GitHub reveals how software engineers are purging federal databases

This comments section seem to be full of the "Fuck Woke DEI" Maganazis and mentioning "systemic racism" will trigger them, but if you're still reading, look at George Floyd, in an alternate world, he'd be a wealthy person descendant of landowners, but in this reality, his grandparents' land was stolen, he grew up poor (and black) and ended up being yet another black-murdered-by-cop figure: https://dwkcommentaries.com/2020/10/08/a-moving-biography-of... . But snowflakes get triggered if there's an idea of better treatment for descendants of victims of systemic racism (another snowflake trigger word).

To the snowflakes: Hey, why care about all that, your continued violence has won you the ethno-supremacy fascism you wanted, where being white and incompetent doesn't matter, because you'll get that cushy job anyway!

An example might be jobs postings, in computer science the tone used for the post might discourage more women to apply than man. Having a process to ensure this doesn't happen results in more women applying, but more men as well, the increase is just less than woman in %

I also not see an issue with changing a word that has a bleak history with one that hasn't, it doesn't remove anything from people

You can't ignore the policy aims when determining what is "productive" as productivity is directly to the end result. It's WORSE that this is productive vs non-productive.

You're "Tired of nazi comparisons" when... Musk did two Nazi Salutes! He brought the comparison on by doing a Nazi salute! Twice! You're the one who refuses to see a salute for what it is.

... and the git changes were allowed to happen on a sane schedule.

Oh, and most of the people or projects affected by the git change got a choice.

    #!/bin/bash
    
    git remote show origin | sed -n '/^ *HEAD branch: */s///p'

    git switch $(git master)

(This is of course irrelevant to the topic of the top-level post.)

The former may annoy some folks until they standardize or figure out a way to tag the repos. The latter is actively aiming to be detrimental to people in a large way, and unless stopped, will very likely succeed in that goal.

Usually you're switching from a feature branch back to main or master anyway.

I was just pointing out that the companies that changed terminology due to “wokeness” only did it for a PR. It was never an actual endorsement of progressive politics or whatever these dorks try to sell it as.

Histerioinics and history are not associated with the same word.

Grow up.

He was elected President, not king. The laws being broken applied to all previous election winners.

So did Hitler.

... and will do just the opposite of what he promised and they were hoping for. Recent news about how scientific grants are being retroactively reviewed for any signs of "woke" language - if that isn't a vast expansion of governmental authoritarian powers, I seriously don't know what is.

Any society IMHO has the right to self-determination and self-sovereignty, as long as they adhere to at least the minimum standards of civilized societies aka UDHR - and the governments of those that don't even pay lip service to it should be fair game for everyone else to depose, we've seen the horrors of Syria, the new Taliban regime in Afghanistan, the genocides of Russia (against Ukrainians), Myanmar and China (Uyghurs and Tibetans) or the kleptocracy that was Gaza under Hamas, enough is enough and someone has to at least enforce the basic laws of humanity.

In the end, the people of Greenland should be the ones that have the say about what happens to their country, not the Americans, and for all I care the question if Denmark should have authority over Greenland should be seriously reconsidered as well given the atrocities of the last decades - among others, kidnapping children and forcibly sterilizing women [1].

[1] https://www.dw.com/en/greenland-denmark-relations-scandals/a...

> His family barely got money to eat most days. Cody had to work to help support his family but through struggle was still able to attend school. He had to do his homework on the bus. His life was full of hardship and out of necessity he did little else than work and study.

Cool narrative building, but this information should not matter for the employer, because that particular employer selects candidates based on grades - I see no issues with it

Your comment is also implies that a kid from a rich family should have higher grades, but it's flawed - who has more motivation to achieve something?

Also between "rich" and "poor" families there are a lot of kids from "medium" families, what about them?

Because the person with the better score was chosen.

> The goal of these initiatives is not to give an unfair advantage to other groups, it’s to even the playing field and combat the systemic bias.

If that is the goal then improve the schooling, make it easier to do homework in a better environment etc. Forcing employers through the law to hire people they wouldn’t if given a free choice is not meritocratic nor helpful more generally.

In any DEI conversation you end up with people making convoluted examples like the one you gave. Nobody is getting a job based on a 80 vs. 79 on a single exam. It's farcical. What you end up with at the end of the DEI road is making promotion, hiring, and firing decisions based on immutable characteristics of people. Okay if you really, really think that being a descendant of a slave from 300 years ago puts you at a material disadvantage today, argue to have public services available to verified descendants of slaves regardless of racial identity, and regardless of current socio-economic status.

But DEI doesn't want to help descendants of slaves. It wants to help black and brown people whether they're actually impacted or not, and it wants to avoid helping white and asian people even if they are at a socio-economic or educational disadvantage. You can't tell me with a straight face that a white person who could verify they have family lineage of slaves from the 1700s would be included as a minority in any DEI program. Look at any conversation where newspeak like "white-passing" is used unironically and this blatant racism is on clear display.

first, what is "personally escorted to school on a horse" supposed to be? and if he had private tutors, why did he only get 80%? and, regardless of the background, is not 80% still objectively better than 79%?

second, your example is about financial inequality. rich vs. poor. you're trying to paint a picture of a spoiled rich kid vs. a grubby gritty motivated poor kid.

but DEI is about "your color defines your opportunity" not your wealth. well, yes some races/color are over/under represented in rich/poor. but that converse is not necessarily true for individuals - an individual being a particular shade does not imply his privilege.

what happens when Billy is a wealthy minority and Cody is neither? and rich minority Billy got a 65% and Cody got a 95%? do you still give the job to Billy? because in the past people that looked like Cody were evil to people who looked like Billy? we cannot solve inequity by creating more of it.

If you are truly for equality and are able to see past what’s right in front of your nose, you’ll realize life is inherently unfair. But promoting literal racism is not going to make up for multiple generations of harm. by punishing those who had nothing to do with that harm. based on the same racism that led to the harm.

It’s unfortunate that Cody had a rough life, but it’s not the job of his employer to help his. They aren’t a charity after all.

I also don’t know where racism played into your example at all so it’s weird you bring it up. It seems to be entirely about SES.

"I was following orders" is not a justification for committing crimes, but "I don't want to" is not a justification for not following lawful orders.

If you have actual reason to believe removing "DEI" from a drop down list on a website is not a lawful order, I would love to hear it. But you don't, which is why you're talking about soldiers and war crimes and trying to frame this as "an enemy...domestic" and not talking about what it is - changing text on websites.

And, and that's been true forever; in fact what is attributed to cancel culture is mild compared to what has been socially acceptable within living memory for displays of political wrongthink, what changed is that that comparatively mild social consequence became acceptable against the side which had previously only been the giver but not receiver of socially acceptable consequence for noncompliance with their norms.