4 ms·

> What's going on on these platforms? Is there any serious evidence to the strong claims? The second paragraph in the submitted article has a link to the women

by latexr 11mo ago

> What's going on on these platforms? Is there any serious evidence to the strong claims? The second paragraph in the submitted article has a link to the women claim. I hadn’t seen it before. I have also never personally seen any overt fascist sympathising but then again I don’t follow Blow closely. From what I’ve seen from him, though, doesn’t seem hard to believe. He has very strong opinions on a lot of things he knows little about (and belittles those who disagree with his uninformed opinion), is enamoured with Elon Musk, and is always going on (dismissively, divisively, and dehumanisingly) about “The Left”. He also has very poor and obvious fallacious arguments filled with bad faith assumptions. He believes in God and (if I recall correctly) his justification was (paraphrasing) “a lot of smart people are not atheists” (weasel words, appeal to authority) then went on to rant about “Reddit atheism” (ad hominem) or whatever. That was on his own stream, by the way, so no chance it was taken out of context when I saw it.

wongarsu 11mo ago
This claim about women [1]? Calling that "doesn't seem to think that women have any role to play in his profession" seems like a wild misquote bordering on slander. His statement is essentially "women might have the same ability but are for biological reasons on average less interested in programming". Which is a statement I don't agree with at all, but also a statement that doesn't make any claims about the role women should play or could play, and he repeatedly states that he is talking about statistics and averages, not all women. 1: https://www.resetera.com/threads/jonathan-blow-the-witness-braid-thinks-women-are-biologically-less-interested-in-tech-than-men.11742/ https://www.resetera.com/threads/jonathan-blow-the-witness-b...
- jstimpfle 11mo ago
  That's the same thing as happened to James Damore, who is, in my view, a harmless guy (even nice) and whoever cancelled him or is unable to acknowledge he had a point is much closer to fascism. I don't like throwing that term but just to return it. It _boggles_ my mind that someone might find it controversial that there are on average differences between the sexes in terms of behaviour and interests. And to throw extremely strong accusations like "fascist" for a totally reasonable assumption or observation like that, I don't have words for that, I think those people have been smoking too much pot.
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
  - latexr 11mo ago
    > there are on average differences between the sexes in terms of behaviour and interests. And to throw extremely strong accusations like "fascist" for a totally reasonable assumption or observation like that That’s not why they’re calling him fascist, but because of things like being a Trump supporter. You’re conflating arguments.
    - jstimpfle 11mo ago
      I quote: > Blow is a full-bore fascist sympathizer who also doesn't seem to think that women have any role to play in his profession. The latter part being argued with a post where he merely opines that the sexes have different interests.
      - latexr 11mo ago
        “who also” means “in addition to”, it doesn’t mean the points follow from each other. The quote does not support your point.
        jstimpfle 11mo ago
        Don't be silly, it's brought up as a support clause that is also lacking any factual evidence.
        latexr 11mo ago
        Why are you so hung up on scrutinising Blow’s words to defend him, but then take the critic’s words with a broad general brush to dismiss them? You even decry the lack of factual evidence in the critic’s case, but for some reason said nothing about Blow doing the same first. That’s what looks silly to me. You’re not treating them the same.
- latexr 11mo ago
  That is a claim I neither made nor defended, I merely pointed the asker to the information they requested in the article to let them decide for themselves. I even explicitly said I never encountered that claim before. As such, I’m not going to do very stupid armchair expert thing I’m criticising and comment on it. The points I made are on the things I know and reflected on, not on superficial information received three minutes ago.
bialpio 11mo ago
> He has very strong opinions on a lot of things he knows little about (and belittles those who disagree with his uninformed opinion) (...) I'm impressed with how well you summarized my thoughts about him. I vaguely recall having this impression about him after I read his technical article (can't remember the topic) and decided that I don't think I need to read more from someone that comes through as an asshole. This was around the time The Witness came out, I'm quite happy that I didn't have to witness (hah!) what sounds like his further slide into the madness.

by latexr 11mo ago

wongarsu 11mo ago

This claim about women [1]? Calling that "doesn't seem to think that women have any role to play in his profession" seems like a wild misquote bordering on slander. His statement is essentially "women might have the same ability but are for biological reasons on average less interested in programming". Which is a statement I don't agree with at all, but also a statement that doesn't make any claims about the role women should play or could play, and he repeatedly states that he is talking about statistics and averages, not all women. 1: https://www.resetera.com/threads/jonathan-blow-the-witness-braid-thinks-women-are-biologically-less-interested-in-tech-than-men.11742/ https://www.resetera.com/threads/jonathan-blow-the-witness-b...

jstimpfle 11mo ago
That's the same thing as happened to James Damore, who is, in my view, a harmless guy (even nice) and whoever cancelled him or is unable to acknowledge he had a point is much closer to fascism. I don't like throwing that term but just to return it. It _boggles_ my mind that someone might find it controversial that there are on average differences between the sexes in terms of behaviour and interests. And to throw extremely strong accusations like "fascist" for a totally reasonable assumption or observation like that, I don't have words for that, I think those people have been smoking too much pot.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
- latexr 11mo ago
  > there are on average differences between the sexes in terms of behaviour and interests. And to throw extremely strong accusations like "fascist" for a totally reasonable assumption or observation like that That’s not why they’re calling him fascist, but because of things like being a Trump supporter. You’re conflating arguments.
  - jstimpfle 11mo ago
    I quote: > Blow is a full-bore fascist sympathizer who also doesn't seem to think that women have any role to play in his profession. The latter part being argued with a post where he merely opines that the sexes have different interests.
    - latexr 11mo ago
      “who also” means “in addition to”, it doesn’t mean the points follow from each other. The quote does not support your point.
      - jstimpfle 11mo ago
        Don't be silly, it's brought up as a support clause that is also lacking any factual evidence.
        latexr 11mo ago
        Why are you so hung up on scrutinising Blow’s words to defend him, but then take the critic’s words with a broad general brush to dismiss them? You even decry the lack of factual evidence in the critic’s case, but for some reason said nothing about Blow doing the same first. That’s what looks silly to me. You’re not treating them the same.
latexr 11mo ago
That is a claim I neither made nor defended, I merely pointed the asker to the information they requested in the article to let them decide for themselves. I even explicitly said I never encountered that claim before. As such, I’m not going to do very stupid armchair expert thing I’m criticising and comment on it. The points I made are on the things I know and reflected on, not on superficial information received three minutes ago.

bialpio 11mo ago

> He has very strong opinions on a lot of things he knows little about (and belittles those who disagree with his uninformed opinion) (...) I'm impressed with how well you summarized my thoughts about him. I vaguely recall having this impression about him after I read his technical article (can't remember the topic) and decided that I don't think I need to read more from someone that comes through as an asshole. This was around the time The Witness came out, I'm quite happy that I didn't have to witness (hah!) what sounds like his further slide into the madness.