Interesting.

So that means match any string that is made entirely of a single repeating sequence, where repititon is possible.

Empty input Or input of exactly 1 character Or input of at least 2 characters, followed by at least 1 something (idk what \1 matches)

Did I get it (almost)?

Englist*

🙅 zeroth, first, second, third
👉 Zerost, onest, twost, threest

Activity pub
… Activists?

Fediverse
… Versus?

Like this? 😱

Unfortunately this does not financially benefit the tv manufacturers, and may land them in trouble with the platforms they themselves advertise on (like Google).

They’re more likely to use AI to serve you more ads as an extra revenue stream; capitalism has gotta capital.

Both tabs and spaces are stupid.

It’s ridiculous that in 2024, code formatting is still embedded in the source instead of being a style you apply.

I suck at git.
I’m currently rebasing 17k commits into my branch. I’m letting it run overnight.

I’m disgusting.

Still peddling FUD?

IDK, I didn’t read it. Piss off with your disingenuous “no solution is good enough” anti-progressive bullshit

Tldr your novella of regressive FUD.

You can’t get a perfect solution so you refuse to accept any solution is the Hallmark of the disingenuous redpill in disguise.

Go sell your snake oil elsewhere

probably more important to fix that problem where the bike crumples

This solution is zero effort

microaggressions […] question of whether it even exists to any significant degree

It does. Ask POC

with a really hard solution

It’s zero effort to change jargon like this.

we could move to stop microaggressions, or we could like, move to stop racial bias hiring practices

We can do both. That was a bold false dichotomy

do not have normal behaviors

If your argument is that neurodivergent people can’t switch from “whitelist” to “allowlist” I think that says more about your personality than neurodivergency.

we may actually just be making things more complicated for people who do not function inside of the bubble of normality.

Ok there, that sounds like a pile of FUD to prevent progress

simply prime people to not care

Ok there psychology genius. Tell us how to do this and receive your nobel prize

I’m done replying to your novel length piles regressive bullshit and excuses dressed up in polite language.

Left option:

Women are in a lot better now and I will call them in a bit.

Middle option:

Women are good at almost everything and the kids are you and I don’t think they are not statistically significantly better than me.

Right option:

Women are so lucky and proud 🥲

Hmmmm 🤔🤔🤔

There are many problems and many solutions. We don’t need to focus on one problem and pick only one solution.

My entire point here was that there is concern that industry jargon can be accidentally exclusionary to some demographics, interest and research on it isn’t new, and the effect is usually a “death by a thousand cuts” type thing, like migroaggressions are.

I didn’t specialize in this, so my knowledge on it is from one part of one class I took like 15 years ago, but I can absolutely see how it could matter.

People aren’t rational and society doesn’t raise us rationally. We can be perfectly ok with something in one context but not ok with it in another context. We can be ok with one thing, but not ok with another similar thing.

I agree there are deeper societal issues about how we raise boys and the incentives/traumas we put on kids. That doesn’t mean we cant pick off this low hanging fruit at no cost.
It’s important to meet people where they are, not where we think they should be.

Did they ever mention the history of the CS field generally being sexist towards women? Yes, of course. WTH? Why would you ever think someone passionate about this would not bring that up?

I would also argue that women being “averse” to terms like killing is equally presumptive Ok I think you’re intentionally misinterpreting my words now. This is not a dichotomy.

It’s better to identity specific facets of society that are problematic […] as opposed to “treating the symptom” so to speak.

I think it’s difficult to separate the two, they form a feedback loop. It’s like the broken window theory.
People see these little ambiguously exclusionary acts, and if they see enough of them then they get the subconscious message that exclusionary acts are ok, and the (possibly accidental) targets of the acts get the subconscious message that they’re not welcome which makes the subject raw and sensitive and primes them to look at acts through that lens.

In college I took a class on how humans and computers interact, and one of the things my professor was passionate about was how the terminology of programming languages tended to be exclusionary to women. Not explicitly so, but just using violent language that women were raised to find uncomfortable (eg killing a process), and it was pushing women out of computer science.
This was like 15 years ago, and he was already passionate about it at the time, so this isn’t really a new thing, its just getting broader attention.

I don’t know if that’s happening here, but it costs nothing to change so even a potential minor improvement is worth it.

Idk if that’s for white folks like me (and you?) to decide, and there is no harm on erring on the side of caution.

It’s like the deal with micro-aggressions. Alone they’re not much, but a constant buildup of these little things can leave someone feeling raw and very sensitive to it.

I don’t think the etymology started with race, I think it started with day/night. But I’m not an expert on etymology, and while I’m very curious, it probably doesn’t really matter here.

I didn’t mean that it originated with bouncers, I meant I imagined it coming to be associated with race in such a way 😅

That’s a cool story, bro.

Completely irrelevant to the observation that descendents of slaves probably dont appreciate the terminology.

If I had to guess, it’s just the general “white=good black=bad” which itself is likely related to day/night.

But it’s easy to imagine a bouncer at a club with a list of whites allowed in and blacks that aren’t. I don’t think that’s the etymology, but it’s also important to remember that language is alive and words can take on unintended meaning.