81–90 of 1001 posts
homogenising all communication and making strict formal guidelines makes it much easier to make a competing platform that scales.
Stanford is doing the transition from a learning platform based in identity to one based I scalability.
My guess, however, is that it is to their detriment.
Is this initiative being evaluated for inclusivity of people with language processing conditions, including autism spectrum disorder, to make sure it doesn't cause discriminatory strain on these folks?
I'm going to take the minority position here (no pun intended), and say that I think these initiatives are in fact helpful and important. I recently joined an engineering team where there's a cultural norm of not using the word "guys" to address a group. When I first heard this, I kinda rolled my eyes but got on board. It took a tremendous amount of mental effort to weed that word out of my vocabulary, but it's had a…
What tangible effects did it have on your mentality?
The inclusion of "Hispanic => Latinx" is staggering because: - The vast majority of Hispanic people don't like "Latinx" - "Latinx" was invented to avoid gendered words like "Latino", and "Hispanic" isn't gendered - It's listed under "imprecise language", but "Latinx" isn't any more precise. It's so ironic that "colonialism" has now come to mean anything progressive academics don't like, but telling a minority group w…
I wonder how many people Stanford has working on this. Much of this is disconnection from reality. Something an educational institution should not be pushing. As an alum, I'm embarrassed.
You can't use the word brave anymore? What in the hell is going on with academics?
Is this initiative being evaluated for inclusivity of people with language processing conditions, including autism spectrum disorder, to make sure it doesn't cause discriminatory strain on these folks?
Specifically, I'm the "parse everything hyperliterally unless I consciously try not to" type, which means I do not see the problem with many of these, and just have to remember a list of words I can't use professionally.
Amusingly, most of the list of words I'd always been told I couldn't use professionally get used all the fucking time.
The inclusion of "Hispanic => Latinx" is staggering because: - The vast majority of Hispanic people don't like "Latinx" - "Latinx" was invented to avoid gendered words like "Latino", and "Hispanic" isn't gendered - It's listed under "imprecise language", but "Latinx" isn't any more precise. It's so ironic that "colonialism" has now come to mean anything progressive academics don't like, but telling a minority group w…
Definitely no colonial undertone to this dynamic whatsoever
I wholeheartedly support the elimination of harmful languages. There's just no good reason these days for anyone to use C++.
This is a violation and implies that all of the C++ language is the same which may be offensive to users of a specific standard such as ISO/IEC 14882:2017. Referring to C++ generically ignores any differences between specifications.
Instead, referring to a specific standard, for example, C++11 is more appropriate to members of the ISO/IEC 14882 community.