4 ms·

>I would caution against trying to paint "developers at Google" using broad strokes.

by cyknus 7y ago

malvosenior 7y ago
There's a lot of irony in saying that about "developers at Google" and then immediately turning around and classifying everyone else as "the masses". Talk about broad strokes!
- empath75 7y ago
  That’s not a derogatory term.
  - reallydude 7y ago
    That wasn't the implication. The issue is an hypocritical assertion. If treating a large group as a unified actor is improper, then giving another group another label and doing the same thing...because it's that group is in a different classification, is also improper. The fact these views live in the same comment, is ironic. ie > I would caution against trying to paint "developers at Google" using broad stroke > a leapfrog for the masses https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20600789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20600789
    - wutbrodo 7y ago
      > If treating a large group as a unified actor is improper, then giving another group another label and doing the same thing...because it's that group is in a different classification, is also improper. I think this is the logical leap that people aren't understanding. Generalizing means assuming things about individuals based on their group membership: OP wasn't saying it's a moral failing, but that it leads to inaccurate assumptions when applied to the heterogenous group in question. What's the analogy to using the term "the masses"?
      - reallydude 7y ago
        > OP wasn't saying it's a moral failing The morality and intent is irrelevant to my core assertion. A criticism of contravariance (if that makes it clearer) followed by a usage of it is unexpected hypocrisy, which is ironic.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- jsolson 7y ago
  Beyond the literal fact that "everyone" is undeniably a giant mass of people, I suspect this term was intended to mean "to consumers", particularly given that the following example calls out enterprises. Developing for a small but demanding set of enterprise customers with concrete (but sometimes arcane) requirements is a very different problem from developing for consumer markets.
- wutbrodo 7y ago
  Can you elaborate? I'm not sure I see any connection between generalizing about every member of a group, and using the term masses.
  - tomc1985 7y ago
    It's an overzealous interpretation of a common manner of speech. Muckrakers...

>I would caution against trying to paint "developers at Google" using broad strokes.

by cyknus 7y ago

>I would caution against trying to paint "developers at Google" using broad strokes.

There's a lot of irony in saying that about "developers at Google" and then immediately turning around and classifying everyone else as "the masses". Talk about broad strokes!

empath75 7y ago
That’s not a derogatory term.
- reallydude 7y ago
  That wasn't the implication. The issue is an hypocritical assertion. If treating a large group as a unified actor is improper, then giving another group another label and doing the same thing...because it's that group is in a different classification, is also improper. The fact these views live in the same comment, is ironic. ie > I would caution against trying to paint "developers at Google" using broad stroke > a leapfrog for the masses https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20600789 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20600789
  - wutbrodo 7y ago
    > If treating a large group as a unified actor is improper, then giving another group another label and doing the same thing...because it's that group is in a different classification, is also improper. I think this is the logical leap that people aren't understanding. Generalizing means assuming things about individuals based on their group membership: OP wasn't saying it's a moral failing, but that it leads to inaccurate assumptions when applied to the heterogenous group in question. What's the analogy to using the term "the masses"?
    - reallydude 7y ago
      > OP wasn't saying it's a moral failing The morality and intent is irrelevant to my core assertion. A criticism of contravariance (if that makes it clearer) followed by a usage of it is unexpected hypocrisy, which is ironic.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jsolson 7y ago
Beyond the literal fact that "everyone" is undeniably a giant mass of people, I suspect this term was intended to mean "to consumers", particularly given that the following example calls out enterprises. Developing for a small but demanding set of enterprise customers with concrete (but sometimes arcane) requirements is a very different problem from developing for consumer markets.
wutbrodo 7y ago
Can you elaborate? I'm not sure I see any connection between generalizing about every member of a group, and using the term masses.
- tomc1985 7y ago
  It's an overzealous interpretation of a common manner of speech. Muckrakers...