“Do you know the hallmark of a second rater? It's resentment of another man's achievement. Those touchy mediocrities who sit trembling lest someone's work prove greater than their own - they have no inkling of the loneliness that comes when you reach the top. The loneliness for an equal - for a mind to respect and an achievement to admire. They bare their teeth at you from out of their rat holes,thinking that you take pleasure in letting your brilliance dim them - while you'd give a year of my life to see a flicker of talent anywhere among them. They envy achievement, and their dream of greatness is a world where all men have become their acknowledged inferiors. They don't know that that dream is the infallible proof of mediocrity, because that sort of world is what the man of achievement would not be able to bear. They have no way of knowing what he feels when surrounded by inferiors - hatred? no, not hatred, but boredom - the terrible, hopeless, draining, paralyzing boredom. Of what account are praise and adulation from men whom you don't respect? Have you ever felt the longing for someone you could admire? For something, not to look down at, but up to?"
"I've felt it all my life," she said.”
― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Logged in to upvoat. I read Atlas years ago and damn if it's not one of the most prophetic books I have ever read. I am not sure that people who diss the book understand its prophetic spot-on-ness.
we have further evidence that there is measurable bias against women in computer science. Women who work in CS have to be better prepared and perform more competently than men in order to survive, and therefore it should come as no surprise that the few women who contribute to open source projects are more skilled than their male counterparts.
So women doing BETTER because their Github contribs are accepted more is... proof that women are discriminated against...... how the fuck they got to that conclusion is only possible to an SJW brain.
So if women's Github contributions were accepted less it would be proof that women are discriminated against. Since women's Github contributions are accepted more, it's still proof that women are discriminated against. Feminists make no sense.
You know, it might take another 10 years, but I hold out hope that the public will wise up to this shit and stop taking it seriously. When it gets this blatant, it seems inevitable that even mainstream opinion will come round eventually. It's like the boy who cried wolf. Remember when everyone thought D&D was a satanic ritual? People at large seem credulous at first, but they cotton on eventually.
The Graph on the right in Fig. 5 is interesting. At first I thought it was important that for outsiders the acceptance rate is lower for known females and higher for unidentified female contributors.
Then I noticed something far more obvious. The acceptance rate for gender neutral contributors is ridiculously higher than for either type of known gender. Is there a ridiculous bias against anyone who clearly identifies themselves?
If you look closely at these chart's you'll see that the vertical is zoomed in tightly. The differences between the genders are only 1%‐3%. The difference between known genders and gender neutral is still about 10%, which is odd, but there is definitely no widespread bias against either gender here. A small handful of project maintainers could be biased against women they don't know and cause that difference. It could be a statistical anomaly.
Now I'm wondering why identifying yourself enough to discern gender makes you 10% less likely to have a pull request accepted as an outsider.
Many of the non‐gmail addresses are under university or tech company domain names. If you get a pull request from somebody@ibm.com or somebody@wisc.edu it looks more trustworthy than one from somebody@gmail.com.
Or perhaps the women that create femaleish profiles are bad programmers? There are a lot of factors that can be at work. That doesn't automatically make it gender bias
The conclusion - "we have evidence of bias against women" - is a bit strange, and should really be evidence of a bias against outsiders of known gender. As for the theory of survivorship bias, that seems pretty clear. Considering that males outnumber females by an order of magnitude, there is far greater competition between the males. More competition means even the most skilled programmers have to withstand peer scrutiny, and many of those peers are, quite frankly, retarded monkeys.
28 comments
25 u/In_Cog_Nito 12 Feb 2016 18:08
Stop linking directly to that garbage: Archive link
22 u/turdovski 12 Feb 2016 16:41
"Some people being better than others is bias"... what the fuck?
So everyone on earth has to be equally good at everything? If not, then it's bias? What kind of retard world are these fucking SJWs living in?
13 u/deadite 12 Feb 2016 17:17
Everyday resembles Atlas Shrugged more and more.
3 u/muffalettadiver 12 Feb 2016 22:01
Logged in to upvoat. I read Atlas years ago and damn if it's not one of the most prophetic books I have ever read. I am not sure that people who diss the book understand its prophetic spot-on-ness.
-1 u/thegrove 12 Feb 2016 21:23
THIS retarded world
0 u/DoomMantia 13 Feb 2016 18:18
^MH101 link^
0 u/IdSay 13 Feb 2016 06:20
"the laurells are sour, said the fox who could not reach them"
10 u/BottomLine 12 Feb 2016 16:48
How about crippling fear of losing job and being send to jail over fabricated charges?
8 u/turdovski 12 Feb 2016 21:08
This is fucking crazy:
So women doing BETTER because their Github contribs are accepted more is... proof that women are discriminated against...... how the fuck they got to that conclusion is only possible to an SJW brain.
So if women's Github contributions were accepted less it would be proof that women are discriminated against. Since women's Github contributions are accepted more, it's still proof that women are discriminated against. Feminists make no sense.
1 u/ZigZagWanderer 16 Feb 2016 16:31
You know, it might take another 10 years, but I hold out hope that the public will wise up to this shit and stop taking it seriously. When it gets this blatant, it seems inevitable that even mainstream opinion will come round eventually. It's like the boy who cried wolf. Remember when everyone thought D&D was a satanic ritual? People at large seem credulous at first, but they cotton on eventually.
7 u/0x7a69 12 Feb 2016 18:20
Peer review or it didn't happen.
6 u/DinoRider 12 Feb 2016 17:35
The Graph on the right in Fig. 5 is interesting. At first I thought it was important that for outsiders the acceptance rate is lower for known females and higher for unidentified female contributors.
Then I noticed something far more obvious. The acceptance rate for gender neutral contributors is ridiculously higher than for either type of known gender. Is there a ridiculous bias against anyone who clearly identifies themselves?
If you look closely at these chart's you'll see that the vertical is zoomed in tightly. The differences between the genders are only 1%‐3%. The difference between known genders and gender neutral is still about 10%, which is odd, but there is definitely no widespread bias against either gender here. A small handful of project maintainers could be biased against women they don't know and cause that difference. It could be a statistical anomaly.
Now I'm wondering why identifying yourself enough to discern gender makes you 10% less likely to have a pull request accepted as an outsider.
2 u/CatNamedJava 13 Feb 2016 05:18
I think what you are seeing is that the acceptance rate is higher for people who don't use google+.(where they got the gender data from).
2 u/DinoRider 13 Feb 2016 16:08
That's a very good point.
Many of the non‐gmail addresses are under university or tech company domain names. If you get a pull request from
somebody@ibm.comorsomebody@wisc.eduit looks more trustworthy than one fromsomebody@gmail.com.6 u/weezkitty 12 Feb 2016 18:27
Or perhaps the women that create femaleish profiles are bad programmers? There are a lot of factors that can be at work. That doesn't automatically make it gender bias
1 u/Tecktonik 12 Feb 2016 19:02
The conclusion - "we have evidence of bias against women" - is a bit strange, and should really be evidence of a bias against outsiders of known gender. As for the theory of survivorship bias, that seems pretty clear. Considering that males outnumber females by an order of magnitude, there is far greater competition between the males. More competition means even the most skilled programmers have to withstand peer scrutiny, and many of those peers are, quite frankly, retarded monkeys.
0 u/ratsmack 12 Feb 2016 18:45
We wouldn't want to just accept the contribution based on its merits, now would we.
0 u/Darmoth 13 Feb 2016 14:21
Maybe the women who are good just don't really care about making a gendered profile?
0 u/SparkS 13 Feb 2016 15:35
that article is bullshit. men are superior beings to women in all ways.