1. To charge an iPhone, you take an iPhone charging cable and plug it into any old USB charger. Fits into a Samsung USB charger without any problems.
That is a restatement of the problem. You need a proprietary plug to charge the thing. Your iPhone does not fit into a Samsung charger without problems. You need an adapter for it. Calling it an "iPhone charging cable" doesn't stop it from being a proprietary interface from the USB standard.
That's why I commandeered any vehicle using my driveway to turn around. The police disagreed and shut down my chop-shop though. Evidently something does not become my property just from being in contact with my property. Fascists.
I'm not from the US but here are some things I've noticed that are fairly oppressive.
They control and monitor your traveling, communication and associations. They'll throw you in jail for consuming certain substances. Force you to admit guilt (being guilty or not) on threat of overwhelming jail times or punishments. Justice seems more like something bought than something inherent. Large smear campaigns of anyone that would dare stand against them.
(All instances of "they" or "them" refer to the abstract cohesion of a large bureaucratic body.)
Okay... what they did was put a big fire under a balloon with some guys in in. Then they aimed the balloon up at something. Then they just had to time the lighting of the fire... and bam "moon landing".
That just means the object never reached terminal velocity. Unless I am wrong in remembering terminal velocity being the maximum velocity a falling object can reach. Ie. when its acceleration becomes 0. So I suppose altitude would make a difference due to differences in air pressure but hitting the ground still does not affect the terminal velocity of an object at x air pressure.
Because there are enough "illogical" people that do things to help others we, as a whole, do not have to be as much at each others throats. That's where the benefit to oneself comes in. If everyone goes by the code "fuck you; get your own" you are much more likely to encounter someone that goes by the code "fuck you; I'll take yours".
Funny, I get that exact same response from women when talking about circumcision.
"But she did *blank*" is never valid justification for systematic prejudice.
I have no idea how you expect me to make this environment any more female-friendly.
1) stop using the term "womyn-born-womyn" to refer to women. It comes across extremely demeaning and inflammatory.
2)
I am simply sick of this notion that the reason women don't get into tech careers must be a man's fault, somehow.
Throwing a fit because you assume that anyone talking about sexism in tech fields must be blaming men puts up unnecessary barriers. You make it them against you or from their perspective "you against them". There is no reason for this.
Is it sexist in your world or hostile in your world to not confront females when they say something sexist?
Not at all. If they say something that you find hurtful/unfair/annoying you should confront them about it. But there are good ways and bad ways to go about that. Sometimes people are just jerks though. You have already stated that you are angry and just ranting here so I will assume you are speaking in a more aggressive manner than normal. But if you attacked me like that in person (and I was a women) because of something I said I would definitely assume you were a sexist blow-hard.
3)
I have been directly accused of sexism because a woman didn't know what a variable was and was unwilling to learn. I tried and tried and tried. I want a female co-worker.
This sounds extremely belittling. If you take this into your interactions with all women then you are most definitely sexist.
4)
I'll be happy to reconsider my biases if I ever meet a womyn-born-womyn who is interested in computers beyond bashing me over the head with Ada Lovelace, blaming me for the actions of other people, and in general not being a complete and utter sexist.
Do you not see the giant internal contradiction there? You blame all women because some of them have judged you based on the actions of others. And it may not be the actions of others that have gotten you judged extrapolating from things you've said here. I know several women that are extremely intelligent and talented that would never "beat me over the head" with Ada Lovelace. It doesn't matter that some women may be insufferable. Judging all women under the same brush (womyn-born-womyn) based on your experience with a couple is a clear case of prejudice. If you approach all women with that attitude they will certainly pick up on it and treat you much differently.
No they did not go cry themselves to sleep. They kept their mouths shut to avoid blow-hards like you shouting them down and marginalizing them because said blow-hards were threatened by a woman being more intelligent.
I sure have. It sucks. Yet somehow these women believe that a woman with no skill would be a better programmer than an individual who has experience and education in the field. All on the basis of gender.
And there are skill-less men whom would think they are better than women simply by being men. My point is that this isn't a gender problem; it's a person problem. Blaming or pointing out the gender only exacerbates the issue.
The basic fact that women never talk about is why so few women are even learning these skills
They do and they try (situations like right now). Then they are inevitably shouted down with "that's their own fault", "it's not my problem" and "it's got nothing to do with me".
I have never once denied a woman a job solely based on her gender.
Perhaps not but you definitely have a very strong anti-female bias. That can be a problem all on its own. And it is what these "womwn-born-womyn" constantly point out. There is distinct institutionalised anti-woman bias in tech culture. It is always passed off by saying "it's just joking; all for fun", "women are free to learn on their own if they don't like it" or "in my experience women rely on the gender-card to get where they are". We know the problem exists and denying it will not make it go away.
I don't know if it's intentional or not, and frankly I don't care.
The door swings both ways. When you, intentionally or not, make an environment hostile to women they will tend away from it. The difference is that some of us do care. We will point out where others are making an environment hostile.
I do not ask you to give women a free pass. I do not demand women be given jobs instead of men simply for being women. I simply ask you and those like you to reconsider your biases and to not hold all women accountable for the actions of a few people.
There are a few women with absolutely no skill where I work.
You've never worked with a man with no skill? I somehow doubt you blame that on their being men. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "they should have hired a qualified woman instead of assuming this know-nothing man was qualified just for having a penis".
You are blaming women for things that you consider yourself discriminated against. They aren't guilty-by-genitalia anymore than you are. The things you are complaining about aren't because of any one gender; they are because of everyone. We all have to work together to make things better. That is why people ask questions like "why are there so few women in tech?".
I'm sick of being blamed for their own shortcomings because of the gender I was assigned against my will.
You are not being blamed for your gender. You are being blamed for your obnoxious comments / beliefs. In the same breath you said that their absence has nothing to do with you and then continuously repeated a term that you clearly consider derogatory toward them. I wonder why they might not want to be around you.
I had a few in mine with a similar experience to you. I always felt that if you took the average of the girls and the guys separately the girls would have a higher average yet the girls always had a lower opinion of themselves.
It is probably at least in part due to fewer women do get involved in computer science. Therefore the ones that do are probably self-selected to be above average. They actually enjoy computer science and/or excel at it. Whereas a lot of guys just get into it because they like video games (that's what I took out of university anyway). Those below average gamers can get pretty obnoxious about how much smarter they are than everybody which can be pretty disenfranchising to a small group of people that already feels out of place.
Maybe if they put that money into making a good movie instead of trying to trick people into watching a bad movie they wouldn't be having this problem.
That's alright. The Xbox One was counted as a failure and it hasn't even been released yet. Windows 8 was counted as a failure and it hasn't been out as long as Office 365 either.
because it's not popular enough to warrant as many people trying to find exploits in it.
That sounds like the OP meant obscure to me. Just because we all know what it is doesn't make it popular (we are a minority). Linux is beyond obscure to the people you actually want to make massive attacks on.
That is exactly how it works in the Windows world too though. Find a problem, report it, wait for someone that can fix it to fix it.
Yes you can find bugs from reading source code. Does it turn out better than a closed sourced project? Perhaps sometimes. There is no reason to assume it is better always, inherently, just by being open source.
Reporting a few glaring mistakes still will not find all problems. Some exploits would still take an expert to spot. At which point it's really no better than a properly security audited closed source system.
That's alright; I take strange satisfaction in pointing out logical fallacies.
This is also an interesting case for moderator abuse. Their original post got modded to +4 or +5 almost immediately before slowing getting knocked down closer to where it belongs. My post got immediately hit with an overrated as well. I wish we could see moderation timing though. It may just be because it is a heated topic and a lot of people were moderating before thinking. But it is also additional evidence for the troll theory. Poe's law will probably ensure we'll never know.
Not really. Mistakes Windows has made in the past does not reflect its current state.
The current Windows kernel is not the same one that they started with so number 1 is meaningless.
Current Windows has a nice permission system so there goes number 2.
Ctrl+Shift+Esc : nope explorer.exe is running under my user account.
Windows doesn't do this anymore and I'm pretty sure I've had Ubuntu auto mount and load stuff on me before "for convenience" (that could be a complete fabrication on my part; I honestly don't remember clearly). Agreed that it is a user convenience that is easily exploitable but it is definitely something that a normal user would want. "Of course I want to run it; why else would I put it in?"
Oh nice- you switched up your logical fallacy. Good to know you aren't a one trick pony. Ad hominems still don't make you right though.
It has absolutely nothing to do with "staying out of notice"
Except we know exactly what the original poster meant when they used the word obscurity because they, quite literally, defined what they meant. The second header on your wikipedia link describes exactly what the OP was talking about for heaven's sake. Did you even read it or think for two seconds before posting? Obviously the two concepts are closely linked when they share your citation.
But you're probably right. It must be me that's the clueless one;-)
Slashdot Mirror
An object used for recreation does not immediately make it a toy. Unless you want to argue that guns are often nothing but toys.
1. To charge an iPhone, you take an iPhone charging cable and plug it into any old USB charger. Fits into a Samsung USB charger without any problems.
That is a restatement of the problem. You need a proprietary plug to charge the thing. Your iPhone does not fit into a Samsung charger without problems. You need an adapter for it. Calling it an "iPhone charging cable" doesn't stop it from being a proprietary interface from the USB standard.
That's why I commandeered any vehicle using my driveway to turn around. The police disagreed and shut down my chop-shop though. Evidently something does not become my property just from being in contact with my property. Fascists.
No possible way for you alone to decimate the population perhaps. But you and all your neighbours would have no problem doing it at all.
I'm not from the US but here are some things I've noticed that are fairly oppressive.
They control and monitor your traveling, communication and associations. They'll throw you in jail for consuming certain substances. Force you to admit guilt (being guilty or not) on threat of overwhelming jail times or punishments. Justice seems more like something bought than something inherent. Large smear campaigns of anyone that would dare stand against them.
(All instances of "they" or "them" refer to the abstract cohesion of a large bureaucratic body.)
Until someone gives us a better way I think I'll take the word of experts in the field over yours.
Definitely. Brute force attempts can often result in the person's brain being bricked. And that will definitely stop their heart.
Okay... what they did was put a big fire under a balloon with some guys in in. Then they aimed the balloon up at something. Then they just had to time the lighting of the fire... and bam "moon landing".
If presumption of innocence can be eliminated based solely on where your car was parked I think you've got way bigger problems to worry about.
That just means the object never reached terminal velocity. Unless I am wrong in remembering terminal velocity being the maximum velocity a falling object can reach. Ie. when its acceleration becomes 0. So I suppose altitude would make a difference due to differences in air pressure but hitting the ground still does not affect the terminal velocity of an object at x air pressure.
Because there are enough "illogical" people that do things to help others we, as a whole, do not have to be as much at each others throats. That's where the benefit to oneself comes in. If everyone goes by the code "fuck you; get your own" you are much more likely to encounter someone that goes by the code "fuck you; I'll take yours".
Funny, I get that exact same response from women when talking about circumcision.
"But she did *blank*" is never valid justification for systematic prejudice.
I have no idea how you expect me to make this environment any more female-friendly.
1) stop using the term "womyn-born-womyn" to refer to women. It comes across extremely demeaning and inflammatory.
2)
I am simply sick of this notion that the reason women don't get into tech careers must be a man's fault, somehow.
Throwing a fit because you assume that anyone talking about sexism in tech fields must be blaming men puts up unnecessary barriers. You make it them against you or from their perspective "you against them". There is no reason for this.
Is it sexist in your world or hostile in your world to not confront females when they say something sexist?
Not at all. If they say something that you find hurtful/unfair/annoying you should confront them about it. But there are good ways and bad ways to go about that. Sometimes people are just jerks though. You have already stated that you are angry and just ranting here so I will assume you are speaking in a more aggressive manner than normal. But if you attacked me like that in person (and I was a women) because of something I said I would definitely assume you were a sexist blow-hard.
3)
I have been directly accused of sexism because a woman didn't know what a variable was and was unwilling to learn. I tried and tried and tried. I want a female co-worker.
This sounds extremely belittling. If you take this into your interactions with all women then you are most definitely sexist.
4)
I'll be happy to reconsider my biases if I ever meet a womyn-born-womyn who is interested in computers beyond bashing me over the head with Ada Lovelace, blaming me for the actions of other people, and in general not being a complete and utter sexist.
Do you not see the giant internal contradiction there? You blame all women because some of them have judged you based on the actions of others. And it may not be the actions of others that have gotten you judged extrapolating from things you've said here. I know several women that are extremely intelligent and talented that would never "beat me over the head" with Ada Lovelace. It doesn't matter that some women may be insufferable. Judging all women under the same brush (womyn-born-womyn) based on your experience with a couple is a clear case of prejudice. If you approach all women with that attitude they will certainly pick up on it and treat you much differently.
Wow, talk about case in point.
No they did not go cry themselves to sleep. They kept their mouths shut to avoid blow-hards like you shouting them down and marginalizing them because said blow-hards were threatened by a woman being more intelligent.
I sure have. It sucks. Yet somehow these women believe that a woman with no skill would be a better programmer than an individual who has experience and education in the field. All on the basis of gender.
And there are skill-less men whom would think they are better than women simply by being men. My point is that this isn't a gender problem; it's a person problem. Blaming or pointing out the gender only exacerbates the issue.
The basic fact that women never talk about is why so few women are even learning these skills
They do and they try (situations like right now). Then they are inevitably shouted down with "that's their own fault", "it's not my problem" and "it's got nothing to do with me".
I have never once denied a woman a job solely based on her gender.
Perhaps not but you definitely have a very strong anti-female bias. That can be a problem all on its own. And it is what these "womwn-born-womyn" constantly point out. There is distinct institutionalised anti-woman bias in tech culture. It is always passed off by saying "it's just joking; all for fun", "women are free to learn on their own if they don't like it" or "in my experience women rely on the gender-card to get where they are". We know the problem exists and denying it will not make it go away.
I don't know if it's intentional or not, and frankly I don't care.
The door swings both ways. When you, intentionally or not, make an environment hostile to women they will tend away from it. The difference is that some of us do care. We will point out where others are making an environment hostile.
I do not ask you to give women a free pass. I do not demand women be given jobs instead of men simply for being women. I simply ask you and those like you to reconsider your biases and to not hold all women accountable for the actions of a few people.
There are a few women with absolutely no skill where I work.
You've never worked with a man with no skill? I somehow doubt you blame that on their being men. I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "they should have hired a qualified woman instead of assuming this know-nothing man was qualified just for having a penis".
You are blaming women for things that you consider yourself discriminated against. They aren't guilty-by-genitalia anymore than you are. The things you are complaining about aren't because of any one gender; they are because of everyone. We all have to work together to make things better. That is why people ask questions like "why are there so few women in tech?".
I'm sick of being blamed for their own shortcomings because of the gender I was assigned against my will.
You are not being blamed for your gender. You are being blamed for your obnoxious comments / beliefs. In the same breath you said that their absence has nothing to do with you and then continuously repeated a term that you clearly consider derogatory toward them. I wonder why they might not want to be around you.
I had a few in mine with a similar experience to you. I always felt that if you took the average of the girls and the guys separately the girls would have a higher average yet the girls always had a lower opinion of themselves.
It is probably at least in part due to fewer women do get involved in computer science. Therefore the ones that do are probably self-selected to be above average. They actually enjoy computer science and/or excel at it. Whereas a lot of guys just get into it because they like video games (that's what I took out of university anyway). Those below average gamers can get pretty obnoxious about how much smarter they are than everybody which can be pretty disenfranchising to a small group of people that already feels out of place.
Maybe if they put that money into making a good movie instead of trying to trick people into watching a bad movie they wouldn't be having this problem.
I thought the Star Trek shows were more interesting when each episode stood on its own without you having to know about the canon and universe.
I always felt that was one of the biggest problems with Star Trek. It's pretty hard to tell a deep/complex/compelling story in only 40 minutes.
Office 365 is a little early to call a success
That's alright. The Xbox One was counted as a failure and it hasn't even been released yet. Windows 8 was counted as a failure and it hasn't been out as long as Office 365 either.
because it's not popular enough to warrant as many people trying to find exploits in it.
That sounds like the OP meant obscure to me. Just because we all know what it is doesn't make it popular (we are a minority). Linux is beyond obscure to the people you actually want to make massive attacks on.
That is exactly how it works in the Windows world too though. Find a problem, report it, wait for someone that can fix it to fix it.
Yes you can find bugs from reading source code. Does it turn out better than a closed sourced project? Perhaps sometimes. There is no reason to assume it is better always, inherently, just by being open source.
Reporting a few glaring mistakes still will not find all problems. Some exploits would still take an expert to spot. At which point it's really no better than a properly security audited closed source system.
Or he is a troll and is laughing right now.
That's alright; I take strange satisfaction in pointing out logical fallacies.
This is also an interesting case for moderator abuse. Their original post got modded to +4 or +5 almost immediately before slowing getting knocked down closer to where it belongs. My post got immediately hit with an overrated as well. I wish we could see moderation timing though. It may just be because it is a heated topic and a lot of people were moderating before thinking. But it is also additional evidence for the troll theory. Poe's law will probably ensure we'll never know.
Not really. Mistakes Windows has made in the past does not reflect its current state.
The current Windows kernel is not the same one that they started with so number 1 is meaningless.
Current Windows has a nice permission system so there goes number 2.
Ctrl+Shift+Esc : nope explorer.exe is running under my user account.
Windows doesn't do this anymore and I'm pretty sure I've had Ubuntu auto mount and load stuff on me before "for convenience" (that could be a complete fabrication on my part; I honestly don't remember clearly). Agreed that it is a user convenience that is easily exploitable but it is definitely something that a normal user would want. "Of course I want to run it; why else would I put it in?"
Oh nice- you switched up your logical fallacy. Good to know you aren't a one trick pony. Ad hominems still don't make you right though.
It has absolutely nothing to do with "staying out of notice"
Except we know exactly what the original poster meant when they used the word obscurity because they, quite literally, defined what they meant. The second header on your wikipedia link describes exactly what the OP was talking about for heaven's sake. Did you even read it or think for two seconds before posting? Obviously the two concepts are closely linked when they share your citation.
But you're probably right. It must be me that's the clueless one ;-)