There is a lot of overlap, and neither Islamists nor Muslims are willing to help us differentiate the two groups.
It's true that there is an overlap; indeed, one is a proper subset of the other. However, there's a far bigger overlap between Muslims and "us". If you are killed by as Islamist terrorist, there is a roughly 90% chance that you are a Muslim.
But here's the question I want you to answer: What could mainstream Muslims possibly do to help "us"?
Well, they could report suspicious behaviour. Do you know what happens when they do that? The people who do do the reporting get surveilled and threatened with deportation for their trouble.
Maybe this is not a case of "us" and "Muslims". Maybe it's all just "us", and we all have to work together on this one. It's called "community policing", and it's all the rage in civilised countries. The US should try it some time.
Sounds like the GP wants us to just forget what they did.
What do you mean by "they"?
We have no evidence that anybody who "did" that was a US citizen, and almost everyone who was responsible is dead. The few who aren't will never set foot in the United States again.
It's been light fare ever since Larry Flint and Hustler.
Playboy and Hustler were never competitors. Hustler was always deliberately lowbrow (it started off as advertising for strip clubs), but the point of Playboy was always the fantasy lifestyle.
A playboy is affluent, worldly, just intellectual enough (without which the "I read it for the articles" joke wouldn't make sense), and likes looking at glamorous women. Even the nudity made the pretence of having artistic merit by the standards of the day.
As Scott Colvey, a writer for The Guardian wrote in 2009, ''Cobol is to business what the combustion engine is to motoring: it has been around so long, and installed in so many places, that doing something different would be impossibly costly.''
Let's see, now. The combustion engine would be extremely costly to replace, but in the mean time it's burning through non-renewable resources and irrevocably destroying the planet's life-support system. Yup, the analogy holds!
It doesn't change the fact that they're still not prepared to do the work when they leave school and the company that hires them has to finish the last 2/3 of their education.
Well duh. Programming is an apprenticeship, and a university isn't vocational training. Everyone knows that.
Take two software engineers and set them side-by-side. One with a four year degree and one with four years of self-study/work experience. Ask them to devise, implement, deploy, and test a solution to a real problem you are having and don't yet know the answer to.
Which one would be better? It depends on the person, and it definitely depends on where the former person got their degree.
In my experience, the best people are self-taught, but the best of the best taught themselves in a university environment. What a university environment gives you is access to smart people, access to a well-stocked library, time where you (probably) don't have to earn a living, and (most importantly) being forced to learn things that you don't want to learn right now.
Far, far too many prospective developers come to places like SE or Quora and ask what language they should learn to get a high-paying job. If that's the mindset that you go into when self-teaching, then after four years you will be more useless than someone with a decent four year degree.
The objectives are all laid out in the executive orders which establish affirmative action, and it has nothing to do with forcing employment of various classes, quotas, or anything like that. The key objectives are "equality of opportunity for all qualified persons" and "efficient and effective utilization of all available manpower". Really, go ahead and read them and see if there's anything that you find objectionable.
Fair point. I said "Slashdot comments", but that was faulty memory on my part; Slashdot wasn't the only outlet where this story was covered today. Sorry about that.
It's still true that you can't win, but this has always been the case.
You have replied to nearly every significant comment, but all you post is negativity.
You have to admit, Slashdot comments were pretty depressing today.
FWIW, my comment was not "there is no way to win", but "there is no way to win, apparently". What I meant by this (and I thought it was clear in context, but that might just be me) is that the crowd doesn't have a consistent position, so there's no point trying to appease it. That's pretty much what you said, so I think we're on the same page there.
I don't understand your point. Do you not work for a Silicon Valley monoculture tech company, or are you admitting responsibility for producing privacy-destroying crapware for the government?
I don't want quality projects distracted trying to recruit, for example either left handers, women, transvestites, jesuit priests...etc. as coders.
Pretty much everyone would agree with you on this point, with one possible exception. Some projects are well-funded enough to be able to afford people who mostly do community outreach. In that situation, it makes sense to reach for more than one community.
However, here's the flip side: I also don't want quality projects fostering (whether by accident or not) an environment where whole segments of the technically-adept population are not welcome.
Open source is about the community around a project, and getting the community right is part of the development process. Ultimately, technical merit must win, however that is literally the last step in getting a patch accepted. Any quality project needs to get all the steps before that right, too.
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.
This isn't a comment about the sex ratio specifically, but if the Silicon Valley brogrammer echo chamber wasn't quite so monolithic, maybe we wouldn't have so much privacy-destroying crapware.
We need husbands and fathers just as much as we need wives and mothers. In fact, we probably need them more at the moment, because the ones who work in the corporate world currently aren't around for their families as much as they should be or want to be. Women are allowed to have a family-work balance; indeed, they are expected to. Men are not.
If we as a society valued care as much as we value making money, institutional sexism in the workplace would be mostly gone within a generation.
People who actually get things done are rather justifiably less patient with those who aren't. Jobs, Gates, Zuckerberg, etc. are not nice people either.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not a moderator here (obviously, since I'm posting), but speaking for myself, I want you to remember what happened on 9/11, and forget what most of the talking heads with a barrow to push have said about it.
Facts, not spin.
There is a lot of overlap, and neither Islamists nor Muslims are willing to help us differentiate the two groups.
It's true that there is an overlap; indeed, one is a proper subset of the other. However, there's a far bigger overlap between Muslims and "us". If you are killed by as Islamist terrorist, there is a roughly 90% chance that you are a Muslim.
But here's the question I want you to answer: What could mainstream Muslims possibly do to help "us"?
Well, they could report suspicious behaviour. Do you know what happens when they do that? The people who do do the reporting get surveilled and threatened with deportation for their trouble.
Maybe this is not a case of "us" and "Muslims". Maybe it's all just "us", and we all have to work together on this one. It's called "community policing", and it's all the rage in civilised countries. The US should try it some time.
Sounds like the GP wants us to just forget what they did.
What do you mean by "they"?
We have no evidence that anybody who "did" that was a US citizen, and almost everyone who was responsible is dead. The few who aren't will never set foot in the United States again.
Playboy and Hustler were never competitors. Hustler was always deliberately lowbrow (it started off as advertising for strip clubs), but the point of Playboy was always the fantasy lifestyle.
A playboy is affluent, worldly, just intellectual enough (without which the "I read it for the articles" joke wouldn't make sense), and likes looking at glamorous women. Even the nudity made the pretence of having artistic merit by the standards of the day.
As Scott Colvey, a writer for The Guardian wrote in 2009, ''Cobol is to business what the combustion engine is to motoring: it has been around so long, and installed in so many places, that doing something different would be impossibly costly.''
Let's see, now. The combustion engine would be extremely costly to replace, but in the mean time it's burning through non-renewable resources and irrevocably destroying the planet's life-support system. Yup, the analogy holds!
"Free" for some values of "paid for by other people"
Not really. Educating people pays for itself over time.
This also applies to healthcare.
Ditto.
Well duh. Programming is an apprenticeship, and a university isn't vocational training. Everyone knows that.
Take two software engineers and set them side-by-side. One with a four year degree and one with four years of self-study/work experience. Ask them to devise, implement, deploy, and test a solution to a real problem you are having and don't yet know the answer to.
Which one would be better? It depends on the person, and it definitely depends on where the former person got their degree.
In my experience, the best people are self-taught, but the best of the best taught themselves in a university environment. What a university environment gives you is access to smart people, access to a well-stocked library, time where you (probably) don't have to earn a living, and (most importantly) being forced to learn things that you don't want to learn right now.
Far, far too many prospective developers come to places like SE or Quora and ask what language they should learn to get a high-paying job. If that's the mindset that you go into when self-teaching, then after four years you will be more useless than someone with a decent four year degree.
FTFY
Right, so probably not the most representative sample there.
The objectives are all laid out in the executive orders which establish affirmative action, and it has nothing to do with forcing employment of various classes, quotas, or anything like that. The key objectives are "equality of opportunity for all qualified persons" and "efficient and effective utilization of all available manpower". Really, go ahead and read them and see if there's anything that you find objectionable.
Fair point. I said "Slashdot comments", but that was faulty memory on my part; Slashdot wasn't the only outlet where this story was covered today. Sorry about that.
It's still true that you can't win, but this has always been the case.
Are you completely ignorant in your day job, too, or do you save it for slashdot posts?
It's not just me.
You have to admit, Slashdot comments were pretty depressing today.
FWIW, my comment was not "there is no way to win", but "there is no way to win, apparently". What I meant by this (and I thought it was clear in context, but that might just be me) is that the crowd doesn't have a consistent position, so there's no point trying to appease it. That's pretty much what you said, so I think we're on the same page there.
You may be interested in this.
I don't understand your point. Do you not work for a Silicon Valley monoculture tech company, or are you admitting responsibility for producing privacy-destroying crapware for the government?
Pretty much everyone would agree with you on this point, with one possible exception. Some projects are well-funded enough to be able to afford people who mostly do community outreach. In that situation, it makes sense to reach for more than one community.
However, here's the flip side: I also don't want quality projects fostering (whether by accident or not) an environment where whole segments of the technically-adept population are not welcome.
Open source is about the community around a project, and getting the community right is part of the development process. Ultimately, technical merit must win, however that is literally the last step in getting a patch accepted. Any quality project needs to get all the steps before that right, too.
I can beat that. I was at the announcement at TPC4.
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.
This isn't a comment about the sex ratio specifically, but if the Silicon Valley brogrammer echo chamber wasn't quite so monolithic, maybe we wouldn't have so much privacy-destroying crapware.
affirmative action
You don't know what affirmative action is, do you.
Hint: It's pretty much just data collection. If there's one thing we love, it's data.
5) We need wives and mothers.
Ah, now the truth comes out.
We need husbands and fathers just as much as we need wives and mothers. In fact, we probably need them more at the moment, because the ones who work in the corporate world currently aren't around for their families as much as they should be or want to be. Women are allowed to have a family-work balance; indeed, they are expected to. Men are not.
If we as a society valued care as much as we value making money, institutional sexism in the workplace would be mostly gone within a generation.
FORK IT and make SOMETHING BETTER. Show them how YOU would do it. Just SHUT THE FUCK UP AND START DOING instead of WHINING.
Nice try, but Matthew Garrett did just fork Linux and everyone in the Slashdot comments just whined about that. There is no way to win, apparently.
Good executives aren't concerned about quotas, they're concerned that there isn't enough talent to fill the demand.
People who actually get things done are rather justifiably less patient with those who aren't. Jobs, Gates, Zuckerberg, etc. are not nice people either.
I wouldn't want any of them as a boss, either.
Jails are much simpler and with anything security, simpler is better.
It's not substitute for actual nested VMs, though. One of these days, someone will resurrect the Fluke model.