Re: my lenovo laptop
On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 at 17:36, John White <john@whitelawchartered.com> wrote:
>
> I agree that peronal life choices of Debian developers should have no bearing
> on whether to use Debian software. My bitch is with identity politics
> generally and, more specifically, with Debian's apparent decision to expressly
> seek transgender developers. The personal life choices of its developers
> should have no bearing, one way or the other on the developer's suitability to
> Debian. Its none of Debian's business.
+1
On Sat, 26 Oct 2024 at 16:54, Gerardo Ballabio
<gerardo.ballabio@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I get your point.
>
> The Debian project values the diversity of its members as an asset
> that can help towards its goal to make better software, but I am not
> aware that there is an explicit focus on seeking transgender
> developers specifically.
Define "diversity" please. Watch-out, it is a trick-question.
> There is a focus on increasing the presence
> of underrepresented groups. I have no statistics on whether
> transgender people are or aren't currently underrepresented in Debian.
> My understanding is that generally in the IT sector their percentage
> is as least as high as in the general population, and Debian probably
> makes no difference.
-1, because it is totally wrong.
What does "underrepresented groups" mean? Is there a correlation
between some sort of personal choice of life and being part of a
project, e.g. like Debian or being interested in developing software
(another example)? Sure and there is nothing wrong about it. Whatever
is the quote that can be chosen for fairly representing a group three
conditions can happen:
a. the group is more represented than the referring quota (e.g. white
men, or western people)
b. the group fits into the referring quota
c. the group is less represented
We can exclude b. case because it is a thin case compared to the other
two. Moreover, it is the product of quotas alignment process. The a.
and c. cases are symmetric but not equivalent. In fact, we can
increase a group (a classification of people) by increasing those
groups or decreasing the not-group (those who do not enter in the
classification.
There are too many biological men in Debian, kick them out until
Deabian reaches the 50:50 quota with biological women is reached. The
opposite is inviting people to enter in Debian who are not interested
in it but because women, they are in some way convinced to get in.
Which is a different way to obtain the same result than previously
described. Even if recruiting a man or a woman would have the same
cost - which probably it is not - in the moment we pre-determined the
sex (or whatever characteristic), we are privileging one kind of
people and disadvantaged the other.
Nope Roberto, it is not in that way. Life is not fair and we are
trying to re-equilibrate the opportunities.
It sounds nice to me but it is completely another story. Poor people
cannot spend their time on Debian developing or janitoring because
they need to work too much. It would sound a great idea to try to
equilibrate this condition. At that moment, Debian will start to be a
social welfare provider or an employer (or both). Debian, as free
software like free speech, is going to equilibrate this unfair
condition because with a refurbished laptop and no license fee, it
reduces the entry-barrier to computing and Internet access.
Let's take in consideration another classification: smart people VS
dumb people. Supposing that in Debian there are more smart people than
dumb people. Are we going to recruit more dumb people? Or kick-out
some smart people? Just asking, because "being woke" works in this
way. Plus, trying to "compensate" under-representation brings to the
Olympics games 2024 in which Russian athletes were not welcome and
"different" people were so much over-represented that more than 200
countries banned the public transmission of the event.
Consider mining activities or oil drilling. There are few women
involved in these activities. Should we send more women to mining.
Probably (and I hope so) also, children are under-represented among
the mining labour force. Should we send them to work in mining
facilities?
This is enough to tell - without any doubts - that the idea of
providing quotas is ridiculously wrong. Please, stop doing politics.
The father of modern politics is Macchiavelli because he wrote the
book titled "il principe". In that book Macchiavelli explicitly
explained that "modern politics" is nothing else than a fraud
perpetrated with lies and wit. Moreover, he explicitly explained that
it would not work as expected - reaching the goal and costs less than
{war, violence, robbery} - if not applied by very intelligent people
(intelligence + wit = smart people). Without these conditions, it
would be better to use violence. Considering how f*cking dumb "woke
ideology" seems, it would not be a surprise that violence will be an
unavoidable answer to it.
Are you trying to fix the world? Do you agree that leading by example
is the best way? Kill yourself in public: no more pollution, no more
overpopulation, no more conflicts, etc.
Conclusion? A "better" world is possible. However, the adjective
"better" is (and always will be) highly subjective. When we-as-person
consider that we are 8 billion people on this planet and for everyone
else (almost saying 8bln - 1 - few fellows friends) a "better" world
is a world in which we-as-person are not here living on this planet
(in fact, many people are dying because of war, illness, pollution,
poverty, famine, etc.) and someone came to me for saying: "I am
feeling under-represented because I am a diverse" instinctively, I
wish to slap that person in the face, two times! (because one can be a
mistake, two are a choice).
Best regards, R-
Reply to: