Who would have suspected this was racially motivated?
Not to defend any actions by anyone, but a keynote is an unusual place to talk about experimental feature a language is considering (unless it's a small component of a bigger update/forecast). That said once the decision was made they should have gone through with it.
My general feeling is that keynotes are for "setting the tone" of the conference/conference day.
I watch a lot of conference videos, but I don't attend many conferences, I don't get value out of the so-called "Hallway track" and I dislike commercial air travel which limits where I could go anyway. I like where I live, that's why I bought it, so remaining here is great.
If your language isn't intending to just remain stuck forever in its current state, a conference is a reasonable place to explain a proposed direction so that other people know where you think it should go. Not every talk has to be speculative, but a speculative keynote seems fine to me so long as it's obvious that we're not in an alternate dimension where this works in Rust already, which I see no sign JeanHyde was intending.
Then you look at the data, and in this case come to the conclusion, "no, it was not a factor."
That seems healthy and normal, it's not outrage bait to acknowledge that yes, sometimes minorities are at a disadvantage or are under represented.
It's just as fallacious to say "of course race was a factor" as it is to say "of course race was not a factor". Much better to ask openly, evaluate the data, and make an informed conclusion.
What does “under represented” mean, in a small, hopefully merit based, org?
There might be reasonable reasons! The existence of an under represented group isn't wrong, it's just a time to ask, "why is it this way?"
To be clear, I'm not saying there should be no under represented groups. But if there are, we should just be deliberate about understanding why. Are there systemic reasons where merit isn't being considered?
What gives you the impression I would want that? I said, quite clearly, that deviations from the norm are worth asking questions about, but those deviations can be fine.
Do you think they should be forced?
Quite the opposite, I believe. Since a keynote is seen by a dramatically larger slice of the audience, it's a good slot for talks meant to provoke thoughts and discussion, even if that discussion isn't necessarily one you agree with.
Rust is a great language with a good macro system that gets used more than it needs to than if it had a stronger type system.
To succeed at improving the language, contributors must strike a balance between approaching the PL research frontier while remaining a practical language.
ThePHD’s talk is a take on that trajectory that appears Pareto-optimal. It’s a really good subject for a keynote, I think.
For the last several years, there are many people and groups who have gotten tremendous positive feedback from being a victim. So, many people would jump to this conclusion for outrage, sympathy, and signaling their virtue.
Thankfully, it seems it may be coming to an end now since it’s disruptive and at odds with reality.
I hope you are right. I'm less optimistic.
Just making shit up to get mad about.