You need to stop and think about what free speech actually means. Your beloved First Amendment, that only applies to the government curtailing your speech. It sure as hell doesn't apply to something like Reddit, nor does it shield you from the responses of other people.
Correct, yet a strawman. I never said the first amendment applies here. Stop pretending you don't understand the difference between arguing what should be vs arguing what is. It's the socjus crowd demanding that institutions (eg reddit) give them their gilded safe spaces, at taxpayer expense no less. They've demonstrated they've got no problem infiltrating such organizations to get what they want at everyone else's financial and political expense.
For all practical purposes, Reddit is private property. They can decide what they are willing to tolerate, and what they're not. As I said, they don't owe you a platform.
So if some site decided to toss all them "pinko commis" off their site for expressing left wing views, you'd be ok with that? It's possible your view is at least consistent on this, but I doubt it.
I've seen a lot of lame attempts to turn the tables on the effective 'special snowflake' label the socjus crowd's been aptly branded with. These people sound like the religious right, demanding blasphem..err I mean 'hate speech' laws in the name of 'decency' so that their fragile political views won't be challenged.
Who are the spoiled children? The ones who think they can say anything, anywhere they like, that other people should be required to tolerate it, and that there are no repercussions from being an idiot. Don't want there to be consequences of your free speech, keep it to yourself.
Spoiled children are usually demanding that big mommy/daddy step in to solve their conflicts for them. That sounds more like the reddit/pro socjus crowd than the pro free speech people. I'm sure you'd say the same thing to the online SJWs getting flamed for their illogical arguments? Oh, right, when they're criticized, it's 'trolling'...
The rest of your post reads like the sniveling whiny spoiled brat you describe. It's about the right amount of hypocrisy I'd expect from a progressive.
I never said they were, only implied that they should do so, especially if they want to encourage lively discussion. I also think it's interesting that the side they've chosen has a history of bitching just as loudly (if not more) when they are denied the 'soapbox' due to organizational limits or laws.
As I'm sure you're aware, he's making an argument, not interpreting the law. Free expression does diffuse the need for physical violence. It doesn't matter whether the censor is the state or private. Shut down communication (especially the uncomfortable kind) long enough and the conflict will escalate.
..and what business owners must learn is that the best people who solve their problems are creative problem solvers that cannot be managed and metric'd like factory workers. Good engineers treated this way migrate to competitors who understand this.
'How' it's done is important too because it determines what's possible in the future. Half-assed 'right now' solutions often end up costing more money down the road. Shortsighted management like this has cost companies way more money than the occasionally overengineered solution (which was probably done in an attempt to avoid this 'firehouse' style management). A lot of this fits under #2 on your list, but also one and three as well.
No, they are not just as good. A degree from Harvard will open a lot of doors. Not only because of the reputation, but also because of the alumni network.
So it's an expensive popularity contest. He was talking about the quality of education.
I find I recall things better over the whole story arc when I watch a series of episodes in sequence. One hour a week and I get bored and stop watching...or I wait for a half dozen to record on the DVR and then watch.
TV is too much of a pain in the ass anyway with all the commercials...and they wonder why people don't want to pay $150/mo for all that interruption..
My first question is who's actually doing the hard thinking involved with design and who's merely talking about it? Collab is fine. That's what conference rooms/IM/video etc are for. When those decisions have been made, it's time to to think more and talk less.. at least until the next milestone has been reached.
I understand, but my point was that the culture in IT is defined by the personalities of the people who gravitate towards it and excel. Grafting in a new culture (ie using hollywood to spread propaganda of the 'New IT') to make the field more compelling to people who prioritize sociability or who meet equal-outcome quotas is indeed adding distortion. If this works at all, it will simply prioritize those traits over merit, driving out the best talent.
Hollywood archetypes to tell a story. That's ok. Familiar character archetypes are needed so that the audience can identify with a character. The problem is that under the guise of fighting against such stereotyping, modern SocJus has simply replaced character archetypes (ie the white nerd) with others (ie the hip/cool black 'hacker'). I think that was the intention all along. Equal opportunity and merit are not compatible with ideological lensing.
A transsexual accusing others of denial.. Perhaps you're projecting your insecurities onto others.
And as for "false construct" - all of society is a false, man-made construct. Get over it.
I never said society wasn't a man made construction nor did I criticize it for that reason.
- the problem of men retreating to games because they are socially inept is not limited to IT.
Like I said, it isn't necessarily a problem so long as he's got a way to pay for his lifestyle without assistance. Who are you to decide how others should spend their free time? It's always a laugh when feminism bitches about men having expectations of women while joining in with the rest of society to bitch at men when they react by finding other things to do.
Also, I pointed out something you completely ignored
..and just about all of your reply was to things I did not say.
Despite your 'in-cel' anecdotes, there are many people in the field who really just don't give a shit about mating or relationships, or at least don't want to make the crazy sacrifices society expects in order to do so. I know that's hard for most to understand, but it is the truth. It's cheaper and simpler to stay single. Whether it's gaming or anything else, it allows more time to focus on what's important. Fewer and fewer guys want the family/relationship routine, especially in today's anti-male political climate, which has indoctrinated many people with attitudes like yours and those found in the culture at google.
You can talk about 'safe spaces' all you want, but the real 'safe spaces' are demanded by those who think their feelings should matter more to others than facts. The people who go into IT do it because their temperaments often end up being good at it while its culture is defined by that temperament's preference of not having to be social every minute of every day. Less talking, more thinking is the norm. Now people such as yourself and google want to impose an artificially constructed, politically correct culture on them by altering the perception of IT culture to try drawing those who are likely ill suited for it. I understand google wants to lower the cost of labor in the field, but this will just make everyone miserable and less productive.
Slashdot Mirror
No thanks, not when the bar for what is intolerable is that low. People crying over words are fucking babies.
How?
Yes, god forbid someone say something you don't agree with on the internet. Quit being such an insecure wannabe tyrant cheering on the big ones.
It's not just the game being broadcast, but his gameplay as well. Gameplay != uploading a copyrighted movie verbatim.
Yeah because non black people never suffered hardships in the country. Stop making this about race.
Not to BLM. Hence, they're just as racist as their KKK counterparts.
Hate to break it to you but life doesn't work that way. Facts don't care about your attitude.
You need to stop and think about what free speech actually means. Your beloved First Amendment, that only applies to the government curtailing your speech. It sure as hell doesn't apply to something like Reddit, nor does it shield you from the responses of other people.
Correct, yet a strawman. I never said the first amendment applies here. Stop pretending you don't understand the difference between arguing what should be vs arguing what is. It's the socjus crowd demanding that institutions (eg reddit) give them their gilded safe spaces, at taxpayer expense no less. They've demonstrated they've got no problem infiltrating such organizations to get what they want at everyone else's financial and political expense.
For all practical purposes, Reddit is private property. They can decide what they are willing to tolerate, and what they're not. As I said, they don't owe you a platform.
So if some site decided to toss all them "pinko commis" off their site for expressing left wing views, you'd be ok with that? It's possible your view is at least consistent on this, but I doubt it.
I've seen a lot of lame attempts to turn the tables on the effective 'special snowflake' label the socjus crowd's been aptly branded with. These people sound like the religious right, demanding blasphem..err I mean 'hate speech' laws in the name of 'decency' so that their fragile political views won't be challenged.
Who are the spoiled children? The ones who think they can say anything, anywhere they like, that other people should be required to tolerate it, and that there are no repercussions from being an idiot. Don't want there to be consequences of your free speech, keep it to yourself.
Spoiled children are usually demanding that big mommy/daddy step in to solve their conflicts for them. That sounds more like the reddit/pro socjus crowd than the pro free speech people. I'm sure you'd say the same thing to the online SJWs getting flamed for their illogical arguments? Oh, right, when they're criticized, it's 'trolling'...
The rest of your post reads like the sniveling whiny spoiled brat you describe. It's about the right amount of hypocrisy I'd expect from a progressive.
I never said they were, only implied that they should do so, especially if they want to encourage lively discussion. I also think it's interesting that the side they've chosen has a history of bitching just as loudly (if not more) when they are denied the 'soapbox' due to organizational limits or laws.
As I'm sure you're aware, he's making an argument, not interpreting the law. Free expression does diffuse the need for physical violence. It doesn't matter whether the censor is the state or private. Shut down communication (especially the uncomfortable kind) long enough and the conflict will escalate.
This is fine as long as it applies to everyone. Take the soapbox away from the socjus crowd and see what happens.
No such thing as 'common decency.' Cultures differ quite a bit on this.
Who are the spoiled children again? The ones who demand free speech or the ones who bitch when it is used to say things they don't like?
..and what business owners must learn is that the best people who solve their problems are creative problem solvers that cannot be managed and metric'd like factory workers. Good engineers treated this way migrate to competitors who understand this.
'How' it's done is important too because it determines what's possible in the future. Half-assed 'right now' solutions often end up costing more money down the road. Shortsighted management like this has cost companies way more money than the occasionally overengineered solution (which was probably done in an attempt to avoid this 'firehouse' style management). A lot of this fits under #2 on your list, but also one and three as well.
No, they are not just as good. A degree from Harvard will open a lot of doors. Not only because of the reputation, but also because of the alumni network.
So it's an expensive popularity contest. He was talking about the quality of education.
Welcome to the future, comrade. It is time to goosestep your thoughts in line with proper Party etiquette.
while still preserving the security guarantees of the web.
I would've stopped reading right there.
Power? India can't even keep the power on 24/7. I don't see how they'll be able to run a hyperloop.
I find I recall things better over the whole story arc when I watch a series of episodes in sequence. One hour a week and I get bored and stop watching...or I wait for a half dozen to record on the DVR and then watch.
TV is too much of a pain in the ass anyway with all the commercials. ..and they wonder why people don't want to pay $150/mo for all that interruption..
..all that proud-to-be-yourself blather, yet you still demonize guys who don't conform to your view on life-priorities as losers. Interesting.
My first question is who's actually doing the hard thinking involved with design and who's merely talking about it? Collab is fine. That's what conference rooms/IM/video etc are for. When those decisions have been made, it's time to to think more and talk less.. at least until the next milestone has been reached.
Why not? We already permit ideological intrusion of the far left..
I understand, but my point was that the culture in IT is defined by the personalities of the people who gravitate towards it and excel. Grafting in a new culture (ie using hollywood to spread propaganda of the 'New IT') to make the field more compelling to people who prioritize sociability or who meet equal-outcome quotas is indeed adding distortion. If this works at all, it will simply prioritize those traits over merit, driving out the best talent.
Hollywood archetypes to tell a story. That's ok. Familiar character archetypes are needed so that the audience can identify with a character. The problem is that under the guise of fighting against such stereotyping, modern SocJus has simply replaced character archetypes (ie the white nerd) with others (ie the hip/cool black 'hacker'). I think that was the intention all along. Equal opportunity and merit are not compatible with ideological lensing.
A transsexual accusing others of denial.. Perhaps you're projecting your insecurities onto others.
And as for "false construct" - all of society is a false, man-made construct. Get over it.
I never said society wasn't a man made construction nor did I criticize it for that reason.
- the problem of men retreating to games because they are socially inept is not limited to IT.
Like I said, it isn't necessarily a problem so long as he's got a way to pay for his lifestyle without assistance. Who are you to decide how others should spend their free time? It's always a laugh when feminism bitches about men having expectations of women while joining in with the rest of society to bitch at men when they react by finding other things to do.
Also, I pointed out something you completely ignored
..and just about all of your reply was to things I did not say.
Despite your 'in-cel' anecdotes, there are many people in the field who really just don't give a shit about mating or relationships, or at least don't want to make the crazy sacrifices society expects in order to do so. I know that's hard for most to understand, but it is the truth. It's cheaper and simpler to stay single. Whether it's gaming or anything else, it allows more time to focus on what's important. Fewer and fewer guys want the family/relationship routine, especially in today's anti-male political climate, which has indoctrinated many people with attitudes like yours and those found in the culture at google.
You can talk about 'safe spaces' all you want, but the real 'safe spaces' are demanded by those who think their feelings should matter more to others than facts. The people who go into IT do it because their temperaments often end up being good at it while its culture is defined by that temperament's preference of not having to be social every minute of every day. Less talking, more thinking is the norm. Now people such as yourself and google want to impose an artificially constructed, politically correct culture on them by altering the perception of IT culture to try drawing those who are likely ill suited for it. I understand google wants to lower the cost of labor in the field, but this will just make everyone miserable and less productive.