BlargMcLarg

Most people aren't denying anything. They are rightfully pointing out there's a vocal minority trying to overcorrect things and write history in a way that wasn't the case.

Most people don't think women are incapable. In fact, they think women are far more capable and autonomous than the average commenter gives them credit for. That's why they willingly choose not to go into IT-related fields or tend to pick things adjacent to it, despite all of the things being done to pull them in. Let alone the fact many are willingly selling their bodies both as eye candy and physically, often without a mediator in between, despite a more stable and on average more lucrative job available to them. At the very least, many of them realized back then sleeping at your office working for peanuts to work on your dream project under supervision of some corporate bigwig wasn't nearly as great as whatever their other options were back in the day.

And god forbid we point out the elephant in the room: most people, women or men, aren't looking forward to working in an industry consisting primarily of the other sex. You take any profession and it will be an uphill battle starting from the cradle all the way to the grave. People acting surprised this hasn't changed immensely in 30 years are underselling the difficulty of solving the problem given all the other options available to any individual person today.

>the UX is so much better.

Meh:

Typing anything complicated is a weird mix of WYSIWYG and knock-off markdown, which causes confusion and frustration. Codeblocks and snippets in particular.

Random delays in getting rid of an indicator as there are weird, in-built checks and timers, forcing more clicks.

Bugs out messages, not able to send or receive (anecdotally only colleagues had this).

The weird split between Teams and Chats tab, which has practically no similarity to its competitors. The Teams tab feels clunky as a result compared to the Chats tab.

The Teams tab was randomly decided to scroll bottom-to-top, while the Chats tab is still top-to-bottom.

..and more. Making something better than Skype, Cisco and other stuff isn't that difficult given the underlying tech has drastically improved. Even so Teams routinely messes up trivial things over weird business decisions, and tries to shoehorn features that have been solved since the times of Teamspeak/Ventrilo/etc.

It's not terrible, but it's apparent Teams isn't that great and routinely emphasizes the wishes of management types over the wishes of end-users. No self-respecting developer would encourage one-click calls without the ability to turn it off. Voice channels solved that issue decades ago.

Sure you can. Class constructors are still a thing.

>so that women

Men aren't impervious to sexism either.

>Only hire young men in their twenties, and praise the idea of working long hours

Young women are working ridiculous hours as well.

>Child care is for their wives to do.

What child care, most of the highly educated aren't having kids to begin with. (Exaggerating, but it's not the big deal given what most career couples in their 30s make.)

>Pay new grads more than you do women engineers

That's universal as well, not specific to women only. Several companies are overcorrecting by overpaying younger women compared to both the older cohort and their male cohort, too.

It's not the lack of open source, it's ease of use. Alternatives exist, but no company is going to run a charity case for you to store tons of data for free. Mail in particular is commonly known to be a hassle which has nothing to do with Gmail the software, as much as Gmail the provider.

When was the last time you heard Google or anything Google-related backing down from getting their paws in deeper? It's no longer a fallacy when there's a sign next to the slippery slope.

It's not an insult to point out the obvious 'ignorance is bliss'. You can still like bargain bin fast food while admitting such food is garbage.

That's the thing happening with these companies, changing things to be more consumer-unfriendly while riding on nostalgia or branding. Pointing it out doesn't make it an insult to those still enjoying the game.

>In Amsterdam, there's this thing called a bakfiet, which is super popular

It's not super popular. The things are a hassle to carry anything with, and any small things are easier done with a regular bike with a satchel or just carrying the bags. Doubly so in a place like Amsterdam, where general commodities are within walking distance and any big things are near a central station.

>It's big enough for you to put two teenagers

Two teenagers? With the average Dutch height? Are you trying to break their legs?

Most social systems are already breaking down due to increased costs, increased burdens and bad privatization, all of which are predicted to increase. Several countries are already pushing the burden back on younger individuals as a way to keep the boomer and older millennial voters happy. Meanwhile, the things named by GP are likely to increase, as well.

It's not the gotcha it was 10 years ago.

This dismisses the lack of therapists in the past and the lack of quality therapists.

People used to do without them just fine before, yet now they are almost necessary to salvage a good 50% of the relationships or so?

And what about the stories of therapists basically telling one side (often the woman) they can do no wrong and the other side has to compromise? Therapists don't even have a long history of evidence to draw from, with ever changing circumstances.

Not everything needs a hyper-abstracted solution. Most people suck at writing neat abstractions, so they spend an excessive amount of time writing shoddy solutions which no one really wants to deal with but there's a soft, begrudging agreement to use them anyway while the business sees no value in having their devs rewrite it. This goes double when you step into the world of microservices, where you now have another layer where you can easily swap the implementation behind the interface.

Surely years of old Java shops with absolutely dreadful software architecture, sloppily copied from literature, showcase the path to hell being paved by good intentions.

>But with high mobility nowdays, they seldom think it is worth it anymore. You teach and then they thank you and move on.

The high mobility part is overblown.

The biggest teaching factories are also the ones who spend exorbitant amounts on bureaucracy and accessories while gratuitously taking advantage of young people eager to prove themselves, having little to no responsibilities and no understanding of the professional world. Their whole shtick is to find suckers willing to stick after, all the while taking advantage of naïve youth.

The vast majority of people don't move if you keep their pays on actual market rates. Interviewing is a chore. Moving for jobs is a chore. Most people hate getting out of their comfort zone. Yet, many will push individuals to 'prove themselves' first, having any pay raises lag behind for several years, where individuals find themselves getting their promotion's worth of money only after moving to a different company.

It's the companies that have optimized for this behavior and chosen internal promotions should be few and unrewarding. Not the other way around. God forbid they reap what they sow.

>People want protection, that's why this gets approved.

You're missing the most important detail: especially in Western/Northern Europe, people are taught from childhood on that the state is there to protect you, and protecting yourself is a risk. Europeans aren't just lazily asking for protection, they simply weren't raised to defend themselves from trespassers and assailants without the thought of potentially suffering consequences (even if it is just defamation).

Of course these people are going to beg the state to do it, handing over whatever privacy or independence they believe not needed. They don't know any better. They've been raised on 'knives will be used against you' from toddler age.

Your concern is the restraint against the police? When the riot is burning down the houses of innocents, robbing them and even taking their lives?

The kid's dead. Settle the issue with the police in court, but keep the innocents out of this. People are far too focused on what's already lost, while ignoring what's about to be lost.

There's nothing centrist or conservatist about gatekeeping and controlling the narrative. Keep that polarizing stuff out of here.

>That's the question, and the answer for some was affirmative action.

Affirmative action on very superficial traits. White man A is not the same as white man B. Of course you're going to get backlash from 'whitey' who came from the boonies, had to work their way up and is potentially losing his chance over affirmative action against some vague 'beneficial treatment' they haven't experienced their entire life. Nor does that 'whitey' feel like they have anything in common with the rich kid who got to breeze through life into those privileged circles, regardless they share the same skin color or not.

The most astoundingly racist thing is how everyone is so eager to reduce individuals to their race, no matter their background, whether it be to victimize or villainize them. Meanwhile the corporate fatcats are chilling on the side while the next generation gets to carry the burden of their shenanigans along with the losers of their own generation. Sure they are okay with it, they are nigh-on untouchable anyway.

It's a honeypot. It prioritizes feminism / viewing issues under the lens of feminism, over solving the issues boys/men have. In bad cases, the advice given is downright self-destructive, as the political/social climate is not there for individual men to act the way that sub would recommend.

So yes, you're correct.

It boils down to the same thing. Demand for things men are primarily doing / willing to do / capable of doing hasn't significantly decreased. It has merely been commercialized and subsidized in a way that it isn't at all obvious the need for men is still very much there. Hence, the lack of a need for men, whatever form you imply, is not the cause.

I'm not fighting tigers but the women around me sure are happy when I can carry something alone they struggle to do with three of them. There's a significant difference between a direct display and a bunch of commercialized abstractions. All those abstractions make people forget the value others have. We just so happened to push a lot of those abstractions onto men and the value they tend to bring as men.

We haven't removed the need. You take away a majority of men from the workforce, society would collapse overnight. Same can't be said for women, even if it would be disastrous both short and long term.

What happened was the government has successfully co-opted the social contract between men and women so women now can reap most of its benefits while men carry most of the risks. That doesn't make things all hunky-dory for women, but it certainly doesn't do men a whole lot of good when some of their biggest assets in a relationship are stripped away and redistributed, without accommodating that in some form.

Meanwhile, society has done very little to put men in a positive light or encourage women to accept the 'new man'. If anything, it has done the opposite: women seem to respect men less than before, and men are expected to be more competitive than ever before, even on aspects which are practically immutable. Now society is slowly showing signs of how dysfunctional things become when men aren't incentivized to be men, while women aren't taught to respect the 'new man'. The men quit trying, the boys get stressed out, and the women run around asking the government to fix it somehow. Virtually no one is happy, and Socrates is rolling in his grave.

..and what percentage of men commit homicides? And who are the primary victims of homicides?

>What about X generations later?

X generations later the number of possible mutations are so big you'd be grasping to point at this as 'the' moment Reddit messed up, unless the statistics clearly indicate it (at which point you can still argue against it). For each person like you who said 'this API change was the moment things fell apart', you'll get another pointing out Reddit mobile, new Reddit, spez becoming CEO, the other incidents they scapegoated onto someone, and more.

Even now, people could argue the worst thing happening isn't the mods being replaced, but Reddit allowing mods to put popular subs on private. The way things are going, those two events will be so close together they'd be practically indistinguishable in the grand scheme.

>As for the UI change. That's a completely different topic and I am not sure why you are bringing this up.

No it's not. It boils down to the same thing: UX experience degradation. Redditors have been on the receiving end of UX degradation for more than a decade now. Your whole argument relies on new moderation making UX bad enough to drive users away.

>And I am predicting the mod (thus content) quality will eventually be significantly worse

Great, like almost everybody, nothing new. Only difference being, you set your forecast on 'in some day in the future' now, which wasn't at all clear from your OP, rather than 'this is the event that will kill Reddit in the next 3 months' everybody is proclaiming it as.

You're making my point for me. People are already assuming the new moderation will be noticeably worse to a significant degree, and using that assumption to assert their position as absolute. You know, in a place full of software devs who routinely mess up estimating something far more similar to their past experiences.

Your assumption relies entirely on the difference between new and old being a noticeable, significant bad. Nothing in this story implies noticeable, let alone significant.

Old Reddit to New Reddit was noticeable and growth continued. The push from browser to app was a noticeable bad, an intended one, and Reddit still grew.

You seriously underestimate the passivity of most users. Reddit has, by all regards, truly messed up several times and still went on. It'll become a problem when mod quality is obviously, significantly worse, and no sooner than that.

>If those moderators leave,

Then they will find new ones. As long as Reddit has usecases, as long as the powertrip is worth the lack of ownership and poor tooling, there will be mods willing to moderate subs and feeling powerful and getting drunk off of it. 'Historically', this has happened in every social medium with moderation so far.

There's no anarchy here. Most Redditors don't care for the mods in particular. If the underlying reason doesn't move them, a new generation of mods will take place and the cycle continues.

>preventing it from degenerating into an echo chamber

Reddit mods are notorious for creating echo chambers through 3rd party mod tools. You know, those tools autobanning about any account who happens to post on a sub they consider no-no, often regardless the context. If those tools weren't on the line, they wouldn't care to join the blackout.

Hasn't been my experience. People who overthink will always overthink. People who play safe and love to discuss things until the sun comes up, will do just that. People who want to be hands on, break things first and then try it again with new information will do exactly that.

Whenever I see people overcomplicate things, the idea usually comes from a senior and then passed down to the chain of loyal followers. We can have a debate on whether that is a 'true senior', but the books sold, praised by the majority of the dev crowd and then recommended by said seniors don't lie. 5+ years or 40+ years, there have been those going for 'crazy new libraries, patterns and ideas', even bold enough to claim things that no study has been able to back up so far.

And god forbid sometimes a mid-level does figure out something can be done in a better way and the seniors ignore it while stuck in their old ways.

Because the latter barely ever happens in 'twice the time' right from the start. Even assuming the flat 2x, that's a lot for a project that takes 6 months the 'dumb way' for any company nowadays. The pay-off for 'smart way', is unlikely to be there before 2 years from project start. You're lucky to have a company look ahead more than 2 quarters, let alone 2 years.

That's not to mention all the other problems as commenters on a different article about speed pointed out yesterday. Dumb way at least gives you something. 'Smart' way goes in and makes a hundred assumptions only to realize they forgot something a prototype would've pointed out to them. Not the dev's fault management doesn't listen to "this is a throwaway prototype".

>It was confusing to have "spooky action at a distance" that's invisible unless you're using a properly configured IDE

This statement seems slightly ironic given the prevalence of IoC containers in the most commonly used backend languages and rampant 'interface everything' syndrome alongside it. You'd almost think such a world would embrace AOP.

Unfortunately, most cultures teach developers not to read. Between having barely any documentation, poor discoverability of said documentation, poor quality documentation, teaching people to 'talk at the first sign of trouble', it is only natural this is the outcome.

Now we're stuck with both a chicken-and-egg problem at most places, while in places with decent documentation, many developers still come in not reading it, discouraging any significant upkeep of existing documentation.

We used that logic in several other countries. This might work for your generation, but you will royally screw over the next without a plan. When there's no system in place to help push down housing prices / build according to the demand / population growth, or push companies to spread across the country, the problem will continue to grow.