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

161–170 of 434 posts

Re: Girls and Software

#161

Post by timr »

sillysaurus2 wrote: post #115
timr wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should also stop and consider, for just a moment, that if the only stories that can convince you need to be famous, you're working in a very narrow space of human experience. It's a big world out there, and there are a lot of smart people who will defy your expectations.

Actually, it's not inherently about fame. It has to do with whether the hackers are skilled. Pg goes into why it's difficult to compare hacker skill in one of his essays, though I forget which. But the summary is that nobody knows who the most talented hackers are, because you have to work with them to know how talented they are. Therefore fame is the only metric that makes sense in this case to derive hard evidence.…

Fame is orthogonal to skill.

Re: Girls and Software

#162

Post by jiggy2011 »

arrrg wrote: post #131
gwern wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Someone else on this thread pointed out that Von Neumann was an exceptionally stylish guy, but he's far from the only example. So your solution is to suggest everyone be as smart as John von Neumann so they can master subjects while still being a snappy dresser? Does this seem like something people can do? The proverbial 10k hours of practice have to come from somewhere . Time is limited, activities are zero-sum.

I don’t think anyone was suggesting that. Many hackers I know do have other hobbies besides hacking and they devote lots of time to those hobbies. Beer brewing, coffee making, writing poetry, music, languages, … What if one of those hobbies is dressing fashionably? Or makeup? Or whatever? Beyond a certain point activities are zero sum but do you seriously suggest that to be a proper hacker you have no time at all for…

When you are younger the scarcity is money, not time. When I was younger I would have liked to dress fashionably or go out and do more sociable activities , but it was either that or buy computer parts and software etc. I couldn't have afforded both.

By the time you get a job that lets you afford both you don't necessarily want to learn fashion from scratch.

Re: Girls and Software

#163

Post by herokusaki »

Crito wrote: post #114
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 think that even with parents doing their best to keep kids off computers, kids will find a way to stay on computers if it is their passion. Probably about half the time as a 10-16 year old (after 16, my parents stopped caring about what I did or where I went at all) I was banned from computer use for various reasons. That didn't stop me though, I'd go to bed at 10pm, wake up at 2am, then use it until school. Was fo…

I find it hard to understand those rules. What country did you grow up in?

Re: Girls and Software

#164

Post by scott_s »

HedgeMage wrote: post #148
scott_s wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I'm trying to describe is the "by 20, it's too late to make a hacker" sentiment, which I do hear people say. So if I did have these qualities, and we're going to identify them after we've already established that I am a hacker, then it must be true that lots of other people also have these qualities, but did not become hackers. My point: the notion that good hackers must be hacking on, and tinkering with, comput…

Actually, I made it a point to explain that it doesn't have to be computers... "Even if they lacked computers, they were taking apart alarm clocks, repairing pencil sharpeners or tinkering with ham radios. Some of them built pumpkin launchers or LEGO trains." There are many early maker/hacker experiences that don't require access to or interest in computers. The point was that, at some point early on, every hacker (m…

And my point was that I don't think anyone could point to those behaviors in me until I was 16. Before then, I think I was inquisitive, but had never had an opportunity to make in the manner you're talking about.

Re: Girls and Software

#165

Post by jkrems »

simias wrote: post #56
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 don't agree. Having unlimited access to technological resources is great, I don't think anybody is denying that. But with unlimited net access also comes extremely violent videos, social networks with all kinds of shady types hanging around etc... I really don't think it's responsible to let a 9-12 yo alone on the net in their room. Enabling them to access the net easily while still supervising what they do, giving…

Kids are capable of closing windows. Yes, they might see something gruesome and have nightmares because of it. But they learn and close the window quicker next time.

Re: Girls and Software

#166

Post by dchichkov »

sillysaurus2 wrote: post #124
dchichkov wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Young women don't magically become technologists at 22. It depends. There is no strict requirement onto starting at the early age. Yes, there is a correlation, but no strict requirement. I knew someone, who had really started coding only at around 22, after she had finished a computer science / engineering degree. She was not a tinkerer/nerd, just a regular bright girl, her dad was not an engineer [was an architect…

It depends. There is no strict requirement onto starting at the early age. Yes, there is a correlation, but no strict requirement. You'll be excluded by 22 if you haven't started early. Excluded by whom? By nature. It was no accident that Zuck developed Facebook only after years of being a hacker, and that he also developed it while he was relatively young. By 22 you start to take on responsibilities which hinder you…

It really depends onto what one has been doing these 22 years ;) There's an effect of transfer learning. And I was not talking about the very top. You are right, getting to the very top, like Woz or Carmack probably requires that early start.

Re: Girls and Software

#167

Post by archagon »

Crito wrote: post #116
simias wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree. Having unlimited access to technological resources is great, I don't think anybody is denying that. But with unlimited net access also comes extremely violent videos, social networks with all kinds of shady types hanging around etc... I really don't think it's responsible to let a 9-12 yo alone on the net in their room. Enabling them to access the net easily while still supervising what they do, giving…

When I was young, probably 12 or 13 I think, I saw a series of images of a spider bite on a mans thumb causing the thumb to swell, split open, go necrotic, and eventually require amputation. Did this damage me? No, I'm fine. I gagged when I saw the images, then I scrolled down and looked at some more. Lasting effects? Well today as an adult, I smash spiders when I see them. Not a big deal.

I disagree. I saw a ton of stuff I never should have seen at that age. It didn't scar me for life, but it's desensitized me to a lot of terrible things. Unless you're a doctor, I just don't think it's healthy to look at NSFL gore, go "meh", and move on to something else. I also occasionally have those images flash in my head. I don't want them there, but there's nothing I can do about that now.

(Granted, the same thing would have happened if I first saw them in my 20s, but at least I would have known what not to click.)

Re: Girls and Software

#168

Post by arrrg »

nitrogen wrote: post #156
arrrg wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think anyone was suggesting that. Many hackers I know do have other hobbies besides hacking and they devote lots of time to those hobbies. Beer brewing, coffee making, writing poetry, music, languages, … What if one of those hobbies is dressing fashionably? Or makeup? Or whatever? Beyond a certain point activities are zero sum but do you seriously suggest that to be a proper hacker you have no time at all for…

It’s a heuristic for identifying in-group people that makes no sense and to me seems highly destructive. I suspect this heuristic started out as a way for the outcast, socially unwelcome hackers to finally find a group to which they could belong, an activity that didn't judge them for their intellect or their appearance. I further suspect that some of the pushback against lifting this heuristic comes from those same…

Oh man, even more zero sum thinking.

Outcasts making others outcasts, bullied becoming bullies. Nice.

The general point is this: rejection because of the way you dress (no matter how) or look (no matter how) is not cool. The direction doesn’t really matter. But this groupthink is pretty disgustingly exclusionary.

Re: Girls and Software

#169

Post by hifier »

simias wrote: post #56
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 don't agree. Having unlimited access to technological resources is great, I don't think anybody is denying that. But with unlimited net access also comes extremely violent videos, social networks with all kinds of shady types hanging around etc... I really don't think it's responsible to let a 9-12 yo alone on the net in their room. Enabling them to access the net easily while still supervising what they do, giving…

The beauty of the internet is that you have unfettered access to mountains of information. When I was in my early teens it was this information and ease of access that allowed me to learn about computers and how they worked. I would spend hours reading reviews of hardware components and researching solutions to hardware and software problems.

Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are ways of protecting your kids while still giving them the access that can seed a lifetime of curiosity.

Re: Girls and Software

#170

Post by herokusaki »

woah wrote: post #136
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…

So it's a binary choice between being Richard Stallman and not programming at all? Your worldview is narrow.

By the same token your comment would suggest a binary choice between having a narrow worldview and not acknowledging very real trends (that hackers care less about dress and appearance than other professionals). That's an uncharitable interpretation.
Post reply on HN