tnone

Congratulations, you've just discovered the truth behind the entire women in tech moral panic.

This post compares the allegations with the harmless actual quotes:

http://atom-morgan.github.io/in-defense-of-douglas-crockford

This appears to have been the instigator:

https://twitter.com/nexxylove/status/771503661956501504

You say that, when the alt right is an artificial internet meme, while leftist dogma rules over universities and continues to go after people's jobs for wrongthink.

Vitriol is clearly a bad measure when subjective interpretation rules are becoming official policy. Even Twitter now has special treatment for particular groups enshrined in its policy. You can be as vitriolic as you want, as long as it's against the "correct" group.

They learned to self censor, lest they be shouted down and branded for heresy by the left wing ideologues with an axe to grind.

Why is it people have so much trouble spelling Breitbart consistently, let alone right?

Just like a creationist, when you finally stop going around in circles, you end up questioning the motivations of your opponent as a shaming attack, even as you insist they are not your business.

This is what religion looks like.

Accusations like "racist" mainly flow towards pre-approved victim categories and are commonly used as a blunt weapon in oppression olympics. In those cases, there is no acceptable defense against it, because the reply will be along the lines of "omg, this racist is trying to excuse their racism". Guilty until proven super-guilty.

That's why this gets people's bristles up, because it reeks of the "reverse racism isn't real" and "racism requires structural oppression" dogma that has jumped the gap from post modern academia to tech by way of HR departments, always enforced by carefully worded but unmistakably our-way-or-the-highway totalism. If someone wants to be an arbiter of what is right without considering what happens when they are wrong, it's not justice they're after.

Outside of the Anglo Saxon sphere, this isn't such a big issue... Yet.

Then maybe the problem is that the web boxes people in and disconnects them from the most basic feature of computers: the ability to modify your tools with your tools.

Funny how at the same time, those spouting this tired refrain scream bloody murder when this logic is applied to themselves rather than the usual punching bags.

"Never" is a strawman, but I imagine that would be a world where academia doesn't feel a need to protect its students from ideas, and where people of different viewpoints can work alongside each other instead of shaming groupthink into existence.

Maybe it wouldn't be such a dud if there was the possibility of using any of this outside the walled garden of filling your house only with Apple products.

Once upon a time apple.com advertised their OS by showing off what you could create with it and how it was based on open technology. Now it's just about how the computer and its flock of gadgets can entertain and do your thinking for you, if only you give in to the mothership.

Empathic is a preference, and judging from your post, one you'd apply selectively and one way.

We're the people _you_ don't want to work with, because our communication style is different.

Nobody's required to stick up for you, your attempts at shaming not withstanding.

I hate these social judean warriors.

Probably, especially if you limit it to practicing Christians. You know the diversity brigade doesn't really want people like that to attend.

This is starting to look more and more like someone's personal hangups turned into vendetta, using the nearest available excuses and target.

No they'll pick on men for being virgins, for being gay, for being cucked on, for being effeminate and weak, and so on. That's how you target masculinity, because masculinity is something men have to earn via proxy traits, whereas femininity is something to be lost.

It's equally vicious, but it's not seen as equally cruel. And the idea that all trolls are male doesn't hold. Women are far more cruel to each other than men are to them. Somehow the Mean Girls of the internet never get considered.

In fluid dynamic sims for example. Water level can be positive or negative. Grids of data can represent more than colors in images.

I'm really curious to hear your justification for calling this a matter of accountability, considering he was set up so that tape could be filmed, and all it shows is consensual sex. People shouldn't have sex? Polyamory is morally wrong? Celebrities do not deserve privacy? What?

The tape was ruled not suitable for publishing a long time ago, when Gawker published "A Judge Told Us to Take Down Our Hulk Hogan Sex Tape Post. We Won't."

They were suitably outraged over leaked female celebrity nudes of course.

It's difficult to link to shadowbanned comments, so...

Basically anything to do with the cult of diversity. The double standards and refusal to acknowledge charlatans is impenetrable. It's no problem to demonize approved groups of people based on hearsay, but considered harassment to point out fraud or lies from protected demographics.

That's a holy cow that HN has slowly but surely adopted. The response is usually a kafkatrap: accuse the poster of being dishonest, and treat refusal as an admission of guilt.

If no explicit statement can be picked at, you get accused of "dog whistling".