751–760 of 880 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at the leadership. They have a large number of non-technical people and placeholders. The reason why it has ended up becoming political is because Rust is run by politicians.
Pray tell, who do you think are non-technical people in https://www.rust-lang.org/governance
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of empathy is realizing when someone is authentically upset, and telling that apart from when they are being cynically melodramatic. > I left because when I felt JeanHeyd's pain and disappointment at being mistreated and betrayed, my heart broke. I wept because of the cruelty. But I also wept because I helped create the system that could do this to someone. This shit does not come off as authentic even a little…
You're right, it's not authentic or to be taken at face value. But that doesn't mean that there's not some authentic meaning that's being clearly communicated here. Look beyond the surface message!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The Rust project needs to stamp this out before it begins to fester. https://www.theregister.com/2021/11/23/rust_moderation_team_... There seems be something rotten at Rust and I've no idea what but anyone who gets a close look at Rust leadership seems to sprint away. It doesn't seem to be a matter of stamping something out it'll be an entire overhaul.
From Rust team discussion at Reddit, it's not that anyone sprints away, the answer is that no one has the time to balance volunteering for Rust, working on code, reviewing, doing technical review, and then on top of that moderation and doing diplomatic stuff. Essentially no-one wants to do diplomatic stuff, so it falls to only person that likes doing that stuff (which isn't a good thing). Which can leads to episodes…
This reminds me of an episode in Scrubs where one of the residents volunteers to announce bad news to patients or family [1].
Several patients later, the lead doc tells them, "... if you could stop worrying so much about who does and doesn't notice... you. Even for a second... that'd be good; that'd be real good."
Their plaintive explanation previously was, "I just wanted to be colleagues."
It wouldn't surprise me volunteers pick up diplomatic work, and it just doesn't jive like a computer program at all. With humans, who knows what we are getting into?
Should we have goals up-front before we dive into open-source? Whether it's for respect and recognition, or a completely selfless quest for the good of a project we care about, or something else.
Maybe we just love to write code; the project is cool; and we just want to be involved.
I guess we have to be ready when the system does not behave like we expect, and we can't QA behavior or choices. That's the hard part of soft skills.
[1] Season 2, episode 4 (S02E04), My Big Mouth
Transcript: https://scrubs.fandom.com/wiki/My_Big_Mouth_transcript
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Have you been judged by the color of your skin Yes. I'm pretty sure I've been judged for every single one of my identifiable immutable characteristics. For my skin color, out loud in the street, for sure when I lived in a place where I was the minority. > and denied opportunities Do you mean directly, aside from that conference where white males were told to attend less, or my employer openly favoring people who ar…
Told to attend less because there needed to be space for other demographics? That’s not discrimination because it’s not preventing white men from attending, it’s just allowing other people to also attend unless you believe that you’re also somehow better than everyone who was allowed to attend. the same goes for favouring people in your job. If you have a systemic issue in your place of work, then report it. But othe…
Prioritizing non-whites and non-Asians for things like university admissions, employment and promotions is the same thing. You're not just giving your preferred groups the opportunity to compete, you're lowering your standards for them and raising them for the disfavored groups, creating barriers based on an immutable characteristic, which is skin color. Plain and simple racism.
You don't have to post your alleged experience with racism if you don't want to, but to then imply that I am racist for sharing mine and asking you to reciprocate sure is disingenuous. For the record, I care about equality, which is why I reject equity, since its implementation is predicated on the discriminatory policies that I described.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Keep your sexual and romantic life to yourself in a programming community. It's normal for people to mention their romantic partners in casual conversation. Straight people do this all the time . So it's really really hard to interpret this request as anything other than a request for LGBTQ people specifically to hide the fact that they're LGBTQ from their coworkers. Examples of straight people doing this: > I have…
And normal (aka non-insufferable) people would just frame these pretty much in the same exact way? - Gay people can have children as well - Gay people will also take paternity/maternal leave? Refer to the above point for this one - This one is the one where people usually just substitute the word "wife/husband" with "partner" Again, none of this has anything to do with software engineering or programming languages in…
As for why people bring this stuff up, I think that reduces to the question of why people make small talk. I don't know, but they do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> for a brief moment in the 90s and early 2000s we didn't have any of this dogma that could demand you nod along. You could be openly gay, openly Christian, conservative, leftist, or apolitical. An awful lot of people didn't have the luxury of being openly gay in the 90s and 2000s. Depending on how old you are, this is naive at best or disingenuous at worst.
An awful lot of people still don't have the luxury of being openly gay in the 2020s, because they happen to live in militant theocratic states. People on the activist left often seem to conveniently forget this, in a way that can only be fairly described as "naive at best or disingenuous at worst".
Are you talking about Iran or Florida? :)
But more seriously, your overall response is quite cryptic. I can’t answer for the ‘activist left’, whoever you take them to be.
Wait. Let me get this straight. Someone is an expert in this field. They're asked to speak at RustConf after a leadership vote. They've also written an article about reflection in Rust - a purely technical thing that is already pretty widely disliked conceptually. (EDIT: the talk was about this, but it's also compile time reflection and came with the usual disclaimer that it was not representative of any of the Rust…
I don't get what's wrong with his post about reflection, why would someone be uncomfortable with a tool? https://soasis.org/posts/a-mirror-for-rust-a-plan-for-generi... - Is this the post ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think its ironic. Its just that a shared ownership model is more complex than having a single person in charge, making decisions. And its a reasonably new idea - not many of us have the experience and skills we need to make it work. Inevitably, more mistakes happen. In many ways its sort of incredible and impressive how well rust functions. There's probably hundreds of people involved, from core compiler tool…
You understand a central tenant of Rust is forbidding shared ownership?