I rationalise it easily. My employers are invariably resource constrained, freeing up resources (people, funding, compute power, whatever) enables them to do more with the same people.
My country provides a safety net for those that can't find paid employment. Companies shouldn't have to.
"You demonstrated that you have no professional ethics and that we can't trust you with a position of responsibility. We would be betraying our customers and shareholders by continuing to employ you."
Just fucking tell your boss that you've optimised the fuck out of your role and what would she like you to pick up next?
I find and fire people like you. Fuck you and your attempts to hold a company to ransom.
Lets face it, if you could implement it then I can get someone competent to replace it, you and most of your team, and do so in a controlled quality way that doesn't breach professional ethics.
Just get a job where those skills and capabilities are recognised and appreciated.
There's immense demand for people that can identify and implement automation opportunities, and it's fun and interesting work that happens to also pay bloody well.
what youÃ(TM)re doing to automate isnÃ(TM)t in your job description
It is in your job description. Every fucking job on the planet includes process improvement expectations.
made sure to make all the automation happen in my spare time to guarantee any programs I wrote are my property
Did you fuck. You're salaried, anything you did to automate your role is work for hire...
spent a lot of time researching even more ways to automate away Ãoecomplexà tasks, which led to me Ãoelooking busyà at all times
..and if you disagree with my previous point, you just admitted using your employer's time for personal enrichment. I'm not sure, in your jurisdiction is that prosecutable fraud or just grossly unethical?
Sorry, I asked that badly. Is it fraud as well as grossly unethical?
Sorry but 'it must be sexism' is a fucking weak argument.
Women get more scholarships than men, the education system was changed to give them better educational outcomes, more women get top grades at school, more women go to university, more women graduate, more women get post graduate qualifications, hiring in academic positions favours women.
I see plenty of sexism but it sure as fuck doesn't explain the Nobel award for physics.
Because we live in a society where men, knowing there's no legitimate reason women cannot contribute equally, feel threatened when they do and are recognized for it
Where the fuck do you live? I've lived and worked in the UK, Germany and the US and in all of those countries men aren't threatened by female competence. They welcome it.
they are special because they overcame the shitstorm of male fragility
That's nothing. You should see the barriers the men had to overcome. Men are special too. Lets all be special.
If you're going to argue that publicly traded firms shouldn't be forced to have women on the boards
I think the primary concern is that they're forced to have women on boards, but not forced to have men on boards. That's sexist.
On top of all that, women are about half of all people. If you can't find competent women, that proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that you're not even trying
Take 'wo' out of that sentence and it's every bit as legitimate and accurate.
Actually, more. Reality is that the pool of male candidates with the experience needed to be a company director is larger than the pool of female candidates.
But only one of those genders gets to demand a seat on the board under Californian law. Sexism.
What it boils down to is examining each individual, in particular things like their testosterone levels
"Yes you have a fully functional uterus but no, you can't compete in the women's event because you'll win too easily."
Athletics has basically entirely discredited the womens' side of the sport.
That's the level of hatred, bigotry, censorship and oppression that trans people face.
Strange, I don't get censorship or oppression. Maybe it's because I ignore the ignorant bigots.
I do get hatred, but it's usually from the bigots - but that includes the trans ones, and anyway, it's usually from people that perceive me to be male attacking me for being a man.
"Ignore them, they're gamergate" isn't virtuous. It's a blatant attempt to disregard their viewpoint and insinuate that they're bad because that label has been used by the media to demonise people.
Maybe - just maybe - some of the themes they're spouting are legitimate points of interest, worth discussing further, and highlight genuine causes for concern.
Certainly I've seen harassment of respected Linux contributors by supporters of the CoC, so I guess you're right, the same tactics relating to the same themes underlying Gamergate are indeed being used.
Slashdot Mirror
It's sad that people even give a flying fuck about this message. Oh, test message.
Loud unexpected noise from a device I've told to stay fucking silent? Hell yes I give a fuck.
Guaranteed to piss me off, whoever fucking sent it.
A very real consequence of much of the work I do.
I rationalise it easily. My employers are invariably resource constrained, freeing up resources (people, funding, compute power, whatever) enables them to do more with the same people.
My country provides a safety net for those that can't find paid employment. Companies shouldn't have to.
"You demonstrated that you have no professional ethics and that we can't trust you with a position of responsibility. We would be betraying our customers and shareholders by continuing to employ you."
Just fucking tell your boss that you've optimised the fuck out of your role and what would she like you to pick up next?
I think it should be modded 'fucking idiocy'. CEOs do scary amounts of work. I mean seriously scary.
Haven't you ever met a CEO at a large company?
Plus there are very few jobs that only one person does. If you can automate your role, you've probably just automated several others.
Companies like that.
I find and fire people like you. Fuck you and your attempts to hold a company to ransom.
Lets face it, if you could implement it then I can get someone competent to replace it, you and most of your team, and do so in a controlled quality way that doesn't breach professional ethics.
Just get a job where those skills and capabilities are recognised and appreciated.
There's immense demand for people that can identify and implement automation opportunities, and it's fun and interesting work that happens to also pay bloody well.
what youÃ(TM)re doing to automate isnÃ(TM)t in your job description
It is in your job description. Every fucking job on the planet includes process improvement expectations.
made sure to make all the automation happen in my spare time to guarantee any programs I wrote are my property
Did you fuck. You're salaried, anything you did to automate your role is work for hire...
spent a lot of time researching even more ways to automate away Ãoecomplexà tasks, which led to me Ãoelooking busyà at all times
..and if you disagree with my previous point, you just admitted using your employer's time for personal enrichment. I'm not sure, in your jurisdiction is that prosecutable fraud or just grossly unethical?
Sorry, I asked that badly. Is it fraud as well as grossly unethical?
Aren't you comparing skilled vs unskilled labour?
In her defence, she seems to be getting put on a pedestal and isn't stepping up there herself. She happily acknowledges that it was a team effort.
She (and the Nobel prize committee) can't help that there are sexists focussing on only one of the recipients.
Where? Who by? How?
Sorry but 'it must be sexism' is a fucking weak argument.
Women get more scholarships than men, the education system was changed to give them better educational outcomes, more women get top grades at school, more women go to university, more women graduate, more women get post graduate qualifications, hiring in academic positions favours women.
I see plenty of sexism but it sure as fuck doesn't explain the Nobel award for physics.
Because we live in a society where men, knowing there's no legitimate reason women cannot contribute equally, feel threatened when they do and are recognized for it
Where the fuck do you live? I've lived and worked in the UK, Germany and the US and in all of those countries men aren't threatened by female competence. They welcome it.
they are special because they overcame the shitstorm of male fragility
That's nothing. You should see the barriers the men had to overcome. Men are special too. Lets all be special.
You're fucking special.
I'll be terribly impressed if they've written a law that excludes watersports but permit tubgirl.
That'd be some seriously tight legalese.
That's fine. Just dress like a female that crossdresses as a man.
Which indicates that there's sexism heavily in practice.
No, it does not. There are many and multiple reasons for gender disparity on boards. Sexism may be one of them, but even that requires evidence.
It's simply not sexist to apply equity to a sexist situation
This law does not apply equity to a sexist situation. It applies sexism to a complex situation.
This in no way explains why there isn't an equivalent quota mandating one to three board members must be male.
A 100% female board is just as shitty a situation as 100% male.
A strong network is a great advantage to a board member, but so is competence, experience and capability.
Why not hire people with all of those attributes?
If you're going to argue that publicly traded firms shouldn't be forced to have women on the boards
I think the primary concern is that they're forced to have women on boards, but not forced to have men on boards. That's sexist.
On top of all that, women are about half of all people. If you can't find competent women, that proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that you're not even trying
Take 'wo' out of that sentence and it's every bit as legitimate and accurate.
Actually, more. Reality is that the pool of male candidates with the experience needed to be a company director is larger than the pool of female candidates.
But only one of those genders gets to demand a seat on the board under Californian law. Sexism.
if you want to do business in California, then you better abide by the rules
This is easily achieved: Either don't go public, or incorporate in a different state/country.
Are you sure the law just doesn't say something like this: "each gender must be represent by at least one member in the board of directors"?
It explicitly sets quotas for the number of women, based on the size of the board.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca...
If on the other hand it explicitly is written as "at least one woman per board" then it should be unconstitutional on the basis of equality.
Lets hope someone challenges it in court, because it's a stupid sexist law in its current form.
This is why feminist theory is sexist and people ascribing to it need calling out as sexists.
The principal, true or false
The principle is a sexist lie invented by sexist people wanting to be sexist.
Shorthand for 'everything else people keep adding to this'
Trust me, it's better than going 17 letters long and still getting complaints that you've missed something.
What it boils down to is examining each individual, in particular things like their testosterone levels
"Yes you have a fully functional uterus but no, you can't compete in the women's event because you'll win too easily."
Athletics has basically entirely discredited the womens' side of the sport.
That's the level of hatred, bigotry, censorship and oppression that trans people face.
Strange, I don't get censorship or oppression. Maybe it's because I ignore the ignorant bigots.
I do get hatred, but it's usually from the bigots - but that includes the trans ones, and anyway, it's usually from people that perceive me to be male attacking me for being a man.
"Ignore them, they're gamergate" isn't virtuous. It's a blatant attempt to disregard their viewpoint and insinuate that they're bad because that label has been used by the media to demonise people.
Maybe - just maybe - some of the themes they're spouting are legitimate points of interest, worth discussing further, and highlight genuine causes for concern.
Certainly I've seen harassment of respected Linux contributors by supporters of the CoC, so I guess you're right, the same tactics relating to the same themes underlying Gamergate are indeed being used.
I don't use labels. Harassment is bad, if that helps?
But guilt by association is also bad. Don't do that.