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

61–70 of 434 posts

Re: Girls and Software

#61

Post by krstck »

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…

> I'd never have been a hacker without vast quantities of unsupervised, unfiltered internet time around age 9-12.

Agreed! Those were about the ages I was when I learned to program and fell in love with computers. I became too sensitive to social pressures after that. (One memory I have is of being 13 and intentionally typing slowly in a class so that people wouldn't know that I was a fast typer, and therefore a computer nerd. The horror!) But that age was key to forming my passion for programming. Did I stumble upon "age-inappropriate" material? Of course, but so does any kid that rides a school bus.

Re: Girls and Software

#62

Post by guard-of-terra »

jt2190 wrote: post #45
gruseom wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Don't forget: born in childhood (edit: I don't disagree with her other definitions. I am concerned that she's missed some key points of the larger debate, namely: * Should "outsiders" be actively encouraged to join the community, or should the community be insular and inward-focused? * Should those who simply want to make a better living be encouraged to learn about and seek employment in the industry, given how lucr…

We do not know whether hackers can be born in adulthood because we all weren't.

Regarding your questions there is an answer that fits hacker mentality perfectly: "Your mileage may vary".

Outsiders should try to join the community if they like. Indeed, you can't tell somebody who is "in" the community from the newcomer because in internet people don't wead badges.

Everybody should be encouraged to learn, but discouraged from cheating WRT their level and skills.

Re: Girls and Software

#63

Post by facepalm »

stefantalpalaru wrote: post #42

> Last year, his school offered a robotics class for girls only. When my son asked why he couldn't join, it was explained to him that girls need special help to become interested in technology, and that if there are boys around, the girls will be too scared to try. And that's why we can't use sexism to fight sexism (or mistakenly enforce the same composition of the general population on self-selected subsets).

It's just the same the world has always been: boys/men are on their own, no handholding provided.

Re: Girls and Software

#64

Post by scott_s »

gruseom wrote: post #33
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.

I think she also implied that this behavior will be exhibited at a very young age, or not at all. (Which jt2190 also points out below.) She's not the only one to imply this - or outright say it.

That always gives me pause, because it does not describe me. My family did not have a computer until I was 16. I figured out HTML on my own, but no programming. I took a programming course in high school, but it was rudimentary, and I did not seek out anymore at home. I don't think it ever occurred to me to try programming at home.

I actually am the hacker that I've read others say does not exist: I did not start programming until college.

Sure, I can look backwards before I started to program, or even before my family had a computer, and point out behaviors that align with being a "hacker." Despite not being a programmer at all, I was comfortable with computers after my family got one, and could figure out problems me and others had; I got a thrill out of making webpages, much the same kind of thrill I got when I first started to learn how to program. But despite these behaviors, I was not "hacking" until college.

I remember freshmen year, all of us computer science majors had a wide variety of experience in programming. A lot of kids had been programming since early teens. By junior year, I did not feel like there was a significant difference between me and them.

Re: Girls and Software

#65

Post by facepalm »

VonGuard wrote: post #50

themade.org teaches free programming classes to kids. We've been doing this for 2 years now, and most of the time, our ratios are 50/50. Yesterday, in fact, we had 3 boys and 6 girls for our scratch class, then had 8 girls and 2 boys for our interactive fiction class, taught in Twine. Couple things we've learned. First, girls default to pair programming. They cluster, they work together, when they have a problem, the…

nobody get's spoon fed computer knowledge.

Re: Girls and Software

#66

Post by cheald »

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…

> 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").

I read that more as "where do your passions lie?" People have many interests, but few passions, and passions demand sacrifices. When push comes to shove, hackers will give up popularity and fitting in for the sake of hacking - not because they don't care about those things, but because they'd rather be hacking. Girls who are told that the most important thing for them is to be beautiful and popular are deprived of the opportunity to develop a passion for hacking, because their passion for popularity chokes out other competitors.

I don't think it's harder to be a hacker if you're interested in social media or graphic design, but if you'd rather be tweeting about your latest logo design than figuring out how to fix a bug, you might not be a hacker.

Re: Girls and Software

#67

Post by dev1n »

Growing up watching shows like "Dexter's Laboratory" and "Jimmy Neutron Boy Genius" definitely shaped me as a child into the tech freak I am today. Girls getting barbies thrown at them when they are 12 does not help put girls into the tech sector. We need television shows like "Diane's Laboratory" or "Jennifer Neutron Girl Genius" to get girls interested in tech. Hit 'em when they're young.

Re: Girls and Software

#68

Post by jebblue »

stchangg wrote: post #43
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…

I'm a female developer w/ a EE degree, but mostly self-taught wrt coding. My parents were nontechnical, but I was lucky enough to have my own computer and a good internet connection starting around 4th grade (8-9 yrs old). Feeling comfortable "breaking" my computer was another thing. I was deathly afraid of breaking things as a kid (unlike my younger brother), and I think it prevented me from coding and exploring thi…

Ironically there was a time when a coding error could lead to physical damage to the screen, even the CPU or other electronics.

Also ironically, breaking things is not only half the fun it's maybe 75% of the learning.

Re: Girls and Software

#70

Post by guard-of-terra »

timr wrote: post #54
bitwize wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

"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." No, you really don't. You believe this because it's what you've seen around you, but that's a selection bias. Someone else on this thread pointed out that Von Neumann was an exceptionally stylish guy, but he's far…

- Hackers tend to do things sequentially. First get really good at something, look around, become good at something else. Compare that to people who just try to be "good enough" at (a limited scope of) everything.

- Hackers tend to have their own path in doing things.

A teenager hacker might look stange and alien to his peers because they do everything in the same way, extremelly conformist. Same thing for beauty: teenagers care less for beauty, more for copying things they understand.

This means that even social and stylish hacker might seem a freak in their teens.

Post reply on HN