7 ms·

This is the first time I've heard someone refer to DEC as "Digital." Is that an Australian quirk? Not that it's wrong, as it is part of the name and could likel

This is the first time I've heard someone refer to DEC as "Digital." Is that an Australian quirk? Not that it's wrong, as it is part of the name and could likely be a regional expression and/or historically accurate, and in any case it's before my time in the industry. > but was yet to announce he was gay (took another decade) I don't know why this detail was included; not that it's anything to be ashamed of. It just doesn't seem relevant at all to the other points you have raised, and seems a bit insensitive or judgemental imo.

p_l 2y ago
It's a Digital thing. IIRC, the company itself promoted the use of "Digital" rather than "DEC", with the latter being accident of funding availability when it was founded.
spacechild1 2y ago
Ha! I had no idea what parent meant with 'Digital', thanks for clearing things up :)
contingencies 2y ago
PC shutdowns have no place on HN, we deal in facts. It was included because I personally felt that it was an interesting historic tidbit... especially since he'd flipped from suit to flip-flops and commercial unix to Linux, but still kept this secret. No doubt in those days executives with career plans probably had to keep such things unknown. Can't comment on Digital analogues. Re. classic PC shutdown emotive, character mud-slinging focused response below, check again: I did not state an opinion, I did exactly the opposite. Unsure what you think you are "calling me out" on - all I expressed was a (very public) fact[0] (furthermore, about which discussion has been intentionally invited), and when questioned, expressed the purpose for doing so was an interest in sharing that fact for others, since it is historically notable with respect to distinction from the current era. If my interest in sharing is now a matter subject to your offense, feel free to be offended, but don't post about it. [0] https://www.linux-magazine.com/content/view/full/55727 https://www.linux-magazine.com/content/view/full/55727
- aspenmayer 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - samatman 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - aspenmayer 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - samatman 2y ago
        I'll elaborate then. @contingencies was telling a personal anecdote about his own life, which happened to involve meeting someone while that someone was still in the closet. Unprovoked, you decided to take umbrage with this. There was no reason to do so. In doing that, you dragged the thread off-topic and continued to escalate. That was wrong. You shouldn't conduct yourself in such a fashion.
        aspenmayer 2y ago
        > Unprovoked, you decided to take umbrage with this. There was no reason to do so. I found it curious that they mentioned it, and described why I thought it was inappropriate. Contrast this with them, who presented their own off-topic anecdote without justification. The original “provocation” as you call it was by them, by presenting someone’s sexual orientation as a curiosity like some kind of carnival barker. > In doing that, you dragged the thread off-topic and continued to escalate. Asking for clarification and pleading for adherence to the site guidelines is no escalation. It’s a conversation. You and they are the ones making it adversarial, then gaslighting me for my original points made. > That was wrong. You shouldn't conduct yourself in such a fashion. I disagree, but even if your points were justifiable, which I don’t believe they are, you are dogpiling by framing the issue as you have done. That was and is wrong. You shouldn’t conduct yourself in such a fashion.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
dang 2y ago
There's nothing wrong with including irrelevant details if they make a comment more interesting; and I don't see what was insensitive or judgmental in the GP. "Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead." - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40598981 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40598981.
- aspenmayer 2y ago
  > There's nothing wrong with including irrelevant details if they make a comment more interesting; and I don't see what was insensitive or judgmental in the GP. It’s insensitive/judgmental in my view to casually mention the public disclosure or lack thereof of someone’s sexual orientation as a curiosity to be commented upon. The original commenter characterized their lack of coming out of the closet as some kind of moral failing or incongruity by juxtaposing it alongside other life changes that are matters of personal preference and nearly commodity-level interchangeability (their clothing operating system choices). This is problematic because of the implication that being “out” is a mere personal preference with minimal stakes, and is offensive because it is close to shaming them for not being out sooner, and close to saying that sexual orientation is a choice, which is a known right-wing talking point and dehumanizing to many in the gay community.

p_l 2y ago

It's a Digital thing. IIRC, the company itself promoted the use of "Digital" rather than "DEC", with the latter being accident of funding availability when it was founded.

spacechild1 2y ago

Ha! I had no idea what parent meant with 'Digital', thanks for clearing things up :)

contingencies 2y ago

PC shutdowns have no place on HN, we deal in facts. It was included because I personally felt that it was an interesting historic tidbit... especially since he'd flipped from suit to flip-flops and commercial unix to Linux, but still kept this secret. No doubt in those days executives with career plans probably had to keep such things unknown. Can't comment on Digital analogues. Re. classic PC shutdown emotive, character mud-slinging focused response below, check again: I did not state an opinion, I did exactly the opposite. Unsure what you think you are "calling me out" on - all I expressed was a (very public) fact[0] (furthermore, about which discussion has been intentionally invited), and when questioned, expressed the purpose for doing so was an interest in sharing that fact for others, since it is historically notable with respect to distinction from the current era. If my interest in sharing is now a matter subject to your offense, feel free to be offended, but don't post about it. [0] https://www.linux-magazine.com/content/view/full/55727 https://www.linux-magazine.com/content/view/full/55727

aspenmayer 2y ago
[flagged]
- samatman 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - aspenmayer 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - samatman 2y ago
      I'll elaborate then. @contingencies was telling a personal anecdote about his own life, which happened to involve meeting someone while that someone was still in the closet. Unprovoked, you decided to take umbrage with this. There was no reason to do so. In doing that, you dragged the thread off-topic and continued to escalate. That was wrong. You shouldn't conduct yourself in such a fashion.
      - aspenmayer 2y ago
        > Unprovoked, you decided to take umbrage with this. There was no reason to do so. I found it curious that they mentioned it, and described why I thought it was inappropriate. Contrast this with them, who presented their own off-topic anecdote without justification. The original “provocation” as you call it was by them, by presenting someone’s sexual orientation as a curiosity like some kind of carnival barker. > In doing that, you dragged the thread off-topic and continued to escalate. Asking for clarification and pleading for adherence to the site guidelines is no escalation. It’s a conversation. You and they are the ones making it adversarial, then gaslighting me for my original points made. > That was wrong. You shouldn't conduct yourself in such a fashion. I disagree, but even if your points were justifiable, which I don’t believe they are, you are dogpiling by framing the issue as you have done. That was and is wrong. You shouldn’t conduct yourself in such a fashion.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

dang 2y ago

There's nothing wrong with including irrelevant details if they make a comment more interesting; and I don't see what was insensitive or judgmental in the GP. "Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead." - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40598981 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40598981.

aspenmayer 2y ago
> There's nothing wrong with including irrelevant details if they make a comment more interesting; and I don't see what was insensitive or judgmental in the GP. It’s insensitive/judgmental in my view to casually mention the public disclosure or lack thereof of someone’s sexual orientation as a curiosity to be commented upon. The original commenter characterized their lack of coming out of the closet as some kind of moral failing or incongruity by juxtaposing it alongside other life changes that are matters of personal preference and nearly commodity-level interchangeability (their clothing operating system choices). This is problematic because of the implication that being “out” is a mere personal preference with minimal stakes, and is offensive because it is close to shaming them for not being out sooner, and close to saying that sexual orientation is a choice, which is a known right-wing talking point and dehumanizing to many in the gay community.