Sep 032015

It turns out that women in tech crap is illegal in California, at least if you exclude men from it.  Because a lawsuit was brought against a women in tech company, several women are whining about it and trying to pretend that they were in violation of some sort of old Jim Crow style law.  Needless to say, the article is full of lies.  For starters, the law in question says that there will be no discrimination based on sex (as well as several other categories).  That’s it.  NCFM has documented the rest of the facts about the situation in question.

None of this beats the petition that was created to support the women in tech who are excluding men.  Just look at the title, “PROTECT WOMEN ENTREPRENEURS AND COMMUNITIES FROM ‘EQUALITY-SEEKERS'”.  I know they put scare quotes around “equality seekers”, but this alone makes it clear that these “women in tech” aren’t about equality.  This becomes more clear in this paragraph of the petition:

However, there are many similar lawsuits in California attacking businesses that exclude men from participation, no matter the social good that these businesses promote, and no matter the historical and contemporary gender inequalities that these businesses attempt to remedy. You may find cases against women’s self-defense classes, free mammograms on Mothers Day, promotion of women in sports, special discounts for ladies and many others.

Special discounts for women?  In other words, they’re afraid of losing free money.  I am certain that if a business had special discounts only for men, these women would be the first to use the law they’re complaining about against said business.

We already knew that “women in tech” was filled with hypocrisy.  This is just more proof of it.

Aug 272015

Mozilla, the open source software organization that clearly spends more time on feminist bullshit like “meritocracy misogyny” and purging people due to their political contributions than writing quality software, has started another witch hunt against its employees.  This time its due to a comment at Reddit that Mozilla CEO Chris Beard called hate speech.  Here is the comment in question from Reddit user /u/aoiyama:

Frankly everyone was glad to see the back of Christie Koehler. She was batshit insane and permanently offended at everything.

When she and the rest of her blue-haired nose-pierced asshole feminists are gone, the tech industry will breathe a sigh of relief.

Christie Koehler was another “woman in tech” who never did anything technical and harassed anyone doing real work.  Clearly, she was nothing but a blight on Mozilla so its no surprise Mozilla employees would feel this way about her.  It’s a good thing for Mozilla employees that Christie Koehler quit on her own.  It would have been impossible to get rid of her because any Mozilla employee pointing out her unprofessional and dangerous behavior or lack of actual work would have have gotten fired just like Chris Beard is threatening to do if he finds out who aoiyama is.
This also means that any woman can get a paycheck now from Mozilla without doing any actual work.  Any Mozilla employee who points out a woman’s lack of willingness to do work will be declared guilty of “hate speech” and fired.
I say we help out aoiyama and other Mozilla employees who are unable to speak up.  What we should do is post comments to Reddit and other websites saying that we work for Mozilla and include some comment that will set off Mozilla upper management.  (This is why I made the title of this post, “I Work For Mozilla And I’m A Misogynist”.)  Either Mozilla will be forced to drop the witch hunt against aoiyama (and anyone else who agrees with him) due to a flood of garbage data, or Mozilla will turn into a gulag reminiscent of the Soviet Union under Stalin.  Either way we will have shown how evil feminism in technology is.
Aug 132015

Elmer pointed out that despite popular belief Ada Lovelace was not the first programmer, but the first developer evangelist.  Historians agree and have shown that Charles Babbage wrote all the programs that Ada wrote three to seven years earlier.  What Ada actually did was work with Babbage on writing up notes about his work.  Those notes are where she gets her undeserved reputation. 

What Ada did was act like Babbage’s developer evangelist.  Since Ada has a programming language named after her for being a developer evangelist, I’m sure someone will lower the bar even further and name a programming language after Adria Richards.  (Of course, the Adria programming language will never work, get some programmers fired, and never be used again.)

Aug 102015

There has already been plenty of discussion about this article from the Atlantic that says robots will unemploy men and not women.  The methodology is problematic, but the main fault is the belief that “people skills” can prevent your job from being taken over by a robot which can be seen in this except from the article:

For instance, of the 3 million truck drivers in the U.S., more than 95 percent are men; of the nearly 3 million secretaries and administrative assistants, more than 95 percent are women. Autonomous vehicles are a not-too-distant possibility, and when they arrive, those drivers’ jobs will evaporate; office-support workers suffer no such imminent threat.

This pattern holds for many of the most gender-biased occupations. Men hold 97 percent of the 2.5 million U.S. construction and carpentry jobs. The Oxford study estimates that these male workers stand more than a 70 percent chance of being replaced by robotic workers. By contrast, women hold 93 percent of the registered nurse positions. Their risk of obsolescence is vanishingly small: .009 percent.

Nearly half of today’s jobs are likely to become obsolete in the not-too-distant future.

What is causing this pattern? The skills exhibited by the coming wave of intelligent machines are better suited to occupations currently dominated by men. Many of the jobs held by men involve perception and manipulation, often in conjunction with physical exertion, such as swinging a hammer or trimming trees. The latest mobile robots combine advanced-sensory systems with dexterous manipulators to successfully perform these sorts of tasks.

Other, more cerebral male-dominated professions aren’t secure either. Many occupations that might appear to require experience and judgment—such as commodity traders—are being outdone by increasingly sophisticated machine-learning programs capable of quickly teasing subtle patterns out of large volumes of data.

By contrast, women typically work in more chaotic, unstructured environments, where the ability to read people’s emotions and intentions are critical to success. If your job involves distracting a patient while delivering an injection, guessing whether a crying baby wants a bottle or a diaper change, or expressing sympathy to calm an irate customer, you needn’t worry that a robot will take your job, at least for the foreseeable future.

If jobs that involved “calming an irate customer” were protected then we wouldn’t see ATM machines.  ATM machines are one example of how “people skills” jobs, in this case bank tellers, can and will be reduced in number.  In fact there are even better examples such as this comment to the article:

Seems to me that automation already came to women’s work. I remember a time when every manager had to have a secretary. Secretaries typed memos, opened and distributed internal mail, filed incoming memos in chron files, ordered supplies, scheduled meetings, and so on.

Today, the traditional job of the secretary is largely done through email. Instead of every manager having a secretary, a single admin assistant can support an entire department.

Computers have also affected other clerical jobs. In the early 80s I worked in the patient accounts department of a hospital. There were around 100 employees, mostly women. Today that same department has around 50 employees, with computer systems doing most of the work of billing and collections.

This is something that has already happened.  And yet the article would have us believe that office workers can’t have their jobs eliminated.  (In fact, the only reason even more women in these types of jobs haven’t be unemployed is because the government is keeping a lot of these jobs around as make work jobs for women via unnecessary regulations and unnecessary government functions.)

What the article fails to understand here is that writing computer software is easier than building a robot.  Women are in a lot of paper pushing jobs (which don’t even involve paper anymore).  That is what we have seen happen and will continue to happen.  Women can’t save their virtual paper pushing jobs by dressing them up in “people skills”.  Women haven’t been able to do that so far.

As for commodities traders, there hasn’t been an elimination of those jobs like there has been with secretaries and the like.  So far big data tools have been doing work that couldn’t have been done before instead of replacing work currently being done.  Unsurprisingly, the article fails to understand intelligence augmentation which is what those tools do.

Since building a robot is harder than writing computer software, jobs in the trades (which the article refers to as “swinging a hammer”) aren’t going to be eliminated in the short term.  To build a robot that can replace a man in the trades requires sophisticated vision hardware and software as well the ability to interact with the real world that isn’t required to replace virtual paper pushers.  It will happen eventually, but the virtual paper pushers will get eliminated first as is already happening.  And this doesn’t even being to address the fact that we have a shortage of people in the trades.  If there were robots ready to replace men working in the trades, it will just mitigate the shortage that already exists.

The only area where technology is going to replace men in the short term is self driving vehicles.  In other words, that means cab drivers and truck drivers.  However, while that may happen quickly, it won’t happen that quickly.  The problem will be that, in the case of truck drivers at least, truck drivers act as de facto security guards for the cargo they’re driving.  A self driving truck doesn’t have that kind of built in security system.  While this is a problem that will be solved eventually, it does mean that the elimination of truck drivers will be slowed down.

Even when truck drivers are eliminated, these men will be fine.  First, there is the option of taking a job in the trades since there’s a shortage there.  Second, men are very capable of creating startups in various industries from tech to craft beer.  In fact, because men are so successful at this, women are accusing the craft beer industry of being misogynist and running a sustained campaign against the video game industry and men working in the tech industry.  The latter even includes nonsense accusations that Elon Musk is going to help #GamerGate take over Mars and, ironically, baseless attacks on self driving vehicles.

What we are seeing with the article from the Atlantic is the same thing that happened to Tom Smykowski, the people skills guy in Office Space:

This article is basically women saying the same thing as Tom Smykowski from Office Space.  Women are saying, “We have people skills.  We are good at dealing with people.  Can’t you understand that?  What is wrong with you people?”  Tom Smykowski was the first to be let go.  His “people skills” did not help him, and women’s “people skills” aren’t helping them either.

Aug 082015

The Ada Initiative, a feminist organization behind many of the so called “anti-harassment” policies that led to things like DongleGate, is shutting down.  Why is the Ada Initiative shutting down?  They couldn’t find anyone willing to run it.  Perhaps one reason they couldn’t find anyone to run it was that their plan to keep it funded did not work out:

When it came to supporting our work financially, we figured that companies that benefited from open source software would just hand over giant wads of cash to an unproven new nonprofit run by two former software engineers.

Even if they were being sarcastic about this, this shows that they literally thought that they would get money for having vaginas and being vaguely related to tech.  Regardless, good riddance to the Ada Initiative.  Unfortunately, since it’s guaranteed that there will be more DongleGates in the future, the damage they did will be long lasting.

Jul 302015

One of the women responsible the current war on men working in the tech industry is Elissa Shevinsky.  She wrote an article in 2013 accusing men working in tech of being misogynists, but now she’s says that she is sorry about it:

Shevinsky is now sorry for whatever role she played in creating all of this outrage and silliness. She’s sorry, she writes in her new book, Lean Out, and she adds that her initial position was “flawed.”

“I’m glad to come out in ‘Lean Out’ and say that my original essay — the one that has been the foundation for people assuming that I am [a social justice warrior] — was deeply flawed,” Shevinsky told the Washington Examiner. “I do see sexism and gender issues, a culture war, in Silicon Valley, but the knee-jerk responses (recruit more women! attack the men!) are not the answer.”

Shevinsky still thinks that the tech industry is full of misogynist neckbeards, otherwise she wouldn’t have said that there is “sexism and gender issues, a culture war, in Silicon Valley”.  She is a SJW for believing that.  What happened is that Shevinsky realized that the current feminist attack on men working in the tech industry was not working.  (She is also using this as an excuse to generate publicity for her book.)

Shevinsky confirmed this when she did an AMA on KotakuInAction when she responded to a question asking if sexism was worse in the tech industry:

Tech seems worse, for some reason. It may have to do with the subjectivity that goes into who gets funded and promoted. It may have to do with the collaborative nature of the work (so there is a lot of interaction between people) Also since there are so few women, the women who are in tech get hit on like all the time. And that’s kinda awk for everyone.

Men working in tech hitting on women is sexism?  As we know from incidents like the Scott Aaronson affair, a lot of men working in tech will choose to never hit on women.  Shevinsky will probably accuse those men of sexism too.  Regardless of that any woman who thinks that men hitting on women is sexism because they work in tech clearly can’t be sorry about helping to start a war on men working in the tech industry.

Jul 282015

When feminists aren’t trying to destroy NASA, they have declared war on air conditioning.  Yes, air conditioning.  Jezebel has complained about it.  So has The Telegraph in the UK.  The Washington Post called air conditioning, “a big sexist plot”.  This isn’t a single feminist whining about air conditioning.  It’s widespread.

Air conditioning is part of HVAC, and I have talked about how HVAC is a critical technology.  Without HVAC we wold not have space exploration or computers.  Since feminists are already attacking the tech industry and NASA and space exploration, it makes sense to attack a technology and an industry that vital to their existence.

If feminists think that HVAC oppresses them, then they can do without it.  Let them work in 100 degree offices during the summer just like many men who have to work outside during the summer.  Let them freeze to death in the winter or force them to use old technology for heating like wood stoves.  Of course, they will probably complain that wood stoves are misogynist.

Jul 182015

We have all heard in the news how NASA’s New Horizons probe has reached Pluto.  This is momentous occasion and an amazing achievement in space exploration.  That means feminists will attack it just like we saw with Matt Taylor (and Tim Hunt).  Since feminists don’t have the excuse of a shirt this time, they have to lie like they did with Tim Hunt.  Since there is no opportunity to lie about a single male scientist this time, feminists are attacking NASA like in this article at The Good Mangina Project:

However, for nearly a decade—and longer—America has invested what I would is assume less than half of NASA’s budget on modernizing public education and recreation in the inner-cities.

Spending more dollars on exploring solar-systems than improving school systems is cause for gross critique, not mass celebration.

I don’t applaud America for what my fellow countrymen perceive is a milestone. To the contrary, I shame this rich nation for its skewed priorities. The type of decision making that says unseen space is more valued than an occupied place is not one that deserves respect nor admiration.

And though access to quality public education ranks high on my set of values, which is why I referred to it early on in this piece, other social issues—like veterans’ quality of life, diversity in the technology and news industry, and homelessness—also weigh on me deeply.

What I quoted above is full of lies.  Trillions of dollars have not been spent on space exploration, much less the New Horizons probe.  In reality less than $700 million has been spent on New Horizons, and that is total over a period of 15 years.  NASA’s budget is 18 billion dollars which is tiny compared to the 2015 federal budget of $3.9 trillion.  And that’s only the federal budget.  If we include all government spending (and we should since education as was brought up in the Good Mangina Project article gets money from local and state government in addition to the federal government), NASA’s budget is a rounding error in government spending.
Why are feminists like the author of the article at The Good Mangina Project lying about NASA?  Most government spending is a transfer from men to women.  NASA is one of the few cases where this is not true.  The article calls for more spending on “education”.  That really means give more money to women since women dominate education and public sector jobs.  NASA gets a tiny amount of government spending, but even one dollar spent on NASA is too much since it is not being spent on women.  It’s not enough that 70% to 80% of government spending goes to women.  They want it all.
And what do we have to show for spending on education and “social issues”, AKA spending on women?  Nothing.  Every year education gets worse.  Various other problems get worse.  And the amount of money spent on education and “social issues” grows tremendously each year.  We would be better off sending that money into a black hole.  Ironically, this would require NASA to build a ship to carry the money to a black hole which would probably do more for education and social issues than handing over 70% to 80% of public spending to women.  And it would be cheaper by at least a factor of 100.
Jul 142015

When I talked about how misandrists are using the fact of a business having a mostly male customer base/user base as evidence of misogyny, one thing got left out.  Since we’re talking about Reddit, does Reddit actually have a mostly male user base?  It turns out the answer is no.

Alexa says that Reddit’s user demographics have more women than average.  So where did the Reddit’s user base is 74% male come from?  It comes from a three year old article at Ad Week, and it’s possible that the data used in the Ad Week article might be up to a few years older than the article itself.

This goes beyond the idea that having a mostly male user base is equivalent to misogyny.  Even when a site like Reddit doesn’t have a mostly male user base, misandrists will lie about it having a mostly male user base so they can accuse the site of being misogynist.  The Daily Beast has an article that is a really good example of this.  Not only does it repeat the lie about Reddit having a 74% male user base to accuse Reddit of misogyny, it also links to the Alexa report I referenced above.  The article through its own links admits it’s lying!  Even the comments at the end of the article notice this.

I image that they will probably try to get around this by saying Reddit was misogynist several years ago and “once misogynist, always misogynist” or some other garbage like that.

Jul 122015

Last Friday Ellen Pao resigned from reddit.  Already the wagons are circling in an attempt to hide the fact that this was due to Pao’s gross incompetence by blaming “misogyny”.  However, there is a new tactic they’re trying that can be seen in an article about Pao’s resignation in the Christian Science Monitor:

While Reddit denies claims that it discriminated against Pao because of her gender, skeptics point to factors that they claim prove otherwise. According to Adweek, 74 percent of Reddit users are male.

First they tried to make us believe that simply having a business or industry where the employees are mostly male is evidence of misogyny.  Now, they’re trying to have us believe that a mostly male user base or customer base is evidence of misogyny.  What they’re saying is men not only should be allowed to work anywhere in large numbers but also shouldn’t be customers of any business in large numbers.  They probably won’t be satisfied until most men are in ghettos because that would be the only way to prevent men from working in a particular industry or being the customers of a particular business.

Attacking Reddit’s user base/customer base isn’t the first time that attacking a mostly male customer base has been tried.  That was the “Gamers Are Dead” articles that spawned #GamerGate.  And this probably won’t be the last time either.  There will be many more anti-feminist customer revolts like #GamerGate.

Jun 212015

Since today is father’s day, I added a new page about how fatherhood and not marriage is essential for civilization.  I’m disabling comments on this post because all of the content is on the new page.  Follow the link or click on the tab at the top of the blog to read the page and comment on it.

May 172015

Going after video games is not enough for the media.  It looks like the next target will be self driving cars.  Google’s self driving cars have driven 1 million miles without any human input, and have caused no accidents.  The only times self driving cars were in accidents were when humans were driving them or another car driven by a human rammed the car.  This is an impressive safety record on what is currently a BETA product, yet the media is trying to make self driving cars into a boogeyman:

A quick review.

Self-driving cars can’t avoid accidents on California Roads,Associated Press

Google Blames Humans for Accidents Involving Its Self-Driving CarsTime

Google’s self-driving cars have been getting in accidents in CaliforniaBusiness Insider

Google’s driverless cars have been involved in three car

Google’s self-driving cars are getting into accidents, MarketWatch

No one knows if such an accident-free future is even possible, or whether autonomous vehicles will prove as flexible and responsive as humans in the most dangerous and unpredictable scenarios. Either way, hiding minor accident reports from the public suggests a rocky road ahead for self-driving cars.

Google’s self-driving cars involved in 11 accidents, director saysReuters

The only thing missing is to accuse self driving cars and everyone who works on them of being misogynists.  I’m sure that will happen either because the media will be called on the carpet for their fear mongering about self driving cars or some other reason that I can’t predict.  This is bound to be the next #GamerGate (or one of the next #GamerGates) because we’re dealing with the same people who are worried that #GamerGate is going to take over Mars.

May 102015

wpid-avengers__age_of_ultron___ultimate_ultron_render_by_eversontomiello-d8fpc62.pngFor my last post about Avengers: Age of Ultron, let’s consider a fundamental mistake in the movie.  Spoilers ahead for Avengers: Age of Ultron.

In the movie, thanks to the alien technology in the staff Loki was given by Thanos, Tony Stark and Bruce Banner can go from nothing to having Ultron exist in 3 days.  While that’s necessary for the movie to work (and for the larger Marvel Cinematic Universe story to work), that is not how technological development would happen in the real world.  That is because nearly all technological development is not going from nothing to everything like that.  It exists on a continuum or a spectrum where most technological advances built on previous technological advances.  I suspect that this fundamental misunderstanding comes from women and manginas (who are letting women’s methods of thinking become their own) because it’s like pregnancy where a woman is either pregnant or not.  There is no such thing as being a little bit pregnant, whereas for many other phenomena it is possible for it to be a little bit of something.

Thus, what happens is that women and manginas will focus on the end point of something and not realize all the disruption that can happen during the journey to that point.  Sex bots are a good example of this.  There is no end to the number of people who want to stop sex bots in an attempt to prevent men from having a sexual alternative to women.  However, there is a lot of disruption that happen in the interim that will give men options without requiring the existence of sex bots.  VR sex is one such example, yet, we hardly hear a peep from anyone on that.  Even internet porn falls into the same category.  Sure plenty of people complain about that now, but that is after the fact.  They didn’t see what was happening from internet porn until it was too late.

What this means is that the real “age of ultron”, the development of artificial intelligence, began in 1985.  Before 1985 CPUs could be designed without computers, but starting in 1985 CPUs got so complex that they could only be designed with the help of other computers.  Since then CPUs have gotten a lot more complicated requiring more and more computer assistance to develop each new generation of CPUs.  There’s even a story that the man who designed the Intel 386 CPU, the CPU that was on the tipping point between could be designed without computers and those that required the assistance of computers, went insane.  That story is not true, but it represents the fundamental shift that happened in 1985.

For women the development of artificial intelligence will be a disaster.  An AI has no reason to follow the feminine imperative.  The “obvious” solution to a gynocentric woman or a mangina would be to prevent development of an “ultron” or an AI.  However, like with sex bots, they are only looking at the end point.  In the journey towards AI, there is a lot of disruption that will negatively impact the feminine imperative.  That is why deep learning is a threat to the feminine imperative.  Anytime decisions are pushed off on to computers (and deep learning is a significant shift human decision making to computer decision making), the feminine imperative will be negatively impacted.  Yet, gynocentric women and manginas won’t see this coming.  And this is not the first example of such a thing happening.  There used to be a lot more women employed in the field of computer technology.  That is because many of them were “human computers” or the equivalent in programming work.  Once technologies like compilers were invented, the need for women in computer technology dropped like a lead balloon even though the need for programmers went through the roof.

If gynocentric women and manginas were going to try and stop the real “age of ultron”, they would have to shutdown all technological advancement in computer technology.   Like with so many other things that are going to wreck the feminine imperative, it’s a long term process that involves millions of men.  The death of the human race notwithstanding, that’s impossible.

May 042015

Since Avengers: Age Of Ultron came out this weekend, this week on the blog with be Ultron week.  All posts this week will be discussing various aspects of Ultron.  (There are a aome spoilers for Avengers: Age Of Ultron.  You have been warned.)

There’s a line in the movie (that also is in the trailers) that Ultron says, “You want to protect the world, but you don’t want it to change.” What Tony Stark and Bruce Banner wanted by creating Ultron was something that would allow everyone on Earth to ignore what was happening beyond Earth.  Ultron would protect the world from alien threats so that everyone could live their lives as if the world had not changed.  It turns out that trying to create such a protector is impossible.  One of Ultron’s messages was that if humanity doesn’t evolve it will die.  The movie is about his quest to force evolution in a manner similar to the asteroid that killed off the dinosaurs.  Vision, the good artificial intelligence, in the movie agrees with Ultron’s assessment that humanity will die if it doesn’t evolve.  Vision just disagrees with Ultron’s methods of killing anyone to do it.

Women and manginas want an “Ultron” that will enforce the status quo.  Their “Ultron” will force things to be like they were in 1987 or 1962 or some other date in the past forever.  It will force men who are engaging in a marriage strike to marry, destroy MGTOW, and keep men in the dark about the real nature of women like previous generations of men were in the dark.

The problem is that in both cases creating an “Ultron” that will keep the world in a static state is impossible.  What many men have discovered is that they need to evolve to survive.  That evolution involves GTOW, refusing to marry, etc.  Any attempt to create an “Ultron” that will end the marriage strike and MGTOW will fall victim to the same problem that Tony Stark and Bruce Banner had.  It will just force more men to evolve faster.  Everything from attempts to shame men who refuse to marry to college rape hysteria is an attempt at creating an “Ultron” who will enforce the misandrist status quo.  However, it has not worked.  More men just discovered the truth of how marriage is a bad deal for men, the false rape industry, and the real nature of women.  All it has done is cause more men to evolve.  That’s the problem for women and manginas.  They want to keep the status quo, but they can’t stop evolution just like Tony Stark and Bruce Banner could not.

Apr 222015

Tyler Cowen, a professor at George Mason University, recently interviewed Peter Thiel, the founder of PayPal and investor in Facebook.  Here is an excerpt from that interview where Thiel talks about Aspergers being important for innovation and the problems of conformity:

TYLER COWEN: Let me give you my take on how I’ve tried to fit different parts of your thought together. And again, for all you listeners, this doesn’t have to be true. It’s just my mental model of Peter Thiel. That you’re one of a lot of thinkers who takes the idea of original sin — it doesn’t have to be a theological commitment — seriously. Tocqueville wrote in the 19th century that America eventually would evolve to be a land of complacent people who were going to stop believing in original sin and stick to a kind of conformist mediocrity.

So you have taken this to heart. The world out there is deeply weird. Even though there appears to be free entry into ideas production, because of René Girard–like ideas, the people who deviate, someone comes down on them pretty hard. So there’s excess conformity, the original sin in people’s motives gets magnified at the social level. So basically, there are distortions out there. And everything we can see, it’s a gnostic theology, and a relatively small number of people who can see through those distortions can be great entrepreneurs, or can tell the truth about politics.

And it’s all ultimately some kind of bundled, implicitly theological, but not necessarily involving belief in God, but theological perspective about the nature of people. And it ends up spreading to all the different parts of society and that, to me, has been what ties your thought together. But that’s a hypothesis; let’s hear your reaction to that.

PETER THIEL: Let’s see. I think the way original sin normally works is that it resides in individuals, in one way or another. And so theologically, I would place it much more in society. And so I think society is both something that’s very real and very powerful, but on the whole quite problematic. We always run the risk of losing sight of that.

I don’t know if it’s strictly the awareness of it that solves it. Certainly, there probably are some people who are just vaguely oblivious to it, so in Silicon Valley, I point out that many of the more successful entrepreneurs seem to be suffering from a mild form of Asperger’s where it’s like you’re missing the imitation, socialization gene.

TYLER COWEN: And that’s a plus, right?

PETER THIEL: It happens to be a plus for innovation, and creating great companies, but I think we always should turn this around as an incredible critique of our society. We need to ask, what is it about our society where those of us who do not suffer from Asperger’s are at some massive disadvantage because we will be talked out of our interesting, original, creative ideas before they are even fully formed?

We’ll notice that’s a little bit too weird, that’s a little bit too strange. Maybe I’ll just go ahead and open the restaurant that I’ve been talking about, that everyone else can understand and agree with, or do something extremely safe and conventional, and therefore hypercompetitive, and probably not that great as an idea.

I’d say a lot of these people may not understand this larger theory about society, but they are somewhat oblivious to it, and it pushes progress. Now, certainly my own experience would have been a little bit more where — I grew up in Northern California. It was this hyper-tracked process, where my eighth grade junior high school yearbook, one of my friends wrote in, “I know you’re going to get into Stanford in four years.”

Four years later I got into Stanford, then I got into Stanford Law School. You won all the conventionally tracked competitions; you ended up at a big law firm in Manhattan. From the outside, it was a place where everybody wanted to get in. On the inside, it was a place where everybody wanted to get out.

You ask one of the people down the hall from me, said that it was great to see me leave. I left after seven months and three days, it was great to see me leave. It was like “I had no idea it was possible to escape from Alcatraz.”

TYLER COWEN: What did you learn there?

PETER THIEL: I learned that I was incredibly prone to this problem of social convention. If you want to give it a religious terminology, the psychological terminology would be that I had a rolling quarter life crisis in my mid-20s. The religious terminology, I had a quasi-conversion experience where I realized the value system was deeply corrupt and needed to be questioned.

I do think that one of the ways of challenging convention, one way, the Asperger’s way, is just to be vaguely oblivious to it all, and continue apace. Then I think there is another modality where you just become aware of how conventional our conventions really are, and then that becomes sort of an indirect route of trying to start thinking for yourself.

TYLER COWEN: In your view, perhaps the contemporary world is becoming, I don’t know what the word would be, stranger, or weirder, or more shaped by individuals who are different, precisely because conformity is being piled on other places. So if the movers and shakers would be people who are in some way neuro diverse, then overall, the world is becoming more surprising in a way, right? That’s what we expect at different margins, at different corners. This will accumulate. It may not ever feel like we’re getting out of the great stagnation, but each bit of change we get is in a way a more different change than we would get, say, in 1957, where everything was done with guys with white shirts and starched white collars, hoping they would be able to buy a little pocket calculator someday.

PETER THIEL: I think the innovation that we are getting is driven in strange ways.

I worry that the conformity problem is actually more acute than it was in the ’50s or ’60s, so that the category of the eccentric scientist, or even the eccentric professor, is a species that is steadily going extinct because there is less space for that in our research universities than there used to be.

I worry that perhaps, if anything, it’s a little bit the other way. It’s very hard to measure these things or calibrate them, but I think that in politics, the conventional approach is to simply look at pollsters. What are your positions going to be? You just look at the polls, you figure this out, and it works fairly well.

At the end of the day, that’s probably not how the system really changes. It probably will be changed by some idiosyncratic people who have really strong convictions, and are over time, able to convince more people of them. But whether this means that we have more or less change is hard to evaluate. It always comes from these somewhat nonconventional channels.

An interesting thing to do with this part of the interview is replace Aspergers with masculinity and conformity with feminization.  When you do that what Thiel is saying makes just as much sense if not more.

What is going on here is that innovation requires a willingness to buck conformity just as Thiel points out.  However, Aspergers (or Autism Level 1 as it is now called in the DSM-5) in many ways is just having an ultra-masculine brain.  In other words, innovation is driven by masculinity.  On the other hand, conformity is driven by femininity.  Thiel points out that the increasing conformity of universities has driven out the eccentric innovative scientist and their Aspergers/ultra-masculine brains.  What has happened to universities over the time period Thiel is talking about?  They have become feminized so naturally they became conformist and hostile to innovation.  That’s why innovation and change comes from nonconventional channels as Thiel points out.  That describes the M(H)RM, MGTOW, and #GamerGate.

Thiel also had something to say about Japan and innovation and conformity:

TYLER COWEN: In the back room, we were talking about Japan, and a recent trip of yours to Japan. Maybe you would like to relate some of what you were saying?

PETER THIEL: They always want you to say things that are sort of contrarian and surprising, and so they asked me at this discussion I was giving in Japan. And the answer that I came up with, which was both flattering to the audience, but somewhat disturbing from our perspective, was I think we always think of Japan as this hyper-imitative, noncreative culture of extreme conformity.

My suggestion is that perhaps at this point, Japan is the least conformist, the least imitative country in the world. There’s actually a lot of interesting aesthetic cultural stuff going on, there still is a lot of very successful types of businesses. There’s innovation in food production, all sorts of interesting areas.

But then it’s an indictment of the West, where I think Japan is no longer the Japan of the Meiji Restoration of the 1870s, or the Japan of the cheap plastic imitation toys of the 1950s. It’s a country that no longer thinks it can get that much by copying the West. There’s probably still some narrow interest in IT and software. Outside of that, I think they are copying the US and Western Europe less and less.

People aren’t even learning English that much anymore. They’re speaking less English than they were 15, 20 years ago. The golf courses are all getting shut down and converted to solar farms or something; people don’t even want to play golf anymore. I think we need to take this as a real critique of our society, very seriously, that they’re finding less that’s desirable to imitate in the US or Western Europe.

I’m not sure about the golf thing because golf is also declining in the US, but that’s beside the point.  Why would Japan want to copy the West less now?  It’s because so much of the West is feminized.  The Japanese know better.  Thiel points out that the one thing Japan is interested in from the West is IT and software.  In other words, Japan only wants to copy things from the West that aren’t feminized.

One thing I have noticed is how much feminists and SJWs hate Japan.  This provides an interesting angle of that.  Japan is rejecting the feminists and SJWs since they are not innovative and ossified conformists.

Apr 182015

A commenter pointed out that Ellen Pao, the most recent Entitlement Princess of the Month winner, is now banning salary negotiations at Reddit.  Besides proving that Ellen Pao does not understand business, what she has done will have the effect of the best tech talent avoiding Reddit completely (assuming they don’t already because of Ellen Pao).  It has been shown that gender quotas and other measures to hire more women drive away capable men and women.  Ellen Pao is in the process of completely destroying Reddit.  I’m sure she will blame all of the problems she causes on “sexism”.

This reminds me of Carly Fiorina’s tenure as CEO of HP.  Like Pao, Fiorina took a tech company and nearly destroyed it.  When Fiorina was finally ousted from HP, HP’s shares immediately went up 6.9%.  In other words, HP became billions of dollars more valuable just by getting rid of her, and investors knew it.

HP was lucky enough to be able to survive Carly Fiorina.  Time will tell if Reddit will be able to survive Ellen Pao.

Apr 152015

We keep hearing about how women are discriminated against in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields.  In reality, the opposite is true.  It turns out that women in STEM have an advantage between 2-1 to 4-1 to getting invited for a job interview and hired.

There you have it.  All the talk about women being discriminated against in STEM fields is just a cover up for the exact opposite.

Mar 262015

A commenter noticed something interesting:

Check out the Munchery menu (Munchery being a dinner-delivering company) :

About 90% of the serious entrees are prepared by male chefs. There are plenty of women chefs, but they only prepare the easier dessert items, which are just cookies, brownies, etc.

Irrefutable proof that men are better even at cooking, than women. You would think that being a chef on the Munchery roster is a career suited for women, since it is a new model and there is no ‘old boys network’ to break into. It is pure merit, based on something women have done since the beginning of time.

Yet, the serious meals are still prepared by men 90% of the time, with the easy things done by women.

Examine the link and poke around it. The proof is damning.

Not only this, but women couldn’t even come up with the idea.  Take a look at the founders of Munchery.  There’s not a single woman among them.  This is especially damning because Munchery was started by busy parents fathers who were looking for an option to get higher quality and quick meals for their families as they say on their about page.

It’s a damning indictment of women from multiple angles.  First, you have something that is traditionally “women’s work”, cooking, but Munchery chef roster is dominated by men, particularly when it comes to serious entrees.  Second, when you consider that women are complaining about having to do “women’s work” like cooking, they don’t come up with options like Munchery to help them out.  Third, with less and less women actually knowing how to cook, they can’t even create an option to outsource cooking to someone else.

Of course, women/feminists will say that Munchery is misogynist because they will use the excuse of blaming “misogynerds” for anything that’s even distantly related to tech.  The reality is that if such misogyny existed, then Munchery would have only been created by women and not by the men in the picture because the men in the picture would have considered it beneath them to even think about how to improve “women’s work” like cooking.  That’s another reason why Munchery is a damning indictment of women.

Mar 112015

A man recently had to opportunity to try a VR sex experience.  This is what he had to say about it:

She looked me in the eye and leaned in and said, ‘I love you, baby.’ I was like, ‘Wow, that was amazing.’ And then I realized I’d only had that experience with a few girlfriends in my life. That’s when I realized this shit is crazy. To connect with a human you need so many things, and this achieved it almost immediately. This girl was there with me, and she recognized me, and she appreciated me.

VR sex is definitely going to be a big hit, and it will be coming soon.

Feb 282015

Scott Aaronson is has decided to follow up on the vicious attacks he received from feminists that happened at the end of last year.  It’s pretty clear that he’s going to end up as another Vivek Wadhwa.  Despite being viciously attacked by feminists/SJWs, Aaronson does not say (and appears to be unwilling to say) that what happened to him is the result of the nature of feminism/SJW.  Instead Aaronson defines the problem as “online shaming campaigns” implying that they can come from anywhere.  Yet, even his own examples disprove this as Aaronson can not name an example of an online shaming campaign that was done by any group other than feminists/SJWs.  In fact, Aaronson’s own (accurate) description of what happened to him shows that this is a feminist/SJW problem:

Alas, once the comment was wrested from its original setting into the clickbait bazaar, the story became “MIT professor explains: the real oppression is having to learn to talk to women” (the title of Amanda Marcotte’s hit-piece, something even some in Marcotte’s ideological camp called sickeningly cruel).  My photo was on the front page of Salon, next to the headline “The plight of the bitter nerd.”  I was subjected to hostile psychoanalysis not once but twice on ‘Dr. Nerdlove,’ a nerd-bashing site whose very name drips with irony, rather like the ‘Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.’  There were tweets and blog comments that urged MIT to fire me, that compared me to a mass-murderer, and that “deduced” (from first principles!) all the ways in which my parents screwed up in raising me and my female students cower in fear of me.   And yes, when you Google me, this affair now more-or-less overshadows everything else I’ve done in my life.

On top of this, Aaronson thinks that working with Laurie Penny is a good idea.  This is a big mistake.  Aaronson believes that it’s only one aspect of feminism that is a problem.  He still labors under the delusion that there are “reasonable feminists” out there.  That delusion will get Aaronson into trouble.  Feminists are not interested in his reasoned arguments or meeting him in the middle.  Anything Aaronson writes can and will be used against him by feminists (proving the statement, attributed to Cardinal Richelieu, that if you give him six lines written by the most honest of men, he will find something with which to hang him) .  For example, in the comments of Aaronson’s latest blog post there was an extended discussion of what is wrong with the Dr. Nerdlove site.  As a result Aaronson ends up saying this about nerds:

On the contrary, I was stating a moral judgment: namely, that people we call nerds make a massive contribution to the progress of the human race; that their ability to do so is directly related to the classic nerd personality traits that some people despise (literal-mindedness, valuing truth over social niceties, obsession with mastering a craft, etc.); that what’s right about the stereotypical nerd personality easily outweighs what’s wrong about it; and that it’s not merely nerds who ought to adapt themselves to the world, but the world that ought to adapt itself to nerds.

While Aaronson is correct, I can already see how feminists will twist this into accusations of misogyny, that Aaronson wants to sexually harass and rape women, and that he’s the next Elliot Rodger.  I hope for Aaronson’s sake it doesn’t happen, but I would be money that it will happen.  Because of this I’m certain that eventually Aaronson will pull a Vivek Wadhwa and bow out of this (assuming he doesn’t lose his job first or worse).

Feb 252015

Let’s say there is a mangina out there in Silicon Valley who panders to women and wants to “help” them.  For his attempts at helping, he gets viciously attacked by feminists.  Despite the attacks, he does not have the presence of mind to realize that being a mangina was a big mistake.  The mangina in question is Vivek Wadhwa, the Indian-American venture capitalist and academic.

Vivek Wadhwa has been attacked by feminists in the past such as by Shanley Kane, the January 2015 Entitlement Princess of the Month.  Feminists have not stopped attacking Wadhwa despite his stated desire to help women in technology.  Here’s a short list of some of the things Wadhwa has been accused of by feminists:

  1. Taking the “oxygen out of the room” by “speaking for women”
  2. Taking credit for the work that two women did in a Huffington Post column
  3. Misappropriating money related to the book he wrote on women in technology
  4. Supposedly direct messaging multiple women on Twitter as a bizarre pretext to sexually harassing them

Because of this Wadhwa has decided to stop talking about women in technology.   However, he has learned nothing.  Wadhwa thinks its his fault for “fighting the battles of women in technology for too long” and “taking the accusations too personally”.  When a group of people lies about you and falsely accuses you of unethical and/or criminal behavior, you should take it personally.  If Wadhwa thinks he took the accusations “too personally”, all that proves is that he can’t see what is really going on.  He can’t see that the issue of women in technology is not about women in technology but a platform to attack men.  Wadhwa can’t see that there is no benefit to being a male feminist.  He must be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

Feb 152015

Anti-#GamerGate has made six (known) great mistakes before this week.  This week we discovered that Anti-#GamerGate has made its seventh and final great mistake with this week’s Law & Order: SVU episode about #GamerGate.  If you haven’t seen it, here’s a shortened version of it on Youtube.  The episode is widely regarded as a joke to the point where Forbes, along with several others, called it the reefer madness of our generation.  It has also made more people pro-#GamerGate.

What makes this Anti-#GamerGate’s next great mistake is that they compared gamers to terrorists/ISIS/etc. enough times that people outside of Anti-#GamerGate started believing them in a very literal way.  The “gamers” in the episode made ISIS style videos and other nonsense.  This Law & Order: SVU episode ran with everything Anti-#GamerGate has said about gamers like a rampaging bull in a china shop.  This is dangerous for Anti-#GamerGate because Anti-#GamerGate has lost control of their own narrative.  (A few Anti-#GamerGaters even realize this.)  One of the things that happened in the episode was that Kotaku, which is solidly SJW/feminist and Anti-#GamerGate, was lumped in with the misogynist terrorist gamers.  This is why this is Anti-#GamerGate’s final mistake.  They created a narrative where despite being Anti-#GamerGate, they’re still lumped in with the the gamers they hate.

darknetThis is a bigger problem for Anti-#GamerGate than just being lumped in with gamers.  The episode had Ice-T saying gibberish like, “they’re uploading threats through the dark net!”  While that sentence makes no sense, the real problem is that its an attack on online privacy and anonymity.  This is the type of thing that will draw the ire of the online rights crowd (with good reason), which adds to one of the previous great mistake that Anti-#GamerGate has been making.

This episode of Law & Order: SVU, like many other of its episodes, is supposed to be “ripped from the headlines”.  But there’s a problem with that.  When have female game developers or even the Anita Sarkeesians of the world been kidnapped and raped?  Never.  That’s a glaring difference between the episode and reality.  Anti-#GamerGate was more careful about this sort of thing, but the wider media doesn’t care.  When people realize that such things are a complete myth, they will question Anti-#GamerGate’s claims of online harassment and death threats and find a complete lack of evidence.  They will also find that there has not been a single arrest, much less a single conviction in a court of law.  The wider media doesn’t care about maintaining the specifics of #Anti-GamerGate’s narrative, but Anti-#GamerGate has to deal with the fallout of the wider media now controlling its narrative.

Feb 072015

Coke has this new social media campaign called #MakeItHappy where an algorithm would turn negative tweets tagged with #MakeItHappy into ASCII art.  This week, Gawker, thought it would be a good idea to create a Twitter bot to tweet passages from Mein Kampf at Coke.  Gawker even bragged about doing this.

What does this have to do with #GamerGate, and why is this one of anti-#GamerGate’s great mistakes?  Gawker is a major media outlet opposed to #GamerGate.  Like all other anti-#GamerGaters they have been trying to portray gamers as a hate group not that different from the Nazis.  Yet, it is anti-#GamerGaters like Gawker that are giving visibility to Nazi propaganda.  This has not gone unnoticed:

There’s another reason why this is a big mistake for anti-#GamerGate.  This isn’t the only example of Naziism among anti-#GamerGate.  Ian Miles Cheong, the Editor in Chief of Gameranx and a major anti-#GamerGate personality, was a former Nazi.  Adjacent to anti-#GamerGate, Shanley Kane, the most recent Entitlement Princess of the Month, used to have a boyfriend that was a Nazi.  When you look at that last part, it makes you wonder how much “women in tech” bullshit and its war on men of Indian and Asian descent working in tech is driven by a derivative of Naziism or white supremacism/nationalism.  This is something that definitely needs further investigation.

Translate »