Yes, it does
Sep 02, 2017
8:06 AM EDT
|Too many people who care about virtue signalling and the latest cause du jour and not enough people who care about getting real work done.
The same people that are yelling and screaming about Colin Kaepernick not having a job in the NFL are perfectly fine with James Damore being fired by Google. Hypocrisy gets old after a while.
Finally: Emma Irwin, Mozilla. Need I note more?
Sep 02, 2017
9:24 AM EDT
|9% are neither male nor female at Mozilla, what combination of X and Y chromosomes can this be ? Their teams are not diverse enough to include baboons though. I'm glad I dropped Firefox since years.
>not enough people who care about getting real work done It's obviously the problem when hollow timber snatch the microphone, just tamtam noise.
Sep 02, 2017
10:58 AM EDT
|I'm offended by the name Firefox, as it demeans and objectifies attractive redheads.|
Sep 03, 2017
9:09 AM EDT
|I'm so sick and tired of this. Yes, I do Open Source. No, I don't subscribe to your political goals - I never have and I'll never do for reasons I stated over and over again. I think it is a MAJOR error to try and connect ANY ideology to FOSS other than FOSS itself.
There has been a satanic distribution. There has been an Islamic distribution. Both could share their code without subscribing to each others world views. That is the force of FOSS.
Hence, if you connect an ideology you're gonna BREAK that power. It has now even come so far, that this toxic mix of feminism, postmodernism and cultural relativism is BREAKING DOWN the very foundations of FOSS itself by defaming meritocracy (https://adainitiative.org/2014/01/24/guest-post-whats-wrong-...), which Emma Irwin proudly refers to.
This dabble of incoherent statements starts with "We prize the idea of meritocracy and weigh merit on contribution to OSS", to continue a few lines later "Some <snip> have been guilty of using their power for bullying, harassment, and sexist/racist/*ist language that they use against others directly and indirectly".
Wikipedia would call it not only "weasel speak", but probably the underlying "evidence" is merely anecdotical.
Another beauty: "Those who contribute less or who don’t at all contribute to OSS are judged to be without merit, regardless of the fact that they have less access to opportunity, time, and money to allow them to freely contribute" vs. " .. We all want a system where we feel we can be rewarded for what we contribute."
Now what is it? A system that rewards those that contribute or a bunch of lame excuses for those who do NOT attribute?
Even lies: "The idea of a meritocracy presumes that everyone starts off and continues through with the same level of access to opportunity, time, and money, which is unfortunately not the case". Meritocracy doesn't state that. It doesn't even IMPLY it. Wikipedia: "A political philosophy stating that power should be vested in individuals almost exclusively based on ability and talent. Advancement in such a system is based on performance measured through examination and/or demonstrated achievement in the field where it is implemented."
And that's exactly what Open Source is: you are what you deliver. Not what you can deliver, what you could have delivered or even what should have been delivered. It's what your contribution actually boils down to.
So if you have kids, don't want to miss "America Next Topmodel", want to travel around the world or write a bestseller, it's ok. But don't come whining you're on the bottom list of your favorite FOSS project. You chose to spend your time that way.
As the maintainer of a medium (or even small) FOSS project I spend (estimated) 15 man years in making this thing. 15 man years I could have spend otherwise. But I CHOSE not to. And that's why I'm a contributor to Open Source and you're not.
The point is that these people are so locked up in their echo chamber, they don't even let any critical notes enter anymore. I can't remember when opensource.com published a comment of mine. There is NO discussion whatsoever possible. Which is a dangerous thing. It could split what we used to experience as a community.
In fact, it may be clear that FOSS has largely gone commercial and that Silicon Valley is incurably infected by this PC disease. I wonder when the split in the community will become visible and commence to harm us.
Sep 03, 2017
10:31 AM EDT
|> I'm so sick and tired of this.
So am I. But if these stories with an obvious political agenda will keep showing up in the feed, I'm going to have to comment, if only to ridicule them. Staying silent isn't an option any more.
Sep 03, 2017
11:00 AM EDT
|>if these stories with an obvious political agenda will keep showing up
Yeah, every one is sick of this. I wonder if the editorial board could consider filtering out such out of purpose articles, with or without a petition. That's nothing to do with censorship, just getting rid of abusive and dishonest content.
Sep 03, 2017
12:50 PM EDT
Yes, that my main problem from the beginning: IT'S ABUSIVE. When this started in September 2009, I was the first to take a stand against the image, that madding crowds of FOSS nerds were (virtually) raping their way to zero female participation in FOSS. As a matter of fact, I wrote:
"The cause of the low number of women who participate in FOSS is the low number of women that are participating in FOSS! Unless a huge number of males quit making FOSS software, that ratio is not going to change."
The "proof" was some anecdotal "evidence" - if I may say so - posed by a female editor of (previously) LinuxToday and LXer.
Bottomline: I never believed that the behavior of legitimate FOSSers was the cause of only a 1.5% female participation of Github or Sourceforge. I thought it was unjust to all these people who wrote software - essentially free - for everyone. I thought it was the ultimate insult to these hardworking individuals.
Fortunately, nowadays the tone is a bit more toned down. Still, we are (as this article states) "not welcoming enough".
I - and I don't think that I'm alone here - welcome ANY contribution. Even when it's not quite to my standards. I don't care whether it's a woman or anyone else. Forth is a language where a woman took an important position, Elizabeth Rather, and I never thought anything of this. But after all this, I'm forced to reflect on gender - not seeing an individual who achieved something, but a woman who may have been put in the spotlight - not for what she has done, but simply because she is a woman. It essentially DEGRADES women who achieved something.
The majority of O'Reilly prizes this year was awarded to women. Given the participation of women in the field, do you really think I'm taking this serious or am I contemplating how many male contributions have been disregarded, simply because they were produced by a male individual?
I'm not for a boycott of these kind of articles. However, those who submit them should allow for criticism. If not, they're just echo chambers and yes, I could do without.
Sep 05, 2017
12:22 PM EDT
|Proof that it's an echo chamber. First: 7 comments. Now: 5 comments. My comment to her comment: not published.|
Sep 05, 2017
3:33 PM EDT
|> My comment to her comment: not published.
Are you surprised? There can be no dissent from the party platform, comrade.
Sep 07, 2017
4:44 PM EDT
|Oh, you people are a piece of work. I'm not going to voice a dissenting comment this time, but you people are just hilarious:
First, one is complaining about comments not being published, somehow censored, like that's a bad thing. Then the second one is asking to not publish - censor - these stories from LXer?
Hehe, you made my evening!
One piece of advice, if your comment is not published, better spend your time on your FOSS project on which you CHOSE to work, right? I assume working on one's hobby leads to more happiness then being angry because one's comment is lost in the echo-chamber that is the internet anyway.
Sep 07, 2017
5:05 PM EDT
When you read correctly, I'm actually saying "I'm not for a boycott of these kind of articles". It may be clear from their commenting policy (BTW, ALL comments have been eradicated by now) that their living in their own bubble. Like North-Koreans.
Strange how liberal people are protesting things they fought for in the sixties and seventies. Like the freedom of speech ("Johnson is a war criminal"), nudity and sex in movies and TV (Phil Bloom, Turks fruit, Blue Movie, PSP election poster) are now arguing that these very things should forbidden.
Hehe, you made my evening!
I, for one, never stopped fighting for the rights to express yourself in any way you see fit, freely exchange ideas and opinions and strangely I find myself shifted now from the left to the right side of the political spectrum.
As a Renaissance man, I have always occupied myself with multiple arts and sciences. For example, I've published close to 100 posts here before my health forced me to slow down a bit. So my FOSS project always got only a part of my attention.
I regret that you see the Internet as an echo chamber. Never saw it that way. Only the most Stalinist sites have such a 1984-like commenting policy - but may be these are the only ones you visit. You just should go out a bit more and not stay within your own bubble!
That's the nice thing here, at LXer. You do get to discuss issues with intelligent people (well, some of 'em)..!
Sep 08, 2017
2:27 AM EDT
|the comments were probably deleted because they may have been negative, criticizing, and possibly even attacking (i didn't get a chance to read them all, so i am guessing).
when you get that kind of feedback, it feels very personal. even if it isn't meant like that.
no-one likes to be criticized. regardless of whether that criticism is justified or not. especially when it's in public. no-one. believe me. it took me 15 years to understand that. criticism is better done in private in a friendly manner if it is to be helpful.
when the discussion stops being positive then it's better not to have any discussion at all. so even if there were positive comments in there it was probably easier to just stop the discussion as a whole.
it is this negative environment that is part of the problem in the first place.
instead of dismissing the authors ideas, it would be better to ask, why does the author have these ideas? what experiences are behind it? instead of diminishing an experience as just an anecdote, how about showing some compassion?
even one single bad experience is one to much. you don't want to care about every individual? fine, but then also please don't criticize that person for their experiece, because that's actually caring, in a negative way.
claiming that all men in IT are bad may be abusive, but attacking the messenger does not help our case. it feels like trying to deny the truth.
instead it would be better to ask, why do we have this reputation? where does it come from, and how can we change it?
bad experiences are blinding. if you have something stolen from you, then for a while everyone will look to you like a thief. one bad apple spoils the bunch. that's an old proverb, with good reason. it comes from generalization. that's where prejudice comes from too.
so yes, there is prejudice against men in IT. but the only way to overcome that is by showing compassion for the hurt, and by giving positive counter examples.
that's for example why i consider it good that women in IT are celebrated, regardless of their achievement. it gives positive counter examples to the negative reputation that IT has.
you may feel that's unfair. but i consider that a lesser problem if it helps to stop our negative image.
Quoting:Let not your heart be offended with anyone. If some one commits an error and wrong toward you, you must instantly forgive him. Do not complain of others. Refrain from reprimanding them, and if you wish to give admonition or advice, let it be offered in such a way that it will not burden the bearer. Turn all your thoughts toward bringing joy to hearts. Beware! Beware! lest ye offend any heart. Assist the world of humanity as much as possible. Be the source of consolation to every sad one, assist every weak one, be helpful to every indigent one, care for every sick one, be the cause of glorification to every lowly one, and shelter those who are overshadowed by fear. (emphasis mine)
Sep 08, 2017
6:18 AM EDT
|> the comments were probably deleted because they may have been negative, criticizing, and possibly even attacking ... no-one likes to be criticized...
The article itself was "negative, criticizing, and possibly even an attack". In fact, it was an attack: On people who have done nothing except get a job and work for a living.
Why are you surprised that vitriol is met with vitriol?
> when the discussion stops being positive then it's better not to have any discussion at all.
We didn't start the negative discussion. She did.
> instead of dismissing the authors ideas, it would be better to ask, why does the author have these ideas?
Ideas? You give her too much credit. She doesn't have ideas. She has "feelings".
> instead of diminishing an experience as just an anecdote, how about showing some compassion?
Where's the compassion on her part? Compassion is a two way street.
> it feels like trying to deny the truth.
See. "Feels". When the simple fact is that everything these people are now claiming is a lie,
> instead it would be better to ask, why do we have this reputation? where does it come from,
It comes from them. It's carefully manufactured to serve their agenda.
> ... and how can we change it?
Change it? We can't change it. These people want us unemployed and unemployable. They want us ejected from society (how many times have they said "there is no place for...."). In short, they want us dead. There is no reasoning with them. There is no negotiating with them. The only thing we can do to make them happy is die. And no, that is not an exaggeration.
> ... if you have something stolen from you, then for a while everyone will look to you like a thief.
This is simply false.
> so yes, there is prejudice against men in IT.
> ... but the only way to overcome that is by showing compassion for the hurt, and by giving positive counter examples.
Sure it is. We've tried that. We've tried that for 50 years. What has it gotten us? Ever increasing demands.
> ...but i consider that a lesser problem if it helps to stop our negative image.
See above. Nothing will stop it.
Sep 08, 2017
10:12 AM EDT
|I just want to express 100% agreement with jdixon on this ridiculous subject (for a Linux forum).|
Sep 08, 2017
10:56 AM EDT
|> on this ridiculous subject (for a Linux forum).
Agreed. There seem to be a dozen or more of these type of stories every month. Debating them here does nothing except drive people away. But the aftermath of the recent US election makes it clear that remaining silent is no longer an option. Qui tacet consentire videtur.
We get more than enough of this in the regular news. I'd rather they weren't posted to the news feed at all, but I'm sure many of them are collected by the automated processes.
Sep 08, 2017
11:36 AM EDT
C'mon, gimme a break. If this had been a newbie who ventured into blogging for the first time, maybe, maybe I would have swallowed that argument. But this is a PAID professional who should know better. Just as doctors have to distance themselves emotionally from their work, so should a professional blogger. And if not, maybe you just aren't fit to be a professional PAID blogger.
We're a long way from the sixties where everything had to be love (no sex please - we're in the '10's) and peace. If someone criticizes your piece, you don't do a "1984" - where history is constantly changed. In every which way it's unprofessional - unless you're running an echo chamber (which they obviously do, I think we can agree to that).
And where truth is concerned, it is a very flexible thing in this regard. It's not the issue whether incidents happened (nobody will deny that) but whether it's the main reason women just don't do (hard) IT. Then you enter the murky world of statistics. For some it will, for some it won't - we can agree to that.
But is it the MAIN cause, in such a way that an appropriate policy will work. And that's one that's hard to establish. First, "self examination" won't work. We've seen some examples of that (Sarah Sharpe). And then there is the thing of the "hidden variables". Connection does not mean causality. Fat people may have more often a gold watch - but it's not like gold watches make fat. It's because they're rich and well-fed.
More often than once though, it's much easier to grab the "politically correct" explanation and go on that course, especially because it makes good PR. That you alienate lots of loyal FOSS-ers seems to be considered "collateral damage". And that stone-cold bean counting is simply dirty.
Sure you're gonna get lots of criticism - and if you bury it WILLINGLY because of PR reasons you're simply a rat. And I suspect (because they are professionals) that's really what's going on. "Compassion" does not even enter the equation.
And I agree with jdixon that speaking out, loudly, is the only option we have. Concessions never brought anyone to negotiating table. You do concessions then you're on speaking terms. And we're a long way from there.
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!