cotelletta

In a pandemic, we make weird friends. I much prefer some pro conservative anti abortion org asking for less censorship than a dozen woke newspapers and rumor mills calling me a fascist or antivaxxer because I don't treat science as an unquestionable holy cow. Or while propping up corrupt politicians because they're on the same team.

I don't need to agree with someone 100% in order to agree that doing X will make the world more like what i want it to be like.

In this case, if this org is wrong, the answer is counterspeech based on facts, not shooing people away from afar without a chance to listen. Because that is the tic of the authoritarian who is intellectually bankrupt.

Just because Wikipedia says it, doesn't mean it's widely known or accurate. Labeling things as denialism is itself a common trick in misinformation. It flattens whatever the original argument was.

There is a common conflation today where criticism of X policy is confused with being anti-X.

The medical censorship is getting so bad that organizations like this now seem pretty useful and on point. I don't need to agree with all their claims to have common ground with them.

Certainly more than the people who see covid as an endless license to control what others are allowed to read or hear.

I had the same impression. Kory vs his detractors gives me a persistent sense of street-smart vs book-smart.

The same kind of thing that made some people realize that lying about masks early on in the pandemic was an irreversible mistake and breach of trust.

The real generational divide is people who feel this post in their bones and people who will nitpick at it because it's not in fact an unbiased survey.

The point about focus is very true. The socialization of development via online tools means people think sticking their nose in other people's code is a virtue instead of a bother. If you're not going to contribute, why are you interrupting me?

Speak for yourself. The rest of the world mostly did not look, because the American media refused to objectively cover those protests.

I only know about it but following local independent outlets in Portland.

Which of these principles demands you let a cabal of intersectionalists flag their enemies off the front page? Just curious where the intellectual curiosity and lack of reflexiveness comes in.

I ask because if there's one thing I've noticed, it's that these people are unable to tell the difference between low quality arguments and low status arguments. Consistently.

If you truly believe abortion is wrong but is better than the alternative of bringing unwanted children into the world, then you should also support fathers having the right to opt out from supporting a child they didn't want.

This would act as a strong incentive for women to think twice before bringing a child into the world by themselves, with a father who resents them. Fatherlessness and a lack of positive male role models is a real issue in certain communities (cough black America).

Funnily enough, this argument never flies, because "the interests of the child" is the excuse for why "the interests of the mother" take precedence.

Your attempt at couching your comment in disclaimers is hilarious. You don't just give supremacists ammunition, you make everyone laugh at the absurdity.

"Part of the culture" is bad... And "correlated with the culture" is good. But "exude pathological behavior" is where you end.

Have you figured out yet that language policing is just tiptoeing around the things you're not supposed to notice?

It also allows for plausible deniability to surgically remove certain viewpoints without anyone noticing. This is not an acceptable trade off if you value freedom of expression and have an understanding of how bad ideologues are at impartial moderation, confusing disagreement for low effort, lack of intelligence or insincerity.

HN has had a problem for years that heterodox views and facts on culture war issues are censored. The enforcement mechanisms are abused to do this. The mods deny it.

So either the mods are lying about their own actions, or they are not in control of their own site and sufficiently sophisticated flagging works to ban certain viewpoints.

If the latter is true, then shadowbanning is not getting rid of trolls, it is entrenching an elite of them.

This very site does the same, and is proud of it.

The more you do the more they will rely on you. But this is on contributors too.

They start out hanging out in their clubhouse, working on their hobby, and people join in. Then a few years pass and you realize your chat is now a support channel for people who do not care and don't wish to care. Tough luck. Maybe it was never about building software after all, and more about learning, socializing, being valued, and pride.

That said, this part:

the offer of the fellowship stipend for being a trans person in tech

It sounds like this person has made ample contributions, but they get a fellowship because they're queer. And they're happy with that? Okay. Personally I'd feel insulted.

Women were not pushed out of CS or discouraged. Just go look at the evolution of degrees by gender and pay close attention to the absolute, not relative numbers.

What happened is that as personal computing took off in the 80s, men's interest in the field soared permanently while women temporarily showed interest and then dropped off again. The same happened with dotcom.

The article you linked is a giant exercise in selling the same tired old narrative, even as it debunks itself. They even spell it out: when Grace Hopper "invented the compiler" it was actually what we'd call a linker today, and the work was in fact mostly clerical and rote because there were no abstractions to compile.

As soon as tooling for that came around, that changed, and we started architecting something we would now consider code. Which men appeared to enjoy more.

I have a much more convincing argument though. 15% of CS degrees are given to women, a number that has remained mostly flat for two decades (but only because men dropping out of college during that time, otherwise it'd be lower). Half the top 25 programming languages on stack overflow's survey were created in that time.

None of them have female creators. Not one. Where are all those genius female programming language designers we keep hearing about? If women are just as capable, are they just too lazy then? Or is creating a good programming language and making it successful such a stubborn gamble of both abstraction skill and confidence that women fall out of the distribution?

Oh no it must be because people tell them they can't do it. Nevermind that gender orthodoxy has sung only one song for the last 40 years, while being amply funded, and they all prefer to go study third rate sociology instead of getting a real STEM degree...

"The UVA rape was real" - Rolling Stone

"That ESA guy's shirt is sexist." - Too many to count

"That nobel prize winner made inappropriate jokes because one person said so and should be sacked." - The BBC

"That Covington kid is a nazi and is guilty af." - Too many again, even after contradicting material came out.

"Jussie Smolliez was nearly lynched by MAGA hats!" - A US presidential candidate.

"Zoe Quinn is a credible game developer with no track record of either scams or BPD at all, and certainly no blood on her hands." - The Guardian

None of the people behind these lies were anonymous, in fact they were quite proud they got to broadcast then.

And their audience loved being given permissable targets for their 2 minutes hate.

Almost no one wants to acknowledge that before the right radicalized online, the left radicalized both offline and on and pretended this was civilized.

Rule of thumb: You should only include code that you could write yourself if you took the time. Otherwise you don't understand your own software.

I hate tutorials that don't explain you how something is actually implemented in the framework, as if you don't need to know your own tools.

I'm inferring suspense is based on exceptions to interrupt unrenderable components, but it would be nice if the author told me.

Protonmail has a huge gap between promises and what's delivered. Their IMAP bridge is slow and buggy, their mobile app hasn't been meaningfully updated in a year, and even as a paying user they put upsell ads in the sidebar, above your own folders.

If PM is not a honeypot, they are incompetent.

But the smallest sync interval is 15 minutes and it won't sync sub folders until you open them.

It's not usable for real work, and I'm pretty sure that's how Google likes it.

I wonder how much of this is actually about Adblockers... vs Googlers just wanting to make some performance numbers go up in aggregate to make their own internal company stats better.

Cos sure as hell no user is waiting for this.

Yes, it is the dumbest thing ever, and demonstrates they've forgotten what Exposé was all about and what the innovation was.

Instead of showing you labels or icons in a task switcher, they just showed you all your windows. Direct representation instead of symbolic proxies.

"Desktop 1/2/3" is meaningless. Show me what's on it so I can see where my windows are. Don't put a dumb gesture between me and what I need to see.

They only did this because of tiny screens, it makes zero sense on any decent monitor.

Old Apple would've put in a hidden pref, tracked its use, and then quietly eaten crow. New Apple thinks they know better than even their power users. It's ridiculously arrogant.

Everyone should be spamming the hell out of Apple's feedback form if they:

- have 32-bit apps or games that won't be updated

- don't think there is anything worthwhile to upgrade for

- don't need mismatched marzipan iOS toys on their desktop

- don't have an iPhone or iPad and just want a computer that's a computer

etc.

This reeks of "we checked our stats and the normies don't care", a huge mistake for a platform once loved by developers.

Wow, not a single feature managed to spark any interest whatsoever.

Have they fixed mission control's top bar not expanding by default yet? That would be the only reason to upgrade.

"Past time"

The only thing that's past time is that more people start to realize the real bullies and harassers are the ones who post medium posts saying "Remove $person"... in which they misrepresent or outright lie, which others in the press then launder, and then act like this is the height of speaking truth to power. The same way that Coraline Ada has hundreds of tweets of yelling, berating and denigrating people, even though "she's the woman bringing civility to open source" (wired) and wants to enforce a code of conduct.

It's all a joke, except it has actually weakened the community, and given power and influence to people who mainly seem to care about themselves, no matter which bodies they have to step over.

Diversity is a farce and geeks are useful idiots who believed it was ever about anything but narcissism. What is happening now is justification after the fact. If the accusers were expected to live up to the same standards of conduct they demand from others, these people wouldn't be taken seriously.

The really dumb part is that GraphQL has more restrictions than JSON on property names, so you can't actually render arbitrary JSON data with gatsby without breaking the GraphQL schema and getting a ton of errors.

It seemed nice at first, but the way they tell you to deal with images and other resources is ridiculous overengineered and gets in the way.

If you throw real data at it, your builds explode from seconds to minutes.

Ill considered, chasing too many fads, and the inability to turn it all off if you don't need it.

That's what gatsby felt like.

As opposed to shifting responsibility from the people who command the work to those doing it? Is that not an equal denial of agency?

OP has it right. They want the engineers to talk ethics because engineers are the new druid class... instead of the wannabe preachers in media and the humanities who step further and further away from being able to have an intelligent, logical thought.

The public long ago absolved itself of responsibility for modernity, and that includes the public intellectual class, who now just fingerwag the ones doing actual work.

I wasn't aware they weren't talking about it.

Are you sure you're not just confused? You may be thinking of some impostors instead of engineers. There's a lot these days.

Perhaps. Or maybe freelance artists are frustrated working with someone who doesn't seem to understand what they like to see in good work, and what gives them a sense of satisfaction in a product they have worked on.

I mean the guy seems incapable of comprehending style if this is what he's putting out 25 years in.

Yeah and because art has vastly different constraints from coding, wanting to swap out artists is just counterproductive.

Then again, the older I get, the more I think the same should apply to developers. You should never lock knowledge inside one person's head, but the idea that you can take over a project without its original creators doing a years long hand off is naive, and leads to all the expected pathologies.

I remember a new $250k CTO saying he was amazed our code didn't have abandoned parts nobody wanted to touch ... this is how professionals are supposed to work, not something they discover "late" in their career.

Give me the speed of fastmail with the encryption of protonmail, make the two talk to each other out of the box, and actually make something new instead of just the same old thing.

Actually, loan some of your devs to protonmail because both their mobile app and their imap bridge are embarrassing.

Drivers are also often unaware how much time they lose on the last mile, whereas a bike can be parked nearly everywhere, and pedestrians just walk up and in.

Living in a north american city, it was insane how much faster I could get to places compared to drivers in a 10 min window.

That's a nice theory. How does the fact that the FBIs own screenshots of the threads, submitted as evidence, show they posted the comments egging people on?