• 4 Posts
  • 550 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: April 27th, 2023

help-circle



  • I think you might be on to something there. I’m in Denmark and Scandinavia have been forerunners when it comes to equality and LGBT+-rights and such, so perhaps the use of the “fem” in the term feels undue for my cultural background.

    There’s surely some issues still to work on with gender equality, but the main big ones have been pretty much solved as best we can.

    I think this very much depends on where you live. I’d say that even in Denmark, which is very well ahead of most of the rest of the world, there are still lots of gender equality issues. We’ve only “solved” them in the sense that the laws are fairly equal (not equal to the extent I would like it, but almost), but the culture is still somewhat unequal. Women still take much more parental leave than men do, for instance.


  • I prefer the term egalitarian or something to that effect. I definitely fall under the definition of a feminist, but I think it’s sort of ironic that a term for equality has an inherent bias for women in the word itself, even if it is not the intended meaning.

    I think the word itself has actually harmed the movement significantly. Turns out the words we use matter a lot. So again, I prefer a more neutral sounding term, like egalitarianism or equal rights.



  • How does any of this matter when Trump won the popular vote? You can’t get around the fact that more than 50% of voters voted for Trump.

    I totally agree that your political system is fucked, but let’s not fool ourselves into thinking that Trump won because he cheated the system or the election was rigged. Trump won because he convinced people to vote on him, and that’s the real problem.






  • Tbf a substantial amount of voters did see the comment - at the time of writing, 297 upvotes on the comment vs 483 upvotes on the post, or ~61%. So actually most people do dig through the comments, if the upvote count is something to go by at least.

    Anyone who doesn’t read comments is unlikely to read reader added context, so you’re probably not getting a large amount of the remaining 39% of people to get the context just because you add some extra UI feature.

    Besides, explaining the context is a much longer affair than a title and just wouldn’t fit. It’s not like I would even say that the title of this post is misleading in the first place, it’s actually pretty to-the-point.

    There’s also a chance that people will get the wrong idea about posts without the context - i.e. that posts without reader added context are super truthful somehow. I feel that people should rather accept that all titles of a few sentences are missing context. That is after all the point of a title - to summarize and bring only the most important information, which inevitably leads to a loss of context.



  • all of computer science is based on the practical

    I don’t understand this at all. Computer science is based on theoretical foundations that were developed way before any actual computer existed. This goes back more than 100 years.

    We teach students computer science to make them into software engineers.

    That’s only true if you studied a very practically-oriented education. Such educations are usually called “Software engineering” rather than “Computer Science”.

    As a computer science graduate myself, my university definitely did not try to make me into a software engineer. It was very theoretical, with a clear focus on further research if that was what you wanted to pursue. You could get through the education quite okay and only ever write very little actual code. It was the maths that was the harder part to write.