Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Outreachy Summer 2019 Participants & Projects Announced

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Outreachy Summer 2019 Participants & Projects Announced

    Phoronix: Outreachy Summer 2019 Participants & Projects Announced

    In addition to Google announcing the accepted GSoC 2019 summer projects, the Outreachy organization on Monday also announced their accepted participants and projects for this internship effort that encourages women and other under-represented groups in technology to get involved in the open-source movement...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...-2019-Projects

  • dkasak
    replied
    Originally posted by fuzz View Post

    You are free to believe that, no issue on my part... it's just that there are a lot of people who claim to be against discrimination but still discriminate in a way that they deem justifiable.
    Yeah. It's called "positive discrimination", and it refers to the act of helping out people in disadvantaged groups. Some people with far-right leanings and mental health issues think this is discrimination *against* them. It's not. It's just a bunch of people who have identified a disadvantaged group, and come up with a plan to help them. Admittedly the term "positive discrimination" confuses people with low IQs.

    Leave a comment:


  • fuzz
    replied
    Originally posted by dkasak View Post

    It's sunk in. I feel good You see ... when people are assholes, they get zero sympathy from me, for either actual or imagined injustices.
    You are free to believe that, no issue on my part... it's just that there are a lot of people who claim to be against discrimination but still discriminate in a way that they deem justifiable.

    Leave a comment:


  • dkasak
    replied
    Originally posted by fuzz View Post

    You are openly admitting to this. Just let that sink in.

    Discrimination
    unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice
    distinct treatment of an individual or group to their disadvantage; treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality ; prejudice ; bigotry
    It's sunk in. I feel good You see ... when people are assholes, they get zero sympathy from me, for either actual or imagined injustices.

    Leave a comment:


  • fuzz
    replied
    Originally posted by dkasak View Post
    I'm happy to see ... discrimination continue to occur against you.
    You are openly admitting to this. Just let that sink in.

    Discrimination
    unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice
    distinct treatment of an individual or group to their disadvantage; treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality ; prejudice ; bigotry

    Leave a comment:


  • dkasak
    replied
    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
    I'm sure if I dug through your posts I'd find you whining for more women in tech, probably in another outreachy thread.
    Go for it I don't specifically remember any such "whining". I guess if I searched through YOUR posts, I'd similarly see YOU whining about how you're under attack from minorities, and sick of being discriminated against, yeah? Probably in another outreachy thread? Pretty pathetic.

    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
    Well someone slept through science class if he thinks that anecdotes beat statistics, especially to then dismiss statistics.
    There are statistics on the number of tomboys in STEM? I don't think so. But feel free to provide something to back up this BS.

    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
    Facts... do not... care... about... your... feelings.
    No-one cares about your feelings either bro. In fact I'm happy to see positive discrimination continue to occur against you, whether you think your bigotry is backed by science or not. As I said before ... pretty pathetic.

    Leave a comment:


  • Luke_Wolf
    replied
    Originally posted by dkasak View Post
    Hahahaha! That would be *you* projecting there, "buddy". Also I didn't say I was "craving"" women in tech
    The fact that you jump to calling others incels when they say things you don't like says enough about your neck bearded fedora wearing "nice guy" stances on the subject. I'm sure if I dug through your posts I'd find you whining for more women in tech, probably in another outreachy thread.
    Originally posted by dkasak View Post
    - I just pointed out that all the women in tech that I know are *not* tomboys. If you can't handle that, the issue is yours.
    Well someone slept through science class if he thinks that anecdotes beat statistics, especially to then dismiss statistics.
    Originally posted by dkasak View Post
    Claptrap! That's the same kind of BS that people used to use to justify racism - invoking the term "science" like it somehow validates whatever you say after it. It's *you* that have a problem with women ... it's on display, yo ...
    Ah that explains it... you SJWs never understood science to begin with, now you hate it because it disagrees with you... which also explains your use of anecdotes, and your further projection of your own usage of the word science onto others. Great show.

    here lemme explain it real slow for you:
    Facts... do not... care... about... your... feelings.

    Leave a comment:


  • nils_
    replied
    Originally posted by Bsdisbetter View Post

    Discrimination is often touted as a reason. That's why we have these affirmative action programs, but ultimately what they do is sacrifice ability and aptitude for placing the <insert specific gender/race/religion> person in that position to fill quotas. It seems to be symptomatic of democracy these days where the majority is beholden to the minority, be it lobby-groups or whatever.
    I'm still waiting for the proof that discrimination exists. Ironically, what Outreachy really proves is that some people are more likely to do volunteer work for free while under-represented minorities have to be paid to participate - and once money changes hands discrimination ceases to be a problem

    Generally I think getting more people to participate, even when it costs money, is a good idea, and Outreachy is free to spend the money whichever way they like, though I find it somewhat humorous that relying on bizarre American notions of race is seen as being inclusive.

    Language: Yes true but there are localized non-english projects, so that's not an entire barrier. I've worked on projects with people with various levels of English and it is hard for non-native speakers to sometimes add their input, however I have never been in one where people with English as a second language have been excluded or not listened to; never. It's also true that many European countries have good English teaching - some would say better than native speaking countries... :-)
    There are a lot of people who don't speak a second language, many of whom don't have access to education. Some countries have abysmal literacy rates. It's clear that people from these countries will not be equally represented though they fit into the minority categories defined by outreachy.

    For better or worse, English is the world language. It dominates business, therefore it dominates commerce, therefore it's a language you need to know. (Surprising seeing as only a few hundred years ago, even the English didn't speak English!)
    That is again a very "first world" view

    Cultures: You're probably correct. Openly criticizing someone from say, South/South East Asia can cause them great shame. However, if you're in a collaboration where you stuff up through negligence, then you take the lumps whether it's culturally acceptable or not. Unfair? Absolutely not, because after all, who brings their culture into a discussion on software in the first place? I mean, seriously? Snowflakes!
    Since it's a volunteer activity, people who can't deal with cultural issues surrounding the review process and other scrutiny simply choose not to participate. Whether this is a problem or not is not for me to say, though I wouldn't want to sacrifice working processes.

    Leave a comment:


  • dkasak
    replied
    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
    Oh nice projection of your incelness onto others there buddy, craving women in tech because you don't know how to talk to people and want to get laid but are shut down every time because you're a creepy sex pest.
    Hahahaha! That would be *you* projecting there, "buddy". Also I didn't say I was "craving"" women in tech - I just pointed out that all the women in tech that I know are *not* tomboys. If you can't handle that, the issue is yours.

    Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
    Meanwhile the actual science on the matter, says that due to tomboys being neurologically masculine, and thus interested in things are much more likely to be interested in STEM than non-tomboy women.
    Claptrap! That's the same kind of BS that people used to use to justify racism - invoking the term "science" like it somehow validates whatever you say after it. It's *you* that have a problem with women ... it's on display, yo ...

    Leave a comment:


  • Bsdisbetter
    replied
    Originally posted by nils_ View Post

    I think there isn't really any good research into that, it is just assumed that the reason must be discrimination. I think separating people by the racial categories used in the US census is pretty stupid to begin with (2 billion people are classified as "Asian"...), which already makes research very difficult.
    Discrimination is often touted as a reason. That's why we have these affirmative action programs, but ultimately what they do is sacrifice ability and aptitude for placing the <insert specific gender/race/religion> person in that position to fill quotas. It seems to be symptomatic of democracy these days where the majority is beholden to the minority, be it lobby-groups or whatever.

    In probably all western cultures, this is now the case. Parliaments have quotas, sports have quotas (or say they do), workplaces have quotas and the last bastion seems to be open source projects. Fortunately, even if you're heavily invested in a project, if it becomes too PC and too oriented to making everyone 'feel comfortable' then you can walk away from an open source project. It's not so easy in a job.

    Originally posted by nils_ View Post
    I think there are a few factors at work here:
    * Language: To work in OS projects you need to have very good / above average English communication skills
    * Economics: People in poorer countries don't have the free time and access to the necessary hardware and infrastructure
    * Interest: Some people just aren't interested in the work (there is a big difference between men and women here for example)
    * Culture: Some cultures don't do well in the open source development model since they don't deal with criticism the way people from Western cultures do.

    I have no proof for that, but I haven't seen any credible evidence of widespread (intentional) discrimination. By and large people who participate in open source are probably more tolerant than average simply because you already have a very diverse set of people you have to get along with.
    Language: Yes true but there are localized non-english projects, so that's not an entire barrier. I've worked on projects with people with various levels of English and it is hard for non-native speakers to sometimes add their input, however I have never been in one where people with English as a second language have been excluded or not listened to; never. It's also true that many European countries have good English teaching - some would say better than native speaking countries... :-)

    For better or worse, English is the world language. It dominates business, therefore it dominates commerce, therefore it's a language you need to know. (Surprising seeing as only a few hundred years ago, even the English didn't speak English!)

    Hey, perhaps we need to all learn Esperanto?

    Economics: Yes, absolutely.

    Interest: Again, yes. Just because women, for example, are under-represented in project X, does not mean those in project X are excluding them. It just means they're not interested.
    In fact how do people know the gender of someone in a project unless they tell them? You certainly can't go from names. Some use real names, others don't. It's a fact of open source.

    Cultures: You're probably correct. Openly criticizing someone from say, South/South East Asia can cause them great shame. However, if you're in a collaboration where you stuff up through negligence, then you take the lumps whether it's culturally acceptable or not. Unfair? Absolutely not, because after all, who brings their culture into a discussion on software in the first place? I mean, seriously? Snowflakes!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X