Please stop speaking up on behalf of African Americans without consulting their own opinion on this matter.
I'm one and not even my Black friends care about this silly posturing from White progressives. We are frankly getting tired of this virtue signalling while the American society doesn't give a shit about actual Black problems.
What is "rationality without empathy"? Have you tried getting off that armchair and tried talking to poor Black people to understand how they feel?
Claiming without evidence that African Americans are offended (not to mention it is patronizing to them) by a term like "master" is subjective reality.
> Is it more accessible? As in, is this change driven by complaints from actual people who feel excluded by the terminology? As far as I'm aware, none of the projects making these changes even claims that, it's all speculation on behalf of hypothetical offended parties.
I'm an African American, and no I'm not offended by Git's branch name. White progressives spend so much time on virtue signalling but hardly pay any attention to pressing Black problems like Black poverty and education.
This shouldn't be a controversial take. It is Occam's razor
after all.
We know that before the tech industry became popular and a way to make good money, women displayed little to no interest in being associated with programming "nerds" which were predominantly men to the extent that men over-represented the group of socially outcast nerds. This was mostly an American phenomenon, and other countries did not share this social hierarchy, hence the data on girls performing better academically outside of the US.
Hacker News has a progressive Silicon Valley bias, where Critical Race Theory provides a religious explanation ("systemic bias") for under-representation of women in tech.
Data from other countries are considered "news" because they invalidate our neoracist beliefs.
Welcome to Hacker News, where anything critical of Silicon Valley's religions (climate activism and veganism), no matter how well-reasoned and factual, gets downvoted to death.
Who is the "we" here? The woke and the neoracists? Do you realize that the platform on which you speak, and censor others, was created by the very people you aim to condescendingly ostracize?
If you can't connect all of this to the larger pattern of Woke propaganda in America, then I don't know what to tell you. Look up Christopher F. Rufo just for one example and how this propaganda is taking roots in schools and universities to brainwash the next generation of Americans.
> Curious - why do people get offended by Torvalds?
Same reason why people get offended by replacing Git branch "master" to "main" or "blacklist" to "blocklist". No reasonable person particularly enjoys the increasing denigration of meritocracy and infiltration of woke neoracism into their sphere.
You are misrepresenting my comment, which I wrote only because you said "I feel like I've learned literally nothing from any of them".
I indicated that affect, not consciousness, is imagined. Furthermore, I indicated (which you entirely overlooked) that consciousness is independent of affect. Take that as a working theory, and you just might discover something new.
Discard whatever you've read in the last 10-15 years, and start afresh; otherwise, you'll just be rehashing the same old same old.
b) Affect is real, and not simply an imagined experience.
In other words, question the validity of the above. Are they in fact true? How do we know them to be true? Why is a feeling given more credence than hallucinations? What if all feelings are an imagined experience, one that is "programmed" into birth by the genetic material? Just because an imaginative experience is encoded genetically it shouldn't make it any more real, should it? How would humans look like to some alien species that is capable of cognition and consciousness (without being robotic, as our species' scifi literature imagines) but not affect and identity? Wouldn't they see us all acting as if suffering from some mass delusion?
<quote>
Before the 20th amendment of the US Constitution - adopted in 1933 - moved the swearing-in dates of the president and Congress to January, American leaders took office on 4 March.
That's why QAnon followers have latched on to this date to underpin their latest theory.
</quote>
Here is more information on them from Sharyl Attkisson, an expert in analyzing media bias,
“This started, and I traced this in my second book, ‘The Smear,’ to Media Matters … the left-wing propaganda group that supported Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and is a big smear organization,” Attkisson says. “They acknowledged going to Facebook about the time when they were worried that Donald Trump was going to get elected.
They really felt that the only thing giving him a leg up, and they still believe this today, is his social media outreach. They tried to think of a way to control, with the kind of social media and news people could get, so Media Matters lobbied Facebook and tried to convince them — and did so successfully — to taking a fact-checking brand-new role that nobody had ever asked for.
We're not begging for our information to be curated. That was a pretend demand created by the propagandists who wanted to control the information. They had to make us think that we needed a third party to step in and tell us what to think and sort through the information … The fake news effort, the fact-checking, which is usually fake fact-checking, meaning it's not a genuine effort, is a propaganda effort …
We’ve seen it explode as we come into the 2020 election, for much the same reason, whereby, the social media companies, third parties, academic institutions and NewsGuard … they insert themselves. But of course, they're all backed by certain money and special interests. They're no more in a position to fact-check than an ordinary person walking on the street …
They have interests. They make sure certain things are not seen, even if true. And I think this is the most serious threat that I'm looking at right now to our media environment.
I'm afraid that our kids will be telling their kids of a time when you used to be able to go on the internet and find most, any, information you wanted, because we are increasingly being pointed only to that which they, people who control the information, wish for us to see.”
I'm one and not even my Black friends care about this silly posturing from White progressives. We are frankly getting tired of this virtue signalling while the American society doesn't give a shit about actual Black problems.
What is "rationality without empathy"? Have you tried getting off that armchair and tried talking to poor Black people to understand how they feel?