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

Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

superpowered.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 311 posts

Re: Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

#301

Post by Snesker »

smadge wrote: post #239
gone35 wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"A little manly-man programming from the wrist and we move on to real problems." See... it's the little things like this. I am pretty sure that was not your intention, but please do know that turns of phrases like that hurt a little, and exclude a little. To see what I mean, s/man/jew/ or s/man/white/ or some other category and see how it reads.

"phrases like that hurt a little, and exclude a little." I agree with you on that part but your substitution doesn't make much sense. The original comment links programming competency to masculinity, which is a problem. It's as simple as that.

Why is that a problem?

Re: Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

#302

Post by Snesker »

Frondo wrote: post #275
evincarofautumn wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should be considerate in how we listen as well as how we speak. It does no good to speak insensitively, nor to listen oversensitively. Communication is a two-way street. When I feel offended, I treat it as an opportunity to learn about a different viewpoint. Sometimes it makes me change my mind. It always gives me a better understanding of people.

The thing is, you've got a woman right here telling you, "this is exclusionary and seems stupid on the face of it." We don't even have to guess at how it's taken by someone who doesn't fit into its built-in description; they're telling us in plain language. The different viewpoint, I guess, is that the original author has some outdated views on gender competence. I've seen lots of comments saying "oh but it adds flai…

1. A woman saying something is exclusionary does not make it exclusionary on the basis that it's a woman who said it.

2.>original author has some outdated views on gender competence This is libel. This is not at all a conclusion that can be drawn from that user's posts. It's an unfair presumption and you're wrong to go around stating your opinions of others as facts.

Re: Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

#303

Post by cbd1984 »

cbd1984 wrote: post #277
kabdib wrote: post #120

I'd heard over the years that working with isochronous systems was difficult. I'd done a number of real-time systems before, and written OS schedulers and NTP-like systems and so forth. A little audio work should be a walk in the park, right? A little manly-man programming from the wrist and we move on to real problems. So I walked into an audio project thinking that "Oh, this latency and synchronization stuff, how b…

None of this is correct.

Down votes don't make me wrong.

Re: Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

#304

Post by cbd1984 »

kabdib wrote: post #120

I'd heard over the years that working with isochronous systems was difficult. I'd done a number of real-time systems before, and written OS schedulers and NTP-like systems and so forth. A little audio work should be a walk in the park, right? A little manly-man programming from the wrist and we move on to real problems. So I walked into an audio project thinking that "Oh, this latency and synchronization stuff, how b…

Flagged for sexism.

Re: Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

#305

Post by Frondo »

Snesker wrote: post #302
Frondo wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, you've got a woman right here telling you, "this is exclusionary and seems stupid on the face of it." We don't even have to guess at how it's taken by someone who doesn't fit into its built-in description; they're telling us in plain language. The different viewpoint, I guess, is that the original author has some outdated views on gender competence. I've seen lots of comments saying "oh but it adds flai…

1. A woman saying something is exclusionary does not make it exclusionary on the basis that it's a woman who said it. 2.>original author has some outdated views on gender competence This is libel. This is not at all a conclusion that can be drawn from that user's posts. It's an unfair presumption and you're wrong to go around stating your opinions of others as facts.

On point 1: if a woman says she feels excluded, then it's exclusionary. It's not up to you to decide how she feels or tell her how she should feel.

On point 2: I can't even dignify that "libel" remark with a response.

Re: Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

#306

Post by DanBC »

Frondo wrote: post #305
Snesker wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. A woman saying something is exclusionary does not make it exclusionary on the basis that it's a woman who said it. 2.>original author has some outdated views on gender competence This is libel. This is not at all a conclusion that can be drawn from that user's posts. It's an unfair presumption and you're wrong to go around stating your opinions of others as facts.

On point 1: if a woman says she feels excluded, then it's exclusionary. It's not up to you to decide how she feels or tell her how she should feel. On point 2: I can't even dignify that "libel" remark with a response.

Snesker is a holocaust denying troll.

The fact that this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9200905 is still live and wasn't heavily downvoted says something about the current HN audience.

Re: Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

#307

Post by Frondo »

DanBC wrote: post #306
Frondo wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On point 1: if a woman says she feels excluded, then it's exclusionary. It's not up to you to decide how she feels or tell her how she should feel. On point 2: I can't even dignify that "libel" remark with a response.

Snesker is a holocaust denying troll. The fact that this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9200905 is still live and wasn't heavily downvoted says something about the current HN audience.

Wow.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Re: Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

#308

Post by Snesker »

Frondo wrote: post #305
Snesker wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. A woman saying something is exclusionary does not make it exclusionary on the basis that it's a woman who said it. 2.>original author has some outdated views on gender competence This is libel. This is not at all a conclusion that can be drawn from that user's posts. It's an unfair presumption and you're wrong to go around stating your opinions of others as facts.

On point 1: if a woman says she feels excluded, then it's exclusionary. It's not up to you to decide how she feels or tell her how she should feel. On point 2: I can't even dignify that "libel" remark with a response.

Someone feeling excluded does not make something exclusionary. It's not up to you to decide someone's opinion is objective fact [i]simply because they're a woman, I might add[/i].

Re: Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

#309

Post by Snesker »

Frondo wrote: post #305
Snesker wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. A woman saying something is exclusionary does not make it exclusionary on the basis that it's a woman who said it. 2.>original author has some outdated views on gender competence This is libel. This is not at all a conclusion that can be drawn from that user's posts. It's an unfair presumption and you're wrong to go around stating your opinions of others as facts.

On point 1: if a woman says she feels excluded, then it's exclusionary. It's not up to you to decide how she feels or tell her how she should feel. On point 2: I can't even dignify that "libel" remark with a response.

Someone feeling excluded does not make something exclusionary. It's not up to you to decide someone's opinion is objective fact [i]simply because they're a woman, I might add[/i].

edit: I find it interesting that, while you're complaining about exclusion, you jumped at the first opportunity to exclude me by accepting that I'm a 'holocaust-denying troll'. Well, not interesting. Aggravating. edit edit: I think I put it in the right spot this time

Re: Android’s 10 Millisecond Problem explained

#310

Post by Snesker »

DanBC wrote: post #306
Frondo wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On point 1: if a woman says she feels excluded, then it's exclusionary. It's not up to you to decide how she feels or tell her how she should feel. On point 2: I can't even dignify that "libel" remark with a response.

Snesker is a holocaust denying troll. The fact that this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9200905 is still live and wasn't heavily downvoted says something about the current HN audience.

What part of my comment do you object to? Challenging the official story of the alleged holocaust DOES cost you your freedom in Germany, and also to a lesser extent in Canada. Do you think it should be a crime to disagree with the government? With Jews? With the 'general consensus'?

Furthermore, my remark doesn't prove in the least that I'm a troll or a holocaust denier. Use your logic. The fact that your comment is still live and wasn't heavily downvoted says something about the current HN audience.

Post reply on HN