That argument completely makes sense (I don’t know if it’s true, because I know absolutely zero about the go community, but it’s a sensible argument). It’s a pity that to make it, you initially used the shorthand of “old white dudes“ - a derogation based on people’s race, sex and age.
> Special attention like having diverse people in positions of power.
You realize that selecting people based on "diverse" qualities is the very act of racism/sexism/whatever-ism, right? You propagate what you claim to oppose.
What? The only Plan 9 people that were on the Go team I know of are Thompson, Pike and Russ. I'm pretty sure that neither Thompson nor Pike know what 4chan is. Russ, being the younger one, probably has heard of it, but I doubt that he ever used it. I've never heard them make sexist jokes. On the contrary, I have heard Pike and rsc speak out for diversity in software engineering and social justice quite often.
Look at how the story had all but disappeared until there was a non-fatal incident that happened to a US airline. Everyone across the media and anyone from regulators to legislators sprung into action focusing their attention and making demands of accountability.
I have zero doubt that had the door-plug came off the plane on a non-US airline, that excuses would have been made, the usual insinuations about poor quality maintenance, and issues would still be brushed under the carpet.
Likewise, had the first crash been a US airline, I'm sure there would have been an immediate grounding.
Instead, after the second crash on March 10:
> On March 11, the FAA defended the MAX against groundings by issuing a Continued Airworthiness Notice to operators.
Absolutely 0 doubt about that. Just look how at the beginning they tried to blame it all on incompetent african pilots. Human lives have wildly different values to us based on race, ethnicity, religion, remoteness etc., I don't like it but this is still very much part of human nature.
How much do you care if plane with 150 civilians falls down in remote russia or china and everybody burns to charcoal? Now compare it to same number of your neighbors or even just unknown people from your own town meeting the same fate.
It had nothing to do with racism against the victims. It’s quite literally that the level of rigor to be a pilot in Africa is not the same as what the FAA requires.
Airlines very frequently get banned from US airspace because their procedures do not meet the strict safety bar set by the FAA. So it’s very reasonable to assume that what was identified as a training gap on the MCAS operations was due to sloppy regional airline training procedures.
So it’s true that it would have been taken more seriously in the US, but it’s because the FAA and NTSB set the bar for aviation safety and crash investigation rigor world wide.
The NTSB and FAA were both sent to help with the investigation (as they would for any US airplane manufacturer), so I’m not sure how them “[setting] the bar for aviation safety and crash investigation” comes into play here.
It would not have been possible on any pilot (not up just US) trained on the auto stab trim. The mistake people made earlier was assuming that Boeing made this new critical piece a critically called out training area.
It's quite easy to go tell other people what they should do with their time.
These researchers are in the business of improving algorithms. Implementing them in large industrial (or open source) code bases in a maintainable way -- and then actually maintaining that code -- is a different skillset, a different set of interestes, and as was pointed out, besides the point.
Either you believe their results, then be grateful. Someone (yoU!) can implement this.
Or you don't. In which case, feel free to move on.
> Implementing them in large industrial (or open source) code bases in a maintainable way -- and then actually maintaining that code -- is a different skillset, a different set of interestes,
You're making a very general point on how algorithm research and software development are two different things, which is of course true. However OP's question is genuine: a lot of research in OR is very practical, and researchers often hack solvers to demonstrate that whatever idea offers a benefit over existing solving techniques. There are no reason to believe that a good new idea like this one couldn't be demonstrated and incorporated into new solvers quickly (especially given the competition).
So the quoted sentence is indeed a bit mysterious. I think it just meant to avoid comment such as "if it's so good why isn't it used in cplex?".
no they're not. they're in the business of making their customers' problems solve fast and well. That's of course strongly related, but it is _not_ the same. An algorithm may well be (and this is what OP might be hinting at) be more elegant and efficient, but execute worse on actually existing hardware.
There's a survey done by Equality labs which is fundamental to this law and the one in Seattle city. Other scholars have argued[0] that this survey is flawed in many ways.
There was a case against Cisco systems for alleged caste-based discrimination, which also was often mentioned in such coverage in the past. It is noteworthy that the case was dropped. More details with legalese is here[1] and a piece by Hindu America Foundation (that opposes such bills) is here[2].
Not to say that caste is not an issue among Indians (in India), however using this survey as the ultimate truth and a source for creating laws does not seem wise.
I can't see any negative outcomes from legally preventing discrimination by caste.
Either it doesn't happen/doesn't happen enough for a law so this is most effectively virtue signalling without any negative outcomes.
Or it does happen and this can help take steps against it.
There is no situation that allowing discrimination by caste to continue is a benefit to anyone other than those that are at the top of the caste system. That is inherently against western social views and anthema to equality.
> There is no situation that allowing discrimination by caste to continue is a benefit to anyone other than those that are at the top of the caste system. That is inherently against western social views and anthema to equality.
This. The US is not here for you to reproduce your oppressive hierarchy from the old country, no matter what hierarchy it was or what country it was from.
An admirable sentiment but essentially useless in solving a problem which is actually more complicated and nuanced than a superficial reading might lead one to believe.
>I can't see any negative outcomes from legally preventing discrimination by caste.
From the article;
Suhag Shukla, the executive director of advocacy group Hindu American Foundation, said that the bill would give California businesses a “license to discriminate against South Asians”. The group has lobbied against the bill, saying its passage would trigger a rise in Hinduphobia.
There have been many articles submitted previously on this subject. You might want to study the reports done by Carnegie Endowment on Indian-Americans listed in my previous comment here - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37333418
You’re asking us to surf all of your supporting links instead of making a case on your own and then referencing these links, so I feel I’m just reading “No it isn’t” pleas rather than arguments. It was common for American whites to claim that laws against racial discrimination missed the nuances, with lots of knowing nods in the audience. You could search this yourself.
>You’re asking us to surf all of your supporting links instead of making a case on your own and then referencing these links
Yes and for a very good reason; i don't want to bias your understanding of the matter with my own take/words. Given the amount of misinformation/insinuations/malicious agendas/emotional manipulations involved over this subject it is imperative that people read up on both the objective (Carnegie endowment article) and subjective (both pro and con articles) before trying to discuss/understand the issues. Hence i have provided a very small number of relevant links which can easily be read in a few minutes for personal edification.
Many similar arguments were made against laws protecting race and other classes we now legally protect. The supposed future actions of a bigoted few is not an argument that stands against refusing to protect another group or stand up against a wrong.
Fundamentally cultural incomparability is not racist. Your arguments for, and tolerance of caste discrimination, are not compatible with western ideals.
You may keep your views and culture and live how you like. I wish you and others no ill will. I will advocate for others around me to respect you while disagreeing with what you say or how you act in this case.
Caste Discrimination is wrong and is not welcome in the society were currently discussing legally. If you require that ability, or the toleration of that, then you are not welcome in said society.
Your comment is a very good example of what is wrong with the discussions on "Caste Discrimination" in the US; which is a lack of knowledge and nuance involved.
Discrimination in any form (both explicit and implicit) is already illegal in the US and laws exist for its redressal. Workplaces can make it very explicit in their policies as needed. Hence any caste discrimination problem can be treated on a case-by-case basis rather than by a blanket bill which will paint a big target on the backs of a whole community for no fault of their own i.e. presumption of guilt will be instituted. This is even more important when you realize that there are malicious/vested interests involved which are at work to fracture and damage a hardworking and upstanding community who are in a upward trajectory in the US.
Note that Google did not allow Equality Labs (and others) to do their rabble-rousing in the company due to these very reasons i.e. they would deal with it on a case-by-case basis if it happened. Last i checked, the Cisco case has also been dismissed as not involving caste discrimination. All evidence points to caste discrimination NOT being "widespread and systemic" in the Indian-American community. Pushing through laws/bills based on sentiment/insinuations is the very definition of Wokeism/sjw gone wrong.
> The supposed future actions of a bigoted few is not an argument that stands against refusing to protect another group or stand up against a wrong.
"Caste" is quite different from Racism etc. Most educated Indians in the US (and in urban India) do not identify with caste at all and as pointed out above it is not the problem that it is being painted to be in the US by vested interests. One should not institute make-believe fairness which may make matters worse when there is not much evidence of unfairness in the first place.
> Your arguments for, and tolerance of caste discrimination, are not compatible with western ideals.
You either have a severe lack of English comprehension skills or are deliberately insinuating things which i have not said at all (you owe me an apology). I have never argued for nor advocated tolerance for caste discrimination but am pointing out the lack of evidence on the ground for the same in the US. Your above line is the very reason why Indian-Americans are fighting against these sort of bills i.e. ignorance coupled with wokeism making decisions with no clue of what the consequences might turn out to be.
Caste Discrimination is like any other form of discrimination. It's wrong.
Pretending being opposed to it is racist is hilarious. I've read your shallow arguments.
There is no case by case basis needed for any segment we see as a protected class now, and caste fits perfectly in there.
While there may not be a large amount of abuse I have personally witnessed caste discrimination and work in an environment where it happens regularly enough I see the value of these laws and regulations filling in where companies are too scared to step up and address it on their own as many are.
There was a lot of backlash against anti racism laws too. That doesn't justify it.
What? There are real consequences to stupid laws/regulations as has been shown again and again. You might want to checkout Consequences Matter: Thomas Sowell on “Social Justice Fallacies” - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pn2gda_phAA
> Caste Discrimination is like any other form of discrimination. It's wrong.
This is NOT what is being argued (it is a given). The issue is whether it is prevalent enough in the US to warrant laws/regulations.
> Pretending being opposed to it is racist is hilarious. I've read your shallow arguments.
You attacked me explicitly and got called out on that so don't hide behind glib and flippant statements. As pointed out above, from your comments it is clear that you have not even understood the issue being discussed. I have given you links to all sorts of data and arguments while you have given me nothing in support of your arguments.
> I have personally witnessed caste discrimination and work in an environment where it happens regularly enough
Where is the evidence/proof (even the Cisco case has been dismissed)? Making such claims anonymously on a internet forum is the very definition of agenda-driven Hinduphobia. Anonymous accusations have zero credibility. If you really were concerned about the issue you would call out the companies/individuals involved under your own name. But seeing that you are not doing so leads one to the inescapable conclusion that you are being untruthful (to put it mildly)
.
> very nuanced problem fanned by vested interests and hence passing a blanket bill without understanding the issues involved can actually do more harm than good
I'm very interested to understand the "more harm than good" part, but the firstpost article you linked doesn't touch on them at all. The article seems to be focused on how the special interests groups are pushing their special interests.
Huh? The article explicitly states certain problems from which further inferences can be made. Some excerpts below;
There is a concern that Hindu and Indian employees will now be looked at with suspicion because employers simply won’t want to deal with frivolous lawsuits.
From the get-go, CoHNA made it clear that they abhor caste discrimination. Dalits and “lower” caste members of CoHNA were vocal that this law would institutionalize the very thing Equality Labs claimed to be fighting.
CoHNA made the strong case that although the language of the ordinance identifies caste among many religions and ethnicities, Hindus are most closely associated with caste. It very clearly paints a target on the backs of Hindu Americans and Indians and creates a presumption of guilt. There are no clear ways to identify caste or implement anti-caste discrimination laws in America.
Sara Nelson voted “No”. She asked whether the Seattle City Council had any data to support Equality Labs and Sawant’s claims of “widespread and systemic” caste discrimination. She also made the point that without ways to identify caste, there would be no way to implement it properly.
How exactly do you determine who is an “upper” caste and who is a “lower caste”? And if you can’t determine what caste someone belongs to, how do you litigate that case?
Even if you could identify someone’s caste, what would the city do if someone from a “lower caste” attempted to sue someone from another “lower caste”?
If someone chooses not to identify with a caste and someone accuses them of caste discrimination, will the city of Seattle force a caste upon them?
Thankfully, we can reference a rigorous study from the Carnegie Endowment which largely disagrees with Equality Labs’ findings.
Instead, they found that there is very little caste identification among Indian Americans, especially in those born in America and that there is even less discrimination actually experienced. It is very far from widespread and systemic.
This study acknowledges Equality Labs and criticizes the findings and methodology, most notably that Equality Labs simply removed responses where people did not identify with a caste at all.
Without guidelines on how it will be implemented, it has the opportunity for great misuse. Hindu children will now be looked at with suspicion in college admissions if they choose not to identify as caste because Equality Labs says that this is a mark of privilege and indicates “higher caste” or “oppressor caste”. Hindu and Indian employees will now be looked at with suspicion because employers simply won’t want to deal with frivolous lawsuits,
And finally, it paints the entire Hindu religion in the way Equality Labs would like – as irredeemable and worthy of dismantling as Soundararajan has stated in multiple interviews and tweets.
There is nothing uniquely different about caste discrimination than Shia/Sunni divide among Muslims or Han Chinese/non. If you goto Africa, similar fault lines are there. It is social evil which is at verge of extinction in a generation or two, unless provided oxygen by these laws. There isn't a widespread precedence for a law which uniquely targets Indians and them asked to prove their non-caste behaviour. Current anti discrimination laws are good. Still these laws keep getting passed. This is witch hunting.
>There is nothing uniquely different about caste discrimination than Shia/Sunni divide among Muslims or Han Chinese/non
Shia/Sunni discriminating against each other is religious discrimination, which is banned in the US. Han Chinese discriminating against non-Han is racial discrimination, which is banned in the US. Indians discriminating against other Indians based on cast is not banned, if they share the same race and religion. The new law aims to remedy this gap.
> It is social evil which is at verge of extinction in a generation or two
Historically this sort of discrimination is incredibly sticky whenever it appears. People teach their kids and their kids teach their kids and so on. Then their neighbors, media, etc... reinforce the stereotypes with stories about said groups. It's incredibly difficult to stamp out because it is so self-reinforcing.
It is social evil which is at verge of extinction in a generation or two, unless provided oxygen by these laws.
I see no reasonable way that a law saying caste-discrimination isn't ok will cause people to start discriminating by caste. I think that's utter nonsense and you're going to have to provide some kind of evidence for such an outlandish assertion.
On a lighter note - I saw a chat message that started with "Hey dude! How is it going". I'm disappointed that the response was not https://nohello.net/en/.
I've made peace with people sending me a bare "hello" with no context. I ignore it until there's something obvious to respond to. Responding with the "no hello" webpage will often be received as (passive) aggressive, and that's a bad way to start off a conversation.
Usually within a few minutes there's followup context sent. Either the other party was already in the process of writing the followup, or they realized there was nothing actionable to respond to and they elaborate.
I should have a slack bot that replies automatically to generic greetings… that way they’ll get on with whatever the issue is and I won’t have to reply.
"No hello" implies that people shouldn't be friendly at all, and comes across as rude.
The concept simply needs a more descriptive name to be accepted. It's not about not saying hello. It's about including the actual request in the first message, usually after the hello.
I made it my status message as well and all I got was a complaint passed along from my manager because somebody said that it was too rude and that I should be more gentle with my fellow corporate comrades...
I tried that on slack for a while, it made no difference. I don't think most people read the status message. The medium lends itself to the "Hi" type messages unfortunately, there's not really a way go constrain human nature, other than to not use instant messaging at all (I also tried changing my status to a note telling people to phone me, that didn't work either)
I have seen people never ask their question after multiple days of saying "hello @user", despite having nohello as a status. And despite having asked them in the past to just ask their question and I'll respond when I can.
This is quite funny for me because at first I didn't understand what the problem is.
In German, if you ask this question, it is expected that your question is genuine and you can expect an answer (Although usually people don't use this opportunity to unload there emotional package, but it can happen!)
Whereas in Englisch you assume this is just a hello and nothing more.
In America it's even worse because they say "What's up?" in the same way we Brits say "Alright?", but "What's up?" to me like the person has detected something wrong with you and wants to know what the problem is. At least "Alright?" is more generally asking for your status.
Of course, both are generally rhetorical, which must be confusing for some foreigners learning English, especially with the correct response to "Alright?" being "Alright?" and similarly with "What's up?".
Though I have had the equivalent in tech support: "App doesn't work" which is basically just hello, obviously you're having an issue otherwise you wouldn't have contacted our support.
The link for "MariaDB corporation" points to an empty image with white colour background. Can anyone explain the context here?