That solution is only acceptable if you trust Microsoft - which I personally don't.
In fact they clearly have the better cards in the long run, in the end you would have to treat any Windows-machine as 0wned by Panella and he has full access to the programs that run while you have none.
The more interesting question is why no one seems to have a problem encouraging more men to go in to nursing, but so many people seems to think encouraging more women to enter tech is going to destroy the world...
SJWs have pretty much destroyed the Mozilla project.
So there is a precedent that shows the damage SJWs can do.
The sort of adolescent behavior you're defending not only contributes nothing, but is actively harmful to any project.
Absolutely wrong.
When you respect those that have contributed something (= Meritocracy) you get contributors that feel respected and are therefore willing to contribute.
If you turn it into some SJW-convention where every idiot can get brownie-points based on his race, gender or perversion, then you may attract a lot of useless SJWs but you will lose the actual contributors because they no longer get respected because they are not "diverse" enough.
Get it through your head: We don't want you, we don't need you, you are parasites that are poison in every organization. You are not just useless, you are actually harmful.
You have to stop trying to argue rationally with SJWs. All they want is to take over stuff (companies, projects, anything of value) that other people have created.
They are unable to create anything on their own, that is why they need Affirmative Action, etc.
Don't think of them as rational beings - they are parasites, basically con-men (or con-women). Do you argue with con-men? Do you think arguing with work? These are fundamentally immoral people.
Forcing existing cultures to change just because you want to be a part of them is nothing short of tyranny. 1) you will be resented. 2) the culture you eventually join will not the be culture that existed at the start. On the other hand, if you join a culture and learn to live within it, it will change for the better simply due to your interactions within it. The more people like you that join, the more the culture changes organically, with no one being forced.
Exactly.
If we want to see a project that has been ruined by SJWs, we only need to look at Mozilla.
Yet somehow Linux managed to become the quasi-standard for embedded projects, servers and supercomputers and also runs about two thirds of smartphones.
And somehow you think that by turning Linux into a second Mozilla, which has been taken over by SJWs is a good idea?
Firefox was quite successful before the SJWs came - now it is slowly bleeding marketshare.
Open source works best when it is a community. While there are millions of little projects that are buy one person alone, all the big ones (Linux, BSD, LibreOffice, GIMP, KDE, Gnome, GNU tools, GCC, LLVM, Inkscape, EMACS, Vi... the list is huge) are the result of many people collaborating.
And many of them (like Linux, Emacs, gcc, most GNU tools) were started by White men working on their own without any community whatsoever. Even when Linus created git, he started it on his own and only let the community work on it later. - Even though he was already famous and would have had no problems of finding a community right from the start, it was better to work alone at first.
There is absolutely zero barriers for anybody to start their own, better projects.
But that is exactly what the SJWs NOT want to do. [b]They don't want to create anything, they want to take over things that were created by others.[/b]
While I agree we shouldn't try too hard to even the genders in coding, saying that females coders bring nothing to the table that men bring is nonsense. The sexes on average approach problems differently.
Wait a minute.
Just a few years ago it was drilled that men and women are the same. Now they are different again?
It's hard for me to keep up - can you SJWs please make up your rotten minds?
Fair enough, but why should we let homosexuals define societal norms? Are we really sure that a world suited for homosexuals is a better world? And why can homosexuals not just move all to San Francisco and let everybody else alone?
As a Linux user I'm sometimes jealous of a browser that doesn't change every month.
Recently, Google announced that they would support IIRC the latest two versions of Chrome and Firefox for their services. The only browser they support for longer than a year is... (drumroll)... IE.
I was really getting my hopes up for the LTS version of Firefox, but they do everything they can to sabotage it (just try to find the LTS version on their website - it's impossible, you have to specifically search for it, they intentionally hid it and do not provide links to it).
Recently Chrome on my Android tablet changed (it now reloads the site when you scroll to far up). Gosh - I'm really starting to hate Google. And I already hate Firefox for their chicken-brained release schedule. And on Linux there is not really an alternative.
Somebody has to fork Firefox and offer a stable platform. The funny thing is that they would not really have to do a lot - just fork it and maintain it.
Until about 2 years ago I was still using Firefox 2 (yes, two) and I didn't have any problems until Google decided to "drop support" (= intentionally break) Google Translate.
Browsers were "good enough" 7 years ago. Firefox was great except for memory consumption and instability. Today, Firefox is adequate (no longer great, they messed up the UI too much for that) except for memory consumption and instability. So all the real issues of Firefox were ignored while we got "features" we don't need.
Being single (especially with a high-prestige job such as pilot), living with your parents *and* using a photo of yourself in San Francisco as your Facebook avatar....
Slashdot Mirror
That solution is only acceptable if you trust Microsoft - which I personally don't.
In fact they clearly have the better cards in the long run, in the end you would have to treat any Windows-machine as 0wned by Panella and he has full access to the programs that run while you have none.
For some reason the law does not apply to white men.
So you agree that on average women are not exactly as competent as men at coding?
That differences in numbers may NOT be the result of unfair discrimination but just the result of merits?
The more interesting question is why no one seems to have a problem encouraging more men to go in to nursing, but so many people seems to think encouraging more women to enter tech is going to destroy the world...
SJWs have pretty much destroyed the Mozilla project.
So there is a precedent that shows the damage SJWs can do.
I think the target of her videos are SJWs.
Just for the record, I personally think that forks are good (and not "redundant" as is so often claimed).
I think it is great that I can have both OpenOffice and LibreOffice installed - and I don't want to kill off either.
Yeah, I know, I'm probably in the minority on that one...
Yet for some strange reason "toxic" Linux is thriving while "diverse" Mozilla is stagnating or regressing since the SJWs have took it over.
The sort of adolescent behavior you're defending not only contributes nothing, but is actively harmful to any project.
Absolutely wrong.
When you respect those that have contributed something (= Meritocracy) you get contributors that feel respected and are therefore willing to contribute.
If you turn it into some SJW-convention where every idiot can get brownie-points based on his race, gender or perversion, then you may attract a lot of useless SJWs but you will lose the actual contributors because they no longer get respected because they are not "diverse" enough.
Get it through your head: We don't want you, we don't need you, you are parasites that are poison in every organization. You are not just useless, you are actually harmful.
Go away and die.
narcc cannot build something.
The point is that the meritless SJWs want to tell people of merit what to do.
If you want any respect: Earn it.
Otherwise we will respect you as much as you respect us - which is not at all.
We are living in a society where whining pays off (Affirmative Action, etc.) and whining has worked numerous times in the past.
Of course they will try their proven tactics whenever they see something shiny they want. They do it because it works!
You have to stop trying to argue rationally with SJWs. All they want is to take over stuff (companies, projects, anything of value) that other people have created.
They are unable to create anything on their own, that is why they need Affirmative Action, etc.
Don't think of them as rational beings - they are parasites, basically con-men (or con-women). Do you argue with con-men? Do you think arguing with work? These are fundamentally immoral people.
SJWs don't think in terms of logic or reason.
SJWs see something valuable and they will scream "You give me dat" - and that's the start and end of it.
Forcing existing cultures to change just because you want to be a part of them is nothing short of tyranny. 1) you will be resented. 2) the culture you eventually join will not the be culture that existed at the start. On the other hand, if you join a culture and learn to live within it, it will change for the better simply due to your interactions within it. The more people like you that join, the more the culture changes organically, with no one being forced.
Exactly.
If we want to see a project that has been ruined by SJWs, we only need to look at Mozilla.
Yet somehow Linux managed to become the quasi-standard for embedded projects, servers and supercomputers and also runs about two thirds of smartphones.
And somehow you think that by turning Linux into a second Mozilla, which has been taken over by SJWs is a good idea?
Firefox was quite successful before the SJWs came - now it is slowly bleeding marketshare.
Open source works best when it is a community. While there are millions of little projects that are buy one person alone, all the big ones (Linux, BSD, LibreOffice, GIMP, KDE, Gnome, GNU tools, GCC, LLVM, Inkscape, EMACS, Vi... the list is huge) are the result of many people collaborating.
And many of them (like Linux, Emacs, gcc, most GNU tools) were started by White men working on their own without any community whatsoever.
Even when Linus created git, he started it on his own and only let the community work on it later. - Even though he was already famous and would have had no problems of finding a community right from the start, it was better to work alone at first.
There is absolutely zero barriers for anybody to start their own, better projects.
But that is exactly what the SJWs NOT want to do. [b]They don't want to create anything, they want to take over things that were created by others.[/b]
They are parasites, plain and simple.
Any parasite wants to "make things more open and accessible". That is was parasites do.
"Inclusivity" is a prerequesite for parasitim.
Anybody who can pull his own weight does not need "inclusivity", does not need to "make things more open and accessible".
While I agree we shouldn't try too hard to even the genders in coding, saying that females coders bring nothing to the table that men bring is nonsense. The sexes on average approach problems differently.
Wait a minute.
Just a few years ago it was drilled that men and women are the same. Now they are different again?
It's hard for me to keep up - can you SJWs please make up your rotten minds?
Exactly. Making an issue of gender is hurting their objective more than helping it.
Their objective is to create jobs for SJWs.
Diversity consultant, gender consultant, etc.
The only problem they have is that there is not much money to be had at open source projects.
Privilege Status: Having to support worthless Affirmative-Action deadwood.
I want to lose my "privilege status".
Fair enough, but why should we let homosexuals define societal norms? Are we really sure that a world suited for homosexuals is a better world? And why can homosexuals not just move all to San Francisco and let everybody else alone?
That is not true, it is not in the interests of homosexuals because they usually don't have children.
Basically "behind me the deluge" is their interest.
As a Linux user I'm sometimes jealous of a browser that doesn't change every month.
Recently, Google announced that they would support IIRC the latest two versions of Chrome and Firefox for their services. The only browser they support for longer than a year is ... (drumroll) ... IE.
I was really getting my hopes up for the LTS version of Firefox, but they do everything they can to sabotage it (just try to find the LTS version on their website - it's impossible, you have to specifically search for it, they intentionally hid it and do not provide links to it).
Recently Chrome on my Android tablet changed (it now reloads the site when you scroll to far up). Gosh - I'm really starting to hate Google. And I already hate Firefox for their chicken-brained release schedule. And on Linux there is not really an alternative.
Somebody has to fork Firefox and offer a stable platform. The funny thing is that they would not really have to do a lot - just fork it and maintain it.
Until about 2 years ago I was still using Firefox 2 (yes, two) and I didn't have any problems until Google decided to "drop support" (= intentionally break) Google Translate.
Browsers were "good enough" 7 years ago. Firefox was great except for memory consumption and instability. Today, Firefox is adequate (no longer great, they messed up the UI too much for that) except for memory consumption and instability. So all the real issues of Firefox were ignored while we got "features" we don't need.
Vista was released 2007 to consumers, right up to that point XP was the "latest and greatest" from Redmond.
And of course Vista had it's problems, so maybe we should take 2009 (availability of Win7) as the point when XP got outdated.
Being single (especially with a high-prestige job such as pilot), living with your parents *and* using a photo of yourself in San Francisco as your Facebook avatar....