[erlang-questions] [ANN] Positive version 13.3.7
Fri Mar 25 18:39:54 CET 2016
On 2016年3月25日 金曜日 10:04:38 Sean Cribbs wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 8:20 PM, zxq9 <> wrote:
> > EVERYONE! STOP EVERYTHING! SATIRE IS NOW "TOXIC"!
> I'm reminded of this Molly Ivins' quote (
> "There are two kinds of humor. One kind that makes us chuckle about our
> foibles and our shared humanity -- like what Garrison Keillor does. The
> other kind holds people up to public contempt and ridicule -- that's what I
> do. Satire is traditionally the weapon of the powerless against the
> powerful. I only aim at the powerful. When satire is aimed at the
> powerless, it is not only cruel -- it's vulgar."
> I'm sure Jesper intended it to be funny, but it just rubs salt in the wound
> of something that was very embarrassing for the JS community, and makes
> Erlangers look bad for doing so. All I'm suggesting is that we have some
> compassion for a change.
Your quotation references the "powerless" VS the "powerful".
Since when was Erlang the big dog and js the outsider?
Get some perspective.
And yes, massively, unfixably huge screwups that affect users who don't
even know what is going on but depend on the magic of actual engineers
doing, on occasion, actual engineering is absolutely worthy of satire.
Especially if said screwups were satirized loud and clear very early in
the life of the environment in which said screwup later occurred.
You *do* realize it is just about impossible to get funding for an Erlang
based project merely because of the word "Erlang" being associated with it
and a crapshoot to get funding for a js project regardless of merit, right?
Or have you not recently walked the streets of LA?
(Hint: I have.)
Get off your horse. It already died.
"We shouldn't judge people."
"But we must somehow make hiring decisions."
"Stop being so judgemental about tech, its all just tradeoffs."
"That's nice, but our infrastructure has to run on *something* we decide
today, and the balance of all tradeoffs are not equal."
PS: Will anyone second this view? No. Of course not. That is a radical
thing today. That only means that we are nearer the end of this cycle than
the beginning. Much less controversial to chain one's self to a convention
center door with a "code of conduct" taped to one's chest that states
attendees are forbidden to take actions that are already illegal.
More information about the erlang-questions