If you wanted to prove someone has talent, you would point to them pushing out noteworthy things on a consistent basis. Sure, someone can be very talented but have only a single thing to their name, but it's just as likely they got lucky.
2,065 karma · joined October 25, 2011
I'd say Minecraft was grown in spite of the way Notch works. The way he works has been the bane of a lot of modders, who are (arguably) the reason his game is so successful.
> In my opinion the important part is that you are doing something meaningful to you as an individual. [...] ...the world would be so much better off if we just had everyone doing this.
You can't separate yourself from humanity as a whole. That's like saying your liver should do something meaningful for itself as an organ, and if it ends up helping your body, all the better. We don't work individually. Humans require other humans, and all of our motivations and desires are influenced by this requirement.
Notch may not have begun Minecraft with the larger gaming community in mind, but he certainly continued development in some small part because of it.
As someone who takes Tramadol for pain, it does have an odd effect when I'm tired: I find I become less tired, as if the Tramadol is making me ignore my fatigue. Oxycodone, on the other hand, causes me to be more drowsy. This might be what the farmers are talking about.
Did this ever say it was in their office? All it said was they were hula-hooping to some music and the response from the bench-full of male employees was embarrassing. If it were outdoors, it wouldn't be unusual.
Either way, in what world do you see something out of the ordinary — but not strange — happening at work and line up to gawk at it?
> It's unexpected that you think it necessarily implies sexual objectification.
It's certainly possible for a bench-full of 20-something programmers to sexually objectify someone. Julie was made to feel uncomfortable, and since she's the best eye witness to the event we've got, there's no reason to doubt her testimony.
Not everything needs to be picked apart. Sometimes, if a bunch of guys are gawking at women, that's what they're doing. You don't need to stick up for them.
Well, they do say:
We know we have to take action and have begun a full
investigation. While that’s ongoing, and effective
immediately, the relevant founder has been put on leave,
as has the referenced GitHub engineer. The founder’s wife
discussed in the media reports has never had hiring or
firing power at GitHub and will no longer be permitted in
the office.
The whole point of Bitcoin that's been touted in pretty much every thread, hoisted up by Libertarians like a giant flag, is that it's unregulated. And now, they're all discovering why we regulated in the first place.
Even then, while that situation is certainly more excusable, you're still the minority. That site isn't made for the Eastern European lower class who can't afford to buy a DVD. It's made for folks who have the money (which means they can purchase and maintain a computer as well as a monthly internet connection) but who don't feel like spending it.
Plus, I'm fairly sure iTunes has movie rentals in most Eastern European countries.[0]
The vast majority of people will be using this to watch movies they don't feel like paying for. There might be a handful who genuinely can't access it, who have no way to legally pay for it outside of handing over a substantial amount of their small wealth, and they paradoxically also have access to an internet connection strong enough and a computer powerful enough that can handle streaming these movies. However, they do not represent the vast, vast, vast majority of users.
Likewise, characterizing me as "hateful" because I pointed out how skewed your priorities are is really quite juvenile. You apparently thought it pertinent to grace me with not one but two replies when the other commenter left something objectively more hateful. That says something about yourself. You should take some time to examine why my comment deserved such protest.
Me thinks he doesn't read what he types.
That was most certainly an ad hominem. It was an attempt to counter a point by attacking the messenger, not the argument. Textbook, really.
Ah yes, empathy is the enemy of intellect! Truly an argument made by a well-adjusted person.
> If I claim I'm a victim in a way that you're not, it becomes literally impossible for you to prove me wrong.
That's now what they're saying at all, and the fact you somehow extracted that from their point really shows how irrational you're being.
Says something about your priorities, chrismonsanto.
The irony of this comment being in a long-winded post on Hacker News is lost, perhaps? You do realize the vast majority of "programmers" aren't building 100% of the time.
Judging by that and the fact you throw out "feminist" like it's an insult, I'm going to say you've got some pretty heavy bias.
You can't just boil a patent down to two words and then claim prior art.
That really doesn't help anything. Why are they not interested? Are you saying something in the core of being a woman makes them not want to code?
> spoon-fed by liberals.
Something something true colors.
For starters, no one is saying it's pg's job. The interviewer asked him if he felt there was anything he could be doing to get more women into YC.
Second, "encourage" does not mean "order someone to do something." No one is going to up women, putting their hands on their shoulders, shaking them, and telling them they must be developers! Instead, they're creating spaces that are welcoming and friendly to women. They aren't forcing them through the door; they're opening it for them and showing them all the delicious cookies inside.
> There are plenty of jobs that have many more women than men. Do you see massive outrage because the workforce is lacking in those jobs?
Yes. There are plenty of initiatives to get more men into nursing, fashion, and teaching. Just because you didn't take the three seconds to search for them doesn't mean they don't exist. You don't hear about them because, what a shocker, you aren't part of those communities. It's almost like you're on a website dedicated to tech culture or something!
And yeah, you're evil — not because you believe those things (that would make you merely ignorant) but because you revel in the fact your beliefs are problematic.
But, much like your beliefs, your comment brings nothing to this discussion. It's a lot of unsourced, pseudo-scientific nonsense hidden behind a veil of verbosity.