4 ms·
PoC has stood for "Proof of Concept" for a long time, so probably not. It is amusing to read it as "People of Color || GTFO" as a statement demanding racial eq
by CiPHPerCoder 9y ago
PoC has stood for "Proof of Concept" for a long time, so probably not.
It is amusing to read it as "People of Color || GTFO" as a statement demanding racial equality in companies' hiring practices.
- wpietri 9y agoIts use for "people of color" goes back to at least 2004: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=poc http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=poc
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- moyix 9y agoThe use of the term Proof of Concept goes back to at least 1984: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_concept#Usage_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_of_concept#Usage_history I'm less clear on when PoC came into vogue, but I think it was likely in the 90s. Edit: Actually, reading more carefully, you can find "proof of concept" at least as far back as 1967.
- TeMPOraL 9y agoDifferent communities, different dialects. I suppose this journal doesn't come from the community that would read "PoC" as "People of Color".
- jameskegel 9y agoI think Proof of Concept predates your genre of terminology
- emodendroket 9y agoThe oldest sense of a term is not necessarily the predominant one; nobody is going to read "moron" or "imbecile" and think of clinical terms today.
- CiPHPerCoder 9y ago> nobody Well, almost nobody, because that's what I think of when people use these terms to degrade others.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- emodendroket 9y agoWhile I presume you mean to say that you think that people who go around calling others morons are the real morons, you've written it in a way that suggests you think such a thing is linked to clinical mental retardation.
- tomc1985 9y agoI don't get these people that would block the title of a publication because one possible definition might be construed as rascist. If anything it describes a certain hegemony by these disaffected groups as they slowly claw more and more of language as their own...
- sillysaurus3 9y agoThere's actually a way to get that. Use work-hire tests. Work hire tests are anonymous and unbiased. Either candidates can do the work, or they can't. You have to set it up so that the work-hire test is all that matters, though, which ~nobody does.
- CiPHPerCoder 9y agoI'm familiar with tptacek's writing. :) This will get off-topic quickly, if we allow it to.
- sillysaurus3 9y agoIn situations where a subthread is already off-topic and destined for the bottom, I try to make a substantive contribution. It's possible to pull out some interesting conversation even from the dregs. It's true that it grows the subthread, but the [-] button exists now.
- door 9y agoexcept not everyone has the time or interest to do a ton of unpaid work for companies they're applying to
- CiPHPerCoder 9y ago> a ton of unpaid work for companies they're applying to Okay, that's a logistical objection to work-sample tests, which is easily rebutted with, "Simply don't assign _a ton_ of unpaid work" to your candidates. The process we use for hiring software developers at my current employer: 1. Clone this git repository. 2. Build a trivial feature (e.g. adding a search feature to an existing blog platform). 3. Send a patch or pull request. Everyone who's being considered gets the same task, and we base our decision off of several factors: Did they implement a working solution? How much new code did they need to create (knowing that the framework does 99% of this already, and is documented)? If so, did they write unit-testable code? Did they write unit tests? Did they find any of the intentional vulnerabilities? It should, realistically, take most people 2-3 hours at most to complete this task successfully. If they're familiar with PHP development, probably 15-20 minutes. Furthermore, it can be completed at their leisure. If that seems unreasonable, contrast it with the cost of taking a day off work to get dressed up and perform an in-person interview during business hours with complete strangers who are scrutinizing you for fitness, with a very high chance of not getting accepted. The burden of work-sample tests shouldn't be on candidates; the burden should lie with the company to ensure they're collecting objective facts about candidates rather than making subjective decisions.
- SideburnsOfDoom 9y agoPeople with no background in programming, maths or engineering might treat the vertical bars as mere embellishments and read it as a racist slogan.
- CiPHPerCoder 9y agoThe solution to ignorance is education. Even if someone refuses to learn, educate everyone around them and let social pressure either break their stubbornness or isolate them.
- Bakary 9y ago>Even if someone refuses to learn, educate everyone around them and let social pressure either break their stubbornness or isolate them. Out of context this is a very ominous sentence.
- CiPHPerCoder 9y agoHah, I suppose it is! But sadly, it's the only effective solution I've found for dealing with e.g. actual Nazis that tried to encroach on my social circle.
- SideburnsOfDoom 9y agoI'm not quite sure how you get from "this can be misread" to "break their stubbornness or isolate them". Are people who might be put off by the title "stubborn"?
- CiPHPerCoder 9y agoI was talking about the intentional racists.
- SideburnsOfDoom 9y agoI see, I had only thought of it in terms of people who might be put off. Those who actually open the book would soon realise that it's not that meaning. Fortunately, there are no intentional racists in that title.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- emodendroket 9y agoI am probably not the only person who assumed that was what it was.