Note: I could have facts wrong but this is the general impression left which is just as important for respondents on this survey item.
I'd be happy to expand upon that if you would like.
That's not even accounting for how perhaps the focus exclusively on American issues could leave the the rest of the world feeling less welcome?
If you look at the data in aggragate, I believe you'll find that there's a disparity even when controlling for factors like that.
> But in countries like the U.K. where one third of their police killings in a whole year are a terrorist who was in the middle of a stabbing spree? That’s just ideological fashion.
British police don't carry firearms in the general case so obviously police deaths aren't a large issue for British BLM, but there's still very much a racial disparity in justice system encounters that still exists despite controlling for the kinds of factors you listed previously. Different sentences for the same crime kind of stuff.
I’m almost certain that this isn’t the case. I think the crime rate alone accounts for the whole disparity and then some. I’ll dig up sources when I have more time. My best steel man is that police are profiling blacks in their killings; blacks do commit more crimes, but whether or not a particular black person commits crimes may not feature strongly in whether or not he is likely to be killed by police. In any case, the more important detail is that we didn’t even talk about it. Anyone who suggested as much was immediately dismissed as a racist; the media never even entertained the question.
> British police don't carry firearms in the general case so obviously police deaths aren't a large issue for British BLM, but there's still very much a racial disparity in justice system encounters that still exists despite controlling for the kinds of factors you listed previously. Different sentences for the same crime kind of stuff.
Perhaps, but it’s very strange to me that the U.K. would respond to subtler forms of alleged discrimination the similarly to how the US responded to graphic videos of black men being killed by police. I won’t argue the point since it’s all speculation either way.
It makes sense to millions of Americans, including those who are not directly impacted by it.
If by "protest" you mean the violence that has sprouted up at these events, then no, that makes no sense at all for the cause itself. But it does make perfect sense for those who want to delegitimize it, e.g., https://www.startribune.com/police-umbrella-man-was-a-white-...
Why would a non-US visitor feel unwelcome seeing that? Why w
And as far as it being a political message, that's also a matter of branding. It's been actively demonized by one particular party, whereas most of its supporters likely consider it to be apolitical -- simply about social justice.
I think you have you answer in there - anyone who watches/reads Fox News or similar thinks that BLM is something very different than you think it is.
You can choose to write off anyone in the world who watches conservative TV, but you can't call yourself welcoming for doing so.
As a non-US visitor with some knowledge of history I am extremely put off by the banner supporting an extremist communist organization, like it is nothing. Just have a look at their original manifesto that is now removed from their website (wayback machine has it).
Some folks actively avoid politics, and seeing it at Go doesn't increase my confidence in the judgement of the folks leading Go.
The "you're actively with us, otherwise you're against us" mindset must learn nuance. Not everybody has to be political all of the time.
Of course, modern critical theory would tell you that it's only by the result of privilege that one can afford to remain apolitical. If you're not actively antiracist, you're racist, and so on.
What a world we live in.
It's true that some companies might do diversity poorly and hire solely to hit diversity numbers. I don't personally feel good about that. However, in practice I've seen companies that focus on diversity adopt the practice of putting more effort into reaching out to diverse candidates, but have the exact same hiring process & hiring bar applied to them. Those reasonable companies don't make the news -- after all, the unreasonable stories tend to be the ones that get attention.
Again, it's not to say that your concern never happens. However, framing diversity as if it was fundamentally at odds with competence, especially in a completely unrelated thread about a programming language, does a disservice to both diversity _and_ competence.
The diversity you're talking about uses the definition everyone is familiar with from English.
The diversity Black Lives Matter is talking about is a technical term with the definition coming from Critical Race Theory, which defines whites as the least diverse categorically due to historically injustices against BIPOC folx.
> The idea of focusing diversity isn't at odds with focusing on competence
It is explicitly such, as stated by the movement you defend.
> The diversity Black Lives Matter is talking about is a technical term with the definition coming from Critical Race Theory, which defines whites as the least diverse categorically due to historically injustices against BIPOC folx.
Can you provide a citation for that from a CRT source, not a political opponent to CRT?
> > The idea of focusing diversity isn't at odds with focusing on competence
> It is explicitly such, as stated by the movement you defend.
I think you're misunderstanding the major points of Ehmke and others. It's not that we should give up on competency being a driving factor, but instead that the set of organizational tools grouped together as "meritocracy" don't actually make competency the final end result because of the biases those tools impart. "Not a great culture fit" and all that.
This is in the context of open-source projects where identity does not matter (and is often not known).
Golang is an extremely simple language (a good thing, IMHO!), but that means two things:
1) a simple language may lack safety features (e.g. anyone can ignore an err or forget to check for nil pointers), which lead to the need to compensate in other ways, which leads to:
2) the bikeshedding bar is very low in simple languages, and it can lead to institutionalizing opinions in the form of styleguide gospels or other types of "improvements" (think overuse of patterns in Java, another relatively simple language), to the point where the institutional rules put off newcomers who were expecting a breath of fresh air but instead find an "old boys club" (in the sense that they don't feel they have leverage to discuss whatever rules have been set).
I also see this phenomenon in other areas, for example, in Javascript, eslint/prettier are supposed to curb bikeshedding, yet there's an awkward dynamic when a new employee wants a new rule, and what follows is 2 hours of bikeshedding with the old guard.
Mozilla got it right on that one.
Setting aside "right" from a technical perspective, the Prettier response to the issue was very, very disappointing.
I wonder why that is.