orless

Yes I get it that he may have stepped over other moderators, I can understand this. But how is that in violation with Code of Conduct, exactly? Just don't say it is "Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting".

https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md

What I'm completely missing in this discussion of Code of Conduct violation is a specific list of which actions violated which clauses in this Code of Conduct.

I see a list of complaints, but for an outsider it is really hard to follow why these actions are considered to be CoC violations.

Take this, for instance:

"In [moderation repository discussion], Rod’s first action was to apologize to a contributor who had been repeatedly moderated. Rod did not discuss the issue with other members of the CTC/TSC first. The result undermined the moderation process as it was occurring. It also undercut the authority as moderators of other CTC/TSC members."

Do you know how this reads? A case is being made against a "toxic" person who "repeatedly breaks CoC" and the first complaint against him is that he apologized to a contributor? Really? I just don't get this.

To be honest, for those not (already) involved in this whole debate, it is very difficult to make an informed opinion here.

What I see is a screenshot of a GitHub issue (https://twitter.com/ohhoe/status/899748838302302212) which was already redacted and does no longer provide any links. Tweet in support of "anti-CoC article" is there (https://twitter.com/rvagg/status/887652116524707841) but that alone would not assert a "harmful person" in my opinion.

I understand the fork is not on political reasons which may be very well grounded. But I don't think they are not explained to the public well enough. There must be a clear answer to "Why should I care?" but there is not. This will probably lead to ignorance and dismissal.

You can increase the percentage of women without discriminating in hires, i.e. still "hiring the best people for the job". By making your company more desirable for women and thus increasing the percentage of women candidates. You can achieve this with different means like running an recruitment advertisement campaign targeted at women or not tolerating sexist behaviour or with strong commitment to work-life balance and so on.

You may say that "making your company more desirable for women" is discrimination as it makes a distinction in favor of women based on gender. Technically that would be correct. But this will not be discrimination in hiring. I.e. from the given candidate pool women will not be chosen over men because they are women.

This will not be hiring women intentionally. So the original statement in discussion may be correct.

This does not have to be gender discrimination. You can achieve this by making your company a better environment for women. This will get you more women in interviews and you'll end up with more female hires.

Technically.

Correct, recruiting women intentionally, not hiring intentionally.

It does not matter if 80% of engineers are men, it matters if 80% of engineers interviewing with your company are men.

The company can try to attract more women to interviews thus changing the 80%. Then you will hire more women, still selecting best people for the job. And it's not "hiring women intentionally" on my book.

How did you learn Greek? Only from parents/grandparents or did you have additional lessons?

We're native Russians and live in Germany for quite a while (17+ years). My children (8 and 5yo) were born here and we're raising them bilingual. They went/go to normal kindergarden/school and have natural exposure to the German language. At home, we speak Russian with children, unless there is a non-Russian-speaker present. The older son additionally goes to the Russian school on Saturdays. We often talk to our parents (who live in Russia) over videochat. Me and my wife are fluent in German, my wife is even Master of Arts in German language and literature studies). We parents also speak English and some French. A few years ago we even had a habit to speak a different language (Russian/German/English) each day, just for practice. We dropped the habit when we got children, completely switching to Russian at home.

I would say that our experience largely overlaps with what I read in the article. Raising bilingual child is hard, "truly bilingual" (whatever the measure for "truly" is) is even harder. But it is probably easier if you're living in a foreign country.

Judging from the older son - yes, his vocabulary in German is somewhat smaller compared to his German peers, but not significantly. His Russian vocabulary is probably also smaller compared to Russian kids, but more than that - it is different. He learned the language primarily from us parents, there are almost no Russian friends around, so his language is very adult, I'd even say academic. For instance, he normally does not use the word "круто", Russian equivalent for "cool", he'd rather say "remarkable". His grammar in Russian, is, however, heavily influenced by German. Prime example are reflexive verbs. For instance, for "I'm wrong" you'd probably say "ich habe mich geirrt" in German - literally "I have erred myself". Note the usage of the reflexive pronoun "mich" ("myself"). You don't use it in Russian as reflexion is encoded in the verb suffix itself - "я ошибся". But my son sometimes still uses the reflexive pronoun in Russian, saying something like "я меня ошибся" which is not correct and sounds pretty funny.

Over the years we've estabilished a small set of rules for language. Speak Russian in the family, unless a non-Russian-speaker is present. Answer in the language in which you were addressed. Do not mix languages. It seems to work pretty well for us.

The article seems to take mixing of languages quite easy. We see this as one of the biggest challenges. It is way too easy to start using German words where Russian translations are cumbersome or unusual. (Prime example is "Termin" - "appointment". In Russian there's just no good translation for this word. The closest is probably "назначенное время" - "the appointed time", but that has a completely different connotation.) It may be not sound so bad if you mix Romance/Germanic languages, but if you mix Russian and German, the result is absolutely horrible. You end up with a language which neither "pure" Russian nor "pure" German speaker will understand. You'll need to know both languages to understand the mixture.

So this is probably the rule where we are most strict and persistent. Do not, never, mix languages. If you don't know a word, ask, we'll help. If it's too complicated, say it in German, we'll help to translate.

It is hard to keep the language and it is easy to loose it. We know families which lost Russian in the next generation. Their children understand some Russian but answer and German. I think this is a pity. Second language has great value, it takes so much effort to learn it as an adult, so it is unforgivable to loose this opportunity in the childhood.

An earlier thread:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14669626

Someone who's experienced and whom you trust to tell you "everybody is cooking with water".

> check if a user with the said email exists, if it does - return it, if it doesn't create it and return it" ... Mongo - not so easily

Can't you easily do it with upsert in Mongo?

> At first they pay more than German students for the same semester

Citation needed. Never heard of any differences in fees for foreigners.

> Then they hardly get access to the public student dorms

Not in my experience. Dorms are full of foreigh students.

> and are put 3-6 people in old, unclean apartments far away from university (partly without public transport access)

"Are put"? What you describe is a "WG" ("Wohngemeinschaft" roughly "living community") which is simply a co-rental. So nobody "is put" there, you search and rent what you can find. WGs are generally recommended for foreign students because it allows better socializing and integration.

> EACH of them pays as much as a German would pay for the whole apartment

What you state is that a foreigner typically pays 3x-6x compared to a native, which is false. The price for 1 room in a WG is normally somewhat lower than for a 1-room-appartment.

> Old dudes (teachers, profs, organizers) dating barely legal girls in exchange for favors also is accepted practice.

University typically starts at the age of 21-23. Since you call this "barely legal" this points out that you either not know what you are talking about or intentionally make false claims.

I live and work in Germany since 2001, I've worked as a researcher at a university institution 2001-2004 and knew a lot of foreign students, also as close friends. Your post is not compatible with the reality that I know.

I came to Germany in 2001 to work as a scientist knowing no German at all. It worked out pretty very well for me.

In Baden-Württemberg, KIT (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology) is the "place to go" in computer science.

Many big companies (like SAP) are totally fine with English only. I know a lot of people working in Germany for many years already, almost without speaking a word in German.

Seems nowadays we need a kind of "remove.me" service to quickly remove your account from certain services.

I'm not sure where I stated that Spring forces "to make business decisions on scope of different domains or interaction between them that might lead to strong coupling and low modularity".

Somehow I don't share your experience. What are the problem with DI and debugging? I had a lot WTF moments with automagical things, but not with pure DI.

It is only generic if you completely drop the context of the discussion (Spring and dependency injection). My point is that Spring brings DI/IoC concepts which help build healthy projects.

Google is definitely not a benchmark for interviews. From what I experienced, they must have a huge rate on false negatives. You can only afford this if you're Google (or that level).

Whether IoC is reasonable or not does not depend on the number of classes in the project. It is still a useful pattern even if you have, like, 3 classes (component A using implementation B of the interface Ib). It's just if you have only few components, you may want to wire them manually in maybe 10 lines of code instead of dropping in Spring JARs.

"... so usually these giant balls of mud are the result of project management and design mistakes, not the failure of the tool."

It is the failure of concepts so if the tool brings the right concepts, it helps avoid such design mistakes in the first place.

I work with Spring and Java EE professionally, prefer Spring wherever I can. Also use Spring for private/side projects (if not plain Java). But I'll talk about Spring here.

I see two import aspects that Spring provide: first, dependency injection/inversion of control as basis and then a way to 1000+1 things "right".

Dependency injection is important because it provides a healthy way to compose an application from many components or services. It's not exclusive to Spring of course, you can do DI/IoC without Spring (even without any framework), but it's baked into the very nature of Spring.

Next, Spring provides "right" way to do a lot of more-or-less standard things. You have solutions for ORM, REST interfaces, security, batch processing and a thousand more tasks. From my experience, Spring solutions are mostly good or very good, at least much better than I'd design in a limited time frame. This gets me faster to the working solution.

I also don't thing that Spring brings that much of a complexity overhead. Once you got past the first threshold (like, you can assemble you application from a few components) you're good to go. Ok, you will eventually need to learn concepts of individual Spring components (like ORM or security), but you'd need to learn them anyway.

Eventually you'll need to fight Spring here and there, I won't deny it. This is normally related to the "automagical" stuff like autowiring or autoconfigurations - things which make your work easier in 98% but might make you crazy for the rest 2%.

Here's an interesting case from the open-source world.

Apache holds the "Apache Maven" trademark. Apache Maven is a build management/automation tool which uses a lot of "plugins".

The peculiar part is that Apache won't let you name your plugin "maven-<foobar>-plugin" whereas "<foobar>-maven-plugin" is allowed. The wording is:

"Calling it maven-<yourplugin>-plugin (note "Maven" is at the beginning of the plugin name) is strongly discouraged since it's a reserved naming pattern for official Apache Maven plugins maintained by the Apache Maven team with groupId org.apache.maven.plugins. Using this naming pattern is an infringement of the Apache Maven Trademark."

https://maven.apache.org/guides/plugin/guide-java-plugin-dev...

To be clear, we're talking about technical naming here, similar to how you'd name a package or an executable file. These names are actually composite, the full plugin name consists of a "groupId" like "com.acme.foo" and "artifactId" like "<foobar>-maven-plugin". For non-"org.apache.maven.plugins" plugins groupdId is mandatory, so "com.acme.foo:maven-foobar-plugin" makes it pretty clear that it's not an Apache development.

I'm a plugin developer who had the bad luck naming my plugin "maven-<foobar>-plugin" before this convention was established. There's an established user base, a lot of documentation, StackOverflow tags etc. There exists also an alternative plugin named "<foobar>-maven-plugin".

But still once in a while I get contacted by someone (from Apache or totally unrelated) who educates me on how the name of my plugin infringes on the Apache Maven Trademark.

I strongly disagree with this and my position was ever since that if Apache wants to enforce this trademark, they are totally welcome to send me a "Cease and Desist" letter. I'll print it out, hang it on the wall and then shut down the project.

"The presence of hidden rules..." except they are not hidden. IANAL and don't have link at hand, but there was recently a legally pretty well based argument in a case of a player who had an assitant able of recognizing cards from the back pattern.

"you're only pushing the buttons" except they were not only pushing a button, they were also recording sequences and sending them abroad for analysis.

But as you directly say that exploiting the flaws of a slot machine is not cheating and that it's fair, I guess I won't be able to persuade you otherwise.

Registration per se is not harmful or restrictive - except that some (figuratively speaking) poor developer in Russia now has to deal with a four-page form in German which isn't even really suitable for software.

The problem is not the registration, the problem is that BNetzA considers software to be "telecommunication services" and thus subject to regulation. There are 152 paragraphs in the TKG (https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/tkg_2004/index.html), how much would it cost a software vendor to comply with everything? Or how much would it cost even to find out what a software vendor would have to comply with? There was a pretty good reason Google went to court over the question whether GMail is a "telecommunication service" or not (https://www.noerr.com/de/newsroom/News/gmail-ist-ein-telekom...). Google lost, by the way.

From the other hand, the list of "providers" includes a lot of organisations like "Antennengemeinschaft Schreiersgrün e.V" - roughly translated as "Antenna community of the village Schreiersgrün (registered society)".

My argument is that even small organized crime groups were capabale of sophisticated operations so it's absolutely not far-fetched to assume that they may be able to implement end-to-end encryption apps. Whether this "organized crime" is "wrong" does not make much difference. It might be even easier to find people to implement it as not many would have moral issues.

Speaking of moral issues, cheating on casino is pretty much off limits on my personal moral compass. That the attack was possible within the normal mode of operation does not make it less of a fraud. Imagine if the casino would reverse-engineer a slot machine and find a way to abuse it within the normal mode of operation, making odds (even more) in their favor. That would be fraud, plain and simple, and I don't see why a player should be held to a different standard.

You are absolutely right, not everything unlawful is wrong. But I fail to see which benefit we as a society would have by allowing exploitation of technical deficiencies in slot machines for profit. It is a crime and it is wrong in my book.

What is the real problem?