Yes, it does
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| jdixon 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? |
| nmset 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. |
| seatex Sep 02, 2017 10:58 AM EDT |
I'm offended by the name Firefox, as it demeans and objectifies attractive redheads. |
| theBeez 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. |
| jdixon 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. |
| nmset 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. |
| theBeez Sep 03, 2017 12:50 PM EDT |
@nmset 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. |
| theBeez 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. |
| jdixon 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. |
| hkwint 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. |
| theBeez Sep 07, 2017 5:05 PM EDT |
@_hkwint 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)..! |
| mbaehrlxer 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) greetings, eMBee. |
| jdixon 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. Thank you. > ... 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. |
| seatex Sep 08, 2017 10:12 AM EDT |
I just want to express 100% agreement with jdixon on this ridiculous subject (for a Linux forum). |
| jdixon 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. |
| theBeez Sep 08, 2017 11:36 AM EDT |
@ mbaehrlxer 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. |
| easylangs Oct 10, 2017 10:27 AM EDT |
"I think it is a MAJOR error to try and connect ANY ideology to FOSS other than FOSS itself." even the "dont induce installation of non-free software" doctrine that is a requirement for "libre" status a la fsf has painted the linux-libre kernel into a corner. alex oliva and i seem to sincerely agree that the status of blob-loading (it wont load them) is not ideal, freedom 0 wise. (we WANT linux-libre to be able to load blobs. it has them removed, it should not actually block them-- whats next? a distro that blocks elfs that arent gpl licensed?) though linux-libre is understandably committed to both freedom 0 and "dont induce" -- the only "problem" is that the debian kernel says its a the kernel has "missing firmware." so do it the debian way-- blob-free and "missing firmware" for removed blobs-- but this is "inducing." or do it the linux-libre way-- blob-free and will not load firmware blobs-- but this doesnt allow you to use the software "for any purpose." this stalemate has lasted for 8 years now, and the linux-libre team would still like a fix. heres mine: keep "dont induce" but when freedom 0 is threatened, yield to the 4 freedoms and perhaps soften on this "dont induce" thing on a careful, case-by-case basis. i just use the blob-free debian kernel. tl;dr: if a tenet as simple as "dont induce installation of non-free software" can affect a key piece of softwares ability to satisfy all 4 freedoms, imagine what bolting on 50 other causes could do. what could it do? it could hinder all development of free software. whos to say it doesnt already? |
| CFWhitman Oct 10, 2017 11:43 AM EDT |
It's funny, but to me it seems like open source being developed over the Internet goes a long way toward reducing discrimination because much of the time people contributing to a project aren't even aware of whether some of the other contributors are of a certain race or gender, and they don't care as long as the code is worthwhile. |
| easylangs Oct 10, 2017 12:11 PM EDT |
"much of the time people contributing to a project aren't even aware of whether some of the other contributors are of a certain race or gender, and they don't care as long as the code is worthwhile." that is an advantage of online collaboration, but it doesnt carry as far as people might think. the more we celebrate and encourage women, the more impossible it is for them to be treated without gender bias. the thing about (any sort of) bias is that most of it is unconscious. any reduction of it through relative anonymity is gradually eroded by gender politics, social media, and contribution policies based on the idea that "people will be more polite and reasonable if you know their real name and what they look like." perhaps, (actually, has that ever really happened? on twitter for example? or among celebrities, who should by this logic be the nicest most reasonable people on earth?) although there goes any reduction in bias, with it. |
| theBeez Oct 10, 2017 8:23 PM EDT |
@easylangs
C'mon, are you really such a good comrade or are you really that blind? [The thing about (any sort of) bias is that most of it is unconscious. any reduction of it through relative anonymity is gradually eroded by gender politics, social media, and contribution policies based on the idea that "people will be more polite and reasonable if you know their real name and what they look like."] Translated: you're always having a bias, even if you don't think you have. Because if you don't think you have, you're especially having one since it is unconscious. Such drabble is pure 1984 duckspeech, simply because it is a Catch-22. I wonder which special specimens you cultural marxists are that you don't suffer from any bias - except of course, towards people that don't agree with your ideology. But they stopped being humans beings anyway, so who cares. FYI: people have prejudices. They're never giving that one up, because that is who we are. It's the species. It's instinct. You need eugenetics to breed that property out. As long as people say "you can never make a second first impression" people are being judged on their gender, size, length, beauty, age and how well their shoes are polished. Get a job and see how that one works in the real world when you're having an interview. [the more we celebrate and encourage women, the more impossible it is for them to be treated without gender bias.] And that's the whole point: we don't celebrate and encourage women, we celebrate and encourage good code. Wherever it comes from. That's Open Source. What you're talking about is a toxic cocktail ideology called "cultural marxism". |
| jdixon Oct 10, 2017 9:17 PM EDT |
> You need eugenetics to breed that property out. And if you did, you'd have a species completely incapable of distinguishing good from bad. Our prejudices are that we favor things we consider good, and discriminate against what we consider bad. Yes, different is often subconsciously translated to bad, but there are sound historical reasons for this, and you don't easily turn of thousands of years of evolution. If you remove that ability, you'll have a species incapable of properly distinguishing between a copperhead or rattlesnake and a blacksnake, just to give one example. Such a species will be short lived. |
| easylangs Oct 11, 2017 2:04 AM EDT |
"That's Open Source." im not really an "open source" guy. im a free software guy. and for the record, i care more about the 4 freedoms and including-- ideally-- everyone that wants to code (including myself, a white male who is not interested in blaming all wallflower types squarely on white men alone) im not ready to throw out every single person with a loud mouth or an unwillingness to follow the herd-- *cough* i mean, "work as a team" or: whatever the heck this is supposed to be: http://www.jonobacon.com/2010/11/08/announcing-openrespect-o... "What you're talking about is a toxic cocktail ideology called 'cultural marxism'." not so much, no. thats obviously what you thought i meant. im neither a social darwinist nor a social marxist. im self-taught, i often work alone rather than collaborate, im kind of annoyed that most of the "coder spaces" are only for girls. there are advantages to both social darwinism (the best rise to the top, hopefully) and social "marxism" or at least what i would simply call "helping people." "And that's the whole point: we don't celebrate and encourage women, we celebrate and encourage good code. Wherever it comes from." the two are not mutually exclusive, you know. i mean yes, they make it mutually exclusive. thats their flawed philosophy though, not mine. its funny how inclusivity is so "with us or against us" but i happen to believe you can "reach out" without diverting funds earmarked for other things (crowdfunding-- do you use it?!) and without plastering code of conducts on everything. inclusion really isnt a bad thing, when its not rammed down your throat. i know, i know-- there arent enough examples to demonstrate what im saying. but thats not the same as proving a negative either. |
| theBeez Oct 13, 2017 12:33 PM EDT |
@easylangs [there are advantages to both social darwinism (the best rise to the top, hopefully) and social "marxism" or at least what i would simply call "helping people.] Neither are canonical for Free/Open Source. Meritocracy is and always has been. And that is exactly what makes this very Mozilla echo chamber "article" so toxic: they try to throw it out of the window and replace it by something that has a lot to do with a whole bunch of things that especially Hillary fans like, but which has NOTHING to do with Free/Open source: (emphasis added) "To combat gatekeeping and *the myth of meritocracy*, community roles must be designed with greater accountability for health, inclusion, and especially for recognizing achievements of others as core functions." The bunch of mental diarrhea that follows (I don't think this one ever had a decent college day in her life) starts by getting the definition of meritocracy wrong (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) - get the Wikipedia definition. It's not about "fair", it's about output. That's the bottom line. You may not like it, but that's what it is. And to say, it doesn't work (saying that it fails) does not seem correct, given the current state of Free/Open source. In other words, I think this meritocracy has worked pretty well for us. And those who pose behind "diversity" and "inclusiveness" aren't really interested in those at all. Those dogmas only apply to "our kind of people" - and there is where it fails. Meritocracy has bound us all in the last couple of decades. "Diversity" and "inclusiveness" (or cultural marxism) is something that has by nature NOTHING to do with Free/Open source - it can (and actually does) DIVIDE us - and there is *exactly* where the problem lies. You may not like a maintainer - or how he runs his show (take Linus himself) but given the political and religious agnosticism of "meritocracy" (or: we LOVE good code) we can still cooperate. If, however, you DEMAND a political conviction (which cultural marxism clearly does - especially when we've discarded the binding principle of meritocracy) you essentially split the community between political lines. Which is contrary to each and every principle that founded our movement. [the two are not mutually exclusive, you know. i mean yes, they make it mutually exclusive. thats their flawed philosophy though, not mine.] As shown above (and you obviously agree with me - "that's their flawed philosophy" ) IT IS, because Mozilla makes it a prerequisite. There are lot of things that aren't mutually exclusive, but doesn't mean they have anything to do with each other. There are FOSS satanists. There are FOSS muslims. It is the force of FOSS that you can be all that and still do FOSS. THERE IS NO PLACE FOR ANY IDEOLOGY APART THE CAUSE OF FOSS ITSELF. The buck stops there. Aus, Ende, Schluss. |
| skelband Oct 13, 2017 1:57 PM EDT |
I agree with theBeez above. FOSS exists for one purpose only: the production and dissemination of good, free software. Where other political or idealogical interests intervene then that can often be a friction to the goals of the free software movement. A very salient example of why this is a bad thing in the main is the Drupal developer scandal. And when I say scandal, I mean the very awful public treatment given to the developer who in private was involved with BDSM. What this developer did legally in his private life had nothing to do with his FOSS contributions but others thought differently. A developer who was well respected in the Drupal community for as far as I have been able to glean. Superimposing social politics into the FOSS movement is a divisive poison that will kill it if left to fester. The very beauty of the FOSS movement is its inclusiveness. It is an ideal that those interested in social progress should embrace. Unfortunately, there are those that just see a battlefield. |
| easylangs Oct 13, 2017 10:04 PM EDT |
"If, however, you DEMAND a political conviction (which cultural marxism clearly does - especially when we've discarded the binding principle of meritocracy) you essentially split the community between political lines." this is *absolutely* true. you cant have free software AND require that free software *conform* to a second ideology, because then it wont be free software. you can offer a second (third, fourth) ideology as an option-- but the less that option is really optional, the more it changes the definition of free software as well as the mode of advocacy. you can have far lefty free software users-- but once you require free software to be far lefty, its something else. once its a requirement, its not a free software movement-- its a lefty software movement, innit? whats freedom 0 then? "the freedom to use the software for any purpose, except in a way that disrespects the feelings of others?" freedom 0 isnt the one you have to worry about. the freedoms this stuff slowly erodes are freedom 2 and especially 3: "the freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others" technically you have that freedom always. and you can have your little sjw free software community. but when a divisive, fundamentalist ideal like "total social justice" takes over, what they try to impose amounts to limiting peoples ability to modify or distribute copies of modified versions. they dont just try to create a "free software safe space" but they try to impose it across the board, and make it so the only freedom 3 that happens in public is through collaboration (on modified or distributed copies) that follows their additional philosophy. when that becomes a mandate, it only reduces the circumstances under which freedom 3 can happen. and most people have yet to recognise that as a threat to freedom 3. the way you get around that recognition is to say "thats ridiculous! we are making it so more people can participate." yes-- and fewer people as well. so youre effectively dictating who can participate on freedom 3. and thats what the left tends to do. they say "freedom isnt allowing enough people what they need, so we are going to limit freedom and impose help on everyone." the problem isnt helping people. helping people is fine! the problem is when helping people imposes limits and mandates on core freedoms. and thats the problem we have now-- its also why i refuse to participate in any events that mandate this nonsense. when you impose these mandates, you make a sham of the entire thing, youve subverted it. we probably disagree on some of the details beez-- but i think overall, we get what each other are saying. |
| theBeez Oct 14, 2017 12:01 PM EDT |
@easylangs You're a reasonable man and I thank you for that. It hope it proves to others that reasonable people - no matter how different their views on life are - can come together in an open, honest and decent debate. Things, we FOSS-ers hold dear and can be proud of. I think it is in the spirit of this debate we can conclude that the principles we have cherished since our movement began, are valuable and should not be discarded so carelessly. No matter, which god we pray to or who we vote for, we are all bound to the cause of the production and dissemination of good, free software (thanks, skelband). It is this TRUE inclusiveness that makes FOSS work. |
| mbaehrlxer Oct 16, 2017 12:23 AM EDT |
Quoting:And those who pose behind "diversity" and "inclusiveness" aren't really interested in those at all. Those dogmas only apply to "our kind of people" - and there is where it fails. that's a bold accusation. and it's false. at least i can attest to that. and i doubt i am the only one. Quoting:FOSS exists for one purpose only: the production and dissemination of good, free software. The purpose of Free Software is to empower the user. greetings, eMBee. |
| theBeez Oct 16, 2017 11:30 AM EDT |
@ mbaehrlxer Don't let me laugh! What you experience in your own tiny, private bubble does not even count as "exemplary evidence". Let me give you something you can put your teeth in: - Universities are so infested with liberal ideas that even liberal scientists (e.g. Mark Lila) sound the alarm bells (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/11/the-d...). And this isn't the first time this fact has been established (you find several references in the Google Memorandum, which BTW every memorandum opponent failed to address); - That my statement is true can be proved by the number of disinvitations of opponent views (https://www.thefire.org/campus-disinvitations-set-record-in-...). Not to mention those who were violently disturbed by "liberals". Obviously, freedom of speech is guaranteed only if you have the "left" (I could hardly say the "right") opinion. "The purpose of Free Software is to empower the user." That's vague and hardly operational. Our says what we DO. Even if you just download and install it for free. But liberals LOVE vague (duck)speech like that, because you can interpret it any conflicting way every time you see fit. |
| easylangs Oct 16, 2017 11:44 AM EDT |
"The purpose of Free Software is" yes-- but this is one step away from "if grass is green, and aliens are green, then grass is aliens." not that it has to go in that direction, but its a quick way to get there. only relevant because of the number of trips made (in general) along that sort of route. free software: "we want to keep the internet free." (as in freedom) senator duckspeak: "we want to keep the internet safe." (as in whatever ridiculous scheme is back on the table this year) free software: "thats a terrible idea!" senator duckspeak: "but what about the children!" just saying, we dont have to tread near this, we are always here-- society is most concerned when at its least genuine. |
| nmset Oct 17, 2017 4:32 AM EDT |
>The purpose of Free Software is to empower the user. I disagree. It empowers geeky developers, not even all computer professionals because not all of them are geeks; quite few users are power users, most of them don't really know what they are doing with a PC. |
| easylangs Oct 18, 2017 11:15 AM EDT |
"geeky developers" it goes well beyond that. free software (and only free software) made the linux kernel possible in the first place, which ultimately results in the only viable alternative to the iphone so far, even though i dislike both android and apple. im glad its not just apple. its also in practically every router, so without free software youd probably be using an airport or some kind of microsoft router. not to mention that free software used to offer a real alternative to chrome and so-called "edge" (and opera) so i think for a good decade at least, free software helped more than just geeky web surfers-- but half the people that went online. free software isnt just gnu/linux, although thats a pretty important part of it. |
| CFWhitman Oct 18, 2017 12:11 PM EDT |
It seems pretty clear to me that the purpose of Free Software is to empower the user. The fact that the majority of users don't exercise that power directly does not make the statement less true. It still exists to empower them, and the fact that it exists does empower them, even if it's usually indirectly through "geeky developers" that are also users. |
| theBeez Oct 19, 2017 2:12 AM EDT |
@CFWhitman "Empower" is vague and political. A user that downloads and uses s/w is "empowered"? He doesn't even see the difference between FOSS and freeware! We always focus on Linux and stuff, but note a LOT of FOSS s/w is run on Windows. Therefore, the the creation and distribution of free s/w is a MUCH better definition. |
| skelband Oct 19, 2017 1:03 PM EDT |
The need for empowerment of users is a thing which is evident to everyone in one form or another.
Portability of software, the ability to detect and fix bugs through code visibility, the opening of closed silos, the ability to control your possessions (play DVDs on hardware our *your* choice without being forced to watch all the legal mumbo-jumbo at the beginning). This is a war between users and those that would enslave us. Without the Free Software movement in all its facets, things would be a *lot* worse than they actually are. In some ways, the Free Software movement has to exist just to oppose those that would control us. RMS is right about one thing. The Free Software movement is primarily about freedom, not cheap or free (as in beer) programs. The older and more cynical I get, the more I realise that he has he truth on the button. And the more I realise that he is not the fruitcase that some would paint him. Pretty much everything that he has said that he was lampooned for at the time for has come to pass. Surveillance by our devices, the fact that we buy things that control us rather than the other way round. The fact that computing would only really flourish when software was free. All of these things have become common knowledge even by those outside the industry. |
| CFWhitman Oct 19, 2017 1:41 PM EDT |
Well, when I say "empower," I certainly have no political meaning. I have no interest in politics. The purpose of Free Software is to give users the ability to do what they want or need to with that software, even if what they want or need requires making changes to the software or requires knowing very specific things about how the software works internally. Of course not everyone can make changes to their own software, but they still benefit at least indirectly when they are given the ability to make those changes because someone else can make those changes in their stead. |
| mbaehrlxer Oct 19, 2017 2:06 PM EDT |
@theBeez: it occurs to me that with <<those who pose behind "diversity" and "inclusiveness">> you were actually thinking of a certain political faction. since politics is off-topic here, i don't want to go into details. let me just state that i misunderstood your statement as applying to everyone who talks about "diversity" and "inclusiveness". just because "diversity" and "inclusiveness" are misused by political factions, that doesn't mean these concepts themselves should be summarily dismissed. when i am asking for "diversity" and "inclusiveness" in the workplace, and in the Free Software community, then this has nothing to do with any political ideologies, but with the necessity that everyone whos live is affected by computers, has a chance to take control of those computers. consequently, as computers play greater and greater roles in every aspect of our lives, this applies to an ever growing section of the human population. hundred years ago, reading and writing was considered a skill necessary for everyone to acquire, and following that achieving literacy in 100% of the population was set as a goal. today, i believe, programming is a skill necessary for everyone to acquire. it does not mean, that everyone should become a professional programmer, just like not everyone who learns to write becomes a writer, but it does mean that everyone should be able to read code, and be able to understand the software they are using. we need "diversity" and "inclusiveness" in the workplace, and in the Free Software community, so that everyone is able to become a developer without feeling out-of-place. greetings, eMBee. |
| jdixon Oct 19, 2017 2:15 PM EDT |
> ...so that everyone is able to become a developer without feeling out-of-place. Is able to? Yes. Is going to? No. Most people have no interest in being a developer, any more than they wish to be an auto mechanic, and electrician, or a plumber. But there is no question that allowing them the opportunity is important. The problem is that even when that opportunity exists for everyone, it won't result in equal outcomes for all for all classes. And certain political groups are unwilling to accept that. |
| easylangs Oct 20, 2017 7:42 AM EDT |
i agree with this very strongly-- "today, i believe, programming is a skill necessary for everyone to acquire. it does not mean, that everyone should become a professional programmer, just like not everyone who learns to write becomes a writer, but it does mean that everyone should be able to read code, and be able to understand the software they are using." this as well: "The problem is that even when that opportunity exists for everyone, it won't result in equal outcomes for all for all classes." code is not a great equaliser-- though at this point, without a certain level of tech literacy (that does not yet exit) people will have no rights at all without being able to make decisions based on an understanding of the tech that surrounds them. this used to be a "first world problem" though there arent a lot of places where the relevance hasnt spread. the homeless have smartphones, the poorest regions of india-- without a fundamental tech literacy surveillance and helplessness will rule all else. to the point where tech illiterate people will assist in making terrible decisions for the tech literate. we need these self-professed "computer illiterates" as allies. we need more numbers. that said, i firmly believe that these programmes to radicalise "diversity" are often promoted for self-serving or misguided reasons, and are a distraction from actually being inclusive. if one group is constantly told theyre not included, and the rest are disqualified for not being "inclusive" enough-- this is not going to help anyone in a way that doesnt set everyone back even farther. i dont think its always by design-- once you set a lousy enough idea in motion, it takes on a life of its own until people get a better idea. we *really* need a better idea. |
| theBeez Oct 20, 2017 5:02 PM EDT |
@mbaehrlxer Who are you actually trying to fool? Would there be any doubt about my political affiliation if I were talking about "capitalists", "reactionary forces", "agitprop" or "world socialism". Or blame all the worlds problems on the "patriarchate", especially "white privileged men" and saw the solution in "gender equality". If you use the lingo, you're part of it. And if you're part of that movement then stand by it and don't hide behind the argument "that you created your own definition" of these subjects. You KNOW - unless you're very naive - that you would AT LEAST be causing confusion. I don't think you're THAT naive, frankly. I feel that ANY endeavor should be achievable by ANYONE willing and able to do it. The difference between you and me is, I don't attach any numbers to it - and I'm not disappointed when any category is "overrepresented". After my biology study (and yes, I finished it, I do have a degree) I understood that nature isn't just. It's not instrumental to her goal. You may think that's accepting the unacceptable. But I think it is wisdom to accept what you cannot change and put your energy in the things that you can change. Bottom line, still: we have to work together to make this FOSS idea work. And that means concentrating on the things that unite us instead of concentrating on the things that divide us. Yes, I'm willing to put energy into teaching those who ask for my help - but I will demand (like all masters and pupils before me) discipline and determination. Those who are not willing to do that, sorry, but you're on your own. 100% computer literacy is not my goal and frankly, not my problem. IMHO, that was not what FOSS was created for or what the FOSS movement stands for. If you want to learn computing, I can provide you with a free compiler which you can use, take apart, study and modify. That's FOSS. And that's what I'm doing. |
| mbaehrlxer Oct 20, 2017 10:30 PM EDT |
i am part of what? if you don't believe that i am genuinely interested in true diversity and inclusiveness, then we can end this conversation right here. go ahead and call me a liar. i don't think there is anything i can say that will convince you otherwise. i am not talking about numbers, but i am talking about the reality that is shown in a growing number of stories about discrimination. my goal is not to achieve gender parity, my goal is to remove the things that are the cause for these incidents. diversity and inclusiveness are just some of the tools to achieve this. the primary tool is education. my hope is that more females in IT will help men learn to improve their behavior(*). how many does it take, i don't know. i certainly hope that it doesn't take gender parity. that would be very sad. it would be interesting to have a study that measures the occurrence of incidents in relation to the diversity in a company. (*) i also hope that more diversity will improve the quality of our work. again, i don't know how much it takes. a quick guess might be, about one female on every team, so depending on team size, maybe 10-20%. greetings, eMBee. |
| easylangs Oct 21, 2017 2:21 AM EDT |
"100% computer literacy is not my goal and frankly, not my problem. IMHO, that was not what FOSS was created for or what the FOSS movement stands for." i agree, 100% computer literacy is mostly a silicon valley thing. i mean code.org was endorsed early on by the zuck himself, if thats any indication. but its mostly to drive down the salary of coders. which is funny, because it kind of dovetails with free software. not that free software is out to make coders less money, although thats the fud isnt it? so you have silicon valley doing something thats sure to have a quicker effect than free software at something free software is accused of. you can make money from free software but osdisc aside, it probably wont be made from selling copies. i happen to think that computer literacy is increasingly important, but when you step outside industry and into education, you can tell that people interested in teaching are finding that the forces that keep females out of computers have in many instances already culminated at age TEN. unless theres a workforce of minors in the i.t. field, silicon valley is leaving this detail out of their message. limited exposure to computers for several groups of people is a problem worth solving-- because thats WHAT EDUCATION DOES. without disputing the fact that gender discrimination happens (i think its safe to say that gender discrimination happens to all genders, without any implication that it happens equally to everyone) its got nothing to do with why i want to teach everyone to code. but i dont consider it free softwares job to do that (parents and teachers are better suited to the task) i do think free software is useful for that purpose. obviously, so does stallman: http://oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/stallman |
| theBeez Oct 21, 2017 8:39 AM EDT |
@ mbaehrlxer Now you show your true face again. Bravo. Exhibit (a): "About the reality that is shown in a growing number of stories about discrimination." Reminds me of the old discussion (SOFUD) that a random bunch of exemplary proof equals truth. Yes, even a single case of discrimination (let's use that word for arguments sake) is part of reality. The question is, is it significant? And why are you overlooking all these men who are bullied at work? Don't you think every nerd has a story about bullying? So why are these so conveniently forgotten? Because they are "privileged white males"? Exibit (b): My goal is not to achieve gender parity, my goal is to remove the things that are the cause for these incidents. Again, SOFUD. The reason that females aren't programming is because "evil, white, privileged rapists" are bullying them out of the profession. Again, I agree there are incidents. Just as you must agree that in a safe environment like writing software in the comfort of your own home and publishing them "genderneutral" on the Internet does brings only 5% females to their keyboards. So, in short, as long as you don't have a definite causality between these two and ruled out each and every other possible explanation you're removing something, but not the cause of these incidents (which defers women from their rightful place in FOSS). Quote: "It would be interesting to have a study that measures the occurrence of incidents in relation to the diversity in a company." You can't even begin to define diversity. In biology diversity means that each and every ecological niche is filled. "Diversity" in your universe means that anyone that is white, male and anyone doesn't subscribe to your ideology is eradicated from the workplace. Different thing. Quote: "i also hope that more diversity will improve the quality of our work. again, i don't know how much it takes. a quick guess might be, about one female on every team, so depending on team size, maybe 10-20%." It would be nice to attach measurements and units to that statement, otherwise it's utterly meaningless. |
| jdixon Oct 21, 2017 9:15 AM EDT |
> ... i don't think there is anything i can say that will convince you otherwise. Correct. Too many people who made that claim in the past have been demonstrated to be lying. There's no reason to grant anyone claiming that position legitimacy at this point. I don't assume you are lying (except perhaps to yourself), but the position you are arguing is one that has been used to demonize and remove education opportunities, employment opportunities, housing opportunities, etc. from me and mine for decades now. Why should I care why you hold it, when it's a weapon being used against me? > i also hope that more diversity will improve the quality of our work. I suspect you hope in vain. The evidence I've seen is that diversity decreases the quality of a team's work. |
| easylangs Oct 21, 2017 11:02 AM EDT |
"And why are you overlooking all these men who are bullied at work? Don't you think every nerd has a story about bullying?" relevant and strongly recommended: "when nerds collide" - meredith l. patterson: "...when our traditional pursuits (programming, electrical engineering, computer games, &c) became a route to career stability, nerdiness and its surface-level signifiers got culturally co-opted by trend-chasers who jumped on the style but never picked up on the underlying substance that differentiates weird nerds from the culture that still shuns them." another apropos gem thats far too ignored: "Many geeks can tell you stories of how they and a few like-minded companions formed a small community that achieved something great, only to have it taken over by popular loudmouths who considered that greatness theirs by right of social station and kicked the geeks out by enforcing weirdo-hostile social norms. (Consider how many hackerspaces retain their original founders.) Having a community they built wrested away from them at the first signs of success is by now a signaling characteristic of weirdohood. We wouldn’t keep mentioning it if it didn’t keep happening." or in other words: "hey, thats a nice subculture youve built here. it sure would be a shame if someone came and changed its core values from something fundamentally to superficially (but more loudly!) ecumenical, and wrote you out of the thing you belonged to, in a culture that generally has no social use for you anyway." wait, i can participate in undervaluing myself further? oh gee, where do i sign? well count me ou-- oh, you already have-- gee, thanks. the thing is, when people talk about "diversity" its usually for the sake of replacing an array of "allowed" views and ideologies with a single (mandatory) ideology. but then thats what newspeak is all about, right? now we are the savages, and here they come to bring civilisation to us. its funny how people always buy that old bit. and the colonists are always shocked about the lack of gratitude. "well what did you expect from them? some of these guys dont even shave their necks!" "well, i dont shave under my arms..." "hey shut up jane, whos side are you on, anyway?" all for diversity and inclusion of course, lets create all new double standards about grooming. i mean, why not?! its a sure sign that weve let the networks get too centralised, that we need to be more mobile, that we have an escape route. but its still not entirely safe to talk about the threat this all poses to free software. unless of course, we just stop caring what anyone thinks. how possible is that still, now that being a geek is a 9-5 thing? anybody? not to mention that the whole neckbeard phobia crosses right into their own taboos against cultural discrimination. i mean, have they not heard of sikhs? "thats cultural appropriation though." oh i get it, not shaving just because you tell me (in the name of acceptance and inclusion) that my body is gross, is something i stole from punjabi culture? i need your approval now, to grow my own hair? for all the sikhs ive met (i would guess hundreds) not one ever said "you know, you should really shave, you should cut your hair short." not one said "oh, thats gross, a neckbeard. i bet you hate diversity..." i guess theres more than one kind of diversity. forced to choose between the silicon valley kind and the sikh kind, i will gladly choose the sikhs. but when someone who doesnt accept me because of my appearance says i should accept everyone else *but myself*, what am i supposed to do? laugh? |
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!