"This is *NOT REMOTELY* a controversial opinion except on Weird Far Left Twitter 2017" doesn't sound like a question.
but the idea that you cant even a-politically pose a question about biology - i dont really get the logic there. seems antiscientific
I also don't think that's bad - you can say blatantly racist things with that template, and I'm ok with those things not allowed to be said in lots of contexts.
Truth is, programming was women-dominated in its inception, but was taken over by men when programming the computer became more prestigious. Whatever biological factors at play here, they're completely overridden by sociological factors.
Who could have guessed a site composed nearly of techie guys would have problems identifying misogyny. This website is trash.
Let's not forget that the first generation of programmers was mostly women, until the job became high-status enough that men could take over. Takeaway: it's all bullshit.
wasn't that there were a lot of women working as operators, but that job went away along with the punch cards.
He may perceive his own appetite for programming as being linked to some form of autism. Because, well, computers are not people, so it's nice to avoid people.
Given that there is a proven gender discrepancy in the distribution of autistic disorders, it's not completely absurd to imagine that men could biologically be more attracted to working with computers than women.
Careful though, I'm not telling you that playing video games as a kid makes you autistic, I'm telling you that doing so can make an individual adopt behaviors previously thought to define/be exclusive to autism.
If it is by nature (being gay is generally accepted to be by nature) means that it cannot be changed by nuture.
The trans issue is currently the hot frontier of this debate.
Could these hormone influences reward centers differ in social rewards, or for human interaction? Computers are not human. Maybe [1], but don't expect much research proving it one way or the other.
[1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/01/190130175604.h...
[1] https://www.history.com/articles/coding-used-to-be-a-womans-...
I don't know if it's true at all...
If it's biological or not is kind of hard to prove without unethical experiments.
I don't know about you, but there does not exist any amount of technical achievement that will make me brush off sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, or anything else. If you are going to be disrespectful to me or people I care about, we cannot work together, period.
By "political correctness" people often mean "the basic requirement to treat your fellow humans respectfully", and that's an incredibly low bar.
This statement, a basic biological fact, is now used as evidence of someone being sexist? To folks that think like this: I suggest you recalibrate your models of interacting with reality because you've gone wildly off track and are about to fall off a cliff.
> looks inside
> opinion
He literally tells you that it's his bellyfeel: "I believe it is likely that (...)". Come on...
I'm confused is it opinion or fact? Can't be both, can it?
Where are you getting this from? As far as I'm aware biologists, practicing or not, are not particularly concerned with the study of human behavior.
And I’d say that misogyny falls under “sexist” in the list of problematic stuff
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRT4vNEUIAEJgP3.jpg "Interest is not the same as ability."
It's the first MOTHERFUCKING LINE, you absolute lying cunt.
> It doesn't help that all males currently under the age of 40 were raised to be supercucks
https://x.com/Jonathan_Blow/status/1854708962462982465
Dear lord, yeah, this is why I completely tuned him out years ago. Somewhat ironically it's the Blow fans in this thread that are cherry picking his comments. He's way too online so says things like this all the time, and it's the fans that are in here demanding a smoking gun comment that somehow proves he's awful rather than telling him "sometimes it's ok to stfu" to comments like this that enable and echo chamber him.
And I say this as a fan of Braid and The Witness (at least of the first couple of layers of puzzles...as you go deeper, just like with Braid, you find more and more self-indulgent windbaggery that should have been on the cutting room floor).
https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1jh275b/ove...
And everything in that post are bad faith links to secondary reactionary sources.
I don't really know much about Jonathan Blow or Jai or really follow it but it's astonishing to me that anyone could possibly take anything from that toxic subreddit with any sort of seriousness.
I've gotta disagree. By "political correctness" people generally mean to not saying or doing anything that could be perceived as offensive. Especially against collectives perceived to be vulnerable.
For example, in the tiny paragraph above I've absolutely respected my fellow humans, but it can be considered offensive because you can suppose I might be looking to justify prejudiced attitudes.
For an even more evident example, political correctness has to do with the political climate and identity (as you mention: sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, or anything else, as well as referring to "those groups"). That is very much detached from treating fellow humans respectfully.
> Trump was my preferred President in the last election cycle but nothing will make me hate him faster than this banana republic shit.
(replying to a post complaining on the direction of government contracts/subsidies under the Trump administration)
> Are you kidding? He is the best President we have had in my entire life, by far. It's a miracle. I just hope it doesn't abruptly go bad.
(In reply to a post ruing Trump’s “showmanship” and wishing that the Republican Party had produced a “legit” candidate.)
Maybe for you. For people like me, voting for Trump is completely unacceptable, in particular after the experiences with the first Trump administration.
I wanted to substantiate this, but I couldn't find the clips. I did find that Jonathan Blow tweeted "Nature is healing" after Trump won, so you can get an idea for where his politics are from that. (Still love the guy, even if politically he's your angry uncle.)
But what is neutral to someone is not inherently neutral to others. Or even if it’s neutral to them, it’s still a form of political expression.
I think the lack of this distinction has led to much, and very painful and bitter online discussion, whereas people in a tribalist political mindset try to pigeonhole others based on a throwaway statement into either a friendly or enemy camp.
I broadly agree with the value that competence is more important in politeness or vibes, especially in people who build critical infrastructure - in fact it is a very very welcome property of these people that they care about things on a level that seems unreasonable to me.
This is true basically of everything critically important in life. One example is security. Everyone enjoys the privilege of using a web browser to visit any website and not have their PC compromised thanks to a variety of measures created by people who care intensely about these things.
If the crash testing on my car was done by people who sought out some amicable middle ground so as to not upset engineers who have to redo the frame of the car after a test gone horribly wrong, and accounting, who gets the bill for it, I would be sweating bullets every time I had to drive anywhere.
Politics imo is the worst sort of tribalism - the idea that people must be sorted into totally disjunct groups who are the bitter enemies of each other - thankfully doesn't translate into practice. Two people might root for sports teams that are eternal rivals, one person's favorite food might be hated by the other, they might disagree on what the important issues are, or what should be done about them, but thankfully that doesn't necessarily stop them from being the best of friends.
That's why there's a blanket ban on discussing politics in every place where people are expected to maintain amicable civility towards each other - family dinners, the workplace, gatherings with friends and acquaintances etc., with everyone usually getting antsy whenever 'politics' is brought up.
No it's not. Politics is the negotiation between two or more people who want conflicting outcomes.
> they might disagree on what the important issues are, or what should be done about them, but thankfully that doesn't necessarily stop them from being the best of friends.
The Republicans are led by white supremacists and they hate me for being transgender. Please stop carrying water for them. Politics matters and shouldn't be dismissed as "sports" or "tribalism"
> competence is more important in politeness or vibes,
I've been a professional programmer for about fifteen years. You could stand to be more polite.
I apologize if I come across as impolite, but I assure you that has not been my intention. Please understand that that there is no hidden meaning behind my posts.
In fact I enjoy the fact that Blow can talk shop about things he disagrees with (such as enterprise software with call stacks 50 levels deep).
The implication was pretty clear to me, in that by reducing politics down to being things reasonable people can always disagree over, you're giving actual bad actors in the space too much credit.
This is utterly false. At best you can claim you’ve heard of a few homophobic racists who happen to be republican . I’ve met just as many who happen to be democrat
Just to easily refute one of your 2 claims. Non-white republicans demographics is growing, not shrinking
Simple example: They want ot fund the police
Their POV: make everyone safer
Another POV: fund bad people
Their POV isn't wrong, it's just different.
Other people have proven he does.
So either you must concede that your initial rebuke was based on insufficient information, in which case why try and act like he has said nothing of concern.
Or his world views fit within your own view and are thus deemed neutral.
His comments are not a matter of opinion. And opinion that extends to affecting the lives of others , including supporting those who affect the lives of others, is very much politics.
So your favourite food is not politics but if you try and affect change that affects someone else’s favourite food, it is inherently political. If you support someone who starts affecting my favourite food, that too is political.
I don’t know which of the two happened here, maybe both, but if we’re mentioning one let’s also mention the other.
Edit: just read some tweets and I think I know which one it is XD you were underselling it.
That is 2021 mentality, and the world is over it.
I will still play Jonathan Blow's next game, but I think he is a bit of a hack outside of game design.
Here's a good article that's basically a summary of events (as well as teaser for a book): https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/from-our-lab-to-theirs-...
Its not credible: two viral lineages emerged from the market ~1 week apart before the world knew what covid was; they differ by 2 nucleotides; mutation rates are 1e-6 per base per passage; doubling time is about half a week. A group of sick animals better explains the phylogenetics w/ these constraints. Everything points against lab leak: location, timing, and genetics.
It really boils down to: do you trust a brutal communist dictatorship that has been attacking the West asymmetrically and wants to invade its neighbours to be honest?
Multiple Western governments believe it was a lab leak and coincidentally I'm sure, relations with China have been quite bad since.
If you want to deny sequence data that predate worldwide recognition and controversy related to COVID-19, OK. But the origin question can never be answered with this denial.
As in, you get to be cranky as long as you're arguing for the highest quality solution