However, judging by the fact that you seem to receive very few upvotes at all for any of the comments you post (but quite a few downvotes), I'm going to suggest that you change strategy, and maybe accept that you can be wrong.
Oh don't you worry about my karma cupcake, I've got it to burn and burn and burn. I have to wonder whether or not you can say the same, although I suspect not.
Because, applied to software, you sound like the kind of guy who will claim that a problem doesn't exist (because you can't replicate it), until your coworkers find it and fix it for you.
You've never worked in software.
Those two stories are totally legit.
Of COURSE they're legit, who wouldn't believe baseless anecdotes spouted by an anonymous zealot on teh intarwebz. Perhap's you'd like the keys to my car while you're at it...?
Every male including myself knows that every female pretty much strolls online and gets harassed.
Aahahahaha! Hoo, go back to agitprop school champ, I'm going to share this with the very _very_ many women I know who are going to laugh even harder than me, at you.
If it's any comfort, you won't get to see the mockery.
Although I hope that in some weird spiritual way, you feel it.
In one place I worked, the CEO said they don't hire women because all they do is "sit around and look pretty, and hang out on facebook". At another, the director was worried about sexual harassment issues.
The problem isn't the workers, its the people doing the hiring, and the CEO's. I agree that women don't seem to be as interested in IT, but, with all due respect, there are serious problems in our industry, and you sir, are actually the one saying bullshit (but you might not realise it).
And yes, this is written by a guy. And no, I don't support everything women claims, but, the above is just my experience (its the side of the story which people like yourself may not hear about).
But women on the other hand are often being treated badly, the moment they contribute to any computing discussion (many female blogs are absolutely buried in comments from 10 year old guys saying how they will mistreat them).
This is a tall stack of bullshit on a par with creationism.
The reason IT is getting attention is because lunatic feminists endless search for people to hate dovetails nicely with the upper crust of the tech industry's desire for cheaper workers. Doubling the workforce halves the wages, and these are the same people currently being sued for conspiring to keep worker wages down in silicon valley.
Still you can't deny that lefties have all the sense of humour of an average lake trout. The best yuks anyone's ever gotten out of them have been at their expense, and so the circle is complete.
I really hate using frameworks. They're fine as long as you use them for their limited purpose-set, but step outside the walled garden and your delving into a wilderness of minified spaghetti coded black boxyness whipped together over a weekend by people who weren't really interested or most likely able to envision different requirements.
And yes I include JQuery in this. Just learn friggin javascript already, it's not that hard.
Oh indeed it is shaming language, one of the few two bit tricks that lackbrained and heavily indoctrinated meat puppet social justice warriors use to try and win arguments. It usually comes accompanied by critical theory attacks, which are not to be confused with critical thought, indeed they are the exact opposite of critical thought.
So, let's "deconstruct" this as you chimanpzees are wont to say.
A real man has a cock and two nuts. That's all it takes to be a real man. Nobody cares what you think a real man is. Nobody.
This site isn't and never has been a place where women are generally considered inferior. Only a dribbling zealot incapable of reading and comprehending the words before them could possibly believe that to be the case. Said zealot then falls back on social justice parlour trick number three: hyperbole the shit out of everything. Someone has an objection to gender based quotas, they're obviously wifebeating rapists. Someone points out that the "pay gap" is based on age and experience instead of gender, they're clearly whiney little boys who need to grow up.
Here's my advice, take two steps back and get fucked, you tantrum throwing little poster child for the wee man syndrome.
If you actually cared about your "daughters, nieces etc" you wouldn't be parroting feminist talking points like an idiot, you'd be teaching them to take responsibility for themselves and to succeed on their own merits. If you weren't so busy seeing muh soggy knees and rapists everywhere, you'd recognise that teaching women to be paranoid neurotics is doing them less of a favour than the Salem witch trials did for the moral fibre of the locality.
Feminist/progressivist position: The reason behind this overrepresentation is a complex system of biases (consider all the studies that have shown that people whose names, listed, on resumes, sound white and male, are more likely to get called in for interviews), historical factors (such as unequal education opportunities), and cultural factors (for example, unequal participation can form a positive feedback loop because being the odd person out, especially in a very visible way, can be off-putting). Then, of course, there really is a lot of overt misogyny, as five minutes on Reddit can prove not merely beyond doubt, but also beyond hope. All of these things (or rather, the gender-related rather than race-related parts) are what feminists are referring to when they use the term "patriarchy". In my opinion that's a poorly chosen term, implying something less nebulous, more focused, intentional, and planned than is the case; but there you are -- the feminist movement isn't perfect either.
("Privilege" is another term that leads to endless misunderstanding, since it gets thrown around in a manner that can sound pretty accusatory, but that again misses the point. The observation that certain people benefit from certain injustices is not the same as blaming them for those injustices. Maybe you went to Harvard on the family fortune your great-grandfather made by exploiting slave labour, and are therefore better educated than the black guy across town whose great-grandfather was one of those slaves. You hold no moral responsibility for slavery, but your superior employment prospects are still the product not of disinterested meritocracy, but the outcome of slavery.)
Of course what exposes feminists and quite often progressives as the naked bigots dressed up in flowery language they are, is that they've nothing to say about fields where women are overrepresented, or their underrepresentation in unpleasant jobs like garbage collection.
It's always a matter of great amusement to hear these often very privileged white women and men talking about how they're part of a civil rights movement when the actual civil rights movement was sparked off by a false rape allegation.
What are you babbling about now, there isn't some great god of success sitting there handing out career advancements based on people's personalities in silicon valley. The world as viewed through a feminist lens appears indistinguishable from a world viewed through the eyes of a primitive witchdoctor.
The point is that it shouldn't be a choice between kids or career.
Yeah the choice is kids or career without much water between the two. If you don't like that resign yourself to having your children raised by strangers and hired help, which for most isn't acceptable. Raising children takes time and effort, something that the convenience of white goods and reduced physical requirements in the workforce hasn't changed.
That's not to say that men shouldn't be househusbands except it seems women aren't very attracted by that. Patriarchy, right?
I think first of all that the religion of feminism needs to die loudly and publicly along with every other social engineering cult, and secondly that people need to learn to differentiate between "a career" and "financial independence". These aren't the same thing.
And do not mistake me for a conservative or a traditionalist, I am neither.
Just on a point of order, women have worked outside the home as long as men have worked. The only "liberating" that was done involved fewer requirements for physical strength in order to work and the mass production of white goods, reducing the effort involved in housework to a couple of hours a day.
The sooner you pop off the better, it's poisonous little shits like you that make humanity look bad tbh. Age brings experience and knowledge of the mistakes that were made by others, mistakes like believing whatever the nearest demagogue is trying to sell. This is knowledge that must be passed on to young people so they don't end up making the same mistakes.
So eh did he not pay taxes on his earnings to date? Is he not going to pay money for the cures which will also benefit everyone else? Do you feel you have the right to somehow demand more?
Oh look, here come the same "social engineers" that brought us soaring male suicide rates and burgeoning single motherhood with it's associated social outcomes, except this time they want to get their clammy hands on the children. They even use the same postmodernistic deconstructivist language as every likeminded gang of merry marxists.
Stop trying to redefine things through ideological lenses you muppets, science doesn't work that way even if you do manage to convince the gullible that it does for a while.
If those companies are run by people who are happy to deliver worse service as long as they can pay fewer people.
Before you start smashing any looms there Neddy Ludd, the purpose of automation is to deliver equivalent or better service for a lower cost. Automation doesn't mean lower quality, usually it means the exact opposite.
Emphasis on the "near" total embargo. Healthcare and medical products and services were excluded, hence why they have a certain amount of relatively good hospitals and many, many doctors. The good hospitals aren't for the natives incidentally, they get the oil lamp and cockroach treatment, they're for wealthy medical tourists.
I have no information about people starving on the streets but I suspect it's a similar story.
Slashdot Mirror
However, judging by the fact that you seem to receive very few upvotes at all for any of the comments you post (but quite a few downvotes), I'm going to suggest that you change strategy, and maybe accept that you can be wrong.
Oh don't you worry about my karma cupcake, I've got it to burn and burn and burn. I have to wonder whether or not you can say the same, although I suspect not.
Because, applied to software, you sound like the kind of guy who will claim that a problem doesn't exist (because you can't replicate it), until your coworkers find it and fix it for you.
You've never worked in software.
Those two stories are totally legit.
Of COURSE they're legit, who wouldn't believe baseless anecdotes spouted by an anonymous zealot on teh intarwebz. Perhap's you'd like the keys to my car while you're at it...?
Every male including myself knows that every female pretty much strolls online and gets harassed.
Aahahahaha! Hoo, go back to agitprop school champ, I'm going to share this with the very _very_ many women I know who are going to laugh even harder than me, at you.
If it's any comfort, you won't get to see the mockery.
Although I hope that in some weird spiritual way, you feel it.
In one place I worked, the CEO said they don't hire women because all they do is "sit around and look pretty, and hang out on facebook". At another, the director was worried about sexual harassment issues.
The problem isn't the workers, its the people doing the hiring, and the CEO's. I agree that women don't seem to be as interested in IT, but, with all due respect, there are serious problems in our industry, and you sir, are actually the one saying bullshit (but you might not realise it).
And yes, this is written by a guy. And no, I don't support everything women claims, but, the above is just my experience (its the side of the story which people like yourself may not hear about).
I call you a liar, fool and propagandist.
Er what? Have you seen the list of womens programmes funded by the US government?
But women on the other hand are often being treated badly, the moment they contribute to any computing discussion (many female blogs are absolutely buried in comments from 10 year old guys saying how they will mistreat them).
This is a tall stack of bullshit on a par with creationism.
The reason IT is getting attention is because lunatic feminists endless search for people to hate dovetails nicely with the upper crust of the tech industry's desire for cheaper workers. Doubling the workforce halves the wages, and these are the same people currently being sued for conspiring to keep worker wages down in silicon valley.
APK's host files as interpreted by Bennett Haselton would have been a better bet.
A swing and a miss.
Still you can't deny that lefties have all the sense of humour of an average lake trout. The best yuks anyone's ever gotten out of them have been at their expense, and so the circle is complete.
Oh I'm not a righty.
Tyrants of any stripe fear nothing so much as laughter.
That's why lefties have no sense of humour.
I really hate using frameworks. They're fine as long as you use them for their limited purpose-set, but step outside the walled garden and your delving into a wilderness of minified spaghetti coded black boxyness whipped together over a weekend by people who weren't really interested or most likely able to envision different requirements.
And yes I include JQuery in this. Just learn friggin javascript already, it's not that hard.
Agreed.
Oh indeed it is shaming language, one of the few two bit tricks that lackbrained and heavily indoctrinated meat puppet social justice warriors use to try and win arguments. It usually comes accompanied by critical theory attacks, which are not to be confused with critical thought, indeed they are the exact opposite of critical thought.
So, let's "deconstruct" this as you chimanpzees are wont to say.
A real man has a cock and two nuts. That's all it takes to be a real man. Nobody cares what you think a real man is. Nobody.
This site isn't and never has been a place where women are generally considered inferior. Only a dribbling zealot incapable of reading and comprehending the words before them could possibly believe that to be the case. Said zealot then falls back on social justice parlour trick number three: hyperbole the shit out of everything. Someone has an objection to gender based quotas, they're obviously wifebeating rapists. Someone points out that the "pay gap" is based on age and experience instead of gender, they're clearly whiney little boys who need to grow up.
Here's my advice, take two steps back and get fucked, you tantrum throwing little poster child for the wee man syndrome.
If you actually cared about your "daughters, nieces etc" you wouldn't be parroting feminist talking points like an idiot, you'd be teaching them to take responsibility for themselves and to succeed on their own merits. If you weren't so busy seeing muh soggy knees and rapists everywhere, you'd recognise that teaching women to be paranoid neurotics is doing them less of a favour than the Salem witch trials did for the moral fibre of the locality.
There's really not much to it.
Typical feminist shaming language. Why don't you take it back to jezebel.
Feminist/progressivist position: The reason behind this overrepresentation is a complex system of biases (consider all the studies that have shown that people whose names, listed, on resumes, sound white and male, are more likely to get called in for interviews), historical factors (such as unequal education opportunities), and cultural factors (for example, unequal participation can form a positive feedback loop because being the odd person out, especially in a very visible way, can be off-putting). Then, of course, there really is a lot of overt misogyny, as five minutes on Reddit can prove not merely beyond doubt, but also beyond hope. All of these things (or rather, the gender-related rather than race-related parts) are what feminists are referring to when they use the term "patriarchy". In my opinion that's a poorly chosen term, implying something less nebulous, more focused, intentional, and planned than is the case; but there you are -- the feminist movement isn't perfect either.
("Privilege" is another term that leads to endless misunderstanding, since it gets thrown around in a manner that can sound pretty accusatory, but that again misses the point. The observation that certain people benefit from certain injustices is not the same as blaming them for those injustices. Maybe you went to Harvard on the family fortune your great-grandfather made by exploiting slave labour, and are therefore better educated than the black guy across town whose great-grandfather was one of those slaves. You hold no moral responsibility for slavery, but your superior employment prospects are still the product not of disinterested meritocracy, but the outcome of slavery.)
Of course what exposes feminists and quite often progressives as the naked bigots dressed up in flowery language they are, is that they've nothing to say about fields where women are overrepresented, or their underrepresentation in unpleasant jobs like garbage collection.
It's always a matter of great amusement to hear these often very privileged white women and men talking about how they're part of a civil rights movement when the actual civil rights movement was sparked off by a false rape allegation.
I would say that the backlash against feminazis and SJWs started by GG is just getting started, and it's long overdue.
What are you babbling about now, there isn't some great god of success sitting there handing out career advancements based on people's personalities in silicon valley. The world as viewed through a feminist lens appears indistinguishable from a world viewed through the eyes of a primitive witchdoctor.
The point is that it shouldn't be a choice between kids or career.
Yeah the choice is kids or career without much water between the two. If you don't like that resign yourself to having your children raised by strangers and hired help, which for most isn't acceptable. Raising children takes time and effort, something that the convenience of white goods and reduced physical requirements in the workforce hasn't changed.
What we're seeing now is a lot of women who went into the workforce and discovered that they were going to be neither wealthy nor successful, just like 99% of men in the workforce. Instead they're going to have a middle class lifestyle that they'd probably have been able to enjoy anyway plus a family had they chosen to raise kids instead. Is it any wonder womens' happiness has been decreasing.
That's not to say that men shouldn't be househusbands except it seems women aren't very attracted by that. Patriarchy, right?
I think first of all that the religion of feminism needs to die loudly and publicly along with every other social engineering cult, and secondly that people need to learn to differentiate between "a career" and "financial independence". These aren't the same thing.
And do not mistake me for a conservative or a traditionalist, I am neither.
Just on a point of order, women have worked outside the home as long as men have worked. The only "liberating" that was done involved fewer requirements for physical strength in order to work and the mass production of white goods, reducing the effort involved in housework to a couple of hours a day.
What if you don't habitually use your computer/tablet outdoors?
The sooner you pop off the better, it's poisonous little shits like you that make humanity look bad tbh. Age brings experience and knowledge of the mistakes that were made by others, mistakes like believing whatever the nearest demagogue is trying to sell. This is knowledge that must be passed on to young people so they don't end up making the same mistakes.
So eh did he not pay taxes on his earnings to date? Is he not going to pay money for the cures which will also benefit everyone else? Do you feel you have the right to somehow demand more?
How did a comment this ignorant get modded up?
Oh look, here come the same "social engineers" that brought us soaring male suicide rates and burgeoning single motherhood with it's associated social outcomes, except this time they want to get their clammy hands on the children. They even use the same postmodernistic deconstructivist language as every likeminded gang of merry marxists.
Stop trying to redefine things through ideological lenses you muppets, science doesn't work that way even if you do manage to convince the gullible that it does for a while.
This is the ultimate failure of communism and marxism, it has no means to communicate value signals, never had and never will.
If those companies are run by people who are happy to deliver worse service as long as they can pay fewer people.
Before you start smashing any looms there Neddy Ludd, the purpose of automation is to deliver equivalent or better service for a lower cost. Automation doesn't mean lower quality, usually it means the exact opposite.
Emphasis on the "near" total embargo. Healthcare and medical products and services were excluded, hence why they have a certain amount of relatively good hospitals and many, many doctors. The good hospitals aren't for the natives incidentally, they get the oil lamp and cockroach treatment, they're for wealthy medical tourists.
I have no information about people starving on the streets but I suspect it's a similar story.
Except about twice the size. I love reading this stuff, it helps me extrapolate the possible cost for spaceships in RPG games.