If you don't believe Stefan Molyneux and folks of his ilk were chiefly upset about TFA because they felt it was feminist propaganda, I'm not sure what to tell you. You don't have to go full "SJW" to recognize that responses like the one to Captain Marvel are, in large part, due to a somewhat small but loud group of (occasionally self-proclaimed) reactionaries.
There is ample evidence that there's a dedicated group on the internet who will do exactly this sort of thing -- downvote something because it stars a woman or a black guy or whatever.
Get Out is a prime example. It had a fantastic trailer, but the usual group of idiots bombed it wherever they could prerelease because it was "racist against white people." There are people in this comment section complaining about women superheros in general, because apparently magic and technology can't outweigh lower levels of muscle mass. It's difficult to judge what's a fair reaction (Ghostbusters 2016 sucks, for example) versus reactions that based on some reactionary ideology that's far from uncommon online (The Force Awakens sucks because a lady with latent Force powers beat up a couple of guys with a space stick).
Of course, their actions are tantamount to free advertising anyway. Marvel executives are pretty pleased at the moment.
Are any of you folks whining about SJWs actually reading his presentation and CERN's statement? On slide 15, he makes a dumbass little chart to whine about someone he calls a "commisar" hiring a woman instead of him. You can't pull shit like that at any conference in any field, and that's exactly what CERN's statement points out.
If you want to prop him up as a martyr for the red-pill crowd, that's your choice. But I wouldn't recommend picking a guy who torpedoed his reputation with a shit-tier analysis of gender issues because a woman got a job instead of him.
Nope, the relevant slide is actually number 15, where he attacks a named "commisar" who hired a woman instead of him. He made a dumbass little chart and everything. It's kind of hilarious.
CERN's statement points out that such personal attacks are unacceptable. It's just plain not okay pull shit like this.
You still hold the copyright of the code. However, you've also provided a license for using/modifying/distributing the code. In fact, the very reason you can provide this license is because you hold the copyright of the code, which gives you the ability to license it under the terms you choose. You cannot at a later date, however, revoke the license for previous releases of the software without cause outlined in the license itself or some other formal agreement. Both GPL- and BSD-style licenses are based on this idea.
It's important to understand the relationship between copyright law and software licenses.
"Floor to roof" is one of several measurements of a building's height, and most "tallest buildings" lists use a different measurement. Determining what is structural and what is ornamental isn't always clear.
These accounts weren't retweeting. They were straight-up copypasting original jokes from other accounts. They've been a bane of Twitter for years and the platform is now slightly less terrible because of this move.
This is incredibly stupid reasoning. You cannot honestly argue that this is what Trump meant when he said Mexico was going to pay for the wall. You can do better than this.
A handful of people complained about the feature on Twitter. There was no real outrage, just a few people who were annoyed you can't turn it off. Engadget is being incredibly dishonest here by throwing red meat to the "omg pc culture is ruining everything" crowd.
I'm a pro-social-justice person, and I defend a lot of/. stories that stretch the "News for nerds, stuff that matters" line. But no, this one really doesn't belong here. I get why it's here though: Touch on a social justice theme and the clicks and angry comments go on for hours.
Giving free advice and guidelines on how to make tabletop games more accessible for some is bad because it might lead to laws? Holy hell what a terrible argument.
"Sickening"? Calm down, buttercup. A paper interviewed someone of historical note. Not everything has to be an SJW conspiracy, commie propaganda, or whatever else the tinfoil hat types are whining about these days.
If nothing else, he's been an effective popularizer of science. A Brief History of Time has been a tremendous success, and it's served as inspiration for many of today's scientists while teaching the public a bit about how the world works. Pretty cool.
Saying he has "a disability" is a massive understatement. The man's body has been effectively useless for decades now, serving only to keep his brain ticking and providing a cumbersome and exhausting means to slowly communicate. But he continues to engage the public and maintain a sense of humor. So that's something.
Sure, he's a celebrity. But he's also done some great things even if you discount all of his scientific accomplishments. He's served well as the face and (robo-)voice of science for a while. I think he's worthy of a short jaunt up to space.
Holy shit. Is there any problem/non-problem you all *won't* blame on "SJWs"?
I'm calling this phenomenon Pseudofrog's Law: Literally anything that can or can't be blamed on SJWs will be blamed on SJWs.
Slashdot Mirror
If you don't believe Stefan Molyneux and folks of his ilk were chiefly upset about TFA because they felt it was feminist propaganda, I'm not sure what to tell you. You don't have to go full "SJW" to recognize that responses like the one to Captain Marvel are, in large part, due to a somewhat small but loud group of (occasionally self-proclaimed) reactionaries.
There is ample evidence that there's a dedicated group on the internet who will do exactly this sort of thing -- downvote something because it stars a woman or a black guy or whatever.
Get Out is a prime example. It had a fantastic trailer, but the usual group of idiots bombed it wherever they could prerelease because it was "racist against white people." There are people in this comment section complaining about women superheros in general, because apparently magic and technology can't outweigh lower levels of muscle mass. It's difficult to judge what's a fair reaction (Ghostbusters 2016 sucks, for example) versus reactions that based on some reactionary ideology that's far from uncommon online (The Force Awakens sucks because a lady with latent Force powers beat up a couple of guys with a space stick).
Of course, their actions are tantamount to free advertising anyway. Marvel executives are pretty pleased at the moment.
So, ultimately, maybe like some sort of subterranean train?
Are any of you folks whining about SJWs actually reading his presentation and CERN's statement? On slide 15, he makes a dumbass little chart to whine about someone he calls a "commisar" hiring a woman instead of him. You can't pull shit like that at any conference in any field, and that's exactly what CERN's statement points out.
If you want to prop him up as a martyr for the red-pill crowd, that's your choice. But I wouldn't recommend picking a guy who torpedoed his reputation with a shit-tier analysis of gender issues because a woman got a job instead of him.
Nope, the relevant slide is actually number 15, where he attacks a named "commisar" who hired a woman instead of him. He made a dumbass little chart and everything. It's kind of hilarious.
CERN's statement points out that such personal attacks are unacceptable. It's just plain not okay pull shit like this.
You still hold the copyright of the code. However, you've also provided a license for using/modifying/distributing the code. In fact, the very reason you can provide this license is because you hold the copyright of the code, which gives you the ability to license it under the terms you choose. You cannot at a later date, however, revoke the license for previous releases of the software without cause outlined in the license itself or some other formal agreement. Both GPL- and BSD-style licenses are based on this idea.
It's important to understand the relationship between copyright law and software licenses.
"Floor to roof" is one of several measurements of a building's height, and most "tallest buildings" lists use a different measurement. Determining what is structural and what is ornamental isn't always clear.
Constantly derailing comment sections into a whinefest about SJWs isn't what most would consider a productive use of time. YMMV.
Why can't the SJWs use their time in a more useful manner?
/. comment section?
Like whining incessantly about SJWs in every
These accounts weren't retweeting. They were straight-up copypasting original jokes from other accounts. They've been a bane of Twitter for years and the platform is now slightly less terrible because of this move.
A post blaming systemd on "SJWs" is now +2 Insightful. Debian is doing just fine. Slashdot's commentors and moderators? Not so much.
This is incredibly stupid reasoning. You cannot honestly argue that this is what Trump meant when he said Mexico was going to pay for the wall. You can do better than this.
Why don't you hazard a guess? I think you'll get it right on your first try.
A handful of people complained about the feature on Twitter. There was no real outrage, just a few people who were annoyed you can't turn it off. Engadget is being incredibly dishonest here by throwing red meat to the "omg pc culture is ruining everything" crowd.
I'm a pro-social-justice person, and I defend a lot of /. stories that stretch the "News for nerds, stuff that matters" line. But no, this one really doesn't belong here. I get why it's here though: Touch on a social justice theme and the clicks and angry comments go on for hours.
Why, you don't think Discord banned the Nazis? I'm pretty sure they banned the Nazis.
Giving free advice and guidelines on how to make tabletop games more accessible for some is bad because it might lead to laws? Holy hell what a terrible argument.
How, then, should Wikipedia determine the truth? People tend disagree about things on occasion.
Dude, you need to relax. May I suggest a trip to your local cinema to unwind?
"Excellent Idea" instead of "Eggsellent Idea"?
For shame.
"Sickening"? Calm down, buttercup. A paper interviewed someone of historical note. Not everything has to be an SJW conspiracy, commie propaganda, or whatever else the tinfoil hat types are whining about these days.
> SJW
lol
If nothing else, he's been an effective popularizer of science. A Brief History of Time has been a tremendous success, and it's served as inspiration for many of today's scientists while teaching the public a bit about how the world works. Pretty cool.
Saying he has "a disability" is a massive understatement. The man's body has been effectively useless for decades now, serving only to keep his brain ticking and providing a cumbersome and exhausting means to slowly communicate. But he continues to engage the public and maintain a sense of humor. So that's something.
Sure, he's a celebrity. But he's also done some great things even if you discount all of his scientific accomplishments. He's served well as the face and (robo-)voice of science for a while. I think he's worthy of a short jaunt up to space.
You're seriously trying to discredit her based on five years of problems occurring before she took over?
Holy shit. Is there any problem/non-problem you all *won't* blame on "SJWs"? I'm calling this phenomenon Pseudofrog's Law: Literally anything that can or can't be blamed on SJWs will be blamed on SJWs.