Communities and prevailing attitudes are pretty different.
And speaking as a gay person, I'm not very interested in the "gay communities". I'm interested in a place that I can live as an openly gay person without having to give a shit about it. Closest in the US to that is the Bay Area, definitely not Texas.
The Sumerians gave us the number "base-like" system that is used in time, but the actual units of hours and seconds that we use didn't come until much later. The Babylonians for example divided the day into 6 top-level units and then down from there.
People who are better looking do enjoy privilege from that. Why would you jump to the bizarre conclusion that men do NOT enjoy privilege because of this?
Money is a source of privilege, but it is important to understand that we have many forms of privilege in this world. If I am born rich, I get privilege from that. If am born white, I get privilege from that. These things do not cancel each other out. Being rich and black does not make you stop feeling the effects of race privilege. Being white and and a woman does not make you stop feeling the effects of gender privilege.
Privlege is not about whining. Privilege is about those who can simple presume that the world will work out for them in various ways, and especially when they do not even realize this is not so for others.
For example a rich black family cannot feel certain that their children will be exposed to positive examples of black people in their general school curriculum. A poor white family CAN be assured that their children will be exposed to positive examples of white people in their general school curriculum. That's an example of privilege.
Complaining is not what's going on. What's going on is that people are raising the bar, and saying that our interactions and our creations should be made in light of awareness that these issues do exist. They do not mean that we need to do penance, or feel guilt, or make a froth about our liberties being impugned. They mean, be aware, and act accordingly.
Except in this case, the subject matter is inclusion along racial, gender, and orientation lines, and this was (projection) insisted that it's a removal of free speech / reduction of freedom.
Of course the REALITY is that this is a wake-up call for designers to consider issues of inclusion, so pretty much EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what is attempted to be claimed by our little knee-jerker.
So if you think that the response "you are knee-jerking by proxy defending a lack of inclusion" is somehow.. inaccurate. Well, it's not. That's what's happening.
You think that, but there's nothing legitimate about it. There's no foundation that makes any sense other than fear and hatred, and those are undeniably bad things to teach to children.
Observe the behavior of the modern homophobe. You see, he or she accepts that there are "lesbian catering developers", thus making the idea of inclusion somehow an abnormality, while pretending that he or she doesn't mind this abnormality. He or she can continue expressing that inclusion is perverse while attempting to maintain the illusion that he or she is not wallowing in privilege.
Well, the summary was misleading. The article was about the game content and design, not player behavior so much.
That said, the concerns here are not about racist, or misogynist games, but are about games that might have characters who are racist or misogynist. That this poster can't tell the difference suggests a problem.
To expand here. I've been mugged. The kids who did it certainly need help, and that help can't just be someone giving them some money or other soft response, but longterm incarceration won't do anyone any favors. It won't help them, it won't help me, it won't help our criminal system costs, and it won't make the neighborhood safer.
What they need is a system that requires them to accept responsibility for their actions and to make restitutions for them so they don't feel guilty for life. That's called restorative justice.
Well, the ORIGIN of the US prison system was around the idea of reform. You were giving people time away from society where they could be "penitent" about their actions, and via reflection, come to more clearly consider where they had gone wrong. It's where we got "penitentiary".
Obviously I agree this is not how things played out, and everyone should be well aware that modern prisons serve only two possible uses. 1 - removal from regular society 2 - punishment.
Personally I find 1 to be a legitimate thing for some classes of crime, while i feel that most forms of 2, punishment, don't work to reduce crime.
It's kind of an odd concept. When you accept that exclusive ownership of something is a intellectual property thing, then someone who shares it while under a contract to not do so is depriving you of that exclusion. Your trade secret is no longer secret and your advantage is taken away from you.
This stuff stems from guild laws, like the secrets of making good parmigiano-reggiano or whatever that were supposed to be kept within the organization and were only shared with you if you agreed to abide by these terms.
Personally, it seems quite awkward to use the verb "theft" in this context, and I would not choose to do so, but it is established usage. Additionally, I find the whole protected trade secret concept sort of awkward, but I might not fully grasp what it is needed to protect in a modern context.
Being able to quickly execute arithmetic is a basic skill that everyone should be pushed to master.
However it has jack all to do with algebra II.
You're mistaking correlation with causation. Inability to quickly add and subtract doesn't really prevent one from understanding algebra. It's just that your students who never truly mastered basic arithmetic are not really truly mastering any of the math they're encountering.
Speed has little to do with it. It's a red herring for most areas of math. Better grasp does typically result in faster execution for the individual, but that does not imply that the slower individuals you encounter do not have a good grasp.
There's a pretty able transit system that goes from San Francisco to Mountain View. It's called Caltrain. It's not perfect, and at off-hours it has more headway between trains than is highly desirable but it's extremely energy efficient and quite affordable as far as rail systems go.
The real reason that the existing transport systems don't serve Google workers well is that Google HQ is over 3 miles away from the nearest train station.
The inefficiency is all down in the suburb, not in the city.
It's not a "bus line". It's a point to point service that causes parts of SF to become artificially more desirable to Google employees than they would be otherwise, whose wealth is propped up by Wall Street investment patterns.
This causes those particular neighborhoods to have housing costs move out-of-reach of median incomes.
Whether or not you see this as unjust is a matter of debate, but it's not equivalent to a city bus route, which is a resource for everyone.
The taste would be far more palatable if the Google workers were working in SF, and thus Google was paying taxes on the work of these employees in SF. That would bring proportional funds into the city to cover infrastructure costs. Unfortunately, Google can pay lower office costs in the south bay because of the sprawl pattern.
Programmers want and appreciate transparency for its own sake and will be happier still with the thank you bosues AND clearly understanding what's going on.
However if the engingeers are a small minority of employees, that might no work because that kind of transparency does not work for all employee types.
Slashdot Mirror
Communities and prevailing attitudes are pretty different.
And speaking as a gay person, I'm not very interested in the "gay communities". I'm interested in a place that I can live as an openly gay person without having to give a shit about it. Closest in the US to that is the Bay Area, definitely not Texas.
Of course if you're comparing to southern California, I've encountered a sufficient amount of racism re: Mexicans there for one lifetime.
I have been there. It is.
The Sumerians gave us the number "base-like" system that is used in time, but the actual units of hours and seconds that we use didn't come until much later. The Babylonians for example divided the day into 6 top-level units and then down from there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
You seem to have responded to being called out on missing the boat with a pile of insults and vile talk.
I'm sorry you're wrong.
Apparently, you are an awful person in real life, just when you think it won't have any repercussions.
People who are better looking do enjoy privilege from that. Why would you jump to the bizarre conclusion that men do NOT enjoy privilege because of this?
Money is a source of privilege, but it is important to understand that we have many forms of privilege in this world. If I am born rich, I get privilege from that. If am born white, I get privilege from that. These things do not cancel each other out. Being rich and black does not make you stop feeling the effects of race privilege. Being white and and a woman does not make you stop feeling the effects of gender privilege.
Privlege is not about whining. Privilege is about those who can simple presume that the world will work out for them in various ways, and especially when they do not even realize this is not so for others.
For example a rich black family cannot feel certain that their children will be exposed to positive examples of black people in their general school curriculum. A poor white family CAN be assured that their children will be exposed to positive examples of white people in their general school curriculum. That's an example of privilege.
Complaining is not what's going on. What's going on is that people are raising the bar, and saying that our interactions and our creations should be made in light of awareness that these issues do exist. They do not mean that we need to do penance, or feel guilt, or make a froth about our liberties being impugned. They mean, be aware, and act accordingly.
You should try it.
So when it's pointed out that someone is using a very tired excuse for privilege your counterargument is "you're telling me that I can't speak!".
This is also absurd.
Except in this case, the subject matter is inclusion along racial, gender, and orientation lines, and this was (projection) insisted that it's a removal of free speech / reduction of freedom.
Of course the REALITY is that this is a wake-up call for designers to consider issues of inclusion, so pretty much EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what is attempted to be claimed by our little knee-jerker.
So if you think that the response "you are knee-jerking by proxy defending a lack of inclusion" is somehow.. inaccurate. Well, it's not. That's what's happening.
I've worked for companies where doing the work involved lots of learning from coworkers. Those places were full of competence and excellence.
I've also worked for companies where doing the work involved no help and no learning. Those places were full of waste and idiocy.
If you want your company to be inefficient and shitty, by all means don't create a culture where people are being trained all the time.
You think that, but there's nothing legitimate about it. There's no foundation that makes any sense other than fear and hatred, and those are undeniably bad things to teach to children.
Observe the behavior of the modern homophobe. You see, he or she accepts that there are "lesbian catering developers", thus making the idea of inclusion somehow an abnormality, while pretending that he or she doesn't mind this abnormality. He or she can continue expressing that inclusion is perverse while attempting to maintain the illusion that he or she is not wallowing in privilege.
Well, the summary was misleading. The article was about the game content and design, not player behavior so much.
That said, the concerns here are not about racist, or misogynist games, but are about games that might have characters who are racist or misogynist. That this poster can't tell the difference suggests a problem.
http://birdofparadox.wordpress...
Would you like to try another form of well-worn denialism? There's a whole list to choose from!
To expand here. I've been mugged. The kids who did it certainly need help, and that help can't just be someone giving them some money or other soft response, but longterm incarceration won't do anyone any favors. It won't help them, it won't help me, it won't help our criminal system costs, and it won't make the neighborhood safer.
What they need is a system that requires them to accept responsibility for their actions and to make restitutions for them so they don't feel guilty for life. That's called restorative justice.
Well, the ORIGIN of the US prison system was around the idea of reform. You were giving people time away from society where they could be "penitent" about their actions, and via reflection, come to more clearly consider where they had gone wrong. It's where we got "penitentiary".
Obviously I agree this is not how things played out, and everyone should be well aware that modern prisons serve only two possible uses. 1 - removal from regular society 2 - punishment.
Personally I find 1 to be a legitimate thing for some classes of crime, while i feel that most forms of 2, punishment, don't work to reduce crime.
robbery?
"Theft of trade secret" is a thing.
It's kind of an odd concept. When you accept that exclusive ownership of something is a intellectual property thing, then someone who shares it while under a contract to not do so is depriving you of that exclusion. Your trade secret is no longer secret and your advantage is taken away from you.
This stuff stems from guild laws, like the secrets of making good parmigiano-reggiano or whatever that were supposed to be kept within the organization and were only shared with you if you agreed to abide by these terms.
Personally, it seems quite awkward to use the verb "theft" in this context, and I would not choose to do so, but it is established usage. Additionally, I find the whole protected trade secret concept sort of awkward, but I might not fully grasp what it is needed to protect in a modern context.
Maybe he worked abroad at some point?
Being able to quickly execute arithmetic is a basic skill that everyone should be pushed to master.
However it has jack all to do with algebra II.
You're mistaking correlation with causation. Inability to quickly add and subtract doesn't really prevent one from understanding algebra. It's just that your students who never truly mastered basic arithmetic are not really truly mastering any of the math they're encountering.
Speed has little to do with it. It's a red herring for most areas of math. Better grasp does typically result in faster execution for the individual, but that does not imply that the slower individuals you encounter do not have a good grasp.
The kooky part is rejecting documentation of same.
This is kind of a miss.
There's a pretty able transit system that goes from San Francisco to Mountain View. It's called Caltrain. It's not perfect, and at off-hours it has more headway between trains than is highly desirable but it's extremely energy efficient and quite affordable as far as rail systems go.
The real reason that the existing transport systems don't serve Google workers well is that Google HQ is over 3 miles away from the nearest train station.
The inefficiency is all down in the suburb, not in the city.
It's not a "bus line". It's a point to point service that causes parts of SF to become artificially more desirable to Google employees than they would be otherwise, whose wealth is propped up by Wall Street investment patterns.
This causes those particular neighborhoods to have housing costs move out-of-reach of median incomes.
Whether or not you see this as unjust is a matter of debate, but it's not equivalent to a city bus route, which is a resource for everyone.
The taste would be far more palatable if the Google workers were working in SF, and thus Google was paying taxes on the work of these employees in SF. That would bring proportional funds into the city to cover infrastructure costs. Unfortunately, Google can pay lower office costs in the south bay because of the sprawl pattern.
Hiding the information is a management error.
Programmers want and appreciate transparency for its own sake and will be happier still with the thank you bosues AND clearly understanding what's going on.
However if the engingeers are a small minority of employees, that might no work because that kind of transparency does not work for all employee types.