• Tyler D (unregistered)

    Dear Sebastian,

    She was flirting with you. You idiot!

  • (cs) in reply to anon
    anon:
    You know, I see a lot more MEN's names show up here, so I will assume that most inept programmers are men.
    Given that most programmers are men, it is logical that most inept programmers are men.
    anon:
    Why is it always gotta go sexist when a woman's name is mentioned? I've seen a shitload of incredibly incompetent men get promoted into positions they didn't deserve, & nobody said anything about their looks.
    It's the nature of the game, anon. Women have been using their looks and men's susceptibility to get what they want since the dawn of humanity, and today is no different. Don't be surprised if it gets taken for granted, because it is a fact of life.

    Addendum (2007-09-11 14:09): Think of it as a trade-off for never having to buy your own drinks in a bar, and being able to get out of a traffic ticket by smiling and hiking the skirt up a little. Men will never know what this is like.

  • barfman (unregistered)

    "So with all the screwups and bad data, the company responded appropriately. By promoting Megan to the Lead Developer for the whole department."

    Yup, seen that happen before... And let me tell you, nothing, NOTHING, pisses me off more!!!!!

    You can flush that department down the toilet...

  • (cs) in reply to Rich
    Rich:
    misha:
    There is a big push in academia at the moment to make maths, science etc more attractive to female undergraduates, but I'm not sure how much success it's meeting with.

    It is apparently being fairly succesful in causing males to leave maths, science etc in droves. There's something of a crisis at the moment apparently.

    I'm aware that there is a lack of enrollment in the "hard" sciences, certainly in the UK not sure about elsewhere. I find it hard to believe this is because Unis are trying to attract women. "Oh noes, there are gonna be chicks on this course, I'd better choose Art History instead!"

    Rich:
    Aim to encourage the best and brightest might be a plan. As long as there are no artificial obstructions, the rest will sort itself out.
    It would be nice if this were the case, but it seems to me that this approach tends to maintain the status quo. I'm not generally in favor of positive discrimination, but the present situation seems to drive away the "best and brightest" if they happen to have a vajayjay [Seejay, is that actually a word in common usage? I'm going to have to start using that one]. Not disagreeing with you Rich, just that there *are* artificial (or at least societal) obstructions, and they need to be dealt with.
  • (cs) in reply to misha
    misha:
    but the present situation seems to drive away the "best and brightest" if they happen to have a vajayjay [Seejay, is that actually a word in common usage? I'm going to have to start using that one].

    snicker. I've read it on a few sites, usually by women making snarky comments about people who make dumbarse comments about gender. :) It always makes me giggle and it's the first time I found an opportunity to use it myself! Feel free to spread it around!

    -- Seejay

  • Non-aardvark (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    Non-aardvark:
    Is that aardvark shell preventing you from observing the reality that programmers are substantially weighted toward males? Probably meeting some silly diversity goal combined with a shortage of female candidates led to the wtf. You do understand that the term "diversity" is a misdirect. The real goal is to make people interchangeable.

    No certain people, unlike you, understand that correlation does not imply causation. Just because woman aren't programmers doesn't mean they're worse at programming. It just means that for various reasons, social and genetic, they do not become programmers. Many probably realize, unlike idiotic males, that they can make more money and work less in many other professions so they avoid anything IT like the plague. More importantly they won't have to (possibly) deal with nerds every day who have the social skills of a dead cockroach. Also this means that fewer woman go into CS and says nothing about the quality of those who DO go into it.

    Perhaps if you actually read what I wrote, you could make relevant comments.

  • (cs) in reply to seejay
    seejay:
    misha:
    but the present situation seems to drive away the "best and brightest" if they happen to have a vajayjay [Seejay, is that actually a word in common usage? I'm going to have to start using that one].

    snicker. I've read it on a few sites, usually by women making snarky comments about people who make dumbarse comments about gender. :) It always makes me giggle and it's the first time I found an opportunity to use it myself! Feel free to spread it around!

    -- Seejay

    A quick google suggests that it was invented for Grey's Anatomy, because they weren't allowed to say vagina too much: http://www.wordspy.com/words/vajayjay.asp

  • a2 (unregistered)

    Good example of people skills dominating technical ones, no?

  • jayh (unregistered)

    earlier quote********* Unless:

    1. Boss' or board member's daughter (sons, nephews, nieces--same)
    2. In-company transfer
    3. Completely non-technical hiring process.
    4. Completely incompetent hiring manager, or at least a not very objective judge of character. You clearly underestimate the male capacity to lose brain function at a moment's notice.

    add the following:

    1. Department needs to add some artificial 'diversity' to meet corporate image goals.
  • (cs) in reply to misha
    misha:
    seejay:
    misha:
    but the present situation seems to drive away the "best and brightest" if they happen to have a vajayjay [Seejay, is that actually a word in common usage? I'm going to have to start using that one].

    snicker. I've read it on a few sites, usually by women making snarky comments about people who make dumbarse comments about gender. :) It always makes me giggle and it's the first time I found an opportunity to use it myself! Feel free to spread it around!

    -- Seejay

    A quick google suggests that it was invented for Grey's Anatomy, because they weren't allowed to say vagina too much: http://www.wordspy.com/words/vajayjay.asp

    And yet one more example of why you can not legislate language. Though our fearful leaders sure do try to protect us from these evil words.

  • Beau "Porpus" Wilkinson (unregistered) in reply to seejay
    seejay:
    Salami:
    Secondly, as for the women-in-programming debate, there is science behind it (which got the Harvard president fired a couple of years ago).

    You know, there was a professor here in Ontario who put together a thesis on racial stereotypes correlating with penis size, intelligence and violent tendencies. It went something like this:

    Blacks: low intelligence, large penis, high violence White: medium intelligence, averge penis, average violence Asians: high intelligence, small penis, low violence

    So apparently your penis size is directly related to your violent tendencies and inversely propotional to your intelligence.

    David Suzuki was supposed to debate him about the results of his study, but wasn't sure how to approach it as it was a lose/lose situation (if he won, it would be attributable to being Asian and of "high intelligence"). This guy's thesis was actually published in a journal (albeit one that was funded by Playboy or Penthouse or something like that).

    Last I heard (back in the early 2000's when I was in university) the guy was still employed at a university (tenure FTL), although he did have to give classes and lectures through video conferencing due to death threats for his racist views.

    Just because a study is done doesn't necessarily mean there's actual science or validity behind it, as evidenced by the idiocy this guy produced.

    (and yes I'm aware that this comes across as an anecdote, but I'm really drawing a blank at the names of the people involved. This information was related to me from my university Anthropology professor on how any idiot can publish in journals and how tenure protects assholes. I'd do some searching but I'm loathe to start typing in search terms that include "penis size" while I'm at work.)

    -- Seejay

    ETA: and by "any idiot can publish in journals", I should clarify... respectable journals would toss this type of moron out on their ass, but there are many journals out there that have the name "journal" in it that people don't realize aren't peer-reviewed respected books. Without doing some research, "Journal of Underwater Basket Weaving" might mislead some into thinking it's a good resource.

    So do you agree with the study's conclusions or not? Or do you just think that sort of thing should not be studied?

  • NotanEnglishMajor (unregistered) in reply to ParkinT
    ParkinT:
    The Peter Principle. What an excellent illustration!!

    Isn't is amazing that Dr. Peter wrote about this phenomenon long before computers were a common part of our life; and, now, we see more clear examples of his principle in the computer industry!!!?

    In this case the "Dilbert" principle applies more completely. This person was promoted to the position that minimized her damage to the organization.

    -Notan

  • Me Too! (unregistered)

    Sounds like a more fundamental problem is testing.

    Promoting the incompetent causes more problems than it solves. The morale and initiative sapping effect more than offsets carrying what would otherwise be merely a non-productive programmer.

    We had an thoroughly incompetent stuporvisor. It was truly a professional insult to have this person as a boss.

    The fact that this person continued to be a manager says a lot about how bad upper management is. If you see that total moron as a low-level boss is never dealt with, run to the exits because it's a reflection upper management more than of the idiot.

    Nothing gets done because (s)he cannot address issues. I called my village idiot "the black hole" because things went in (requests, questions, etc.) and nothing ever came out.

    Not able to be a technical lead, (s)he focuses on "management." All of a sudden the trivial is of utmost importance. Our version of the TPS report took up 10x or more time than it should have.

    Unable to make technical judgments, to the retarded boss everything is ultra important requiring immediate answers. For example I was ordered, from hence forth, to take lunch at 11:00 when, on a day I took a late lunch (due to work, duh!), he did not find me in my office the one moment that month (no exaggeration) he wanted to ask something (like it couldn't wait 30 minutes!). P.S. He never told me why he wanted to see me!!!!!!!!

    The fart-between-the-sheets-of-live cannot understand that software development is not a flawless process. My annual evaluation marked me in one area as "unacceptable" because of spelling errors in a single text file that was still under development at the time, and released w/o those errors!!!. The overall evaluation was also "unacceptable." In this same time frame the division chief sends an email suggesting that my project be submitted for an award.

    In the final analysis work takes too long and is of lower quality due to the direct efforts of the "tragically helpful." They say "lead, follow, or get out of the way." Sadly, the clueless boss can do none of these.

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Tyler D
    Tyler D:
    Dear Sebastian,

    She was flirting with you. You idiot!

    You sir, are a man of perception :-)

  • (cs) in reply to Beau "Porpus" Wilkinson
    Beau "Porpus" Wilkinson:
    So do you agree with the study's conclusions or not? Or do you just think that sort of thing should not be studied?

    Attempting to study a correlation between race, penis size, intelligence and tendencies to violence isn't a study. It's an attempt to justify racism and bigotry based on characteristics that have no relation to each other.

    Might as well do a study attempting to find the relevance between hedgehog growth to rainfall in Egypt.

    -- Seejay

  • (cs) in reply to Non-aardvark
    Non-aardvark:
    real_aardvark:
    GrandmasterB:
    Women shouldnt be programmers. The personality attributes needed to be a productive programmer are just not those typically found in women. Sorry, its the truth. There may be a small number who buck the trend here in there, but in general chicks cant code.

    Mind you, I'm not saying all male programmers are good - most of them are clueless too. Women are just more likely to be clueless when it comes to programming. They make damn fine web designers though. Much better sense of color than most men, who are functionally color blind.

    Luckily, you're not a troll.

    Unluckily, you're a moron.

    I'm not quite sure where to start here, but "Women shouldn't be programmers?" Nah. You're a dickhead. ...snip...

    Is that aardvark shell preventing you from observing the reality that programmers are substantially weighted toward males? Probably meeting some silly diversity goal combined with a shortage of female candidates led to the wtf. You do understand that the term "diversity" is a misdirect. The real goal is to make people interchangeable.
    Armadillos have shells. Aardvarks merely have rather prominent noses. Still, it's nice to know that (for the second time, I believe) you've chosen to reply with a variant on my moniker. Care to register so that we can track you down and laugh at you in person?

    Two comments.

    Whose real goal is it to make people interchangeable? Leaving sexual discrimination to one side, I for one have absolutely no intention of having hot, sweaty sex with a Hull docker just because he's "interchangeable" with Kate Moss.

    Secondly, did you actually read my post? Like, two lines down?

    I'm not in favour of positive discrimination when it comes to anything technical, let alone programming. I just see a ridiculous amount of negative discrimination. This may well be because 90% of programmers are male. That doesn't make it healthy, let alone sane.

    Oh yeah, and a third comment. If you're going to make sweeping, free-wheeling judgements about the ability, or lack thereof, of the fairer sex when it comes to programming ... or indeed anything else ... I would suggest that phrasing such judgements in terms such as "Chicks can't code" are not going to win you any brownie points in the great game of life.

    Try again. But harder, this time. Maybe using your tiny, testosterone-shriveled brain?

  • (cs) in reply to GrandmasterB
    GrandmasterB:
    real_aardvark:
    Luckily, you're not a troll.

    Unluckily, you're a moron.

    I'm not quite sure where to start here, but "Women shouldn't be programmers?" Nah. You're a dickhead.

    I figured the PC twits would jerk their knees over that.

    Look, whether you want to accept it or not, its the truth. Contrary to what has been force fed by the feminists into everyone's minds over the past 50 years, men and women's brains are different. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses. There's a reason why most engineers and programmers are men, and its not because men are 'keeping the sistas down'. Its because men are better, on average, than women at those types of jobs. And women are better than men at many other jobs. And for some jobs its not a factor at all. There's the occasional outlier that breaks the averages, but as a general rule its true.

    You can let reality seep through that little PC bubble you live in or not, I dont care. You're the one denying reality, not me. And calling people names doesnt change that.

    I've cleaned up a couple of newlines that you left whilst presumably using the spitoon for target practice. Maybe your right hand is palsied and lingers too long over the "enter" key; I don't know.

    I didn't call you names. I merely made reference to your obvious mental deficiency.

    And at this point I would like to apologise to those of us who are born morons. It would indeed be "calling people names" were I to refer to these (in my experience, having worked at a children's hospital) genuinely nice and friendly people.

    You, on the other hand, are a worthless asshole.

    Sorry, run out of names.

    I'll call you Timothy, if it makes you feel any better.

  • (cs) in reply to FredSaw
    FredSaw:
    Addendum (2007-09-11 14:09): Think of it as a trade-off for never having to buy your own drinks in a bar, and being able to get out of a traffic ticket by smiling and hiking the skirt up a little. Men will never know what this is like.
    Well, I tried it, and I do know what it's like.

    Believe me, it isn't very pleasant.

    I may never wear a skirt again.

  • non-aardvark (unregistered) in reply to real_aardvark
    real_aardvark:
    Non-aardvark:
    real_aardvark:
    GrandmasterB:
    Women shouldnt be programmers. The personality attributes needed to be a productive programmer are just not those typically found in women. Sorry, its the truth. There may be a small number who buck the trend here in there, but in general chicks cant code.

    Mind you, I'm not saying all male programmers are good - most of them are clueless too. Women are just more likely to be clueless when it comes to programming. They make damn fine web designers though. Much better sense of color than most men, who are functionally color blind.

    Luckily, you're not a troll.

    Unluckily, you're a moron.

    I'm not quite sure where to start here, but "Women shouldn't be programmers?" Nah. You're a dickhead. ...snip...

    Is that aardvark shell preventing you from observing the reality that programmers are substantially weighted toward males? Probably meeting some silly diversity goal combined with a shortage of female candidates led to the wtf. You do understand that the term "diversity" is a misdirect. The real goal is to make people interchangeable.
    Armadillos have shells. Aardvarks merely have rather prominent noses. Still, it's nice to know that (for the second time, I believe) you've chosen to reply with a variant on my moniker. Care to register so that we can track you down and laugh at you in person?

    Two comments.

    Whose real goal is it to make people interchangeable? Leaving sexual discrimination to one side, I for one have absolutely no intention of having hot, sweaty sex with a Hull docker just because he's "interchangeable" with Kate Moss.

    Secondly, did you actually read my post? Like, two lines down?

    I'm not in favour of positive discrimination when it comes to anything technical, let alone programming. I just see a ridiculous amount of negative discrimination. This may well be because 90% of programmers are male. That doesn't make it healthy, let alone sane.

    Oh yeah, and a third comment. If you're going to make sweeping, free-wheeling judgements about the ability, or lack thereof, of the fairer sex when it comes to programming ... or indeed anything else ... I would suggest that phrasing such judgements in terms such as "Chicks can't code" are not going to win you any brownie points in the great game of life.

    Try again. But harder, this time. Maybe using your tiny, testosterone-shriveled brain?

    One of the primary goals of globalism is to make workers interchangeable and relocatable. For this purpose, most people across the globe today have been brainwashed with post-modernism, the principles of which underly your comments.

    Even when showered with information, it cannot penetrate the thinking of someone who has rejected the existence of objective reality.

    I have heard it said that this often changes when they experience the result of their beliefs in the form of a military boot up the backside.

    Globalism is a one-way ticket to a world of barons and serfs, which has been the norm for most of recorded history.

  • (cs) in reply to TallGuy
    TallGuy:
    Nelle:
    ... I mean every form of generalising is inherently false

    I'm glad we got that straightened out, aren't you?

    Cute. Nice debating point.

    But, essentially, she's right. Totally -- if you insist on an absolute. Now go back and read the goddamn post again, you moron.

  • (cs) in reply to KenW
    KenW:
    <snip>

    Thanks, buddy.

  • (cs) in reply to Non-aardvark
    Non-aardvark:
    Anon:
    Non-aardvark:
    Is that aardvark shell preventing you from observing the reality that programmers are substantially weighted toward males? Probably meeting some silly diversity goal combined with a shortage of female candidates led to the wtf. You do understand that the term "diversity" is a misdirect. The real goal is to make people interchangeable.

    No certain people, unlike you, understand that correlation does not imply causation. Just because woman aren't programmers doesn't mean they're worse at programming. It just means that for various reasons, social and genetic, they do not become programmers. Many probably realize, unlike idiotic males, that they can make more money and work less in many other professions so they avoid anything IT like the plague. More importantly they won't have to (possibly) deal with nerds every day who have the social skills of a dead cockroach. Also this means that fewer woman go into CS and says nothing about the quality of those who DO go into it.

    Perhaps if you actually read what I wrote, you could make relevant comments.

    Well, not to be too Arthurian about it, but I did read what you wrote. Every single stinking syllable of it. Exactly where do you disagree with (sadly) Anon, and how would you justify yourself?

    Oh dear.

    I'm going to have to repeat myself. And you know I don't like doing that.

    Dickhead.

  • (cs) in reply to non-aardvark
    non-aardvark:
    One of the primary goals of globalism is to make workers interchangeable and relocatable. For this purpose, most people across the globe today have been brainwashed with post-modernism, the principles of which underly your comments.

    Even when showered with information, it cannot penetrate the thinking of someone who has rejected the existence of objective reality.

    I have heard it said that this often changes when they experience the result of their beliefs in the form of a military boot up the backside.

    Globalism is a one-way ticket to a world of barons and serfs, which has been the norm for most of recorded history.

    That would be a different topic. You appear to have missed the point. Or, at the very least, you appear to be railing against straw men.

    Nice to know that "post-modernism" principles underly my comments. I'll permit you that gratuitous insult, because you've never met me.

    I spend as much of my time as possible dealing with the detritus of Thatcherism, and if I have any guiding philosophy at all, it's Humanism/Core Christianity.

    Not that this is at all relevant to the current post, but exactly where does (anti)globalision come in?

    On the other hand, I do love your prose. So static. So Stalinesque:

    "Even when showered with information, it cannot penetrate the thinking of someone who has rejected the existence of objective reality."

    Brillant, Paula!

  • scooter (unregistered) in reply to Zylon

    You know -- bigger than a violin, smaller than a cello.

  • (cs) in reply to real_aardvark
    real_aardvark:
    Non-aardvark:
    real_aardvark:
    GrandmasterB:
    Women shouldnt be programmers. The personality attributes needed to be a productive programmer are just not those typically found in women. Sorry, its the truth. There may be a small number who buck the trend here in there, but in general chicks cant code.

    Mind you, I'm not saying all male programmers are good - most of them are clueless too. Women are just more likely to be clueless when it comes to programming. They make damn fine web designers though. Much better sense of color than most men, who are functionally color blind.

    Luckily, you're not a troll.

    Unluckily, you're a moron.

    I'm not quite sure where to start here, but "Women shouldn't be programmers?" Nah. You're a dickhead. ...snip...

    Is that aardvark shell preventing you from observing the reality that programmers are substantially weighted toward males? Probably meeting some silly diversity goal combined with a shortage of female candidates led to the wtf. You do understand that the term "diversity" is a misdirect. The real goal is to make people interchangeable.
    Armadillos have shells. Aardvarks merely have rather prominent noses. Still, it's nice to know that (for the second time, I believe) you've chosen to reply with a variant on my moniker. Care to register so that we can track you down and laugh at you in person?

    Two comments.

    Whose real goal is it to make people interchangeable? Leaving sexual discrimination to one side, I for one have absolutely no intention of having hot, sweaty sex with a Hull docker just because he's "interchangeable" with Kate Moss.

    Secondly, did you actually read my post? Like, two lines down?

    I'm not in favour of positive discrimination when it comes to anything technical, let alone programming. I just see a ridiculous amount of negative discrimination. This may well be because 90% of programmers are male. That doesn't make it healthy, let alone sane.

    Oh yeah, and a third comment. If you're going to make sweeping, free-wheeling judgements about the ability, or lack thereof, of the fairer sex when it comes to programming ... or indeed anything else ... I would suggest that phrasing such judgements in terms such as "Chicks can't code" are not going to win you any brownie points in the great game of life.

    Try again. But harder, this time. Maybe using your tiny, testosterone-shriveled brain?

    He meant "the fairer sex can't code," I guess.

  • mana (unregistered)

    they made her lead to get her out of the code and leverage her networking skills

  • Brazilian guy (unregistered)

    It is not about Mega and "its" knowledge, it is about be a boss: Boss is a team member who does not have any skills, except be part of the team.

  • etr (unregistered)

    I'd like to comment on the sexism and racism, but I'll start with globalization because it will dovetail nicely.

    While some executives might want globalization to be about making everyone interchangeable, that's the opposite of the policy reason for proposing it. The true goal of globalization is to direct the economy to the segment that can do it with the best efficiency/opportunity cost trade-off.

    Consider agricultural subsidies and tarrifs in the first world. Government policy guarantees first world farmers a better-than-market (world market, that is) price when others elsewhere--typically in the third world--can produce more cheaply. Consumers in the first world pay more for their food, and producers in the third world make less because a portion of the market is closed to them.

    The idea of globalization is that when you ditch the subsidies, the first world consumers pay less and the third world producers make more. This may represent a loss to the first world farmers...but the impact on this very small population is vastly outweighed by the impact of the broader one.

    Furthermore, most economists assume that these first world farmers will ultimately find other work to which they are better suited (in their balance of talent and circumstance). This arrangement might not suit them as well as the current one, but then the current arrangement is about given them more than is justified by what they are currently producing. In this sense, globalization is about unseating current barons (including perhaps, first world coders like myself) rather than minting new ones. (That said, the devil is in the details.)

    What's really telling is that one those making the sexist remarks is arguing that globalization is bad because it tries to make people interchangeable in one breath, and in another saying that all women are more or less interchangeable as far as coding ability is concerned. The sexist poster has a point: there are different biological norms for males and females, and those differing norms do extend to brain function. That said, both sexes exhibit wide variation. Furthermore, our current impression of the gap between the biological norms is almost certainly exagerated by insufficient control for societal factors.

    For the same reason, I won't automatically dismiss the idea that different races have different norms for penis size or intelligence. However, there is again going to be significant variation, and societal factors would almost certainly exagerate any real difference that might exist in the biological norms were we to try to measure them.

    This is not to say I don't dismiss all such research I've heard about. Such norms might theoretically be a question of legitimate scientific interest. However, I think society is sufficiently likely to misuse or misconstrue any research on this question that its examination is, at present, unethical. If someone is willing to ignore ethics to consider the question, he or she is probably also someone vulnerable to intentionally or unintentionally distort the results to suit his or her preconceptions.

  • Future serf (unregistered) in reply to etr
    etr:
    I'd like to comment on the sexism and racism, but I'll start with globalization because it will dovetail nicely.

    While some executives might want globalization to be about making everyone interchangeable, that's the opposite of the policy reason for proposing it. The true goal of globalization is to direct the economy to the segment that can do it with the best efficiency/opportunity cost trade-off. ... snip ...

    A sincere thanks for your thoughtful words.

    I'm typing this in notepad since the reply box is now the size of a postage stamp.

    You have my complete agreement that the top-level goal of globalism is economic. However, I would say that the financial benefits will primarily flow to the elites, and those living in poverty today will see improved lives, but the middle class of today will suffer greatly in the leveling process. The common man will lose much freedom in the consolidation of power. Rights flow from individual to government, rather than the other way around. My city is beginning to resemble an apartment complex, with government taking the role of landlord.

    My other comments are directed against the belief that generalizations/heuristics are not valid and people who try to regulate the beliefs and speech of others by group opprobrium. Of course, this only reveals philosophical bankruptcy.

  • Jon (unregistered) in reply to seejay
    seejay:
    Beau "Porpus" Wilkinson:
    So do you agree with the study's conclusions or not? Or do you just think that sort of thing should not be studied?
    Attempting to study a correlation between race, penis size, intelligence and tendencies to violence isn't a study. It's an attempt to justify racism and bigotry based on characteristics that have no relation to each other.
    I think you're being too hasty to draw that conclusion. There could be some other, relatively harmless reason that he conducted the study. For example, he might have done it to annoy you.
  • Thomas (unregistered) in reply to dmitriy

    Concidering the environment and the other examples, I'd say it's PL/SQL.

    Either from Forms application or database package.

  • LouCypher (unregistered) in reply to Tyler D

    Well, he didn't know she could do that.

  • Ben (unregistered)

    Why didn't he just suggest:

    SELECT * FROM ( SELECT * FROM APPL WHERE APPRCVD IS NOT NULL INTERSECT SELECT * FROM APPL WHERE APPRCVD IS NULL )

    Would have gotten her the same result, and would have been evidence down the road of her stupidity...

    Strike that. She probably would have blamed him if anyone questioned her on it.

    Strike the striking. Obviously no one questioned her on anything.

  • (cs) in reply to real_aardvark
    real_aardvark:
    FredSaw:
    Addendum (2007-09-11 14:09): Think of it as a trade-off for never having to buy your own drinks in a bar, and being able to get out of a traffic ticket by smiling and hiking the skirt up a little. Men will never know what this is like.
    Well, I tried it, and I do know what it's like.

    Believe me, it isn't very pleasant.

    I may never wear a skirt again.

    Disturbing, no matter which gender you are (I haven't read enough to be sure, but the negative testosterone references argue heavily for female).

    So you would let a single unpleasant encounter dictate your behavior from now on?

  • Global Warmer (unregistered) in reply to KattMan
    KattMan:
    Where can I get a job where hot girls like Meagan will sleep with me for a promotion?

    Im in on that too.

  • wtf (unregistered)

    ok.... no. this is simply not possible. it is a fake story. sorry, i can not accept the opposite.

  • wtf (unregistered)

    Oh, about women and programming... You know what they say - a woman programmer is exactly as much a woman and as much a programmer, as the Guinea pig is a pig and comes from Guinea.

  • (cs) in reply to Jon
    Jon:
    seejay:
    Attempting to study a correlation between race, penis size, intelligence and tendencies to violence isn't a study. It's an attempt to justify racism and bigotry based on characteristics that have no relation to each other.
    I think you're being too hasty to draw that conclusion. There could be some other, relatively harmless reason that he conducted the study. For example, he might have done it to annoy you.

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with being annoyed by racism and stereotypes, especially when it's used in an attempt to discredit both the black and Asian populations. It's also germane to this conversation that the professor is white as am I, and I find the theory itself to be disgusting and bigoted.

    -- Seejay

  • (cs) in reply to seejay
    seejay:
    There's absolutely nothing wrong with being annoyed by racism and stereotypes, especially when it's used in an attempt to discredit both the black and Asian populations. It's also germane to this conversation that the professor is white as am I, and I find the theory itself to be disgusting and bigoted.

    -- Seejay

    Given that it was presented in earnestness, I agree. But to me it sounded so preposterous that I had to assume it was a tongue-in-cheek presentation done deliberately to provoke outrage and debate in the classroom.

  • (cs) in reply to seejay
    seejay:
    Jon:
    seejay:
    Attempting to study a correlation between race, penis size, intelligence and tendencies to violence isn't a study. It's an attempt to justify racism and bigotry based on characteristics that have no relation to each other.
    I think you're being too hasty to draw that conclusion. There could be some other, relatively harmless reason that he conducted the study. For example, he might have done it to annoy you.

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with being annoyed by racism and stereotypes, especially when it's used in an attempt to discredit both the black and Asian populations. It's also germane to this conversation that the professor is white as am I, and I find the theory itself to be disgusting and bigoted.

    -- Seejay

    I got the impression from your description that the study was about the stereotypes (i.e. analyzing why people apply those stereotypes), not a study of actual intelligence, violent tendencies, and/or endowment. Could you have misinterpreted it?

  • (cs) in reply to seejay
    seejay:
    Beau "Porpus" Wilkinson:
    So do you agree with the study's conclusions or not? Or do you just think that sort of thing should not be studied?

    Attempting to study a correlation between race, penis size, intelligence and tendencies to violence isn't a study. It's an attempt to justify racism and bigotry based on characteristics that have no relation to each other.

    Might as well do a study attempting to find the relevance between hedgehog growth to rainfall in Egypt.

    -- Seejay

    Did you know that there's a direct correlation between the decline of Spirograph and the rise in gang activity? Think about it.

    Also, you may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s.

  • (cs) in reply to BrownHornet
    BrownHornet:
    Also, you may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s.

    Actually you are wrong. The shrinking number of pirates are caused by global warming, earthquakes and hurricanes. What self respecting pirate wants to be at sea during a hurricane and get sunk by a tidal wave during an oppressive heat wave.

  • (cs) in reply to BrownHornet
    BrownHornet:
    Did you know that there's a direct correlation between the decline of Spirograph and the rise in gang activity? Think about it.

    The rise in gang activity also has a direct effect on the advancement of technology. All we need is a few more violent gangs and we will master faster than light travel.

  • tastey (unregistered) in reply to KattMan
    KattMan:
    What self respecting pirate wants to be at sea during a hurricane and get sunk by a tidal wave during an oppressive heat wave.
    This is why they all live inland in their parents' basements now.
  • Resa (unregistered) in reply to Harrow

    Yeah, I tried that once. Unfortunately, the CTO preferred people working for him who were idiots because it made him look good. I'm the one that got let go.

    Harrow:
    Sebastian was way too kind to Megan and consequently screwed over everyone else in the company. He should have let her slip beneath the waves after about the second or third time she fell out of the boat.

    "Megan, I'm keeping a log of all your dumb questions, and I'm counting up the ones that prove that you shouldn't be employed here."

    "How many of them is that?"

    "Pretty much all of them. And I'm giving your boss a copy."

    "But you'll get me fired!"

    "I'm afraid so."

    "Oh. I didn’t know you could do that!"

    -Harrow.

  • Resa (unregistered) in reply to seejay

    I'm the second of three generations of female programmers, and since my Mom started when there were almost NO women in development, I probably know as much about this as anyone.

    Fact 1) The real reason that there are very few female programmers is due to the high number of testosterone loaded jerks in IT departments.

    Fact 2) The inept number of men in development who are a total waste of space out number useless female developers 10 to 1.

    seejay:
    Salami:
    Secondly, as for the women-in-programming debate, there is science behind it (which got the Harvard president fired a couple of years ago).

    You know, there was a professor here in Ontario who put together a thesis on racial stereotypes correlating with penis size, intelligence and violent tendencies. It went something like this:

    Blacks: low intelligence, large penis, high violence White: medium intelligence, averge penis, average violence Asians: high intelligence, small penis, low violence

    So apparently your penis size is directly related to your violent tendencies and inversely propotional to your intelligence.

    David Suzuki was supposed to debate him about the results of his study, but wasn't sure how to approach it as it was a lose/lose situation (if he won, it would be attributable to being Asian and of "high intelligence"). This guy's thesis was actually published in a journal (albeit one that was funded by Playboy or Penthouse or something like that).

    Last I heard (back in the early 2000's when I was in university) the guy was still employed at a university (tenure FTL), although he did have to give classes and lectures through video conferencing due to death threats for his racist views.

    Just because a study is done doesn't necessarily mean there's actual science or validity behind it, as evidenced by the idiocy this guy produced.

    (and yes I'm aware that this comes across as an anecdote, but I'm really drawing a blank at the names of the people involved. This information was related to me from my university Anthropology professor on how any idiot can publish in journals and how tenure protects assholes. I'd do some searching but I'm loathe to start typing in search terms that include "penis size" while I'm at work.)

    -- Seejay

    ETA: and by "any idiot can publish in journals", I should clarify... respectable journals would toss this type of moron out on their ass, but there are many journals out there that have the name "journal" in it that people don't realize aren't peer-reviewed respected books. Without doing some research, "Journal of Underwater Basket Weaving" might mislead some into thinking it's a good resource.

  • (cs) in reply to Resa
    Resa:
    Fact 1) The real reason that there are very few female programmers is due to the high number of testosterone loaded jerks in IT departments.
    Doesn't hold up, Resa. A high number of testosterone loaded jerks is not unique or special to IT departments; they exist everywhere, in other departments and social circles and bars and churches and every aspect of life that involves males. If they're running you off from IT, then they have to be running you off from everything else, too.
    Resa:
    Fact 2) The inept number of men in development who are a total waste of space out number useless female developers 10 to 1.
    Please see my response to anon, above.
  • Jon (unregistered) in reply to Ben
    Ben:
    Why didn't he just suggest:

    SELECT * FROM ( SELECT * FROM APPL WHERE APPRCVD IS NOT NULL INTERSECT SELECT * FROM APPL WHERE APPRCVD IS NULL )

    Isn't that a syntax error? I think you need a small change to make it valid: SELECT * FROM ( SELECT * FROM APPL WHERE APPRCVD IS NOT NULL INTERSECT SELECT * FROM APPL WHERE APPRCVD IS NULL ) please

  • (cs) in reply to FredSaw
    FredSaw:
    real_aardvark:
    FredSaw:
    Addendum (2007-09-11 14:09): Think of it as a trade-off for never having to buy your own drinks in a bar, and being able to get out of a traffic ticket by smiling and hiking the skirt up a little. Men will never know what this is like.
    Well, I tried it, and I do know what it's like.

    Believe me, it isn't very pleasant.

    I may never wear a skirt again.

    Disturbing, no matter which gender you are (I haven't read enough to be sure, but the negative testosterone references argue heavily for female).

    So you would let a single unpleasant encounter dictate your behavior from now on?

    Six foot six, bald, male, and English, Fred.

    But I do look good in high heels.

  • E. (unregistered)

    Typical company, typical woman...

Leave a comment on “I Didn’t Know You Could Do That!”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article