Girls and Software • Hacker News Board

Re: Girls and Software

#241

Post by Crake » Mon, Feb 10, 2014, 5:01 AM UTC

archagon wrote: post #234

Crito wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd draw the line at where PTSD is actually induced. IE, actual damage. Replace "motorcyclist missing a head" with "photos of Hiroshima or liberated nazi death camps" and I don't think anybody would think it particularly strange that disturbing images are available to view. Yeah, there is historic significance behind those examples, but that doesn't really come into play when considering the effects of disturbing ima…

I could be wrong, but I think PTSD can be induced with images. The Hiroshima/Nazi photos were powerful because they were such a rare display of extreme violence. (At least, that's how I remember feeling when I first saw them.) Plus, their impact was lessened because they were grainy, old, and black and white. Would you be OK with kids today seeing a modern mass grave -- bodies hacked up, heads cut off, etc.? Me, I'd…

>I could be wrong, but I think PTSD can be induced with images.

You're wrong. I know tumblr likes to use the word "trigger" for just about everything, but real diagnosed PTSD is predicated on events significantly more traumatizing than seeing some photographs. There's nothing life-threatening about an image, no matter how disturbing.

Re: Girls and Software

#242

Post by phazmatis » Mon, Feb 10, 2014, 5:25 AM UTC

archagon wrote: post #225

phazmatis wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think it's unhealthy?

I've noticed myself showing a lack of empathy when horrible things happen to people who aren't close to me. This is especially the case with photos of war or famine. I really feel like I should have a visceral reaction, but I've just seen it all before. As I said, I also sometimes see these images in my head. I don't want to have anything to do with them, but now they're impossible to get rid of.

I would be careful not to confuse having a reaction with having empathy. If nothing you do can stop that war or famine, then an emotional reaction serves no one. Is it healthier? That's subjective.

Re: Girls and Software

#243

Post by cocoflunchy » Mon, Feb 10, 2014, 5:25 AM UTC

Crito wrote: post #231

archagon wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely you would agree that there are limits, socially determined or otherwise? Would you be OK with your child seeing a motorcyclist's head blown off? A man's distended anus? There are no limits on the internet. I saw all these things because I didn't know any better, or because I was morbidly curious. It didn't ruin me or give me PTSD or anything, but it definitely shaped my personality. I regret it now, in my mid-…

I'd draw the line at where PTSD is actually induced. IE, actual damage. Replace "motorcyclist missing a head" with "photos of Hiroshima or liberated nazi death camps" and I don't think anybody would think it particularly strange that disturbing images are available to view. Yeah, there is historic significance behind those examples, but that doesn't really come into play when considering the effects of disturbing ima…

It's interesting that you would draw the line at "photos of Hiroshima or liberated nazi death camps" because this is exactly what I was shown in school (at age 13 or 14) in history lessons. I assume the goal was to shock in order to remember that yes, the holocaust really happened, and it is our responsibility to not let something like this happen again (this is in Europe by the way). I know my friends were also into looking at gore pictures online around that age, even if I personally never felt the need/want to.

But what's for sure is that the images of mass graves and emaciated bodies are stuck in my mind probably forever, and I don't think it's a bad thing as long as it came with proper guidance. It's not the same thing to see them in school with a proper explanation and to stumble upon them by randomly clicking around online on your own in your room.

Re: Girls and Software

#244

Post by xerophtye » Mon, Feb 10, 2014, 5:26 AM UTC

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…

I am surprised you only mentioned violent videos and everyone seems to be going on and on about that. Aren't we forgetting porn? I thought parents were much more concerned about THAT rather than violent videos

Re: Girls and Software

#245

Post by japhyr » Mon, Feb 10, 2014, 5:26 AM UTC

HedgeMage wrote: post #134

japhyr wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since it is impossible to autonomously do payments on the internet before age 18, my parents' willingness to let me use their credit card I'm a high school teacher, and I teach some intro programming classes once in a while. I teach primarily low-income/ at-risk students, and this is one piece of the puzzle that keeps my students from gaining more real-world experience. It's a hard issue, too, because you can rack…

Recent bank reforms in the US created a requirement for any institution offering any checking account to offer at least one checking account option with no fees and no overdraft protection. At my banker's suggestion, I opened this type of account for my son. He has a debit card, but no checks. When he runs out of money, the debit card gets rejected -- no debt and no overdraft fees are possible. It's a great tool for…

This is a really good suggestion. If I could recommend an approach for students and parents where they would know their exact level of risk, ie $100 on a debit card, not connected to any other account, I wouldn't feel nearly as reluctant to help coach students into learning about web hosting.

Thanks!

Re: Girls and Software

#246

Post by oh_sigh » Mon, Feb 10, 2014, 5:28 AM UTC

donaq wrote: post #221

"Young women don't magically become technologists at 22. Neither do young men. Hackers are born in childhood..." Nitpick: I actually only started learning to program in university as an undergraduate (I was ~21). I have a female friend who had a similar start, so you don't necessarily have to start as a child. It's not gymnastics. The thrill of solving puzzles can be experienced at any time in your life, I think. Oth…

I don't really understand your thought process. You seem to get it, but you don't.

When you learn to program has nothing to do with when you become a hacker.

Re: Girls and Software

#247

Post by phazmatis » Mon, Feb 10, 2014, 5:32 AM UTC

tedks wrote: post #198

belorn wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think the best way forward is to throw out years of feminist research. That sentence gave me a nice smile. feminist research is poor at best, non-existent at worse. Take affirmative action in education. Give me a single study that shows that it a) produce long-term professionals, b) is better than the base line, and c) if it has any of the negative and well documented long term effects inherent of single-se…

>There are plenty of feminist research that shows there exist an gender imbalance in STEM, and most studies gives one or other kind of theory around the why. The theories are however rarely if ever tested. The "years of feminist research" has not gotten to that part yet, and won't until we demand more from researchers than summery of latest census data. Could you give specific examples? Please limit yourself to peer-…

Could you give specific examples? Please limit yourself to peer-reviewed journals in psychology and sociology.

Re: Girls and Software

#248

Post by vex » Mon, Feb 10, 2014, 5:32 AM UTC

codygman wrote: post #208

krstck wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But with unlimited net access also comes extremely violent videos, social networks with all kinds of shady types hanging around etc... Those are all there in the real world, too. You can't protect kids from anything harmful or scary, nor should you. Stumbling across a porn or horror site is probably more traumatizing for the adult, anyway. It's like people have forgotten what it's like to be a kid! You've been told…

You're not really a 4 year old until you see your first beheading on the internet!

I saw plenty of beheading videos and weird pornography on kazaa when I was 11-12. And I turned out just fine today, thanks.

Re: Girls and Software

#249

Post by einhverfr » Mon, Feb 10, 2014, 5:50 AM UTC

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…

I started programming at 8. I gave up on it at 16. Picked it up again in my mid 20's. Responsibilities are an issue, (and this is especially an issue for women, who, if they want to have a family can't wait as long as men can), but it isn't the only one.

One thing that I think is pretty clear is that as we age, our thought processes change. This is something we don't like to talk bout because because it brings up spectres like age discrimination, but it is true.

The thing is, this isn't a neutral tradeoff. While purely abstract manipulation of data may be easier in one's twenties, solving real-world problems is much easier at the age of 40, not only because we understand the problems we are solving better but also because we understand problem solving better, and tend to be better at it.

Can someone with a liberal arts degree pick up coding on her spare time and make real, significant contributions to the world by so doing? Absolutely. Will she be interchangeable with someone who has been coding since age of 6? Probably not. But interchangeability is overrated and the ability to find our own problems to solve is not.

Re: Girls and Software

#250

Post by einhverfr » Mon, Feb 10, 2014, 5:56 AM UTC

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.

Some of it is context though. Kids have curiosity, and often an ability to look at things and process them in ways that we adults have lost.

My son came to me when he was 8 and asked me what gangrene was, so the first thing we did was a Google image search. We talked about it, what it was, etc.

All too often we focus on content more than context but context is extremely important. Kids look to adults on how to react. A frightened parental figure is far more scary to a child than any image the child could ever see is.