack of shiny images on the frontpage map. FOSS UAV mission control systems do not care about a StreetView clone. They care about precise up-to-date geodata.
Of course, I would love to get an OSM web frontend that can compete with Google Maps. But this is not a component of OSM that belongs into the project, it is a use case for its data and – especially if it is to bring in completely unrelated features like images, traffic data, restaurant suggestions etc. – could and should be developed outside of it.
A significant portion of those who contribute to OSM do not use or care about the web map at all. They are in it for the data itself.
People needing huge multi-monitor setups & tall screens are just bad at organizing their desktops.
I envy you if someone pays you money for looking at a desktop all day long. As opposed to, you know, using applications that display data and need a large screen real estate. Like, say, GIS, or CAD, or academic writing using digital sources and literature.
It's funny that Microsoft is willing to fight trademark trolls but they seem to show little sincere interest in fighting piracy. Windows is widely used for illegal streaming services, and there doesn't seem to be much progress by Microsoft to ensure that it is used for lawful purposes. This seems like karma to me. When you create a product and don't care whether it's used to break the law, I have a hard time finding sympathy that you also have to deal with trademark trolls. The name Windows is becoming synonymous with piracy, and Microsoft needs to step up and prevent this.
Before you say that Windows has legal uses ad [sic!] there the piracy doesn't matter, let me point out that there are plenty of legal uses. This doesn't mean, however, that car manufacturers and dealers shouldn't take steps to try to avoid selling cars to speeders and design their cars to make it less likely that they will be used for criminal purposes. Likewise, Microsoft should take steps to prevent their software from being used for piracy. And piracy isn't defensible, either. If you don't want to pay the prices for films that don't meet your standards, the appropriate thing to do is simply don't watch them. Your criticisms of the film industry do not justify theft, no matter how much you pretend otherwise.
my CS classes in high school and university between 1990 and 1997 were easily 95% men. In later years, maybe 90% men, so my experiences of a pre dot-com utopia for equality in tech is the opposite of hers.
She did not say that there were more women in IT then than there are now (although I understand most statistics to confirm this). She said that the field had less male assholes in it. And from my temporally limited experience since the late 90ies I would tentatively agree. How is your perception? How were those 5 to 10% of women in your classes treated by the male participants?
The money argument is something that I cannot confirm but also would not dismiss entirely. IT has indeed changed significantly – from a purely academic field to an exotic adventure park for nerds and misfits to a serious multi-billion dollar cut-throat industry with enough economic leverage to blow most nation states out of the water. And its culture has changed with it.
A thousand times this. The argument from population composition requires two underlying assumptions:
I am all for removing barriers to entry, but it is incredibly sexist/racist to demand that every gender/racial group shall choose jobs in equal proportions. If women as a group have a higher affinity for social occupations, then that is perfectly fine. The sexist thing to do is to tell those women: "Being a nurse, family lawyer or office assistant is not good enough! Go get a job in IT!"
With racial groups I would acknowledge that there ought to be a rather uniform distribution under equality of opportunity, with the caveat that a culture isolated to a certain race may well legitimately skew the distribution slightly.
all of this is pseudoscientific bs backed by nothing.
Is it really? All the studies I could find confirm that neuroticism is more prevalent in women than men, and most studies found a statistically significant effect. The difference between the sexes is not dramatical, but it is noticeable. A cursory search confirms the other claims.
And all his claims are confirmed by the incessant demands for tailoring technical courses towards women by making them more about people and less about abstract concepts and cold machines. If there was no difference between men and women, we would not need those to attract more women into STEM, would we?
Diverse teams are more productive than homogeneous teams. Exact numbers are tough to find [...]
Exact numbers are impossible to find if you want to be able to generalise from them in any meaningful way. From what I have seen so far in both industry and academia, diverse teams have an advantage in horizontal (creative or problem-solving) tasks but have a disadvantage or can even fail spectacularly in vertical ('do one thing to perfection') tasks. Sometimes you need to look at a problem from many sides to find the best solution. Sometimes you need a number of brains that think in unison, undisturbed by distractions.
But none of this has any bearing on the Google memo. And if it had, then in the case of technical positions I would intuitively lean towards the brains-in-unison scenario being the more productive and profitable.
Is it yet another expense to renew until you die?
Do you get to fill up your car for free? Do you get free replacement batteries for your gadgets, or free electricity to charge them?
Email, web hosting etc. are services, and services need to be paid for, one way or another. I run my own mail server and cloud storage, using my own domains, to the tune of about € 100 per year. The machines are overpowered for my modest needs, to be honest, and they still cost me less than what I spend on chocolate annually.
With some variation of this, perhaps?
"[...] everyday objects in outdoor environments -- whether it's posters or street signs or even the shirt you're wearing -- can 'talk' to you [...]"
Sure. If I can have a backchannel directly into Gollakota's ears through which the shirt I am wearing automatically sends a hearty "Go fuck yourself!" whenever one of these 'smart' objects tries to annoy me.
[...] Arming yourself is the best way to have a fighting chance against anyone who's trying to kill you in a country where access to firearms is so ubiquitous, cheap and simple that every punk and their dog have one. [...]
FTFY.
From a European perspective, the US is just a tiny step up from, say, Mogadishu when it comes to gun-related violence. Over here, shootings usually make national news. That is how rare they are.
[...] the petty squabbling over insignificant details? [...]
The burden of proof is an insignificant detail to you?
[...] After all, there are far fewer women in certain jobs than there ought to be, when you take into account the number of women with the skills and the talents that are available [...]
Absolutely! Whenever I come by a construction site or happen to see the waste collection crew doing their rounds or when I see combat units deployed to war zones I wonder where all those qualified women are. Must be that damn patriarchy suppressing them.
Yes, that was sarcasm, obviously. There is a scarcity of women in certain professions. As there is an equal scarcity of men in other fields – I work in the humanities, so I know first hand how it feels to be the minority gender in a field. Have you ever heard of a high-profile campaign to get more men into literature or Jewish history or pedagogics, complete with scholarships, mentoring programmes, gender-segregated courses? Didn't think so. Do you know how many male secretaries I have encountered in close to a decade at university? Take a guess.
I am all for removing obstacles, giving everyone a fair and honest chance at success. And I am happy to throw away gender roles for a more open and free society – my fiancée is an Army doctor, I will take the lion's share of parental leave with the kids so she can stay on track with her career. But I will not let myself be brainwashed into feeling guilty for other men's success. Especially when this brainwashing revolves almost exclusively around getting a few women into one very narrow field, namely that of the highest paying jobs. We need women in hands-on lower to mid-level tech, production and construction jobs, we need men in lower to mid-level positions in the social professions. We need a fairer gender distribution throughout the whole job pyramid. But mysteriously the focus lies almost exclusively on getting a few more women into the tiny tip.
[...] were not part of the wider, social context that should have taught us the skills and mindset that go with relating well to the other sex [...] we don't have all the tools to judge whether complaints about misogyny are real or not [...]
I don't even know where to begin here. As someone rather 'nerdy' working in the humanities: No, you are wrong. Horribly wrong. About both us nerds and about the non-nerds.
[...] Offending is often a result of lack of education [...]
Apparently you have never had to deal with upper management or higher ranks at research institutions. Any peasant can throw expletives around, but it takes a well-trained mind to weaponise passive-aggressiveness to the truly astounding degree that I have witnessed in professors and heads of departments.
[...] it's, unfortunately, fairly common behaviour among geek/techie personalities. Go to a forum dealing with, say, gardening or pets or childcare and you'll very rarely see this sort of thing, the standard response there is sympathy and advice. [...]
From experience I have to disagree. I have seen different communities focusing on the same issue behave radically different. And frankly, for the most part I found geeks to be quite productive. The tone may not be the most empathetic, but geeks seem more open to solving a puzzle even if they do not see a useful application in it themselves. They are more open to telling you in your face if an idea actually is stupid, but for me that also is a valid and often helpful reply. YMMV, of course.
And I have seen highly toxic communities around non-tech issues like cooking, parenting (Oh boy, hell hath no fury like a parent criticised.), emergency medicine, Lego, cosplay, whiskey...
“Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.” - commonly attributed to Edsger Dijkstra, but disputed.
[...] Mastery of the advanced studies of your discipline will make you a better than merely someone who can just get the job done.
The caveat being here that a good portion of what goes for CS at universities is essentially "How to use the vast resources of a supercluster as a glorified pocket calculator". I had the dubious honour of suffering through four semesters of so-called CS at my uni, and I can attest that you can be an incredible computer scientist and still be unable to program even modestly simple applications. And that is said without even touching upon the vast difference between CS and software engineering (and the equally vast difference between software engineering and programming, to be fair).
All three disciplines have their place. But CS is not exactly the 'advanced study' of programming.
For the protective eyewear scenario, this is a minor issue, there you often have contraptions that make even slightly heavier gear comfortable to wear. For everybody else, just wait a few iterations. We didn't exactly start with pocket-sized 'mobile' phones either.
In Germany, a third of the population wears correction glasses (or contact lenses) permanently. More than 60% wear correction glasses or lenses at least part of the time. More than 60% wear sunglasses. And that is just the consumer market.
I could not find numbers on the actual use of protective eyewear in the workplace, but just looking at the most obvious industries, ie. anyone dealing with chemicals, sparks, dusts, body fluids and excrements and so on, there definitely is a market for such a thing. Aircraft mechanics alone would probably form a profitable market, if the value provided is high enough. It could be a real boon in healthcare or construction.
While I agree that this will never reach the ubiquity of smartphones or even MP3 players, I would not discount it so broadly.
What did you expect? That people laud her wisdom? She was somewhere between 30 and 31 years old when she sent a sex video of herself to her then ex partner to hurt him and to other people. She harassed her ex, and by sending it to (I assume) mutual friends she also humiliated him within their social circle. She is not really a victim here. If she could not handle the heat, she should not have lit the fire. No sympathy. Really, none.
To the other commentator who mentions rape culture: Do you have even the slightest idea what you are talking about?
True. The signal-to-noise ratio makes organised planning so hard. Half the people who sign up for attacks never show up. And don't get me started on those "Maybe Going" types.