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

291–300 of 434 posts

Re: Girls and Software

#291

Post by arrrg »

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #226
arrrg wrote: post #120

Nice, complete misunderstanding of feminism and what most people argue for. Nice attacking of straw men. Nice rant for the status quo. I’m sad now.

Please elaborate. There's no such thing as a "misunderstanding of feminism". Feminism hasn't been a coherent movement in decades. It's a highly stratified network of ideologies and schools, some of which are only vaguely united under the pretext of social justice, but which have radically different views. Some are even openly and proudly transphobic. I'd like it if we stopped pretending feminism is some zenith of civ…

Feminist thought is diverse, sure, but there are certain schools of thought that are by far more widespread. This article misrepresents those.

I do not know any feminist, for example, who would ever think of telling a woman to dress more gender-appropriate. Such gender policing is abhorred and practically unheard of. It’s just so weird to read about that as some sort of feminist idea.

Also, feminism is super-rad. Proud feminist!

Re: Girls and Software

#292

Post by leoedin »

scott_s wrote: post #64
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.

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 rudimenta…

I don't think "hacker" and "programmer" are completely synonymous. The "hacker" attributes that you definitely see in some children - taking apart things (although often failing to put them back together), building things, solving problems - often turn into careers in mechanical engineering, electronics, even sculpture. Programming is just one way of expressing that desire to create and tinker. I don't think all programmers are hackers, and many hackers aren't programmers.

Re: Girls and Software

#293

Post by aestra »

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…

Not if you grew up poor like me and didn't actually have access to a computer. I didn't until I was 12 years old.

>Was four hours of sleep every night good for me? Probably not, but kids can get away with that sort of thing.

No they cannot. Children need sleep, perhaps more than adults. They need sleep for proper development and functioning. They also need more sleep than adults.

http://www.webmd.com/parenting/guide/sleep-children

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/education/2010-08-12-kid...

http://www.atsjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1164/ajrccm.157.4.9704...

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998....

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/80/5/664.short

Re: Girls and Software

#294

Post by e12e »

facepalm wrote: post #283
belorn wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let see what findings the cited studies in the paper has to say: "teachers give boys greater opportunity to expand ideas and be animated than they do girls and that they reinforce boys more for general responses than they do for girls." (1994) "teachers who are made aware of their gender-biased teaching behaviors and then provided with strategies and resources to combat bias are better able to promote gender equity i…

I think that kind of research is interesting, but feminists are prone to jumping to conclusions. All sorts of things could happen in the classroom. For example, maybe boys raise their finger more often to ask questions (no idea, just an example). That could be a reason for "teachers giving them more time and space". No theory of discrimination necessary. Or maybe boys are dumber and need more help than girls - anothe…

> think that kind of research is interesting, but feminists are prone to jumping to conclusions.

I'm afraid researchers in general are far to prone to jumping to conclusions.

> As soon as they see any data that can be interpreted to support the presence of discrimination, the case is closed and no further inquiry is being made.

That's not my experience with such research. On the contrary, there are usually a progression: first look at the statistical data to see if there appear to be differences, and if there are, then try and find out more about those differences, why they are there and if they can and/or should be mitigated.

A lot of the work in classrooms, for instance, first started with documenting classroom settings on video, looking at the amount of time spent with various students and how often one or another group was picked to answer questions etc. This work revealed rather stark differences, much to the surprise of teachers who subjectively thought themselves to not do any sort of differentiation.

Now, explaining those differences is indeed complex. And while I don't think there is any support for the idea that boys are dumber than girls (or vice versa) -- there are indeed studies suggesting that young boys have a harder time learning and concentrating in a quiet "at-the-desk" classroom setting. This then has implications for how one should organize class; in general you don't want noisy students to distract those that are more quiet/more mature -- nor might you want to segregate the classroom too much.

> For example, in the wage gap discussion, I have never seen anybody ask an employer why they pay women less. Who knows, there might be some surprising answers.

That amounts to asking employers why they are breaking the law, which makes it a little tricky. In general there are three important questions here: do women earn the same as men (no); are women paid the same amount for the same work as men (no, but the difference is smaller -- especially now than in the 60s); And: Why?

The answer to why is also a two-part answer: partly women do more of the work that is considered free (or very low wage when people are hired to do it): housework and staying at home with children. Additionally, due to women being overrepresented in careers with lower wages, in a typical family, it makes more economic sense for the woman to stay home with young (and/or sick) children -- which again means the woman might progress slower in her career.

To cut an already too long comment short, have a look at for example:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-06-21/equal-pay-pl...

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/04/09/1839281/on-equal...

Re: Girls and Software

#295

Post by rahw »

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.

While starting early is obviously a tremendous advantage, it's a shame that it's often discussed in such an exclusive way.

For reference, I am a female programmer who got a /relatively/ late start. I took my first cs class because I was embarrassed that I used my computer like an Internet Explorer box. Barely three years later, here I am knee-deep in code with a job offer from Google. Am I an exceptional hacker? No. Can I hold my own with the 'started-at-12' crowd? Pretty much.

It saddens me that more people don't feel empowered to dive into a new field. Many people, especially high-achieving students, suffer from the misconception that to succeed in various technical fields, you must specialize early. Whenever an outsider expresses any interest in programming or math, I encourage them to try it. "It's too late for me," and "I'm just not an X person," are common responses. These attitudes are caused in part by the way we STEM folks don't bother as much with non-children. You might tell a little kid about how cool programming is, but do you even attempt a real explanation of your work with a young adult? Your uncle? If so, gold star. If not, you are only contributing to the wall between the tech-savvy and general populace. It's never too late for someone to learn.

Too much stress on the early start just adds another barrier to entry for people like myself who lacked either the exposure or awareness to get started sooner.

If our goal is to make the tech universe more accessible, we shouldn't be perpetuating the idea that you need a certain background to participate or excel.

Re: Girls and Software

#296

Post by e12e »

Crake wrote: post #241
archagon wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> I know tumblr likes to use the word "trigger" for just about everything

While I also find the use of "trigger warnings" rather strange, that usage has to do with triggering reactions that stem from actual PTSD, not that the images themselves can induce it. I know shooting victims can be troubled by fireworks, I don't doubt abuse victims can be troubled (or triggered) by images as well. I don't think that alone should be reason to censor everything we do, but that doesn't mean we can't try to empathize with those that have experienced terrible things either.

Re: Girls and Software

#297

Post by tptacek »

VonGuard wrote: post #177
gruseom wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you get kids modding Minecraft? I suggested this a little while ago for a kid in my brother-in-law's Grade 8 class, but then regretted it because the tools for doing it seemed inaccessible to beginners.

You don't. It's Java. It's like a kid asking you to build a car engine from scratch day one. We kindly point them to our Scratch class as a way to learn how to program.

So what? My kid went to summer camp for Java graphics/game programming; he had a middle school semester of Python before that and nothing else. He wasn't the youngest in the course, either. Java is not that hard. In fact, because it's so explicit (and wordy and boilerplatey), it might even be easier than some of the alternatives.

Re: Girls and Software

#298

Post by mtrimpe »

Crake wrote: post #238
mtrimpe wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 incompe…

>I don't think either of us is capable of making definitive statements on the harm of women-only education programs Well, it's pretty much a given that they're increasing sex based discrimination in the world. Both as a primary effect ("we only take people with vaginas") as well as a significant secondary effect ("wait, so I can't go because I'm a boy?"). >I do believe however that it's completely and utterly impossi…

> Incidentally, this makes you a sexist.

Given that sexist isn't a binary thing I'm perfectly willing to concede that to some degree and in some ways I am indeed a sexist.

Heck, I'm bisexual and to some degree I'm a homophobe. I don't like it, I'm not proud of it, it definitely doesn't work in my favour and I'm actively working on it, but I still am.

And so are you and that's OK. As long as bit by bit we're all getting better.

Re: Girls and Software

#299

Post by lordCarbonFiber »

rahw wrote: post #295
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. While starting early is obviously a tremendous advantage, it's a shame that it's often discussed in such an exclusive way. For reference, I am a female programmer who got a /relatively/ late start. I took my first cs class because I was embarrassed that I used my computer like an Internet Explorer box. Bar…

First off, congrats to you for success. I certainly agree that it's very possible to break into this space at pretty much any stage in your life. However, I think you have the cause and effect of attitudes toward non-children backwards. There is, unfortunately in my opinion, a lot of cultural pressure to develop artificial specializations early. This helps create the "I'm not an X person" mentality which in turn creates a chilling effect toward anyone trying to pass on a passion for technology. The belief in technology as unfathomable magics extends even into other scientific fields among people who are very intelligent (at least in my experience). It tends to be easier to convince a child this is not the case and efforts in technology education have followed the path of least resistance. I think there is huge room to grow in terms of expanding technology education, but I don't know how it's going to happen in an environment where "I'm not an X person" is an acceptable (even encouraged) mentality.

Re: Girls and Software

#300

Post by aaronem »

Dewie wrote: post #266
HedgeMage wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I don't think I ever fixed, made or was curious about such things when I was a child. So I guess I'll just have to accept my fate of becoming a corporate programming drone that hackers will secretly or not so snicker at for being so clueless and unproductive, and to become unemployable or change careers at 40 because of my relative lack of passion for the craft. At least I've been warned.

Well, you could take everything incredibly personally for no obvious reason, or you could consider that no one is actually saying you have to be a "hacker" so-called to participate in the industry.
Post reply on HN