So do fps like quake or UT. You need fine motor skill and discipline to play those at any decent level. Doesn't mean they're considered sports. I think the sport vs game discussion is more about ego and self importance than anything else. Chess is considered a sport, too, and it does not require significant hand/eye coordination.
You mean the 'normal' people who were stuffing them into lockers, and are now demanding their feelings be respected when they do stupid things? Makes sense to me.
GG was the gamer community response to the type of personality described here. This issue with garrett and sharp is kernelgate, or linusgate perhaps. Same type of whining, same type of proselytizing, same appeals to victimization...
I would imagine that many of them behave this way while being paid, so yes, the behavior is part of their professional lives.
1. There is no gauntlet of vitriol, only for quality code and design. Linus only whips out the big guns for deserved behavior/code. It's very rare, but, historically, when it happens, it saves a ton of time and stress for everyone else. Honesty is more important than shielding sensitive people from bad feelings. 2. garrett wasnt' seared 'whenever he got anything done.' That bit about the PE binaries was pretty stupid on his part. 3. appeals to what 'normal people' are, implying that kernel devs are not, is just ad hominem.
Nope. No talent is valuable to a group effort if it comes with emotional baggage that cannot tolerate direct, blunt communication when needed. This mathew garrett guy is a prime example of a prima donna that projects could do without.
Bitching about 'cis' white men *check* Bitching about 'privilege' *check* deprecating towards women like he's some kind of hero *check* 'reverse discrimination' isn't a valid criticism of my brand of discrimination *check* comments disabled "because I don't trust you guys" *check*
These and other posts by him read like first year student polysci essays. It makes perfect sense that linus and co want to keep diseased politics like this out of their community. I'm sure they wouldn't want bible thumper 'developers' telling them they're shits for not integrating jesus into their group culture either.
... the leaders of the community are prioritising the "need" for people to express themselves aggressively over other people's potential need for respectful and sensitive communication.
Yup, that's right. It's their communication style and it has worked well for them for years. If people with 'sensitive needs' want to participate, they should have to toughen up, or fork the code and show those mean bastards the superiority of 'sensitive' interaction styles. Sharp has no right to impose her expectations on them. They've made it clear they don't respect whiners who can't handle harsh criticism for mistakes, and what does she do? Whine. What a joke.
It's all very well to say that people need to learn not to take things personally, but the fact is that you can't possibly know - especially not over a mailing list - just what emotional or personal issues a person might be going through. Do you really a want a situation where curious and potentially talented developers are put off contributing to an important project because of a toxic culture?
It doesn't matter how talented the person is if those emotional problems prevent rational acceptance of criticism, especially if the person is now in a critical role. Linus gets a lot of flack for his bluntness, but he really only lets loose when someone in such a role fucks up big time. One individual's (or group's) toxic culture is another's productive environment. The only way to change the culture is to compete and outpace it with superior productivity. In the case of the kernel, she should fork it and start her own team to show linus and friends how it's done.
No they don't. Feminism presents it as a battle between male space or a female space. It's a false dichotomy. The hypocrisy is that feminists expect men to take the 'chivalrous' route and modify their interaction styles for women, yet asking women to reciprocate with some toughness and objectivity is 'oppressive' or 'misogynistic.' The net result is that men are driven out of areas where women have gotten their PC 'safe spaces' for their interaction and thinking styles because men do not do well there. Just ask a male nurse. Fighting discrimination with discrimination is not a solution.
I'm a fan of what works for a given environment and given group of people. The individuals making up the bulk of the effort are the ones who decide the culture simply because they are the most productive. Anything else would drive these productive individuals out and weaken the result. Linus and his lieutenants are far more productive than sarah sharp is, and she is not happy with the interaction style they set, so she goes. No big loss. She's welcome to either adapt to that or work on a different project. If her viewpoint is truly superior and her politics in line with reality, it should be a no brainer to fork the kernel and demonstrate this. The best contributors would flock to her and, in time, her branch would be the technically superior one. She should be showing us 'misogynists' how it's done instead of whining and stirring up shitstorms.
Feminism (and the social justice crowd in general) hate the idea of judging on merit and performance. Some random quick google searches. Note how they contort the language and definitions.. http://mediadiversified.org/20... http://geekfeminism.org/2009/1... This has also infected academia. It's no surprise a lot of people with sarah sharp's attitudes have come out of the university system. http://www.ucop.edu/academic-p...
Honesty would be refreshing in today's age of political correctness and doublespeak. As far as kindness goes, sure, as long as it's not mandated. Once it's mandated, it becomes shallow and meaningless.
They're only evil towards copyright because it resists their business model of information aggregation, and they are evil towards ibm because ibm competes with them. None of this has to do with giving a damn about doing the right thing (whatever that is).
Both are based on subjectivity. What is evil to some is good to others, what is right to some is wrong to others, etc. Google's behavior to date vs the criticisms it has received is evidence of this.
If they had any intrinsic value, someone else will take their places fairly quickly. If not, oh well. I'd rather lose the site than clean adnet malware out of my system.
Right... and governments aren't known for (ab)using taxpayer's funds for their own purposes? How quickly people have forgotten the lessons of the cold war (on both sides!).
Slashdot Mirror
monospaced fonts > web 2.0 messes.
So do fps like quake or UT. You need fine motor skill and discipline to play those at any decent level. Doesn't mean they're considered sports. I think the sport vs game discussion is more about ego and self importance than anything else. Chess is considered a sport, too, and it does not require significant hand/eye coordination.
You mean the 'normal' people who were stuffing them into lockers, and are now demanding their feelings be respected when they do stupid things? Makes sense to me.
GG was the gamer community response to the type of personality described here. This issue with garrett and sharp is kernelgate, or linusgate perhaps. Same type of whining, same type of proselytizing, same appeals to victimization...
I would imagine that many of them behave this way while being paid, so yes, the behavior is part of their professional lives.
1. There is no gauntlet of vitriol, only for quality code and design. Linus only whips out the big guns for deserved behavior/code. It's very rare, but, historically, when it happens, it saves a ton of time and stress for everyone else. Honesty is more important than shielding sensitive people from bad feelings.
2. garrett wasnt' seared 'whenever he got anything done.' That bit about the PE binaries was pretty stupid on his part.
3. appeals to what 'normal people' are, implying that kernel devs are not, is just ad hominem.
Nope. No talent is valuable to a group effort if it comes with emotional baggage that cannot tolerate direct, blunt communication when needed. This mathew garrett guy is a prime example of a prima donna that projects could do without.
http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/35...
http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/36...
http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/33...
Bitching about 'cis' white men *check*
Bitching about 'privilege' *check*
deprecating towards women like he's some kind of hero *check*
'reverse discrimination' isn't a valid criticism of my brand of discrimination *check*
comments disabled "because I don't trust you guys" *check*
These and other posts by him read like first year student polysci essays. It makes perfect sense that linus and co want to keep diseased politics like this out of their community. I'm sure they wouldn't want bible thumper 'developers' telling them they're shits for not integrating jesus into their group culture either.
This is the reason poettering was mentioned.
https://plus.google.com/+Lenna...
I'm sure the BBC is just as good at lying.
..or the social justice crowd set its sights on IT in the last few years and the left-friendly media is painting him as such..
... the leaders of the community are prioritising the "need" for people to express themselves aggressively over other people's potential need for respectful and sensitive communication.
Yup, that's right. It's their communication style and it has worked well for them for years. If people with 'sensitive needs' want to participate, they should have to toughen up, or fork the code and show those mean bastards the superiority of 'sensitive' interaction styles. Sharp has no right to impose her expectations on them. They've made it clear they don't respect whiners who can't handle harsh criticism for mistakes, and what does she do? Whine. What a joke.
It's all very well to say that people need to learn not to take things personally, but the fact is that you can't possibly know - especially not over a mailing list - just what emotional or personal issues a person might be going through. Do you really a want a situation where curious and potentially talented developers are put off contributing to an important project because of a toxic culture?
It doesn't matter how talented the person is if those emotional problems prevent rational acceptance of criticism, especially if the person is now in a critical role. Linus gets a lot of flack for his bluntness, but he really only lets loose when someone in such a role fucks up big time. One individual's (or group's) toxic culture is another's productive environment. The only way to change the culture is to compete and outpace it with superior productivity. In the case of the kernel, she should fork it and start her own team to show linus and friends how it's done.
No they don't. Feminism presents it as a battle between male space or a female space. It's a false dichotomy. The hypocrisy is that feminists expect men to take the 'chivalrous' route and modify their interaction styles for women, yet asking women to reciprocate with some toughness and objectivity is 'oppressive' or 'misogynistic.' The net result is that men are driven out of areas where women have gotten their PC 'safe spaces' for their interaction and thinking styles because men do not do well there. Just ask a male nurse. Fighting discrimination with discrimination is not a solution.
I'm a fan of what works for a given environment and given group of people. The individuals making up the bulk of the effort are the ones who decide the culture simply because they are the most productive. Anything else would drive these productive individuals out and weaken the result. Linus and his lieutenants are far more productive than sarah sharp is, and she is not happy with the interaction style they set, so she goes. No big loss. She's welcome to either adapt to that or work on a different project. If her viewpoint is truly superior and her politics in line with reality, it should be a no brainer to fork the kernel and demonstrate this. The best contributors would flock to her and, in time, her branch would be the technically superior one. She should be showing us 'misogynists' how it's done instead of whining and stirring up shitstorms.
Feminism (and the social justice crowd in general) hate the idea of judging on merit and performance.
Some random quick google searches. Note how they contort the language and definitions..
http://mediadiversified.org/20...
http://geekfeminism.org/2009/1...
This has also infected academia. It's no surprise a lot of people with sarah sharp's attitudes have come out of the university system.
http://www.ucop.edu/academic-p...
Apparently, we also live in a world where people like to imply distinctions where none exist. Words have definitions for a reason.
You know, it's corporates AND governments, too. At this level, the whole right/left battlefield is just a circus put on for the rest of us.
I don't buy that. Any place 'don't be evil' fits, 'do the right thing' fits as well, and both are subjective, dangerously so.
Honesty would be refreshing in today's age of political correctness and doublespeak. As far as kindness goes, sure, as long as it's not mandated. Once it's mandated, it becomes shallow and meaningless.
They're only evil towards copyright because it resists their business model of information aggregation, and they are evil towards ibm because ibm competes with them. None of this has to do with giving a damn about doing the right thing (whatever that is).
The more they control, the more they get to control.
Plenty. The issue is overeating.
What you describe has more to do with being grotesquely overweight than drinking soda.
Both are based on subjectivity. What is evil to some is good to others, what is right to some is wrong to others, etc. Google's behavior to date vs the criticisms it has received is evidence of this.
If they had any intrinsic value, someone else will take their places fairly quickly. If not, oh well. I'd rather lose the site than clean adnet malware out of my system.
I pay for my bandwidth. Why should I have to subsidize theirs with mine?
Right... and governments aren't known for (ab)using taxpayer's funds for their own purposes? How quickly people have forgotten the lessons of the cold war (on both sides!).
Namecalling isn't a valid method of argumentation either.
So they bathe in the ganges? That's hardly a mark in their favor.