Wait a second, there's programmers that aren't using only pure algorithms, refined from the finest electrons, bred from the keyboard controller outputs of Bjarne Stroustroup himself? Well damn, standards are just slipping everywhere. What next, thinking of the web as a platform? Client-side security? Linux on the desktop?
Don't worry, we don't want you to feel interrogated. We just want to know everything about you. Results will be posted in the cafeteria.
Oh the tyranny of average... Just wait until they start singling out people for not fitting profile American 2.0, because they didn't recognize the last American Idol contestant on the subliminal. Think it's far fetched? Think again. In other, unrelated news, cattle mutilations are up.
It is cool, but that's not quite what I'm wondering. Put another way -- how do they know they're "programming" it correctly? If there's one thing that I've learned about "random" things; It's that very often they only look that way until the underlying mechanisms are better understood. Even just a simple example - a mobieus(sp?) transformation... Without knowing how coordinate substitution works, seeing the before and after to my eyes look completely unrelated.
There is widespread discrimination against culture and things that violate the excepted social mores, this is true, but it is not Gender Discrimination, it is run of the mill Discrimination.
Gender = does Sex = is
If people are attacking you because of how you dress or act, that's discrimination. If it's because you're doing so because the style of dress or mannerisms is gendered (ie, man or woman), then it is gender discrimination. Treating someone differently on the basis of their sex is something else entirely.
also believe that most gender roles and their norms are a continuation of biology(nature, not nurture) and willingly taken on by individuals, not Patriarchal or cultural repression. I also believe that education is vital to overcoming "our genes" and "poo flinging" urges, but the fact that it is human behavior can not be denied.
Most expressive behavior that would be classified as a gender role or norm have been at various times in our history adopted by both genders. The expression of these things is cyclical -- when our country was founded, men wore wigs and makeup, as one example. The problem isn't gender role, the problem is linking gender roles to sex and saying one is better or worse than the other -- ie, that a female who acts manly instead of womanly = bad, or a male who acts womanly instead of manly = bad. The two are in fact completely unrelated; But until we have social equality, that is is okay for a female to act manly or a male to act womanly, any attempt to separate the two will simply reflect our own prejudices.
Okay, disclaimer: I suck at math. ^_^ That said -- how does this actually prove anything? How do they know that the way they set the system up isn't the reason why its creating random results and another system could be created that has all those axioms in it and doesn't produce a random result? Put another way -- how do they know amongst all the possible configurations that there isn't one?
I've always looked at math as more of a language than a discipline, so in my own way I guess what I'm saying is how do they know they're asking the question right?
Hey, would you like to come over to my house and play a new game?
Sure, what is it?
It's called Virtual Peace!
Virtual Peace, huh. That's a cool name for a sex game! Is it like Leisure Suit Larry?
No, Peace, not piece, you know, as in non-violent lovey-dovey.
So it's a girl game?
Well, not exactly. It's about saving people from disasters and injustice through negotiation and treaties.
Oh. Do you get to kill people, like in Star Wars where they were all like What are you doing!? And she was all, "Aggressive negotiation!"
No. It's just a sim where you run around passing out supplies. You get feel good points though, which you can use to upgrade to a bigger backpack, or better running shoes, or a nice biosuit.
Umm... Could we just play Grand Theft Auto?
Yeah, sure! It's way more fun anyway. Wanna know a quick way to make money? After you pick up the hooker you kill her and then she drops money. Cool huh?
This is not a place where you want to encounter mistakes, and caution is the word. You might hear excuses for some, but those people are idiots. This is/inexcusable/.
Instead this guy bends over backwards to explain how this broken database is actually quite useable, and ready for "general production" - how that's different from just "production" is clear: apparently "general production" refers to systems with zero value.
I think it would be better to simply say -- this is not ready for enterprise or mission-critical usage and will not be for some time. My little Saturn will get me to and from work without much complaint for cheap, though it isn't engineered as well as other vehicles and breaks more often. And for me, that's all I need. Many businesses are like that -- they need something cheap that mostly works and if it breaks it can be fixed without too much trouble. It doesn't have to be the best, it just needs to be good enough.
The arguments of VHS v. Beta are not applicable today even if the debate of blue ray and HDDVD were similar and drew a lot of lessons from it.
I think I see your problem; History has no value to you. Nothing old does.
The social mores that exist have more to do with Sexual Dimorphism and gender differences that even baboons exhibit.
I suppose we should all just give up then and fling poo at each other, because we are only our genes, nothing more. You then go on to implictly state that only dumb girls and dumb men subscribe to this (never mind your choice of pronouns, which is comparing a child to an adult). You're just full of contradictions and you can't even see them; Which is essentially what prejudice is.
Forget you, you're what I call an educated moron -- someone who's come up with extremely rationalized prejudices that sound great on the surface. I've met people like you -- the fact that you're smart and educated doesn't prevent you from making stupid mistakes like this one. Apparently repeatedly. There's good news for you though -- you've got a lot of company.
Just about every major non-open source project that has shipped with major bugs, the/. crowd jumps on for releasing poor quality products due to bad planning, poor communication, legal reasons, marketing deadlines, oh and the list goes on. When an open source project is shipped with major bugs though, what do I hear? Excuses. Is it just possible that people who develop open source are human, and make the same decisions, for the same reasons, as their closed-source counterparts? Which might lead to the conclusion that different methods don't necessarily yield different results; ie, that open source innately presents no inherent technical advantage over closed source, only social and legal advantages. Uh oh... they're getting a duck and a large scale out. I think that's my cue to post and run now...
I'm guessing you're originally from the area of the river running between the countries of Crimea and Fughen; the Crimea-Fughen river.
Ah, not a country actually -- just Minnesota. Which has over 10,000 lakes, but no rivers named Crimea or Fughen that I know of. I do have some crackers here though to go with that wine of yours. You're welcome to come over eh.
In other words, women were treated as second-class citizens back then. Do tell. If you think you're angry now, wait until you find out how non-whites were treated, and still are. You'll have so much steam blowing out your fucking ears, you'll be contributing to global warming.
Dear, there's injustice everywhere. There's no point in comparing scars. It's like the "Well what about the starving children in Africa?" argument... No matter how bad it is for you, someone's got it worse, and someone else has it better. You pick what matters most to you and do what you can. If you've got a good heart and an open mind, you can go one more step and listen to what matters to other people and then try to make their lives a little easier while you're in it. That's all anyone can ask of another human being, be they black, white, jew, christian, atheist, gay, straight, male, female, or anything else.
I've got a tremendous amount of respect for women, but really women do a piss poor job of treating men with any sort of meaningful respect. I've been fortunate enough in recent years to deal with a higher class of women, but really being liberated isn't any reason for being rude.
If you've "been fortunate enough in recent years" its likely because you're giving respect first instead of expecting it. That said, I don't think you've come as far as you think you have. The reason so many women are rude is because so many men have the expectation that they should be respected as a matter of course. As to being a bitch, I freely admit I'm being one here... like so many women, I sometimes get sick of having to deal with this crap day in and day out. The thing is, I lose my cool, I'm suddenly being compared to a "lesser class" of women and I'm somehow representing all of womankind here? I don't think you'd give that much weight to the previous poster, suggesting you've been blessed with being around a "higher class" of men, or that he's representative of all of mankind. At least you're thinking about it though, that's a start.
If the problems facing this country were government actions killing whole races then it would be relevant today, as it stands the Holocaust is marginally relevant today.
The holocaust wasn't about killing off a race. It was about attacking and marginalizing a minority. And it is happening today, on a smaller scale; Guantanamo Bay.
If slavery existed in this country than abolitionism would be relevant today. It is not.
It's successors are; Illegal immigrants and their poor working conditions, prisoners being forced to do 'hard labor', so-called wage-slaves, and federal legislation to prevent unions (in particular those who work for the airlines) from striking and walking off the job en masse by threatening jail on the participants, medical workers who can legally be forced to work for sometimes days straight due to "urgent need", etc.
Womans lib has destroyed itself through success. It has become marginalized in todays society because there really isn't any systematic discrimination left for them to strike down.
Consider this as my challenge to your statement: Go to work for the next week in female attire appropriate to your work environment and tell me how well that works for you. Decline to answer questions about why, simply do so and then try and carry on with your job. If you can't see why this is directly relevant to your comment, you need to sit down and have a hard think about what systematic discrimination is.
I saw a recent blog post which was lamenting the fact that, when asked to name a women scientist, most college students name Marie Curie, with a smattering of Barbara McClintock, ignoring all the other women scientist. No one in the comments stopped to consider that when asked to name a male scientist, most would have responded Albert Einstein, with perhaps a smattering of Richard Feynman, ignoring all the other male scientists. Yet somehow gender was thought to play a major role in those other female scientists being marginalized in this example.
Hmmm. That may be a leap. Being a female scientist in and of itself causes a certain level of marginalization. That doesn't mean it can't be overcome (as with any stereotype). Discrimination is usually pervasive but subtle. Gender discrimination effects those who are truly talented less than those who are average because it's harder to ignore real talent. But for the mediocre -- the lab assistant, the post-doc, the grunts of the community, discrimination looms large in their world.
And to answer to another point in your post -- this is also why the people who do struggle to the top have a lot to say about the discrimination they endured. It's because they've watched so many of their friends and colleagues drop off because of it, and because the higher you go the fewer like you there are. It may be trite and tiring to hear, but the stereotype is still there and for my small part I don't mind being considered trite and tiring to listen to because stereotypes come the same way -- hearing the same thing over and over again. The only way to break the cycle is to keep people from only hearing one message.
You're seriously comparing the historical significance one individual's recognition in her own time or her "social station" to the holocaust, slavery, and the "morons" of the American Revolution. Did I get all that right? Maybe her social strata is still relevant today, but I'm edging toward "bring up the nazis and you immediately lose."
"So she didn't get to a high station because she was a woman in a society thats over 100 years dead."
Please don't forget the forest while you're looking at the trees.
don't know about that. She was possibly one of only three important people in the history of medicine that I learned about when I was a child here in the UK. And my impression was that she was somewhat sainted (despite any lack of formal 'establishment' status); regarded as a genuine heroine to be lauded by all.
You limeys take your history and literature a bit more seriously than us yanks.;) You should see what they put in our history books these days; The books get more colourful by the year to make up for the total lack of content.
So she didn't get to a high station because she was a woman in a society thats over 100 years dead, that really sucks for her, but only marginally relevant today.
The Holocaust is over 50 years dead now. It must have really sucked for them, but it's only marginally relevant today. Slavery in this country is over 150 years dead now. It must have really sucked for them, but it's only marginally relevant today. Some morons died for their country 200 years ago after signing something called a Constitution. It must have really sucked for them, but it's only marginally relevant today.
I've heard this line before. Maybe her name was in "all of those statistics books with a history section", maybe not, I'll never know without a citation. But I do know this: You haven't read much history at all, or if you have you've managed to retain a stunning lack of understanding of its relevance to make a statement like that one.
No woman in her right mind would claim to have created Powerpoint. Every other woman who's had to sit through a presentation by some suit thinking he's all that and a bag of chips because he made pretty shiny on a screen would want her revenge. And trust me, us girls have ways of dealing with our own that would leave you wishing there was more than just your hands to cover your balls with after I told you even a tenth of what all that entails.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait a second, there's programmers that aren't using only pure algorithms, refined from the finest electrons, bred from the keyboard controller outputs of Bjarne Stroustroup himself? Well damn, standards are just slipping everywhere. What next, thinking of the web as a platform? Client-side security? Linux on the desktop?
Don't worry, we don't want you to feel interrogated. We just want to know everything about you. Results will be posted in the cafeteria.
Oh the tyranny of average... Just wait until they start singling out people for not fitting profile American 2.0, because they didn't recognize the last American Idol contestant on the subliminal. Think it's far fetched? Think again. In other, unrelated news, cattle mutilations are up.
At what percentage are they legally allowed to start pulling the dirty tricks again?
Well, I hope the one they're at now. Given the tricks Apple has been pulling lately, I rather miss the devil I knew.
It is cool, but that's not quite what I'm wondering. Put another way -- how do they know they're "programming" it correctly? If there's one thing that I've learned about "random" things; It's that very often they only look that way until the underlying mechanisms are better understood. Even just a simple example - a mobieus(sp?) transformation... Without knowing how coordinate substitution works, seeing the before and after to my eyes look completely unrelated.
There is widespread discrimination against culture and things that violate the excepted social mores, this is true, but it is not Gender Discrimination, it is run of the mill Discrimination.
Gender = does
Sex = is
If people are attacking you because of how you dress or act, that's discrimination. If it's because you're doing so because the style of dress or mannerisms is gendered (ie, man or woman), then it is gender discrimination. Treating someone differently on the basis of their sex is something else entirely.
also believe that most gender roles and their norms are a continuation of biology(nature, not nurture) and willingly taken on by individuals, not Patriarchal or cultural repression. I also believe that education is vital to overcoming "our genes" and "poo flinging" urges, but the fact that it is human behavior can not be denied.
Most expressive behavior that would be classified as a gender role or norm have been at various times in our history adopted by both genders. The expression of these things is cyclical -- when our country was founded, men wore wigs and makeup, as one example. The problem isn't gender role, the problem is linking gender roles to sex and saying one is better or worse than the other -- ie, that a female who acts manly instead of womanly = bad, or a male who acts womanly instead of manly = bad. The two are in fact completely unrelated; But until we have social equality, that is is okay for a female to act manly or a male to act womanly, any attempt to separate the two will simply reflect our own prejudices.
Okay, disclaimer: I suck at math. ^_^ That said -- how does this actually prove anything? How do they know that the way they set the system up isn't the reason why its creating random results and another system could be created that has all those axioms in it and doesn't produce a random result? Put another way -- how do they know amongst all the possible configurations that there isn't one?
I've always looked at math as more of a language than a discipline, so in my own way I guess what I'm saying is how do they know they're asking the question right?
but has anyone considered that he has a good idea?
Pffft. No, THIS. IS. SLASHDOT!
Hey, would you like to come over to my house and play a new game?
Sure, what is it?
It's called Virtual Peace!
Virtual Peace, huh. That's a cool name for a sex game! Is it like Leisure Suit Larry?
No, Peace, not piece, you know, as in non-violent lovey-dovey.
So it's a girl game?
Well, not exactly. It's about saving people from disasters and injustice through negotiation and treaties.
Oh. Do you get to kill people, like in Star Wars where they were all like What are you doing!? And she was all, "Aggressive negotiation!"
No. It's just a sim where you run around passing out supplies. You get feel good points though, which you can use to upgrade to a bigger backpack, or better running shoes, or a nice biosuit.
Umm... Could we just play Grand Theft Auto?
Yeah, sure! It's way more fun anyway. Wanna know a quick way to make money? After you pick up the hooker you kill her and then she drops money. Cool huh?
Word.
In other words, SCO is a zombie. It can't be killed by normal litigation. Argh, kill it with fire! Do it now!
This is not a place where you want to encounter mistakes, and caution is the word. You might hear excuses for some, but those people are idiots. This is /inexcusable/.
Like this, that, and the other thing?
Instead this guy bends over backwards to explain how this broken database is actually quite useable, and ready for "general production" - how that's different from just "production" is clear: apparently "general production" refers to systems with zero value.
I think it would be better to simply say -- this is not ready for enterprise or mission-critical usage and will not be for some time. My little Saturn will get me to and from work without much complaint for cheap, though it isn't engineered as well as other vehicles and breaks more often. And for me, that's all I need. Many businesses are like that -- they need something cheap that mostly works and if it breaks it can be fixed without too much trouble. It doesn't have to be the best, it just needs to be good enough.
Isn't this where the thread comes to an end?
Clearly not. I thought it was a signal that we're now diving into the shallow end of the pool but it keeps going... :\
"Popular people get noticed. Unpopular people don't. Sorry if you're in the second group."
The arguments of VHS v. Beta are not applicable today even if the debate of blue ray and HDDVD were similar and drew a lot of lessons from it.
I think I see your problem; History has no value to you. Nothing old does.
The social mores that exist have more to do with Sexual Dimorphism and gender differences that even baboons exhibit.
I suppose we should all just give up then and fling poo at each other, because we are only our genes, nothing more. You then go on to implictly state that only dumb girls and dumb men subscribe to this (never mind your choice of pronouns, which is comparing a child to an adult). You're just full of contradictions and you can't even see them; Which is essentially what prejudice is.
Forget you, you're what I call an educated moron -- someone who's come up with extremely rationalized prejudices that sound great on the surface. I've met people like you -- the fact that you're smart and educated doesn't prevent you from making stupid mistakes like this one. Apparently repeatedly. There's good news for you though -- you've got a lot of company.
Just about every major non-open source project that has shipped with major bugs, the /. crowd jumps on for releasing poor quality products due to bad planning, poor communication, legal reasons, marketing deadlines, oh and the list goes on. When an open source project is shipped with major bugs though, what do I hear? Excuses. Is it just possible that people who develop open source are human, and make the same decisions, for the same reasons, as their closed-source counterparts? Which might lead to the conclusion that different methods don't necessarily yield different results; ie, that open source innately presents no inherent technical advantage over closed source, only social and legal advantages. Uh oh... they're getting a duck and a large scale out. I think that's my cue to post and run now...
I'm guessing you're originally from the area of the river running between the countries of Crimea and Fughen; the Crimea-Fughen river.
Ah, not a country actually -- just Minnesota. Which has over 10,000 lakes, but no rivers named Crimea or Fughen that I know of. I do have some crackers here though to go with that wine of yours. You're welcome to come over eh.
In other words, women were treated as second-class citizens back then. Do tell. If you think you're angry now, wait until you find out how non-whites were treated, and still are. You'll have so much steam blowing out your fucking ears, you'll be contributing to global warming.
Dear, there's injustice everywhere. There's no point in comparing scars. It's like the "Well what about the starving children in Africa?" argument... No matter how bad it is for you, someone's got it worse, and someone else has it better. You pick what matters most to you and do what you can. If you've got a good heart and an open mind, you can go one more step and listen to what matters to other people and then try to make their lives a little easier while you're in it. That's all anyone can ask of another human being, be they black, white, jew, christian, atheist, gay, straight, male, female, or anything else.
I've got a tremendous amount of respect for women, but really women do a piss poor job of treating men with any sort of meaningful respect. I've been fortunate enough in recent years to deal with a higher class of women, but really being liberated isn't any reason for being rude.
If you've "been fortunate enough in recent years" its likely because you're giving respect first instead of expecting it. That said, I don't think you've come as far as you think you have. The reason so many women are rude is because so many men have the expectation that they should be respected as a matter of course. As to being a bitch, I freely admit I'm being one here... like so many women, I sometimes get sick of having to deal with this crap day in and day out. The thing is, I lose my cool, I'm suddenly being compared to a "lesser class" of women and I'm somehow representing all of womankind here? I don't think you'd give that much weight to the previous poster, suggesting you've been blessed with being around a "higher class" of men, or that he's representative of all of mankind. At least you're thinking about it though, that's a start.
If the problems facing this country were government actions killing whole races then it would be relevant today, as it stands the Holocaust is marginally relevant today.
The holocaust wasn't about killing off a race. It was about attacking and marginalizing a minority. And it is happening today, on a smaller scale; Guantanamo Bay.
If slavery existed in this country than abolitionism would be relevant today. It is not.
It's successors are; Illegal immigrants and their poor working conditions, prisoners being forced to do 'hard labor', so-called wage-slaves, and federal legislation to prevent unions (in particular those who work for the airlines) from striking and walking off the job en masse by threatening jail on the participants, medical workers who can legally be forced to work for sometimes days straight due to "urgent need", etc.
Womans lib has destroyed itself through success. It has become marginalized in todays society because there really isn't any systematic discrimination left for them to strike down.
Consider this as my challenge to your statement: Go to work for the next week in female attire appropriate to your work environment and tell me how well that works for you. Decline to answer questions about why, simply do so and then try and carry on with your job. If you can't see why this is directly relevant to your comment, you need to sit down and have a hard think about what systematic discrimination is.
I saw a recent blog post which was lamenting the fact that, when asked to name a women scientist, most college students name Marie Curie, with a smattering of Barbara McClintock, ignoring all the other women scientist. No one in the comments stopped to consider that when asked to name a male scientist, most would have responded Albert Einstein, with perhaps a smattering of Richard Feynman, ignoring all the other male scientists. Yet somehow gender was thought to play a major role in those other female scientists being marginalized in this example.
Hmmm. That may be a leap. Being a female scientist in and of itself causes a certain level of marginalization. That doesn't mean it can't be overcome (as with any stereotype). Discrimination is usually pervasive but subtle. Gender discrimination effects those who are truly talented less than those who are average because it's harder to ignore real talent. But for the mediocre -- the lab assistant, the post-doc, the grunts of the community, discrimination looms large in their world.
And to answer to another point in your post -- this is also why the people who do struggle to the top have a lot to say about the discrimination they endured. It's because they've watched so many of their friends and colleagues drop off because of it, and because the higher you go the fewer like you there are. It may be trite and tiring to hear, but the stereotype is still there and for my small part I don't mind being considered trite and tiring to listen to because stereotypes come the same way -- hearing the same thing over and over again. The only way to break the cycle is to keep people from only hearing one message.
You're seriously comparing the historical significance one individual's recognition in her own time or her "social station" to the holocaust, slavery, and the "morons" of the American Revolution. Did I get all that right? Maybe her social strata is still relevant today, but I'm edging toward "bring up the nazis and you immediately lose."
"So she didn't get to a high station because she was a woman in a society thats over 100 years dead."
Please don't forget the forest while you're looking at the trees.
don't know about that. She was possibly one of only three important people in the history of medicine that I learned about when I was a child here in the UK. And my impression was that she was somewhat sainted (despite any lack of formal 'establishment' status); regarded as a genuine heroine to be lauded by all.
You limeys take your history and literature a bit more seriously than us yanks. ;) You should see what they put in our history books these days; The books get more colourful by the year to make up for the total lack of content.
That would be funny if the brain was a sex organ.
Well if you had one you might have a different opinion.
So she didn't get to a high station because she was a woman in a society thats over 100 years dead, that really sucks for her, but only marginally relevant today.
The Holocaust is over 50 years dead now. It must have really sucked for them, but it's only marginally relevant today.
Slavery in this country is over 150 years dead now. It must have really sucked for them, but it's only marginally relevant today.
Some morons died for their country 200 years ago after signing something called a Constitution. It must have really sucked for them, but it's only marginally relevant today.
I've heard this line before. Maybe her name was in "all of those statistics books with a history section", maybe not, I'll never know without a citation. But I do know this: You haven't read much history at all, or if you have you've managed to retain a stunning lack of understanding of its relevance to make a statement like that one.
>> No corner-cutting, no vagina using, no feminist propaganda, no tricks
Well. Some would say that's just working from your strengths.
Hey, did you hear the story about the person who was born with both sex organs? Apparently, they had a penis and a brain.
No woman in her right mind would claim to have created Powerpoint. Every other woman who's had to sit through a presentation by some suit thinking he's all that and a bag of chips because he made pretty shiny on a screen would want her revenge. And trust me, us girls have ways of dealing with our own that would leave you wishing there was more than just your hands to cover your balls with after I told you even a tenth of what all that entails.