Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In defence of Douglas Crockford

atom-morgan.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 450 posts

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#131

Post by DonHopkins »

aap_ wrote: post #116
DonHopkins wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are perfectly legitimate reasons to put a network interface controller into promiscuous mode [1], and it's nothing to be ashamed of, and perfectly acceptable to discuss at conferences. Back in the "bad old days" of the simplex NCP protocol [2], before the duplex TCP/IP protocol legalized same-sex network connections, connect and listen sockets had gender defined by their parity, and all connections were require…

I don't see where the socket numbers are added. You test ac3 which is loaded from consck, but where does that come from? Or did you mean the code you linked to with "The PDP-10 code above"?

Good catch -- the link to the code was wrong (it was linking to an old version). I updated it to point to the new NCP version.

That's weird that it does several different types of moves in a row into the same register -- there must be some kind of implicit calculation going on, or maybe it's just a bug.

I'd use "git blame" to bug-shame whoever wrote that heterosexist code, but I don't think they were using safe source code control practices back then.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#133

Post by generic_user »

eli wrote: post #108
tzs wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think it's easy to look past someone's personal preferences and outrageous comments when you're already part of the club. But respect that that isn't everyone's experience. What specifically did Crockford say that was outrageous?

I have no idea. The conference organizers said people privately voiced concerns and other speakers threatened to pull out over his presence. I was addressing the parent comment's point about inclusiveness in general.

Clearly these other people are in the club and Crockford is most definitely not. If this other person can get Crockford removed from the conference on a whim with no explanation the power and abuse of it is in the hands of the other person.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#134

Post by iopq »

inopinatus wrote: post #81
rand_r wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using the male pronoun by default is simply common practice in English, dating back at least hundreds of years. I wouldn't read into it.

Maybe it depends on your origins or age, but I'm over forty and attended a conservative religious school, and it boggles even me that anyone considers "he" the current generic/default pronoun.

I learned English in my teens and I use "he" as the default pronoun because that's what everyone uses.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#135

Post by iopq »

eli wrote: post #104
rdtsc wrote: post #34

> We will also be removing Douglas Crockford from our keynote speakers list to help make the conference a comfortable environment for all. If they are going to insinuate things about what he said, they should mention exactly what he said or did. The fact that they don't somehow tells me there is not much there to go on. To put it another way, if they have the guts to remove Crockford that should have enough guts to c…

I don't think they insinuated anything beyond that he apparently made others uncomfortable.

"We have deleted eli's messages from HN because he made others felt uncomfortable."

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#136

Post by madeofpalk »

bsder wrote: post #100

This is becoming increasingly concerning to me. The problem is that there is no way for the person affected to receive "justice", "fairness", or "a day in court". You want to not invite somebody? Fine. You want to disinvite somebody? Okay, but be prepared to be called a jerk. But assassinating someone's professional character publicly? You'd better be standing on REALLY solid ground for a REALLY good reason. Crockfor…

You've kind of just resolved your concerns yourself.

> The problem is that there is no way for the person affected to receive "justice", "fairness", or "a day in court".

Of course there is. There's 'private arbitration' - just resolve the matters yourself like regular people do. Then then, if the victim feels particularly damaged, there's the courts.

> Crockford might just ignore this--it's probably the best course of action given his station.

Yup. He doesn't need 'justice' because he doesn't feel he's been particularly wronged.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#137

Post by tzs »

nopit wrote: post #3

Why is crybullying so rampant in the tech community?

I'm often a jerk, and occasionally an asshole. If I do something bad and someone justifiably berates me over it or criticizes me over it, I pretty much have to acknowledge that it was something I did that has upset them. That's because I'm a white male, so I can't rationalize it away as them just being racist or sexist.

Some women and minorities (some, nowhere near a majority, but it only takes a few to stir up a lot of trouble) are also jerks and assholes, and when that draws criticism or anger or insults they can rationalize it away as them being attacked for their race or sex.

It's a lot easier on the ego and self-esteem to think that someone dislikes you because of something you have no control over such as your race or sex rather than because you have a terrible personality.

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#138

Post by rudedogg »

tamana wrote: post #83
unimpressive wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I notice a fairly common tactic for trying to change norms is to pretend that the norms aren't norms and then aggressively shame people for doing a normal thing. This leads to a toxic atmosphere where people can't be secure in their words, social reality keeps being pulled out from under their feet.

When the normal thing marginalizes people, marginalized people are hurt. In recent years, they have started to defend themsves in force, the ks to unifying power of the internet. The insecurity you observe is feeling of the erosion of privilege.

You assume the parent is privileged (younger white male) for having an opinion that conflicts with your own?

Another point - educated white males are not your enemy. If you're looking for racists, sexists, etc - you need not seek them out by reading between the lines of comments here. There are people proudly spewing garbage you can speak out against (on their own forums and blogs). Why fight against your allies in this?

Re: In defence of Douglas Crockford

#139

Post by jstewartmobile »

What a cowardly, hateful thing to do! They have even gone so far as to make a static page to address the tweet, yet a concrete accusation is nowhere to be found on it: http://nodevember.org/statement.html

A community that accepts a covert hit-job like that Tweet is a garbage community. Don't be a garbage community Nodevember.

Post reply on HN