I think you must have missed the part where I said, "when potentially deserving persons are excluded for reasons that have nothing to do with their merit."
Meritocracy also naively assumes a level playing field, in which everyone has access to the same resources, free time, and common life experiences to draw upon. These factors and more make contributing to open source a daunting prospect for many people, especially women and other underrepresented people.
As an observer without personal experience with any of this from a technical perspective, I can only go by instinct and feeling, my general sense of what, from what I DO see in the world as possibly relating here. I was rather personally stunned, then, to find that perfectly summarized in an earlier post by cytg111, who often seems to think along the lines I do:
"So Linus comes to terms with his mild Aspergers and discovers he has been an ass all these years... and in the wake of this personal growth he tries to remedy some of what he has done.
And this is a problem. Ok."
It seems to me then, that in order to have any objective sense of how to properly evaluate this issue, one would need to know something about whether the idea that only the best code should be included, (this 'technical excellence thingi' being the primary issue,) can actually be objectively evaluated. Can the 'best code' actually be easily differentiated from inferior code, by most coders, or is it, like most things, evaluated on the basis of assumptions that may not be conscious, the condition that causes bigotry. Not knowing what good code or bad code would look like and having never mastered any proficiency myself in that area, I don't feel qualified to evaluate who holds the objective high ground.
What I do think I see is the usual conservative thinkers, the reason blind, in other words, seem generally to be coming down on the notion this new direction in Linux is a threat. Since the conservative brain is magnetize by fear and thus magnifies it, the sky is falling of their prior, to their minds, God given privilege, I do have to say it raises my suspicions we are seeing just another of their more global catastrophic hallucinations.
Wouldn't that be saying that if you base your filter not on ability but ability conferred by past advantage, people with equal or better skills will be filtered out by greater disadvantage to begin with?I'm confused then. They (the people that pushed for this change) are saying that the "deserving people" are being filtered out by their skills/experience.
That given the context is saying that if you base your filter on ability that you are going to maintain the disadvantage gap.
Wouldn't that be saying that if you base your filter not on ability but ability conferred by past advantage, people with equal or better skills will be filtered out by greater disadvantage to begin with?
I don't know if a blind submission process is workable. I got the sense that one needed to sign up for different code projects. I just don't know if this suggestion is practical, in other words. Secondly, I was not arguing that code can't be evaluated objectively. I was saying I do not know that it can be. I am not arguing anything but, the general sense, I HAVE that this issue has roots in the difference between liberal and conservative world views.Two things. Set up a blind submission where the person that wants to add something is unknown to those that are approving the change.
2nd, if your argument is that people can't evaluate code objectively, then how can they evaluate conduct objectively?
Again, I make no such assumptions. I was seeking information I do not have and can't have since I have no experience in coding or how it can or can't be objectively evaluated.That goes to the 2nd. If people are unable to objectively evaluate the code because of bias, how could others be able to do the same? If you think the judges are biased, then the judges of the judges would not be biased?
I don't know if a blind submission process is workable. I got the sense that one needed to sign up for different code projects. I just don't know if this suggestion is practical, in other words.
Secondly, I was not arguing that code can't be evaluated objectively. I was saying I do not know that it can be. I am not arguing anything but, the general sense, I HAVE that this issue has roots in the difference between liberal and conservative world views.
Again, I make no such assumptions. I was seeking information I do not have and can't have since I have no experience in coding or how it can or can't be objectively evaluated.
It seems to me then, that in order to have any objective sense of how to properly evaluate this issue, one would need to know something about whether the idea that only the best code should be included, (this 'technical excellence thingi' being the primary issue,) can actually be objectively evaluated. Can the 'best code' actually be easily differentiated from inferior code, by most coders, or is it, like most things, evaluated on the basis of assumptions that may not be conscious, the condition that causes bigotry. Not knowing what good code or bad code would look like and having never mastered any proficiency myself in that area, I don't feel qualified to evaluate who holds the objective high ground.
I find you to be funny. You simply will not permit me to not know things. I don't know if a blind process is possible. That means I don't know not that I am proclaiming your blind submission thingi to be impossible. I don't know. If I say I don't know it means I don't know and therefore have no idea if what you say is feasible or not. Therefore, since I do not know if it is workable or not, I am under no obligation to be more specific about some argument I never made.This ultimately does not seem to be your issue. There are multiple ways of doing something like a blind submission. Even if you had to sign up, you could still create a blind way of being part of the group. You would need to be more specific in what you think is not workable though.
So, you think its possible, you just don't know how it could be possible to be objective?
I find you to be funny. You simply will not permit me to not know things. I don't know if a blind process is possible. That means I don't know not that I am proclaiming your blind submission thingi to be impossible. I don't know. If I say I don't know it means I don't know and therefore have no idea if what you say is feasible or not. Therefore, since I do not know if it is workable or not, I am under no obligation to be more specific about some argument I never made.
Ah yes, that bit where highly concerned male gamers ruthlessly attacked female game developers under the guise of protecting ethics in gaming journalism.
God Damn. I an not questioning HOW it can be objectively evaluated, I am asking if it can be objectively evaluated since I have no idea if it can or can't be since I have no experience in that area.Yes you did.
You are questioning how code could be objectively evaluated in a general sense.
God Damn. I an not questioning HOW it can be objectively evaluated, I am asking if it can be objectively evaluated since I have no idea if it can or can't be since I have no experience in that area.
I clearly made an argument all right. My argument was that, lacking any ability on my own to know if code can be objectively evaluated, in order for me to come down pro or con in this Linux policy change issue personally, I would need to know that information. However, lacking that information, I gave my gut reaction to what I was seeing instead. As is your wont, you have tried to turn me into your chew toy.If you don't know if its possible/impossible, then you have nothing to say. If you have some idea, ill though out or not, then provide it. If you have a sense that it can't be done but no way to express it then lets talk about it and see if it can be fleshed out.
You cannot say you did not make that argument, as, clearly you did.
If you want to try and hash it out, I would find that enjoyable. It would probably be better in a different thread and or through PM though.
Uh oh quibbles the quibbler strikes again!
I clearly made an argument all right. My argument was that, lacking any ability on my own to know if code can be objectively evaluated, in order for me to come down pro or con in this Linux policy change issue personally, I would need to know that information. However, lacking that information, I gave my gut reaction to what I was seeing instead. As is your wont, you have tried to turn me into your chew toy.
God Damn. I an not questioning HOW it can be objectively evaluated, I am asking if it can be objectively evaluated since I have no idea if it can or can't be since I have no experience in that area.
Yesterday, Slate came out with an article bemoaning the lack of diversity in Google’s ranks. They’re unhappy with the fact that there are too many white and Asian males in Mountain View, California.
Within tech jobs, just 17 percent of employees are female. Ninety-four percent are either white or Asian, while just 1 percent are black and 2 percent Hispanic. The only job category that is balanced in terms of gender is “non-tech” (52 percent men, 48 percent women); racial and ethnic disparities are bad across the board.
By releasing its own data, Google may put pressure on other tech firms to do the same. Maybe then we can start a real conversation—with concrete statistics and numbers—about fixing Silicon Valley’s mentality.
Whenever this kind of article comes out, I just have to roll my eyes. It is absolutely galling to see a journalist/writer/blogger criticize the fact that tech companies are predominantly male, white, and Asian. When is somebody in the media finally going to admit that the reason why Silicon Valley is mostly white and Asian males is because white and Asian males make up the vast majority of engineers and software developers?
A company like Google would love to hire more female and non-Asian minorities as software developers. The problem is there just aren’t that many of them out there to begin with. And there are even fewer who are good enough to work at Google, one of the premier software companies in the world.
Software development is hard. A B.S degree in computer science, the traditional route for prospective developers, requires a solid understanding of advanced math (calculus 1-3 plus discrete mathematics), logic, and sheer, dogged determination it takes to read and comprehend stuff like this:
Image by Jay Sun
To hack it as a CS major in college, you need to have a damn good fundamental base of education, which means you had to be good in high school, especially in the subjects of math and science. And guess which kinds of people are most capable in math and science? White and Asian males.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not arguing that white and Asian males are inherently more intelligent than other kinds of people. There are plenty of sociological and economic reasons that explain white and Asian males are more likely to go into and excel in math and science. But that’s another article for another day.
I’m tired of journalism, English, and liberal arts majors who glance at my profession and say that we’re flawed because there aren’t enough girls and non-Asian minorities in the fold. Trust me, I would love to see more black, Latino, and female developers in my line of work. But not enough of them have both the desire and ability to become CS majors and software developers.
The end result is that we see a highly skewed demographic that works in technology. That’s not Google’s fault. It’s the fault of parents, teachers, and the rest of society that steer girls and non-Asian minorities away from math and science at an early age. If this is a “problem” that you want to see solved, pick up a CS book and learn why an O(n log n) algorithm is more efficient than an O(n^2) algorithm.
Otherwise, software will remain a field dominated by white and Asian males and no amount of ridiculous über-progressive handwringing will change that.
I have a question. Do you note there is no question mark? I did nothing but identify what my question was. What I have also done is remain rather calm and helpful in trying to show you that you don't think through your reactions to things. You read in things that are not there. I think everybody here would enjoy your posts more if you didn't do that so frequently so I also enjoy helping you as best I can,You cant have a sense without have a stance. It might be a stance that you do not hold strongly, but, you are using something to take that position. I don't ultimately care though as if you can somehow articulate and or expand upon that then it could be enjoyable for me. You also did not present it as a question.
I have a question. Do you note there is no question mark? I did nothing but identify what my question was. What I have also done is remain rather calm and helpful in trying to show you that you don't think through your reactions to things. You read in things that are not there. I think everybody here would enjoy your posts more if you didn't do that so frequently so I also enjoy helping you as best I can.
Nice article but it has no bearing on whether code one piece of code can be objectively be evaluated as the superior product to another.This may help
https://thoughtcatalog.com/jay-sun/2014/05/silicon-valley-is-male-white-and-asian-for-a-reason/
Silicon Valley Is Male, White, And Asian For A Reason
I am not feeling I am in a contest. I don't object to your counterpoints to my posts because I feel attacked or threatened. I feel they very often have nothing to do with what I say, that you are jousting at windmills of your own creation. I do not reject your reaching out to me. My problem is that you don't see what I do as reaching out to you when I think that is what I was doing.This is a problem you have. I am not trying to win or beat you in any way. Given how I have reached out to you in the past, do you really think I would want to attack you?
Nice article but it has no bearing on whether code one piece of code can be objectively be evaluated as the superior product to another.