The methods for influencing results within an organization exist on a spectrum, and failing to adequately utilize the breadth of that spectrum is always counter-productive.
If you want to measure the language used by the productivity of the desired outcome. I'd encourage you to survey the ratio of comments talking about the problems with github's very broken CI and UX, with how many people expressed an objection to the language and words used in the announcement. Failure to convey ideas with tact and respect, is demonstrably more counter productive.
I assume you'll choose to dismiss those who object as fragile birds... but then you don't really care about the productivity towards the goal then do you? You just want to be ok with being mean because it doesn't bother you.
> Why do you consider that a useful metric? Hit dogs holler, after all.
you do...
> The methods for influencing results within an organization exist on a spectrum, and failing to adequately utilize the breadth of that spectrum is always counter-productive.
Or did you have a different expectation for result in mind? The one you thought would be counter-productive without insults.
My assumption was that ark wanted to put support behind codeberg, and encourage others to take a critical look at how bad github has become, and to consider other options. Not rally additional support and defense of github's actions.
I haven’t actually used harsh language with anyone so I’m not sure what your point is. I have been on HN long enough to know that expressions of strong negative emotion are punished here. That says absolutely nothing about the effectiveness of different methods of influence within an organization.
I think if people are rallying to defend GitHub due to some language that ruffled their feathers and not objective technical merit then they have completely lost the plot as engineers.
As far as Andrew’s goals, I think he has been pretty successful within the framework of the attention economy.
I'm talking about the ideas, threads and conversations that are occupying the head space of others.
> then they have completely lost the plot as engineers.
I think most people who would call themselves software engineers have lost the plot of engineering.
That applies equally to those who are blind to the fact that engineering only exists to create stuff for humans. Most engineers are ignorant to the ability to consider the humans they're supposedly build for.
The point is to make shit better, not worse, and not more inhuman.
This is painfully true. I went to a US university after high school in France and had a really hard time adjusting to the American style of essays. So many paragraphs with sentences crossed off for being too long, in particular. Hitting word limits when, in a French dissertation, you'd just be getting started (an exaggeration, yes, but still).
It wasn't a "language" problem because I was already a fluent American English speaker. It was all style-related.
I've recently started reading 19th century French literature again and sometimes I have to reread sentences multiple times because they're so long I come to the wrong conclusion too early.
This reminds me a bit of my Korean professor from college. Perhaps the most memorable thing from his class was when he explained the Korean style of writing essays was to not explain up front what you are going to cover but to "beat around the bush" until the end. He accompanied the bit in quotes with a mime of him swinging a stick at various parts of a really big bush.
For some reason, that image will forever accompany that phrase in my mind.
I don't know how far "back then" is but I got on the internet in the 90s and people on freenode and other IRC networks making racist/sexist comments was definitely not a rarity.
Edit: or actually, whatever predated freenode (OPN?) because I forgot freenode was a 2000s change.
I wasn't on IRC much in those days but yeah IRC was a subculture that wasn't great. A lot of people messing around with scripts too to harass people. Agreed.
I was thinking more about Usenet which was very helpful in my experience. When it was still a discussion forum and not a place for warez.
Though it goes for society as a whole. It's very hostile and confrontational now. I tend to avoid most mainstream situations now. I only frequent a few websites that are still ok (like this one), some fediverse, some cosplay and when going out I only go to specific LGBT-positive parties where a "rave culture" still exists (think the love everybody kinda thing). I'm done with this tough guy act that most males think is normal now.
Does Secure Boot with NixOS even make sense? In an ordinary Secure Boot setup, you get the kernel/initrd/etc. with signatures from a trusted vendor, but with NixOS it is going to obviously sign everything locally. That means that you are not protected against bootkits and a root compromise is still just as bad as ever.
I suppose in combination with LUKS you could at least prevent evil maid attacks, to the extent that your machine's firmware is actually secure, but it seems like a lot of work for just that...
The original comment was that the cars are Clio/Golf sized instead of SUV-sized.
You countered that SUVs and crossovers are outselling other categories, but subcompact crossover SUVs like the Captur, Yaris Cross, 2008/3008, etc are, in fact, Clio/Golf sized.
So whatever statistics you're considering, if you're going just based on "type contains SUV" without considering size, then you're missing the actual important part.
If you're going based on your link's content, it also says:
"Compact SUVs (C-SUVs) were the most popular type within the category, accounting for 42% of total SUV registrations last year, followed by smaller models (B-SUVs), with 36% market share."
So that means that about a third (64% of the 54% number you're quoting) of vehicles sold are SUVs larger than the Clio/Golf size they mentioned.
And since this whole sub thread started based on a comment about vehicle sizes, it's not "moving the goalposts" to talk about the actual size of the vehicles being sold.
Of course, one could argue "it's SUV sized if it has SUV in the class name (regardless of compact or subcompact)" but I think that would be willfully sidestepping the point.
reply