4 ms·

Then, after spending 4+ years in college studying surface friction losses or CRDT applications without tombstones, and n+ years in industry trying to debug some

• loco5niner 10y ago
  Seems to me that genetics is a perfectly acceptable answer.
  • zzalpha 10y ago
    It was a perfectly acceptable answer to justify segregation, too... using "genetics" as a basis for justifying social bias is a very dangerous road to go down unless you're certain you're on extremely firm ground.
    • loco5niner 10y ago
      > It was a perfectly acceptable answer to justify segregation Actually, no. It was not an acceptable answer to justify segregation.
      • rimunroe 10y ago
        I believe the other commenter was saying that at the time people believed it was an acceptable answer, just as now you're saying it's a plausible explanation for this problem.
        • zzalpha 10y ago
          Yes, thanks, I didn't think I'd actually need to be that explicit... lesson learned!
          • loco5niner 10y ago
            No need to be explicit. I understood your intended meaning just fine.
        • loco5niner 10y ago
          Yes, I understood he was referencing "at the time", that's why I included the word _was_. My point still stands. Although many people did accept it, it WAS not an acceptable answer, and IS still not an acceptable answer to justify segregation.
          • rimunroe 10y ago
            So wait, do you reject the possibility that this situation couldn't be the exact same as the one in the past? It seems like you're saying, "Yes, genetics was not an acceptable answer then, but it is now." If that is what you're saying, then what makes it different now?
  • rayiner 10y ago
    If there was any evidence supporting that answer, sure.