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

When a No means Yes

hackingdistributed.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 44 posts

Re: When a No means Yes

#21

Post by danso »

groby_b wrote: post #20
brennenHN wrote: post #11

Headlines like this are the casual references that makes tech a boys club. You don't think you're doing any harm, but by distorting an important argument about rape, you're undermining the sentiment behind "No means no" even as you use it in a different context.

And of course the HN boys club doesn't see anything wrong with the headline. I expected nothing less :( Seriously, people: "No means yes" is a clear reference to "No means no". It's a really bad choice of headline, because it communicates "I don't care about issues that women are facing, if it gets me a catchy headline".

I'd be inclined to be ambivalent on this, except that in the OP there is no literal "yes" or "no" involved (i.e., something like, "I set the MONGO_UNSAFE_DATA_COMMIT flag to 'No'") so I'm not even sure what the headline means, except that it gets a little edge parodying the anti-rape saying.

At least you can't blame the OP for thinking too much about SEO.

Re: When a No means Yes

#22

Post by [deleted] »

groby_b wrote: post #20
brennenHN wrote: post #11

Headlines like this are the casual references that makes tech a boys club. You don't think you're doing any harm, but by distorting an important argument about rape, you're undermining the sentiment behind "No means no" even as you use it in a different context.

And of course the HN boys club doesn't see anything wrong with the headline. I expected nothing less :( Seriously, people: "No means yes" is a clear reference to "No means no". It's a really bad choice of headline, because it communicates "I don't care about issues that women are facing, if it gets me a catchy headline".

[deleted]

Re: When a No means Yes

#23

Post by unnali »

brennenHN wrote: post #11

Headlines like this are the casual references that makes tech a boys club. You don't think you're doing any harm, but by distorting an important argument about rape, you're undermining the sentiment behind "No means no" even as you use it in a different context.

I clicked on the comments just to see if anyone noticed this shit; thank goodness you did.

Re: When a No means Yes

#24

Post by aeflash »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #15
aeflash wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, the 10gen spokesperson seems to have read only the H2 elements on my original writeup -- he seems to not have read or understood the actual text that goes along with them. Do they have some local CSS applied that makes regular text invisible? Couldn't read past that.

Why? It was accurate, and it does you no favors to brag about not reading an argument.

I suppose I was just not in the mood to read an article filled with such an overt tone of condescension.

Re: When a No means Yes

#25

Post by tunesmith »

epochwolf wrote: post #13
brennenHN wrote: post #11

Headlines like this are the casual references that makes tech a boys club. You don't think you're doing any harm, but by distorting an important argument about rape, you're undermining the sentiment behind "No means no" even as you use it in a different context.

Congrats on invoking Godwins law on a topic not related to the thread.

Uh, technically, you did.

Re: When a No means Yes

#26

Post by brennenHN »

rhizome wrote: post #18
brennenHN wrote: post #11

Headlines like this are the casual references that makes tech a boys club. You don't think you're doing any harm, but by distorting an important argument about rape, you're undermining the sentiment behind "No means no" even as you use it in a different context.

Hair-trigger, there.

You're absolutely right. I have zero tolerance when it comes to cultural acceptance, denial, or apologizing for rape.

We all know what the title is referencing, and it's implying that there are circumstances when "no means no" isn't true. The content of the article may be unrelated, but the title is still problematic.

Re: When a No means Yes

#27

Post by brennenHN »

unnali wrote: post #23
brennenHN wrote: post #11

Headlines like this are the casual references that makes tech a boys club. You don't think you're doing any harm, but by distorting an important argument about rape, you're undermining the sentiment behind "No means no" even as you use it in a different context.

I clicked on the comments just to see if anyone noticed this shit; thank goodness you did.

I did the same thing and no one had yet

Re: When a No means Yes

#28

Post by gwagner85 »

josh2600 wrote: post #5
gwagner85 wrote: post #2

This guys arguments are really bad because he makes them from a very narrow one sided point of view. It is actually hard to read through the hatred....

I don't read it as hatred at all. If you read the Mongo rebuttal it seems as though they willfully misconstrued the points he made in his original post. Mongo was broken by default in 2.0, that's why they changed the default behavior in subsequent versions. The author even went out of his way to talk about the changed behavior in his first post. I don't know, this is the first critique of Mongo I've seen that really…

I am not discounting due to word choice, i am discounting because his points seem to be a rant based on the whim that software never has bugs or problems. For some mongo does exactly as advertised, for some it doesn't. It is the same argument that you can pose between eventual and immediate consistency.

Also i will be the first to agree that Mongo does not hold up well to all points but to say that data gets lost is pretty bold. I have been using it for quite some time now and by following mongo best practices, i have not lost any data. In fact by following mongo best practices i have saved myself from a few data-catastrophes.

The argument that it doesn't come configured correctly out of the box is pretty weak too (at least that is how i am reading his statement of "broken by default"). What is configuration too hard. Sure they put their software out in a way that is more in tune with a lab / development atmosphere... but if your using mongo in production and you do not do the proper configuration steps, then maybe you should hang up your devops hat and hand that job off to someone else. Even mysql sucks for production out of the box, it is a security nightmare. Innodb looses data when shutdown incorrectly especially if the journal is corrupt. Saying that there is only one drive fault tolerance just means that your not striping your data properly. All the arguments are based upon a lazy implementation not actual problems.

And YES you should know something about how your backend software works. You should know it intimately so that you can debug and make it more bullet proof. So ya, i think the arguments are weak and full of hate and not something made off of experience and ability to work with a software vendor. Do i think mongo is perfect for the tinkerer like mysql is, no. Do i think mongo is good enough to hold BI data that is critical, yes.

Re: When a No means Yes

#29

Post by josh2600 »

gwagner85 wrote: post #28
josh2600 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't read it as hatred at all. If you read the Mongo rebuttal it seems as though they willfully misconstrued the points he made in his original post. Mongo was broken by default in 2.0, that's why they changed the default behavior in subsequent versions. The author even went out of his way to talk about the changed behavior in his first post. I don't know, this is the first critique of Mongo I've seen that really…

I am not discounting due to word choice, i am discounting because his points seem to be a rant based on the whim that software never has bugs or problems. For some mongo does exactly as advertised, for some it doesn't. It is the same argument that you can pose between eventual and immediate consistency. Also i will be the first to agree that Mongo does not hold up well to all points but to say that data gets lost is…

SO I think we're almost having two separate arguments here.

On the one hand we're talking about Mongo working out of the box and on the other we're talking about developer skill. I'll agree with you that an unskilled developer is going to have a bad time running any Database, but I take issue with the idea that defaults aren't important.

The default settings are the defaults for a reason. Whether that reason is ease of adoption or performance testing, there's a reason. Mongo's default behavior was not sensible and has since been corrected to be more sensible, and I think we both agree on this point.

Mongo is a really cool database with a lot of neat features, but it doesn't get a pass just because it's cool. If the defaults on Mongo could cause data loss, they should change the defaults, right?

I agree you should understand your backend, but I also see a lot of value in having sane default settings. To be honest, the majority of users may never pass beyond the default settings, which is a shame, but true.

So the author's rant is just that, but he's not wrong. He might be mistaken about the potential of Mongo, but he's not really mistaken about Mongo "out-of-the-box".

Does that clarify my position with respect to the author's opinions?

Re: When a No means Yes

#30

Post by martinced »

brennenHN wrote: post #11

Headlines like this are the casual references that makes tech a boys club. You don't think you're doing any harm, but by distorting an important argument about rape, you're undermining the sentiment behind "No means no" even as you use it in a different context.

Could we please stop with the intellectual terrorism on HN?

People can't write a blog entry anymore without being labelled either homophobic or sexist.

What's your take on humor btw? You know, like stand-up comedians making fun of white people or making fun of black people?

Post reply on HN