It might be. I don't want to argue over the meaning of "sexist" here, but rather look for practical solutions in THIS case.
Again, we are dealing with volunteers, not a formal "sue-able" organization. You can slap labels on them until the cows* come home, but it won't change anything.
* Oops, I said the C word. Un-mooo, troll, un-mooo.
I'm an old fogie and used to laugh tracks. Most "light" comedies seem awkward without them. It guess it's hard to make every generation happy.
But as far as the show, I sometimes get a "geek" kick out of it. You get dialog similar to:
A: "Rats, according to my carefully considered forecasts, I'll probably die before they can upload human conscientiousness into androids so one can live forever."
B: "Oh great, you'll really want to mill around as an awkward, annoying robot?"
A: "You claim I'm awkward and annoying now. How is that a change?"
Mitt Romney once used the phrase "knock some heads together" in a debate regarding how he'd ensure some gov't task was done right. I don't remember the typical pundits or press taking notice of that statement. Contrast the reaction with "binders full of women".
Rather than view it in terms of "the right way" versus "the wrong way", how about we agree that on average men PREFER a certain communication style that is different from women's average preferred communication style.
It's an old-fashioned "culture conflict" type of problem.
These are mostly volunteers in this case such that we cannot simply slap a discrimination lawsuit on them to force them to talk "professionally".
Maybe someone can offer special classes to learn how to sling "dude crap" with the best of them. I've known women who perfected the art. They can be fun to be around, but I wouldn't want to date them.
As an anecdote, I was arguing with one lady about a signature on a document. "I don't care how it's signed, I'll sign it with my damned wanker if I have to!".
If everyone drove Google Cars (and equiv), that wouldn't happen. A robot car wouldn't typically be programmed to be rude (or the vendor will get sued).
But even before that, I suspect the average Google reflexes are faster than the average human driver's. People's attention tends to come and go.
Plus, if the auto-car has a cam, then you have evidence of the "other guy" driving like a loon. Enough get sued that way and you get fewer loons.
Yes, PROFIT for Google. The bottom line is that driving is a boring time-pig. We've outgrown it. If a google-like car can automatically take us through our usual routes such that we can surf the Interwebs during that time, that's a great thing as far as I'm concerned.
If HP thought their music player was any good, they wouldn't have sought cross-branded iPods because they wouldn't need it. They likely already concluded they lost the music gizmo race when they made the deal.
I agree they lost the potential revenue of Apple paying them to pre-install iTunes. They apparently gambled that an HP branded iPod would help their image in exchange for no iTunes or MS-Music-Spam install revenue for a while.
Trying to predict what future Apple products would be like is a dark art, especially since that was early in the Steve Boom.
HP didn't want to enter the music player gizmo biz, otherwise they wouldn't do the iPod deal to begin with. And not having Microsoft's music spam-ware on HP's PC's didn't hurt HP, it hurt Microsoft.
The only way it would hurt HP is if MS was contractually locked out from bribing HP to put the MS spam-ware on the HP PC's. But we don't know how much MS was willing to pay.
So they basically pulled an IBM and milked the short-term dry, killing their body. And I'm sure the executives and board members who made that decision all gave themselves big bonuses during their short-lived boom time.
If we use the progressive-domino-slingshot effect, perhaps we can smash a big icy asteroid into Venus at a angle that gives it a faster rotation, and knocks the carbon out of the atmosphere.
You forgot that those who want to cut taxes don't give a hoot about polluting cars and probably drive an out-of-tune Hummer or Suburban type of vehicle.
Either they think climate change is a giant conspiracy, or believe it doesn't matter because The Rapture is just around the corner. (It may be, but they'd likely be the cause.)
Indeed! Our neighbor's dryer fumes are blowing our way and are probably out of environmental compliance. We considered ratting on them because I'm allergic to fumes, but our dryer is probably also out of compliance. We'd invite scrutiny our way if we ratted them out. I just give them the evil eye instead, hoping they eventually get a clue. (They are old houses built before dryers were common.)
Agreed. I've been around a while and see this claim re-pop up every 5 or so years in a different dress.
The closest I ever saw it happening on a large scale was Lotus 1-2-3 (spreadsheet) keyboard macros that mirrored the Lotus menu key shortcuts (letters). With the "if" function and a goto-cell option, it became Turing Complete.
The key to success was that it leveraged something users already knew:
1. The menu letters (it was the DOS days), the equivalent of API calls. 2. Formulas. Accountant types gotta know those. 3. Cells: They were the reference-able equiv of programming statements and sometimes parameters.
Frameworks, API's, and environment setups make "regular" programming too much a keep-up-or-don't-bother profession.
However, power-user semi-programming tools like Query-By-Example, and Boolean and set handling rule-based engines like those found in desktop MS-Outlook's message handling/routing tool can provide near-programming capability to power users. MS actually did I pretty good job on that, I have to say. But, I don't see it in wide use; less than 5% of office users I'd guess.
One can also write an entire small-scale CRUD app in MS-Access having up to about 7 tables without a single line of code (other than maybe a conditional filter as found in a WHERE clause). It's not polished, but generally works.
Also, one does have to know a bit about relational modelling in terms of 1-to-many, many-to-many, etc. Just about any non-trivial data tooler has to understand those to avoid duplicating info etc. (basic normalization and relational integrity).
It's one of the things "hobby" programmers often get snagged on because it may not become a clear-cut problem until later. Since they are often the initial user themselves, they just learn to be careful in data entry to prevent certain duplication problems when the data set is small. I think "programming" education should cover basic data factoring and relationships. It's not just about "knowing commands".
Managers who monitor tracking reports and summary statistics often don't get data factoring either, asking for contradictory business rules. Thus, data factoring knowledge would help more than just programmers. The "coder" push in schools is too narrow.
Slashdot Mirror
You saying we're all cows?
But I found slammers have poor wi-fi
It might be. I don't want to argue over the meaning of "sexist" here, but rather look for practical solutions in THIS case.
Again, we are dealing with volunteers, not a formal "sue-able" organization. You can slap labels on them until the cows* come home, but it won't change anything.
* Oops, I said the C word. Un-mooo, troll, un-mooo.
I'm an old fogie and used to laugh tracks. Most "light" comedies seem awkward without them. It guess it's hard to make every generation happy.
But as far as the show, I sometimes get a "geek" kick out of it. You get dialog similar to:
A: "Rats, according to my carefully considered forecasts, I'll probably die before they can upload human conscientiousness into androids so one can live forever."
B: "Oh great, you'll really want to mill around as an awkward, annoying robot?"
A: "You claim I'm awkward and annoying now. How is that a change?"
B: "You sleep a third of the day now."
Mitt Romney once used the phrase "knock some heads together" in a debate regarding how he'd ensure some gov't task was done right. I don't remember the typical pundits or press taking notice of that statement. Contrast the reaction with "binders full of women".
Rather than view it in terms of "the right way" versus "the wrong way", how about we agree that on average men PREFER a certain communication style that is different from women's average preferred communication style.
It's an old-fashioned "culture conflict" type of problem.
These are mostly volunteers in this case such that we cannot simply slap a discrimination lawsuit on them to force them to talk "professionally".
Maybe someone can offer special classes to learn how to sling "dude crap" with the best of them. I've known women who perfected the art. They can be fun to be around, but I wouldn't want to date them.
As an anecdote, I was arguing with one lady about a signature on a document. "I don't care how it's signed, I'll sign it with my damned wanker if I have to!".
"Ah, you mean short-hand!", she replied.
If everyone drove Google Cars (and equiv), that wouldn't happen. A robot car wouldn't typically be programmed to be rude (or the vendor will get sued).
But even before that, I suspect the average Google reflexes are faster than the average human driver's. People's attention tends to come and go.
Plus, if the auto-car has a cam, then you have evidence of the "other guy" driving like a loon. Enough get sued that way and you get fewer loons.
Well, that's gonna make an eye-catching air-bag.
Yes, PROFIT for Google. The bottom line is that driving is a boring time-pig. We've outgrown it. If a google-like car can automatically take us through our usual routes such that we can surf the Interwebs during that time, that's a great thing as far as I'm concerned.
Let the robots do the grunt work!
Go with the presidential form: "Lernified", or "Lernifaad" with a southern tinge.
As my grandfather always said, if you can't beat 'em, and you can't join 'em, then joke about 'em.
...a Comcast download simulator.
We get to see Neil's blurry thumb 2,000 times.
Brokemon
If HP thought their music player was any good, they wouldn't have sought cross-branded iPods because they wouldn't need it. They likely already concluded they lost the music gizmo race when they made the deal.
I agree they lost the potential revenue of Apple paying them to pre-install iTunes. They apparently gambled that an HP branded iPod would help their image in exchange for no iTunes or MS-Music-Spam install revenue for a while.
Trying to predict what future Apple products would be like is a dark art, especially since that was early in the Steve Boom.
HP didn't want to enter the music player gizmo biz, otherwise they wouldn't do the iPod deal to begin with. And not having Microsoft's music spam-ware on HP's PC's didn't hurt HP, it hurt Microsoft.
The only way it would hurt HP is if MS was contractually locked out from bribing HP to put the MS spam-ware on the HP PC's. But we don't know how much MS was willing to pay.
No, I don't like people who fsck up our planet over imaginary conspiracies or elevators.
That's NOT about how they dress, talk, or what music they listen to.
So they basically pulled an IBM and milked the short-term dry, killing their body. And I'm sure the executives and board members who made that decision all gave themselves big bonuses during their short-lived boom time.
If we use the progressive-domino-slingshot effect, perhaps we can smash a big icy asteroid into Venus at a angle that gives it a faster rotation, and knocks the carbon out of the atmosphere.
We are having trouble removing it from Earth's, and we have far less.
You forgot that those who want to cut taxes don't give a hoot about polluting cars and probably drive an out-of-tune Hummer or Suburban type of vehicle.
Either they think climate change is a giant conspiracy, or believe it doesn't matter because The Rapture is just around the corner. (It may be, but they'd likely be the cause.)
Indeed! Our neighbor's dryer fumes are blowing our way and are probably out of environmental compliance. We considered ratting on them because I'm allergic to fumes, but our dryer is probably also out of compliance. We'd invite scrutiny our way if we ratted them out. I just give them the evil eye instead, hoping they eventually get a clue. (They are old houses built before dryers were common.)
No wonton soup for you!
You just clued me in to a sure-seller title:
"Nursing Node.JS Code Back to Health for Dummies Unleashed in 7 Days."
Agreed. I've been around a while and see this claim re-pop up every 5 or so years in a different dress.
The closest I ever saw it happening on a large scale was Lotus 1-2-3 (spreadsheet) keyboard macros that mirrored the Lotus menu key shortcuts (letters). With the "if" function and a goto-cell option, it became Turing Complete.
The key to success was that it leveraged something users already knew:
1. The menu letters (it was the DOS days), the equivalent of API calls.
2. Formulas. Accountant types gotta know those.
3. Cells: They were the reference-able equiv of programming statements and sometimes parameters.
Frameworks, API's, and environment setups make "regular" programming too much a keep-up-or-don't-bother profession.
However, power-user semi-programming tools like Query-By-Example, and Boolean and set handling rule-based engines like those found in desktop MS-Outlook's message handling/routing tool can provide near-programming capability to power users. MS actually did I pretty good job on that, I have to say. But, I don't see it in wide use; less than 5% of office users I'd guess.
One can also write an entire small-scale CRUD app in MS-Access having up to about 7 tables without a single line of code (other than maybe a conditional filter as found in a WHERE clause). It's not polished, but generally works.
Also, one does have to know a bit about relational modelling in terms of 1-to-many, many-to-many, etc. Just about any non-trivial data tooler has to understand those to avoid duplicating info etc. (basic normalization and relational integrity).
It's one of the things "hobby" programmers often get snagged on because it may not become a clear-cut problem until later. Since they are often the initial user themselves, they just learn to be careful in data entry to prevent certain duplication problems when the data set is small. I think "programming" education should cover basic data factoring and relationships. It's not just about "knowing commands".
Managers who monitor tracking reports and summary statistics often don't get data factoring either, asking for contradictory business rules. Thus, data factoring knowledge would help more than just programmers. The "coder" push in schools is too narrow.