5 ms·

Until the late 60s, "programming" had very little to do with the "software development" that bloomed in the 70s. Interestingly, "dumb frat bros" are somehow no

by Sacho 9y ago

Until the late 60s, "programming" had very little to do with the "software development" that bloomed in the 70s. Interestingly, "dumb frat bros" are somehow not affected by people calling them that and manage to fight through the emotional pain and still achieve their dreams of being in tech. I've noted a very large group of people react negatively to the person who wrote the memo, writing insults(like "dumb frat bro"), demanding he be fired, threatening him with violence, the whole shebang. Unless I'm missing something, you seem to be implying that women are inferior to "dumb frat bros" because the "dumb frat bros" seem to be better at handling other people trying to bring them down.

zimpenfish 9y ago
> Interestingly, "dumb frat bros" are somehow not affected by people calling them that and manage to fight through the emotional pain and still achieve their dreams of being in tech Yes, almost as if the entire system was heavily weighted in their favour! > Unless I'm missing something, you seem to be implying [something I wasn't even vaguely implying but makes a good false point to try and hang a specious argument on] Does that tactic ever work for you in arguments? > demanding he be fired He demonstrated -in spades- that he wasn't capable of being a professional team player within that environment. > threatening him with violence That is too far and wholly wrong to do.
- Sacho 9y ago
  > Yes, almost as if the entire system was heavily weighted in their favour! "The entire system"? Is this system like the Matrix, or is it governed by people? How did a "dumb frat bro" ever manage to get into Google in the first place when Google's system seems so actively hostile to them? > Does that tactic ever work for you in arguments? I didn't anticipate that you would argue "the system" was supporting "dumb frat bros", when quite clearly he was not receiving any support from Google, yet somehow managed to join them and work there.
  - skj 9y ago
    Google is trying to differentiate itself from the rest of the system. The system, on context, clearly refers to the world of education and technology as a whole. In fact, there doesn't need to be an explicit bad actor to have detrimental systemic effects. Just a long slow build up of bias. Like the idea, worked into our heads from a young age, that boys are better at science.
  - zimpenfish 9y ago
    > when Google's system seems so actively hostile to them? The key word here is "seems" and it only "seems so actively hostile" -to them- themselves. I don't think any impartial outside observer would say your average privileged white dude had an "actively hostile" environment at Google (or, indeed, almost anywhere else.)
- josteink 9y ago
  > He demonstrated -in spades- that he wasn't capable of being a professional team player within that environment. That's a very subjective judgement on your part. If you scan this discussion here on HN, I think you will find that almost half the posts are in stark disagreement with your position. Honestly, if you find an email like this triggering to the point that you're calling for others to be fired and keep on insisting that something is "toxic", I'd rather single out you as the problem, not the original person sending the email. You live in a democracy. People are entitled to different opinions. For your own sake, I say you better get used to it.
  - zimpenfish 9y ago
    > That's a very subjective judgement on your part. Of course but that's the nature of judgements. > I think you will find that almost half the posts are in stark disagreement with your position Indeed, I have read most of them and I would put money on them being from libertarian / alt-right dudes who would take up any cause, no matter how reprehensible, if it gave rise to "liberal tears". Given I've seen people defending Charles Murray in these threads, I'm 100% A-OK being on the other side. > You live in a democracy. People are entitled to different opinions. You're missing the important bit - "People are entitled to different opinions but they are not entitled to a consequence free expression of those opinions [1]." [1] Except in very limited circumstances in the US.

by Sacho 9y ago

zimpenfish 9y ago

> Interestingly, "dumb frat bros" are somehow not affected by people calling them that and manage to fight through the emotional pain and still achieve their dreams of being in tech Yes, almost as if the entire system was heavily weighted in their favour! > Unless I'm missing something, you seem to be implying [something I wasn't even vaguely implying but makes a good false point to try and hang a specious argument on] Does that tactic ever work for you in arguments? > demanding he be fired He demonstrated -in spades- that he wasn't capable of being a professional team player within that environment. > threatening him with violence That is too far and wholly wrong to do.

Sacho 9y ago
> Yes, almost as if the entire system was heavily weighted in their favour! "The entire system"? Is this system like the Matrix, or is it governed by people? How did a "dumb frat bro" ever manage to get into Google in the first place when Google's system seems so actively hostile to them? > Does that tactic ever work for you in arguments? I didn't anticipate that you would argue "the system" was supporting "dumb frat bros", when quite clearly he was not receiving any support from Google, yet somehow managed to join them and work there.
- skj 9y ago
  Google is trying to differentiate itself from the rest of the system. The system, on context, clearly refers to the world of education and technology as a whole. In fact, there doesn't need to be an explicit bad actor to have detrimental systemic effects. Just a long slow build up of bias. Like the idea, worked into our heads from a young age, that boys are better at science.
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  > when Google's system seems so actively hostile to them? The key word here is "seems" and it only "seems so actively hostile" -to them- themselves. I don't think any impartial outside observer would say your average privileged white dude had an "actively hostile" environment at Google (or, indeed, almost anywhere else.)
josteink 9y ago
> He demonstrated -in spades- that he wasn't capable of being a professional team player within that environment. That's a very subjective judgement on your part. If you scan this discussion here on HN, I think you will find that almost half the posts are in stark disagreement with your position. Honestly, if you find an email like this triggering to the point that you're calling for others to be fired and keep on insisting that something is "toxic", I'd rather single out you as the problem, not the original person sending the email. You live in a democracy. People are entitled to different opinions. For your own sake, I say you better get used to it.
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  > That's a very subjective judgement on your part. Of course but that's the nature of judgements. > I think you will find that almost half the posts are in stark disagreement with your position Indeed, I have read most of them and I would put money on them being from libertarian / alt-right dudes who would take up any cause, no matter how reprehensible, if it gave rise to "liberal tears". Given I've seen people defending Charles Murray in these threads, I'm 100% A-OK being on the other side. > You live in a democracy. People are entitled to different opinions. You're missing the important bit - "People are entitled to different opinions but they are not entitled to a consequence free expression of those opinions [1]." [1] Except in very limited circumstances in the US.