Sep 292016
 

By now, I’m sure you have all heard about the fiasco that happened to Palmer Luckey, inventor of the Oculus Rift, due to a single donation of his along with having a Trump & #GamerGate supporting girlfriend.  Many people are calling this Brendan Eich 2.0, refering to how Brendan Eich was forced out of Mozilla, due to his political beliefs.  While there are similarities between what is happening to Palmer Luckey and what happened to Brendan Eich, simply calling this Brendan Eich 2.0 ignores a major part of why Palmer Luckey is in this situation.

When Brendan Eich was forced out of Mozilla, it was just about him.  No one was interested in destroying Mozilla, just getting rid of him.  There was also no attempt to connect Brendan Eich to some larger group like 4Chan.  With Palmer Luckey, it’s different.  For example, VentureBeat is connecting Palmer Luckey to everything from the NRA to 4Chan just because he uses common abbreviations like LEO for law enforcement officer and the “>” symbol for quoting comments that he is responding to. VentureBeat says that using the “>” symbol is evidence of being connected to 4Chan because on 4Chan “>” turns text green.  In reality the “>” symbol has been used in email and on Usenet for quoting previous comments since before Palmer Luckey was born and before 4Chan existed.

While that may seem to be the most absurd thing anyone could say about Palmer Luckey, it gets worse.  The Atlantic is not only trying to connect Palmer Luckey to Trump & 4Chan, but to Elliot Rodger, (yes Elliot Roger), Peter Thiel, and Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit against Gawker (which Peter Thiel funded).  The Atlantic article doesn’t make much sense.  It seems to be saying that Silicon Valley is festering with Trump supporting Elliot Rodger wannabes, yet, even by the article’s own admission, Silicon Valley is heavily anti-Trump.  It seems like the article is trying to imply some sort of conspiracy theory where Palmer Luckey, Peter Thiel, 4Chan & similar elements are secretly working together to use VR to turn geeks into Elliot Rodgers.

What The Atlantic & VentureBeat is absurd and lacks any connection to reality.  Brendan Eich didn’t have to deal with this level of craziness.  Wrapped up in all of this is the narrative that the media has been selling about this.  That narrative is that Palmer Luckey has managed to completely derail the progress of VR development.  The media is pushing that narrative hard because the media wants to derail the development of VR.  VR is a threat to traditional media like The Atlantic and even newer media like VentureBeat, Gawker, etc.  VR is a bigger threat to current media than Trump could ever be.  The media has declared war on Palmer Luckey in an attempt to stop VR.  That will not work.  Attacking Palmer Luckey is too little, too late to stop VR.  VR has been in development for decades, and VR development will not stop or be slowed down regardless of what happens to Palmer Luckey.  The worst case scenario is that developers use a different platform for VR than the Oculus Rift.  There is too much money involved and too many options available for a crash in VR development to happen.

Sep 192016
 

I have been avoiding commenting on the Douglas Crockford situation where he got dis-invited to the Nodevember conference due to vague accusations of making other people (namely women) uncomfortable.  The problem for me was that there was no hard information about what was going on.  I figured something would come out eventually (and it would exonerate Douglas Crockford).  I decided to stop waiting when I discovered the following “example” of  Douglas Crockford’s sexism.

Someone on reddit said that at the previous Nodevember conference, Douglas Crockford was talking about hot chicks during his keynote.  Here is the video of hit allegedly doing that:

He wasn’t talking about hot chicks. He was talking about HOT CHICKEN.  For those of you who don’t know, hot chicken is a type of fried chicken from Nashville, where Nodevember is held.  Hot chicken is made using cayenne pepper so it is spicy. It is very good so if you have the opportunity to try it you should do so.  Before Douglas Crockford’s keynote at the last Nodevember, hot chicken was served for lunch, and that is the hot chicken he is referencing in the video.

This tells you everything you need to know about the Douglas Crockford situation.  Feminists and manginas are so desperate to get him that they’re twisting hot chicken into hot chicks.  On top of that, they’re sullying the good name of hot chicken.  I’m sure some feminist or mangina will soon say that hot chicken is misogynist rather than admit they made a mistake by not realizing the difference between hot chicken and hot chicks.

What’s next?  Will feminists and manginas say that Roscoe’s House of Chicken and Waffles oppresses women?  Eventually, it is going to happen.

Jul 092016
 

I found an example that proves that the feminist idea that there is pervasive misogyny in the tech industry is nothing but paranoid propaganda:

Here’s an example I was thinking of after I wrote my original post.

I work at a largish engineering company, and help organize events for summer interns. One of them is an “ask us anything” panel where we encourage interns to ask recently graduated full-time employees about life at the company without managers / HR in the room.

Every year, we get a young woman asking us something along the lines of “I’ve heard the engineering industry is super sexist. How horribly oppressed am I going to be?”

Now, the response they usually get from the ladies on the panel (who I assume are being truthful) is basically “you will very occasionally get some sexist / not-quite-appropriate remarks, almost exclusively from people either within 10 years of retirement (hence self solving) or from the non-college educated techs that have a rougher culture in general. This will be mildly annoying but won’t have a real effect on your career”.

So given that it seems workplace sexism for our engineers isn’t really fake, but is typically a minor irritant at worst, is that female intern really well served by being primed to expect lousy sexist treatment? The potential paranoia that every adverse decision is unavoidable due to your gender, or that today will be the day you’re horribly harassed… can’t that be worse than the actual harm of the intransigent remaining vestiges of professional sexism?

This shows that there is no vile hive mind running an assault mission against women in tech.  In addition, the two examples of “kindly annoying misogyny” in tech are likely to not be misogyny at all.  In the case of the men within 10 years of retirement, that is more likely to be noting more than failing to use the latest SJW approved language than actual misogyny.  For the less educated men, that is likely to be the problem as well plus the (college educated) women being bigoted against men who are not college educated.  Thus, it is clear that there is no misogyny in the tech industry.

Jun 252016
 

I don’t know how to describe this so let me start off with the words of Sarah Nadav, a startup founder who came up with a new idea:

Let’s talk about an uncomfortable truth, sexual harassment and assault is common in the tech industry. The only reason we don’t hear more about it is because the men who perpetrate it the most are also the ones who hold the “keys to the kingdom”- as investors or powerful industry figures, women don’t want to ruin their careers by speaking out.

So I have come to a conclusion. I am adding a “sexual misconduct clause” into all of my investment agreements. If an investor or employee of the investor/accelerator/incubator makes a sexual advance towards me or anyone in my company (Civilize), then they are stripped of all of their shares in Civilize (even the ones that have vested) and there will be a public notice to shareholders as to the reason why.

Notice the jump from sexual assault to a sexual advance, which could mean anything including asking someone out for coffee.  On top of that, not only is there no due process when an alleged “sexual advance” occurs, but how easily this could be used for fraud.  Want to steal an investors shares in a startup?  That’s easy to do with this since all you have to do is accuse the investor (or one of their employees) of asking someone out.  Who would want to invest in such a scenario?

Or what if the person who is falsely accused of asking someone out is gay?  Or a gay individual actually asks someone out of the same sex?  That will be an immediate fraud lawsuit plus the accusation of discrimination against gays and homophobia.  And that has to be an issue, because she says that ” sexual harassment and assault is common in the tech industry”.  Remember, we keep hearing about how few women are in tech.  For sexual harassment and assault to be endemic in tech, that has to mean the primary victims of this alleged epidemic are men not women.

I don’t know how this would be enforceable.  Take how she listed employees of an incubator as being bound by this clause.  Every employee of the incubator would have to be informed and sign a document to that effect.  Any smart employee of said incubator will just avoid Sarah Nadav and her company.  Another reason that it would not be enforceable is the question of how it would apply to Sarah Nadav herself.  What happens if she (or one of her employees) asks out an investor, an employee of an investor, or an employee at an incubator?  Why does she and her employees have the right to ask people out working for their incubator or investor, but not the reverse.  For that matter, someone who is pissed off at her could use this policy against her by falsely accusing her of sexual advances and threatening to use this policy against the accuser.

Where did Sarah Nadav get this insane idea?  Read her own words:

Let me walk you through my process:

Yesterday I read Lena Dunham’s Linkedin post

We don’t need to continue reading after that, but it gets worse.  She is by her own admission filled with rage about (potential) investors:

While other CEOs are worried about getting funded, I am shit scared that one of them will invest.

Every time I get up to pitch, instead of sharing my vision I am exploding with rage. And then I apologize and promise to do better, and change my pitch to one that is even more antagonizing then the last.

I was literally told that I need to work harder on hiding my thinly veiled contempt for the investors.

The good news is that no one will have to deal with her “sexual advance clause” and its fraud because she will have already scared all investors away.  Despite this, Sarah Nadav is worried that an investor will want to have dinner with her:

Because here is my deepest fear- I am afraid that one of these men, these bad actors will end up investing in Civilize. He will have a board seat, he will own part of my life’s work. One day, he will offer to take me out to dinner and I will think it is professional but he will have another agenda (because in his mind lunch is for business and dinner is for lovers but I didn’t get the memo), he will make an advance, I won’t know what to do, everything will get awkward and I will be afraid of making an enemy of him because he will have the power to oust me from my company.

I have good news for Sarah Nadav.  She never needs to worry about an investor (or any other man) asking her out to dinner.  No investor will invest in her startup after seeing her rage and contempt.  No man (investor or otherwise) will ask her to dinner because they won’t want to be alone with her.  Given her rage, paranoia, and all around crazy, no man will want to be anywhere near her without multiple witnesses.  And that will be true for many women too.  The only conclusion I can draw from this is that Sarah Nadav has decided to shout, “I’m insane.  Don’t invest in my startup.”  We have all gotten the message.

Jun 172016
 

More and more has been happening with the Jacob Appelbaum case.  For those of you who don’t know what is going on, Jacob Appelbaum is (or rather was since he resigned his position) at the TOR Project, a software application to help protect anonymity on the internet.  A website (http://jacobappelbaum.net/) got created out of nowhere to document all of Appelbaum’s alleged rapes and sexual assaults.  It has all of the hallmarks of being nothing but false accusations.  The crimes that Appelbaum are supposed to have committed unspecified or poorly specified.  They are also mostly unfalsifiable except in one case that was reported by witnesses, but the supposed victim insists she was not sexually assaulted.  (This is exactly the same thing that happened at CSU.)  It’s also a social media campaign with a call for others to come forward to join the social media campaign.  None of that involves going to the police or taking any legal action whatsoever.

That last part is very important.  One of Appelbaum’s accusers objects to due process and the legal system because it is “violent towards accusers”.  This is basically the same argument that is being used by the women at the University of Tennessee who are suing to end due process because they believe due process violates their rights.  In other words, this woman wants to completely eliminate due process.  Additionally, that same woman objects to being described as a lynch mob:

I was troubled by some of the misguided defenses of Jake. People speaking up were dismissed as a lynch mob — an ahistorical and offensive way to describe a critical mass of people who had previously been silenced and were demanding accountability.

This is the exact same argument that the KKK would use to lynch black men, especially if a white woman was falsely accusing a black man of rape.  Everyone who is accusing Appelbaum of anything is morally equivalent to the KKK now.

Instead of due process and a real evidence based investigation conducted by police, the accusers want something called “transformative justice”. From what I can tell is half gibberish and half complete totalitarianism. Take a look at some of the steps involved in “transformative justice”:

0. Jake must be excluded from all community activities as a precondition for healing.

1. We must believe victims, and continue to foster an environment where they feel safe to report their stories of abuse.

“Transformative justice” is just another term for getting rid of due process and legal standards like innocent until proven guilty.  It doesn’t even replace innocent until proven guilty with guilty until proven innocent.  Under guilty until proven innocent an innocent man still has a chance of being declared innocent sometimes.  “Transformative justice” is guilty forever with no possibility of proving innocence.  The court systems of the most totalitarian nations that have ever lived (including the Soviet Union) weren’t this bad.

It’s obvious that all of the accusations against Appelbaum are false.  Any criminal accusation made by someone who wants to eliminate due process must be a lie.  Anyone who has a legitimate criminal accusation against someone would not be afraid of due process.

May 212016
 

As we know, the women in tech movement seeks to remove as many men as possible from the tech industry.  And part of that is targeting Indian men and Asian men working in tech.  Many Asian and Indian men who work in tech are immigrants.  Now, there is a new angle in targeting Asian and Indian immigrants working in tech, using the fact that some visas require their wives to not work.

The article blames “an immigration system focused only on meeting corporations’ needs” which is bullshit by itself since any of these wives of immigrants working in the tech industry could change their visa status.  However, I anticipate that the next target will be the immigrant men working in tech themselves for forcing their wives into an immigration status where they can’t work.  Since the vast majority of immigrant men working in tech are Indian and Asian, this is really an attack on Indian and Asian men working in tech.  Indian and Asian men are already accused of importing “misogyny” into the tech industry, and this visa issue will be used to bolster that attack.  Even with tactics like these, I don’t anticipate this will stop class action racial discrimination lawsuits from Asian and Indian men when the women in tech movement tries to remove them from the tech industry.

May 052016
 

Ellen Pao is up to her old tricks. She has started a group to “improve diversity” in the tech industry focusing on startups. Since Ellen Pao is involved, this group is nothing but an attempt to shakedown companies in the tech industry over “diversity”. It is telling that Ellen Pao is focusing on startups. Startups don’t have the resources to fight an extended battle against a group shaking them down with mafia style tactics. She’s hoping that startups will pay her off instead of dealing with the negative publicity she could generate.

Of course, there is a built in problem with what Ellen Pao is doing. Anything having to with “diversity” in the tech industry requires that Asian men be fired which will open up Ellen Pao’s group and any company stupid enough to follow her to discrimination lawsuits from Asian men.

Apr 102016
 

What does “Women in Tech” mean?  This should be self evident, but not when you put male to female transsexuals in the mix.  I found this subreddit called GenderCritical.  It’s a subreddit for feminists who think that male to female transsexuals are a conspiracy by men to oppress women.  One of the posts on this reddit was how male to female transexuals were forcing actual women out of the Women in Tech movement (and out of the tech industry).  This is apparently a plot to keep women out of the tech industry.  The comments are even better such as this one where they believe that male to female transsexuals are getting better jobs than actual womenThe reason why this is happening in the tech industry according to them is because the men who started the tech industry are socially maladjusted guys who really hate women, unlike plain old misogynists:

I don’t see a lot of other industries really hating women. Sure, misogyny has been a part of the fabric for a long time because it’s been a part of the social structure for forever.

Tech was started and built by deeply socially maladjusted males. They used their technical expertise to cover for their massive insecurities. Social media is basically the social version of all of the misogyny and awkwardness of an industry that maintains hatred of women as a cornerstone.

This is an example of why accusations of transphobia should be used against accusations of sexism/misogyny.  Let the male to female transsexuals and women fight over what the women in “women in tech” means.  If they can’t define what “woman” means then there is no need for “women in tech” nonsense, then the tech industry can’t be sexist and can’t be expected to increase the percentage of women in tech because no one knows what a “woman” is.

Apr 062016
 

One way the tech industry, gaming, CEOs, etc. is accused of being sexist is by using the ratio of men to women in those areas.  At the End Women’s Suffrage blog, I found the perfect way to use their own “logic” against them:

This shows us the perfect defense to use against accusations of sexism in these areas.  The same people making those false accusations are also very pro transgender.  To them being in a male body doesn’t necessarily mean that person is a man.  Since they believe that, how do they not know that the male/female ratio in the tech industry or gaming isn’t 1 woman for every man?  They can’t without being transphobic according to their own politics.

The next time someone says the tech industry, gaming, or anything else that has more men than women is sexist, accuse them of transphobia.  According to their politics, they can’t know that there is more men than women just by looking at them.  Their politics says that just because someone looks like a man, it doesn’t mean that they are a man like the conversation above points out.  Use their own politics against them.

Mar 162016
 

Imagine you are Google and looking to hire someone for your social media team.  Who would you hire, especially if you are looking for someone with experience create online communities (and not wrecking them)?

  1. Adria Richards
  2. Ellen Pao
  3. Coraline Ada Ehmke
  4. Randi Harper
  5. Some random “diversity” hire
  6. Chris Poole, a.k.a. moot, the founder of 4Chan

The logical choice would be Chris Poole, and Google is hiring him, presumably to work on their social media products.  This makes sense.  Chris Poole understands how to successfully create online communities, and Google understands that they need that kind of experience to compete in social media.

Shanley Kane, the January 2015 Entitlement Princess of the Month, does not understand this.  She wrote an article where she angrily whines about how Google chose to hire Chris Poole instead of a “marginalized person”.  (As far as I can tell “marginalized person” means someone with no technical knowledge and no relevant experience.)  Take a look at what Shanley Kane said about Chris Poole and 4Chan:

Then, just yesterday, Google announced it was “thrilled” to hire the founder of 4chan on its social products team.

Yes, that’s right: 4chan, a site known primarily for enabling mass cyber sexual assault against women

Mass cyber sexual assault?  Somehow I doubt that 4Chan users have figured out how to grope women through the internet.  (If they have then, Google should hire Chris Poole for their VR team to enhance their VR products with physical interaction.)  “Cyber sexual assault” is a contradiction in terms unless people can be groped through the internet.  As we can tell from the link, Shanley’s definition of “mass cyber sexual assault” is downloading some pics.  4Chan users might be guilty of hacking or illegally possessing copyrighted material, but that’s about it.

a site [4Chan] whose only claim to fame is hosting, harboring, coddling, incubating and disseminating hate, harassment, groupthink, violence and terrorism?

Terrorism?  Without 4Chan, ISIS/ISIL/Daesh would have never gotten off the ground, right?

4chan evokes a visceral sensation of fear and trepidation in many marginalized Internet users.

There is no such thing as a “marginalized internet user”.  A true marginalized person can not afford access to the internet.

as if founding a terrorist group is some kind of achievement

4Chan is such a terrorist group with all their suicide bombers and guys who fly planes into buildings, right?

building a massively homogenous community, largely geographically isolated to the US, UK and Canada

It’s like people speak different languages and primarily go to online communities in their native language.  Who knew?

By it’s own account, 4chan is 70% male; though more detailed demographics are unavailable, all signs indicate a primarily young (age: 18-34)

Young men don’t deserve to have online communities made for them, right?  Anytime more than one young man is in a room, it must be a terrorist group, right?

Since tech companies refuse it, and the tech press will not do it, I instead call on the tech community itself to condemn Google’s hiring of Christopher Poole.

Condemn Google for what?  Hiring a competent man with experience instead of a shrill man hating harpy with no tech knowledge?  I commend Google for hiring Chris Poole and not giving in to whining feminist harpies.

Mar 082016
 

Since today is International Women’s Day, let’s take a look at female contributions to science.  While any writing on this topic should include events like #ShirtGate/#ShirtStorm, the unwarranted attacks on Dr. Matt Taylor, and the witch hunt against Dr. Tim Hunt, not to mention the feminist belief that Isaac Newton’s Principia Mathematica is a rape manual, I am going to focus on female attempts to “contribute” to the body of scientific knowledge.

Anna Catherine Hickey-Moody “contributed” to science how carbon fiber is sexist.  Yes, there is actually an academic paper that carbon fiber oppresses women.  Take a look at the abstract for the paper:

In this paper I am concerned with instances in which carbon fiber extends performances of masculinity that are attached to particular kinds of hegemonic male bodies. In examining carbon fiber as a prosthetic form of masculinity, I advance three main arguments. Firstly, carbon fiber can be a site of the supersession of disability that is affected through masculinized technology. Disability can be ‘overcome’ through carbon fiber. Disability is often culturally coded as feminine (Pedersen, 2001; Meeuf, 2009; Garland-Thompson 1997). Building on this cultural construction of disability as feminine, in and as a technology of masculine homosociality (Sedgwick, 1985), carbon fiber reproduced disability as feminine when carbon fiber prosthetic lower legs allowed Oscar Pistorius to compete in the non-disabled Olympic games. Secondly, I argue that carbon fiber can be a homosocial surface; that is, carbon fiber becomes both a surface extension of the self and a third party mediator in homosocial relationships, a surface that facilitates intimacy between men in ways that devalue femininity in both male and female bodies. I examine surfaces as material extensions of subjectivity, and carbon fiber surfaces as vectors of the cultural economies of masculine competition to which I refer. Thirdly, the case of Oscar Pistorius is exemplary of the masculinization of carbon fire, and the associated binding of a psychic attitude of misogyny and power to a form of violent and competitive masculine subjectivity. In this article I explore the affects, economies and surfaces of what I call ‘carbon fiber masculinity’ and discusses Pistorius’ use of carbon fiber, homosociality and misogyny as forms of protest masculinity through which he unconsciously attempted to recuperate his gendered identity from emasculating discourses of disability.

If carbon fiber oppresses women, then wait until we can become cyborgs.  I anticipate feminists will start shrieking that cyborgs are a MRA army, if carbon fiber scares them this much.

Several authors (some of which were men, but without women’s contributions this paper wouldn’t exist) “contributed” to science how men use glaciers to oppress women.  At least that’s what I think the paper says.  It’s hard to tell since it is filled will gibberish if it’s abstract is anything to go by:

Glaciers are key icons of climate change and global environmental change. However, the relationships among gender, science, and glaciers – particularly related to epistemological questions about the production of glaciological knowledge – remain understudied. This paper thus proposes a feminist glaciology framework with four key components: 1) knowledge producers; (2) gendered science and knowledge; (3) systems of scientific domination; and (4) alternative representations of glaciers. Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.

None of this compares to the “contributions” to science of French philosopher, Luce Irigaray.  Irigaray has seriously said that E=mc2 is a sexed (aka sexist) equation that privileges the speed of light over other speeds.  She also said that “masculine physics” privileges rigid, solid things and that men are incapable of understanding fluid mechanics:

The privileging of solid over fluid mechanics, and indeed the inability of science to deal with turbulent flow at all, she attributes to the association of fluidity with femininity. Whereas men have sex organs that protrude and become rigid, women have openings that leak menstrual blood and vaginal fluids… From this perspective it is no wonder that science has not been able to arrive at a successful model for turbulence. The problem of turbulent flow cannot be solved because the conceptions of fluids (and of women) have been formulated so as necessarily to leave unarticulated remainders.

I guess all of those male physics professors and scientists who study fluid mechanics should just give up.  For International Women’s Day, celebrate these female contributions to science.

Mar 072016
 

One thing that comes up on places like the KotakuInAction reddit is that if feminists keep saying that the video game and tech industries are hostile to women, women will avoid them.  That makes sense because why would anyone go to a place that they believed was hostile to them if they had a choice.  Feminists keep saying that they want “diversity” in tech and video games, yet lying about nonexistent hostility to women gets the opposite of what they want.  Therefore, feminists must want something else.

What do feminists want from the tech industry?  This article illuminates what feminists really want.  First, take a look at this paragraph from the article:

Trying to force women back into a toxic environment isn’t going to work if the dynamics of the industry remain the same. And women are smart for leaving- because they aren’t giving up, they are moving to other industries that treat them better.

The author says that women should leave tech because it’s hostile to them.  Now, take a look at another part of the article:

It is time for the next wave, and it has to be focused on men. We need gender diversity workshops, sensitivity training, sexual harassment workshops for CEOs, VCs and Angels.

Conference and panel organizers who “can’t find” diverse panel members should be fired. Point blank.

VC’s who “can’t find” women entrepreneurs are not good at deal flow and their investors should pull out. Point Blank.

So if women are correctly avoiding tech because of its alleged hostility to women, then how are conference organizers supposed to find women for conferences, and how are venture capitalists supposed to find women entrepreneurs?  You can’t have women choosing to avoid an industry and have that industry be able successfully find women.  It’s logically impossible.

The author’s demand when the tech industry can’t satisfy her contradiction is that men get fired.  “Point blank”, as she says.  That is what the women in tech movement is all about.  It’s not about ending hostility towards women in the tech industry because even they know it doesn’t exist.  It is about getting men fired, so that they can take the jobs of the fired men.  Of course, that strategy won’t work since getting large numbers of men fired from the tech industry will cause the businesses they employed at to collapse.  There will not be any jobs for men or women since they will be gone.  I suspect that feminists won’t be bothered by that since they got to stick it to men they find nerdy and unattractive.

Feb 282016
 

GitHub is going to die soon in what is likely to be a massive explosion.  Coraline Ada Ehmke, the June 2015 Entitlement Princess of the Month, is going to work at GitHub on “community management” and “anti-harassment tools”.  I anticipate “community management” means running off men and anyone else who does actual work and that
“anti-harassment tools” means find new ways to attack men.  It can’t have anything to do with actual harassment since no one has provided any evidence (much less even made the claim) that harassment is a problem at GitHub.

We already have a preview of what life will be like at GitHub with Ehmke employed.  Someone put an issue into ContibutorCovenant repository requesting that Ehmke end her association with Shanley Kane, the March 2015 Entitlement Princess of the Month, for her misandrist tweets.  This should remind you of #OpalGate since the same reasoning is being used here.  However, there is an important difference.  With #OpalGate, discussion of the issue was allowed.  Ehmke didn’t do that.  She just immediately censored any discussion of the issue.  Based on this, we can assume that GitHub will become a virtual police state and will start bleeding employees who want to escape the insanity.  It is guaranteed that there will several class action lawsuits against GitHub by employees that become the victims of Ehmke.  I don’t know when GitHub will shut down, but it is likely to be quick and sudden.

There is one good thing about this.  It shows the power and necessity of distributed systems.  Since git, the software behind GitHub is distributed, there are local copies of a user’s repositories on their computers.  Even if GitHub shuts down all of a sudden, the repositories are saved and can still be moved to a new git server.  Ehmke can destroy GitHub, but she can’t destroy the software created with it.

Feb 252016
 

Men are being accused of sexually harassing virtual assistants like Siri and Cortana.. To call this nonsense would be an insult to regular plain old nonsense. A virtual assistant is nothing more than a computer program that makes sounds that approximate a female (or male) voice. It is no where near an artificial intelligence so a virtual assistant can not be considered a person under any circumstances. What really proves that this is BS is that no one has talked about a virtual assistant with a male voice being sexually harassed.

I predict that the next thing in this vein will be feminists accusing men of raping virtual assistants. That makes even less sense than virtual assistants being sexually harassed but this will happen. We are lucky that there is an easy way to avoid being accused of raping your virtual assistant. Only use a virtual assistant with a male voice. Feminists will still accuse you of being a misogynist for using a male voice in your virtual assistant, but they will accuse you of being a misogynist regardless of what you do.

Feb 132016
 

There was this study done called “Gender Bias In Open Source: Pull Request Acceptance Of Women Vs. Men“.  This study did not show any bias in open source software.  The study analyzed the rate of acceptance from what an automated program thought were male and female contributors to open source projects on GitHub.  It also separated the contributors between “insiders” (people who have contributed to a particular open source project on GitHub before) and “outsiders” (people who have not contributed to a particular open source project on GitHub before).  The closest thing to bias against women the study could find was that male “outsiders” had a rate of acceptance of 64% whereas female “outsiders” had an acceptance rate of 63%.  That’s just statistical noise.  One thing in the study that isn’t getting talked about much is that female “insiders” have a higher acceptance rate than male “insiders”.  If you’re interested in all the details, Scott Alexander has a breakdown of it (including the other problems in the study).  It is also worth pointing out that this was an undergraduate study that was not peer reviewed.

Obviously, this study failed to show any bias against women in open source software.  However, that didn’t stop various media outlets from saying that men in tech are supervillians bent on oppressing women.  Here are some examples:

That last link even says, “a vile male hive mind is running an assault mission against women in tech“.  Then, immediately afterwards, the article brings up #GamerGate and includes the standard litany of lies against #GamerGate.  Obviously, there is no such thing as “a vile male hive mind”, but this is the type of propaganda that is being used against men working in tech.  It is not an exaggeration to compare this to anti-semetic propaganda because pretty much all anti-semetic propaganda describes all Jews being part of “a vile Jewish hive mind”.  In fact, I’m certain if you searched enough anti-semetic literature, you would find that exact phrase.  The phrase even belongs on the MenKampf reddit due to its similarity with anti-semetic propaganda.

No one should be surprised that men working in tech are starting to have reactions like this:

As a nerdy straight white male programmer, that fact that people like me are constantly being propagandized against by the media is getting pretty wearisome. Add in the apparent surge of support for socialism among the young and it’s getting downright frightening.

If I was an American I’d be thinking about buying a gun and at least having a backup plan in mind to escape the revolution, as paranoid as that might sound.

This sounds like good advice especially if you’re a man working in tech in San Francisco.

Feb 042016
 

Yahoo is being sued by a MALE former employee who is accusing the company of discriminating against him on the basis of his sex. Looking at the facts, it’s clear that he (and other men) are being discriminated against for being men.  Despite the facts, I don’t expect this lawsuit to be successful, but the results of the lawsuit won’t matter to Yahoo.  Yahoo is already in a death spiral, and getting rid of their male employees is only making things worse.

This lawsuit is a public announcement for men to avoid working at Yahoo if Yahoo is hiring.  It also gives Yahoo’s male employees more motivation to find a new job (if they weren’t aware already that Yahoo is a misandrist hell hole on the verge of collapse.)  Yahoo won’t be able to replace the men who are leaving or laid off with women who are equally as productive as the men.  It’s time to start a death watch for Yahoo.  The only reason that Yahoo has survived this long was that it made an investment in Alibaba several years ago.  If Yahoo hadn’t did that, Yahoo would have already shut down.

Jan 222016
 

Twitter has been having a lot of problems lately. The stock has been dropping like a rock. It was offline for many users for an extended period of time. I’m hoping that this is the beginning of the collapse of Twitter because we will better off without Twitter.

Why does Twitter need to die? It’s because Twitter is centralized. Thus Twitter has a monopoly on microblogging, and it’s easy for feminists/SJWs to take over and censor anything they don’t like. There are potential alternatives to Twitter out there which prevent this by design so the death of Twitter would be a good opportunity to replace Twitter with one of the alternatives.

GNU Social is an example of a Twitter alternative. It is decentralized and federated, just like how email works. With email you can choose among many different providers, and it is the same with GNU Social. Thus feminists/SJWs can’t take it over just as they can’t take over email. GNU Social also has the benefit of being open source so you are in control of your microblogging data instead of a bunch of feminists/SJWs in San Fransisco. (This is a reason why feminists have declared war on open source software. Open source software puts software developers and users in control of their software and data instead of feminists/SJWs.)

Killing off centralized social media services will weaken feminism. Any time there is an opportunity to replace social media with a decentralized and federated alternative, we need to take it.

Dec 222015
 

I found an article about how students in the Women & Gender Studies department of West Virginia University had a fair to show off what they learned in the last semester. This fair was supposed to show “real world applications” of their coursework. “Real world applications” to these women & gender studies students making penis piñatas.  I’m not joking, but I wish I was.

Since the goal of this women & gender studies fair was to show what students learn in those “subjects”, we are forced to conclude from the penis piñata that they learned to attack male genitalia with a bat. And they intend to attack male genitalia with bats in the future because the other purpose of this fair was to show “real world applications” of women & gender studies.

For comparison, let’s take a look at what an equivalent STEM fair would look like. (Put aside the fact that STEM students would be too busy with real work for such a thing.). Instead of making silly piñatas, there would be demos of computer softwaruse hardware and demos of various engineering fields from aerospace engineering to electrical engineering to materials engineering. These would all be things that have clearly improved people’s lives unlike penis piñatas. The only reason that a penis piñata would even be near such an event is because of women & gender studies students protesting a STEM fair. (They would protest because improving people’s lives is misogyny.)

In other words women’s studies is so useless that a penis piñata is considered a real world application of the subject.

Dec 082015
 

The National Science Foundation is spending money on something that is the complete opposite of science, making “gender sensitive computers”.  So far it has cost US taxpayers $345,000 over the last 2 years and more money will be spent on this between now and 2019.  Here is the stated goal of “gender sensitive computers”:

“The [Principal Investigator] PI’s long-term goal is to create theory to inform [Human-Computer Interaction] HCI design practices, to ensure the production of egalitarian designs that reflect all users’ values,” a grant for the project states. “In particular, she aims to create feminist theory for HCI, which she hopes will close the gap in women’s participation in computing.”

“Previously, the PI has shown how approaches to designing for women are questionable when viewed in light of feminist theory,” the grant continued. “Feminist scholars argue that the lack of women in computing further discourages women from pursuing programming-related careers, and that women are also excluded because technologies created by men better address male needs.”
The research will also explore “gender and technical identities” and the belief that computer system designs “alienate women.”

If the grant proposal was written a year later, I’m sure it would have included attacking #GamerGate as an example of this alleged conspiracy by male nerds to keep women out of the computing field.  Another goal of this waste of money is, “The project will teach middle and high school girls to “create technologies in keeping with their gender identity.”  In other words, we will end up with nothing but more vagina software.  (Hopefully, said vagina software won’t be created after eating vagina bread and drinking vagina beer.)

What is not understood here is that computers don’t have a gender, just as all inanimate objects don’t have a gender.  There is no such thing as a computer for women or a computer for men.  A “gender sensitive computer” is a contradiction in terms.  There is no conspiracy to make “male computers” or anti-female computers because such a thing is impossible.  Computers are already “egalitarian” because a computer will do anything a user tells it to do, and the computer can neither discern any gender characteristics about its user nor understand the meaning of it.  What is driving this so called “research” is not that computers are male or pro-male in any way.  What the feminists involved in this project can’t stand is that computers don’t treat female users any different than male users.  Like with so many other things such as government policy, what these women want is not equality but special privileges.  The problem for them is that a computer does not know how to give special privileges for women.  No matter what they do a computer will never give them what they want.  That will be true even when artificial intelligence is developed.

Nov 052015
 

Feminists hate Linus Torvalds.  They hate him for not caring about “diversity” in tech (a.k.a. women in tech) and for saying that individual contributions and technical skills matter.  Feminists hate Torvalds for refusing to kowtow to Sarah Sharp, a now former Linux developer, who accused him of being abusive. Torvalds also refused to step down from managing the Linux kernel as feminists like Shanley Kane have demanded.  How Torvalds has handled feminists can be best summed up by this image:

Thus, I was not surprised when Eric S. Raymond, another leader in the free and open source software community, found out from a trusted source that there is a persistent to get Torvalds into a position where a woman could make false attempted sexual assault accusation against Torvalds.  ESR’s source has said that there have already been several attempts to do this to Torvalds.

While all we have is an IRC conversation as evidence, it is likely there is at least one woman out there trying to set up Torvalds.  This is the same tactic that has been used against Julian Assange and Michael Shermer, by the atheist+ feminists.  Linus Torvalds definitely needs to be careful.

Oct 252015
 

I have decided that the theme on the blog this week will be the feminist war on space exploration because feminists are constantly attacking space exploration from so many angles.  A feminist in the magazine, Scientific American, attacked space exploration as being excessively male (and white and American)Feminists attack space scientists like Dr. Matt Talyor who successfully accomplish new things like landing a probe on a comet over the most trivial of reasons such as his attire.  Feminist website, The Good Men Project, outright lied about NASA’s budget effectively accusing NASA of eating up most of the federal budget.  Feminists have also made space out to be a place where women will get raped.  Feminists have attacked Elon Musk many times.  (I will write about that later this week.)  Feminists have attacked the plaque that was put on the Pioneer 10 probe for “having a man raise his hand in a very manly fashion”:

The plaque shows a man raising his hand in a very manly fashion while a woman stands behind him, appearing all meek and submissive

Here is the Pioneer 10 plaque where a man is being very manly:

And feminist attacks on space exploration aren’t limited to what actually happens.  Feminists have Interstellar, a movie where thanks to space exploration humanity is saved from a dying Earth, as “aggressively masculine”.  They also said that the spaceship in Interstellar was an extension of the penis.

Why do feminists attack space exploration?  The main reason is that space exploration has nothing specifically to do with women.  As we know between 70% to 80% of government spending is a transfer from men to women.  Money spent by governments on space exploration is money not spent on women.  It doesn’t matter that the amount of money spent on space exploration (both by government and privately) is infinitesimal compared to the amount of money spent on women.  Feminists are greedy and want it all.  Attacking space exploration is also an extension of feminist attacks on science such as by Sandra Harding who called Newton’s Principia Mathematica a rape manual.  Space exploration is also very nerdy, and feminists hate nerds as we see with things like #GamerGate.

Something to consider with nerds and space exploration is that space exploration is a way to escape Earth.  In the last several decades, nerds went off on their own and created Silicon Valley and the modern tech industry.  Feminists do not want to see that happen again with space exploration, especially since if nerds move to Mars (or elsewhere in space), they will be out of the reach of feminists.

Oct 212015
 

The UN has decided to fight back against #GamerGate showing how their report on “cyberviolence” was a complete joke. In the UN dispatch, #GamerGate is being accused of being associated with “conservative conspiracy theorists”.

There’s a couple of problems with accusing #GamerGate or anyone adjacent to them of being conspiracy theorists.  First, the UN along with the rest of #GamerGate’s enemies has created conspiracy theories about #GamerGate such as that it is a secret organization to abuse women.  Second, the UN “cyberviolence” report quoted Lyndon LaRouche, an actual conspiracy theorist who believes that video games cause murders and that Pokemon is a satanic conspiracy, as a serious source.

The UN and the rest of anti-#GamerGate are a bunch of conspiracy theorists, and they’re accusing #GamerGate of being associated with “conservative conspiracy theorists” to cover up that fact.  That’s all there is to this.

Oct 192015
 

Those of you who follow #GamerGate know about their attempt led by Arthur Chu to eliminate Section 230 of the Communications Disclosure Act, the law that allows Web 2.0 and social networking to exist by protecting companies from liability for user generated content.  Such a law makes sense because if someone wrote graffiti on another person’s garage that named a person and accused them of child molestation, it does not make sense to hold the owner of the garage liable for that.  Despite widespread opposition, it’s clear that #Anti-Gamergate, and Arthur Chu in particular, do not intend to give up this absurd quest.

I’m happy that Anti-#GamerGate is continuing to fight against Section 230.  This is the same mistake that led to the creation of #GamerGate when gaming journalists decided to censor all discussion about Zoe Quinn and declare gamers to be over and misogynists.  Anti-#GamerGate was already a problem for the online rights and privacy crowd with their false DMCA complaints.  What Anti-#GamerGate is doing now is a declaration war against online rights and privacy.  Anyone who cares about online rights and privacy such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation isn’t going to accept the loss of their rights on the internet.

We’re on the way the #Section230Gate or something like that since Arthur Chu and the rest of Anti-#GamerGate won’t stop.  This will be a major disaster for feminism, but bigger than #GamerGate, because this is the start of attacking mainstream political groups.  Feminists will accuse the EFF and similar groups of being misogynists which is obviously absurd to any thinking person.  And Facebook and Twitter and other social media companies will have to defend their businesses against feminism or die.  (Many social media companies will end up committing suicide.)

Just as feminism’s war on gamers led to feminism’s war of online rights and privacy.  Feminism will declare war on communities adjacent to online rights and privacy advocates.  Whoever those adjacent communities end up being, they will be mainstream leading many more men who never thought about feminism to discover the ugly truth about feminism.  Feminists won’t stop even though it is in their best interests to do so just as they should have never attacked gamers.  Think of how many men would still be pro-feminist without #GamerGate.  The same thing is about to happen over and over again since feminists aren’t smart enough to know when it is in their best interests to shut up.

Oct 122015
 

Mozilla is working on a new compression format called Brotli.  They were going to use the extension, .bro, for Brotli compressed files.  Bro was also going to be the name of the command line tool and the name of the encoding.  This is harmless, yet since this is Mozilla it went all feminist:

Thanks for pointing that out jyrki, can I talk you out of it? Certainly not too late to change the draft registration. “bro” has a gender problem, even though the dual meaning is unintentional. It comes of misogynistic and unprofessional due to the world it lives in.

This led to an argument with several responses hidden.  They had to consult a feminist from “the North American culture sphere” to decide what to do:

I have asked a feminist friend from the North American culture-sphere, and she advised against bro.

Mozilla has gotten to the point where it has to ask feminists about file extensions.  I’m sure anyone who disagrees will be subject to a witch hunt, since that is how it has handled similar dissent.  If you need another reason not to use Firefox other than the fact that Firefox is progressively becoming a bigger piece of garbage, you have it.

Since I’m sure that there are a lot of people at Mozilla who don’t want to be dictated to by feminists, here is what they should do.  They should create a file format for a sequential look up table with the extension of .slut.  The tool to create .slut files will be called sluts because it generates many .slut files.

Translate »