Female founders who've had a great 2016

Re:Female founders who've had a great 2016 by facepalm on Tuesday December 27, 2016 @04:14PM (#13266234)

My question is/was: do you think sexism is the main thing that differentiates tech from other non-routine cognitive professions? That economists created such a classification is pretty irrelevant. The point about the broadness was that if it is so broad, you might as well take all professions and get a different result.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Female founders who've had a great 2016 by tomlock on Tuesday December 27, 2016 @07:41PM (#13267561)

I think your original argument was worded "only thing" not "main thing". It feels like you've changed your argument slightly.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Female founders who've had a great 2016 by facepalm on Wednesday December 28, 2016 @11:09AM (#13271386)

Are you sure you can not decipher the argument I am making? Feel free to either replace "only thing" with "main thing" in my first comment, or "main thing" with "only thing" in the later comment, to make it consistent enough for you to parse.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Female founders who've had a great 2016 by tomlock on Wednesday December 28, 2016 @05:46PM (#13274329)

"Only" and "main" have two significantly different meanings so you actually stated two different arguments.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Female founders who've had a great 2016 by facepalm on Wednesday December 28, 2016 @06:05PM (#13274446)

Sorry then my English isn't good enough for such nuances. Maybe replace all instances of "main" and "only" with "significant" or something like that?

I think with some goodwill, you could see the point I was trying to make.

[ Parent | on HN ]