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

Girls and Software

linuxjournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 434 posts

Re: Girls and Software

#31

Post by [deleted] »

Crake wrote: post #24
timr wrote: post #14

I'm torn. I think she makes some really good points -- particularly about discouraging young girls and the futility of shoving adult humans into foreign social situations -- but I also think she might be rather narrowly defining the personality type of a "hacker", and dismissing behaviors that she doesn't find valuable (in her words: "ephemera -- popularity, beauty and fitting in" ). Maybe it's possible that there ar…

>Maybe it's possible that there are plenty of people out there who care about "ephemera", and yet are also capable of programming a computer or soldering things together? Did you even read the article? The point she made is that feminists are trying to "fix" the gender ratio in tech by expanding the definition of hacker to people who have no idea what solder even is and have never printed a hello world in their life.…

[deleted]

Re: Girls and Software

#32

Post by Crake »

jt2190 wrote: post #13

I'm not sure I understand what the definition of "hacker" is in this article: > Young women don't magically become technologists at 22. > Neither do young men. Hackers are born in childhood, > because that's when the addiction to solving the > puzzle or building something kicks in to those who've > experienced that "victory!" moment like I had when I > imposed my will on a couple electronic primates. It seems to impl…

I don't think that's what she's saying. Note that she defines the personality type as an interest in "solving the puzzle or building something." Even if you don't have access to computers to tinker with, the sort of person who tends to become good at programming is the type who has always been innately curious and tinkering with something.

Re: Girls and Software

#33

Post by gruseom »

jt2190 wrote: post #13

I'm not sure I understand what the definition of "hacker" is in this article: > Young women don't magically become technologists at 22. > Neither do young men. Hackers are born in childhood, > because that's when the addiction to solving the > puzzle or building something kicks in to those who've > experienced that "victory!" moment like I had when I > imposed my will on a couple electronic primates. It seems to impl…

Seems to me the author vividly conveys what she means by "hacker" in the very paragraph you quoted:

  technologist
  addiction
  solving puzzles
  building things
  "victory!" moment
  impose will on electronics
These things are done and felt for their own sake and not as a means to an end, like a paycheck. Perhaps that's the main difference.

Re: Girls and Software

#34

Post by Crake »

skybrian wrote: post #29

It's a good rant. There are concrete suggestions for improvement, and also concrete examples of where some people went a little too far. I'm less happy about excluding people who are coming into computing late, though.

>I'm less happy about excluding people who are coming into computing late, though.

I don't think she's doing that. Note that she doesn't say that you haven to have been programming since age 2, just that you have to have a natural interest in "solving the puzzle or building something." I came late to programming since I didn't have access to computers I could tinker with, but I was still putzing around with k'nex and getting yelled at for taking household appliances apart from a very young age.

Re: Girls and Software

#35

Post by bitwize »

timr wrote: post #14

I'm torn. I think she makes some really good points -- particularly about discouraging young girls and the futility of shoving adult humans into foreign social situations -- but I also think she might be rather narrowly defining the personality type of a "hacker", and dismissing behaviors that she doesn't find valuable (in her words: "ephemera -- popularity, beauty and fitting in" ). Maybe it's possible that there ar…

For the longest time I harbored the biggest crush on a girl from my high school. The thing that made me fall in love with her (and it was love -- as much love as a 14-year-old could feel) wasn't that she was pretty or cute or popular -- though she was all these things. (Head cheerleader. Literally. Dated a football player and everything.)

It was that I had the good fortune to peek over her shoulder at some BASIC code she'd written in our completely noddy, intro-to-computers class. She wasn't going to put Grace Hopper to shame, but it was surprisingly well-structured and showed she knew how to reason about causes and effects within the machine. Which is, like, the first skill that you need to be a decent programmer.

But the thing about pretty girls is that they often find it is more immediately profitable to be pretty than to be bright. And staying pretty and popular -- keeping that limelight on you -- is a lot of work. It's a full-time job with potentially ruinous consequences without some sort of balance (look at Miley Cyrus). So she eventually forgot about coding and went on to become a television personality.

My point here is that you become what you invest time in becoming. If you want to ascend to elite-level hackerdom, then you almost have to put things like attractiveness and popularity on the back burner. You don't have to have poor social skills to be a hacker. But the people who are best at being popular and fitting in are the people who invested time and effort into doing just that, just like the best programmers are the ones who invested time and effort into programming. And we only have so much time to give, so yes, you kinda gotta pick and choose.

Re: Girls and Software

#36

Post by Crake »

gms wrote: post #11
forgottenpass wrote: post #2

I resubmitted this because it seems like an viewpoint that's important in the larger gender in tech conversation, but the author seems to be outside the mainstream conversation (or at lest what I see of it on Hacker News). Sadly it looks like this submission is dying an even more uneventful death than the first time it was posted.

I'm quite glad you submitted it; thanks. Unfortunate that such an online article could only have been written by a woman, as the likelihood of being on the receiving end of outrage is too high had it come from a man.

You have to be the right gender, race, or sex these days to have an opinion these days. Not judging people based on their sex would be extremely sexist!

Re: Girls and Software

#37

Post by sillysaurus2 »

timr wrote: post #28
sillysaurus2 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's possible that there are plenty of people out there who care about "ephemera", and yet are also capable of programming a computer or soldering things together? I think it's possible. Sure, Jobs did. On the other hand, Woz was the tech genius, not Jobs. I've never heard of a tech genius who also cared much about the qualities you mention. This seems more than a coincidence. If it were, then there'd probably…

"Woz was the tech genius, not Jobs....I've never heard of a tech genius who also cared much about the qualities you mention." I hope you've considered that your worldly experience may not be comprehensive. I've known plenty of good programmers who care about all the things I mentioned. They just don't self-select with the Linux user groups of the world, so you're unlikely to come upon them if that's where you hang ou…

To clarify, I asked for an example, not touted myself as the arbiter of worldly experiences.

I also asked for an example of a programmer on the level of Woz. This is an important distinguishing quality, because otherwise there's no way to know how good a hacker actually is. Every story would be anecdotal instead of resembling factual.

Re: Girls and Software

#38

Post by llimllib »

sillysaurus2 wrote: post #18
timr wrote: post #14

I'm torn. I think she makes some really good points -- particularly about discouraging young girls and the futility of shoving adult humans into foreign social situations -- but I also think she might be rather narrowly defining the personality type of a "hacker", and dismissing behaviors that she doesn't find valuable (in her words: "ephemera -- popularity, beauty and fitting in" ). Maybe it's possible that there ar…

Maybe it's possible that there are plenty of people out there who care about "ephemera", and yet are also capable of programming a computer or soldering things together? I think it's possible. Sure, Jobs did. On the other hand, Woz was the tech genius, not Jobs. I've never heard of a tech genius who also cared much about the qualities you mention. This seems more than a coincidence. If it were, then there'd probably…

> I've never heard of a tech genius who also cared much about the qualities you mention.

How about von Neumann, famous for always being in an impeccably tailored suit? I hope he's genius enough for you.

You don't even have to go past the very first hackers to find ones that care about those qualities. There are many, many other examples.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann#Personal_life

> Von Neumann took great care over his clothing, and would always wear formal suits, once riding down the Grand Canyon astride a mule in a three-piece pin-stripe. Mathematician David Hilbert is reported to have asked at von Neumann's 1926 doctoral exam: "Pray, who is the candidate's tailor?" as he had never seen such beautiful evening clothes.

Re: Girls and Software

#39

Post by shazow »

superuser2 wrote: post #12

>Parents are warned to keep kids off the computer This point cannot be overstated. I'd never have been a hacker without vast quantities of unsupervised, unfiltered internet time around age 9-12. The largest enabling step for me was when I got my own laptop which I was free to break (software-wise) and free to take into my room so I could focus away from the distracting noises of the kitchen/living room. Much of even…

Very yes. Me as well.

I got my first unsupervised access to my grandparents' computer at age 7, but with no Internet. Then at age 10-11 some foundation for underprivileged kids gifted me my own computer with free unlimited dialup and a separate phone line. This was definitely a turning point in my life.

The fact that my single mother parent trusted me with my independence was a huge amplifier, too.

Re: Girls and Software

#40

Post by mtrimpe »

Crake wrote: post #30
mtrimpe wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Start with a young woman who's already formed her identity. Dump her in a situation that operates on different social scripts than she's accustomed to, full of people talking about a subject she doesn't yet understand. Then tell her the community is hostile toward women and therefore doesn't have enough of them, all while showing her off like a prize poodle so you can feel good about recruiting a female. This is a re…

>On the other hand it has a pretty strong "I got mine" component to it, where she laments the negative effects these changes have had on her personally but doesn't acknowledge that while she's in a position she likes that doesn't at all mean it is, or would be, like that for many others. These special ed for women programming events are harmful to all women, not just women who already program. You can't de-emphasize…

I don't think either of us is capable of making definitive statements on the harm of women-only education programs, so I'll stay out of that.

I do believe however that it's completely and utterly impossible to improve gender dynamics without putting emphasis on it.

Using the (un)conscious (in)competence learning model [1] as a reference what you're saying is essentially that we should just go from unconscious incompetence straight to unconscious competence without doing that whole 'conscious' step, but that's just not a realistic option.

To achieve mastery or improvement in anything it needs to, at least temporarily, become conscious.

And yes, that will indeed be uncomfortable at first, but I really don't believe we can get there without it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_competence

Post reply on HN