MustardTiger

8 ms·

31.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
>All that is evidence of is that women give up more often than men Yes, that's the point. >That doesn't provide any evidence that it's because men's value is tied to achievement. Indeed, that's what we're
32.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
I am sure that assuming their behavior does not follow the obvious explanation because you simply dislike the obvious explanation is silly.
33.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
>Do you have any evidence to back up that opinion The very article we're discussing? Remember, it shows 7 times as many women give up as men do. A generalization is not contradicted by one example to the contrary, it would need a m
34.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
No, that's not how it works, which is the point. As they said, men's value is judged on their current success. Not trying makes you just as valueless as trying and failing, it is the exact same outcome.
35.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
You are describing the wrong group of people. The "emotionally justify giving up" you describe is precisely what we observe with the group of people who are not considered failures for doing so: women. For men, that is failure.
36.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
>What we do know is that current hiring practices aren't inclusive & they aren't successful. We don't know either of those things, they are baseless claims. Software gets made, it gets shipped, it kinda works. Given
37.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
>the cost for rejecting a good applicant is 4-5 hours of my teams time while they interview someone else The cost seems much higher to me. I have to interview dozens of people to find a single good applicant. Rejecting one good applica
38.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
That makes absolutely no sense. By definition, giving up is failure. So the options are "100% chance of failure" vs "less than 100% chance of failure", and you think they are more likely to pick "100% chance of fa
39.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
So, you have no evidence that this "problem" is actually a problem. You have no evidence that your solution to this "problem" actually solves it. And in fact, the only evidence you present indicates that the thing you
40.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
It could be much worse. Simply making random changes and hoping it is an improvement rather than making things worse is not sensible.
41.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
>No, correctness is not pedantry Pedantry is though. And that's what that entirely pointless post was. >Any linking of number of columns to normalization is pure nonsense. That's what I said, that's the point. Don&#x2
42.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
>No, relations describe facts, not things. That is impressively pointless pedantry even for HN, well done. >Theoretically it's possible to imagine a normalised relation with 50 columns Yes, that would be what I said. "You&#
43.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
What are you talking about? A table has as many columns as the thing it describes has attributes to be described. You can have a fully normalized database with 50 column tables in it, and there's nothing unusual or suspect about that
44.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
Or better yet, since you don't care about your data anyways, just don't bother storing it. Infinitely scalable and always blazingly fast. >I have never seen a properly denormalized table Do you mean normalized? There's n
45.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
Is that site satire or not? I honestly can't even tell any more.
46.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
No, try reading it. We do both of those things all the time. Where's the war crimes trials? Those are only war crimes under certain circumstances.
47.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
He wants to jail Clinton, because she has committed numerous felonies. And how has he been "actively undermining the legitimacy of the electoral process"? That's what Clinton did, remember? You know those Podesta emails th
48.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
Ok? Neither of those are war crimes or dismantle US democracy, which are the claims in question.
49.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
>There is a difference between firing an employee and continuing to do business with someone that funnels millions of dollars into a racist, sexist, sexual predator that's backed by a foreign intelligence service. Doesn't havin
50.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
The fact that these arguments always seem to require one said to make up crazy nonsense is pretty telling. He advocates nothing of the sort.
51.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
It may be the case, or it may not. Since we're not discussing how we use facebook, it is both unknown and irrelevant. We're talking about how facebook uses us, not at all the same thing. Facebook curates what you see no matter
52.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
Keeping in touch with your family is not a community. And no, this is not democracy working as designed. Democracy as designed required access to information. This is why hearing everyone was important. You do not hear the voices in you
53.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
>Oh but we do have communities, and we do talk to actual people (also about politics!) No, we don't. Communities have bonds. Seeing facebook spam is not the same as talking to a person, and joining a group of people who post likem
54.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
This is why certain groups have such a strong interest in controlling twitter, facebook, google, etc. Most people simply go along with what they perceive as the majority opinion. This used to take the form of doing whate everyone around y
55.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
It isn't the best, you just like it best. Lots of people do not agree. I also used darcs and mercurial. I still do use darcs, and have essentially stopped participating in most open source projects because I find git so unpleasant t
56.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
That's not obvious from your post, your statement clearly says it was. It was even quoted. It is obvious from the original post, but it is equally obvious that nothing else was a slur either, the post contained no slurs.
57.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
"Minorities" is not a slur, it is a normal word that means "people who are in the minority". I don't see how that comment is not part of a reasonable discussion. Just because you don't like the fact being men
58.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
Even after re-reading the guidelines, I still don't know which one that post is violating. Which guideline are you referring to?
59.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
No it isn't. In fact, almost all of the "diverse" teams I see are a monoculture of opinion. They are all people who buy the standard SJW nonsense fully and hate anyone who doesn't. They actively try to stamp out div
60.
by MustardTiger 10y ago
No, I am referring to innodb, which has a number of known reliability problems which are "wontfix".

More ›