SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
[The] main problem here is that software development is not an individual sport. Assessing technical traits means that we are looking at candidates as individuals. At the same time, we will put them in a team context and the project's success will depend on their teamwork. A person's resume or LinkedIn profile says close to nothing about their team skills.
What's more, we know quite a lot about what makes teams effective. Anita Woolley's research on collective intelligence [DOI: 10.1126/science.1193147] [DX] provides extremely valuable insight on the topic. First of all, how do we define collective intelligence? It's basically the skill of a group to solve complex problems. Well, it sounds like the definition of everyday work for software development teams if you ask me.
Why is collective intelligence so important? Exploiting collective intelligence, as opposed to going with the opinion of the smartest person in a room, is a winning strategy. To put in Anita Woolley's words: "Collective intelligence was much more predictive in terms of succeeding in complex tasks than average individual intelligence or maximal individual intelligence."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by kurenai.tsubasa on Sunday September 24 2017, @05:30PM (9 children)
In general agree. NASA is a good example. When doing things that are truly dangerous, the gender caste system finds the limit of its usefulness (assuming it has any).
This is my daily experience with womyn-born-womyn. I'm constantly being interrupted and talked over. It's gotten to the point where I've learned to just shut up when I'm not able to complete a single thought in a discussion dominated by womyn-born-womyn and just abandon the point entirely. Of course, had they not interrupted me and talked over me, so many times it would have saved them problems down the line, problems that these selfsame womyn-born-womyn have the audacity to try to hold me accountable for despite the way they systematically silenced and excluded me.
But hey. My experience obviously doesn't count because I was assigned the male gender at birth.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 24 2017, @05:49PM (1 child)
Great. Stop taking it out on the rest of us.
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Sunday September 24 2017, @08:18PM
No.
When feminism wants to get serious about gender equality, especially the part where you give up privileges you're used to being unaware you have, such as the privilege of being unaccountable for one's personal failures, then I will consider it.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Sunday September 24 2017, @07:56PM (5 children)
So, what you're saying is, you've become a man.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Sunday September 24 2017, @08:13PM (4 children)
I would if I could. However, I have learned quite a bit from men.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 25 2017, @08:11AM (3 children)
Kurenai... even though a lot of Helen Reddy types sing otherwise, we still have a helluva lot of expectations placed on us according to our gender. I am of the belief that I play the cards I am dealt. There are some good things about being female, along with some bad. Same with being male.
I see females being put up on pedestals, where apparently they can do no wrong. A man and a woman get in a fight, unless the guy has a lot of witnesses, its the guy who is probably going to cool off in the jail. Even if the woman is pushing his hot buttons. I have watched several of my friends who fell into marriage fall back out, with disastrous setbacks to his finances. While the woman ended up with the house.
The welfare systems around here will take care of a homeless woman, but a man is on his own. People come burn his tent down when he leaves to get something to eat. He stops to take a crap and other men steal his bike. Men have always been expected to settle their differences physically. Look at the old westerns - see many women having bar fights and gunplay in the streets? Nah, its nearly always the men brawling and its hard to put them up in a decent place... many act like hoodlums and tear the place up.
Now, the women seem by and large to think things out a bit more. Men seem way too gullible to be manipulated. Especially by women. It seems its in our nature to have to compete with each other to be accepted by a woman. We will often go into dire financial disarray just to present a transient illusion of our ability to provide to a woman. I do not know why we do it, but most of us do.
Admittedly, I am still single, as I did not play this game. I have had women play me before, and get me into fights, and bad financial moves to "prove" my love. Well, she was of the belief that I was supposed to buy her trinkets and fun times. I was of the belief that I needed to go through life with a help-mate, not a parasite. We did not see eye to eye, so I just left it at that.
Someone else can have the little princess, along with the upkeep to keep her satisfied. I figured having her was like having a fancy sports car that I could not afford neither the special gasoline nor the parts for. While not as satisfying, I can get porn-assisted biological relief. And its a lot less expensive to hire out the things she could have helped me with with others that specialize in those kind of things.
For me, its not at all like the relationship Dad had with Mom. It worked for over 50 years with Dad and Mom, but neither of them had today's expectations of what a relationship should be. They both had role models. Like "Leave It to Beaver". Dad did guy things. Mom did lady things. And we kids did chores. The family was a lot like watching a machine run.... everything had its purpose, and when it failed to work, it made it hard on everyone. I could not take the post "Helen Reddy" woman - not as a wife anyway. Between Women's Liberation and Walt Disney, I figured my generation was all Princesses. Not fit for anything but endless adoration by doting men all competing for a touch of her magic wand. I have enough problems of my own, trying to keep my bills paid. I simply did not need this.
I will have duck out as an anonymous coward, as I dared say things directly as I saw them, and most are not politically correct.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday September 25 2017, @12:57PM (2 children)
You're looking in the wrong places, at the wrong women. If you desire cheerleaders, you're gonna find they have cheerleader expectations. You're generally not going to find a cheerleader who, unexpectedly, loves abstract art.
First, figure out who you are and what values are important to you. Then, go to places where those things are practiced and celebrated. For example, if you're a Christian and that's important to you, then you should be looking for dates through church. If you love nature and outdoors activities, look for dates on Sierra Club hikes or trail runner clubs and the like. If you like art, take a sculpture/painting/whatever class. Women who share your specific interests are apt to share other interests with you, and having that in common is a natural ice-breaker.
But you gotta go looking. The perfect mate for you is not going to wander into your living room while you're playing Halo and demand you sweep her off her feet.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday September 25 2017, @09:53PM (1 child)
For example, if you're a Christian and that's important to you, then you should be looking for dates through church.
I'm not religious, but to add to this, what I've heard from several Christians is that the single female to single male ratio in Christian churches is absurdly high. So if you're a conservative Christian, you really should be having an easy time finding dates at church; if you've exhausted your options at your current church, try a different one. Conversely, though, life is pretty hard for single Christian females, or so I'm told, and also it's a disadvantage for non-religious men because women are, on average, much more religious than men, so if you want to date, you either have to give in and date a religious woman (who'll likely be much more conservative than you, which means your sex life will probably suck), or hold out for one of the non-religious women which are in short supply, then try to weed out the overly materialistic ("high maintenance") ones that are very common, or others who have various unstated expectations about your role as man in the relationship.
Honestly, I can see why more and more people are simply opting out of marriage and long-term cohabiting relationships. It's hard to find someone really compatible, and they don't really live up to their promises. Some minority of people get really lucky and find someone that really works as a partner to them, but they're the lucky few.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday September 26 2017, @10:12AM
Again, the hunting grounds you choose matter. If you're in the South, what you're saying holds absolutely true. The Midwest a little less so. In the West and Northeast, you'll do fine. As a bonus, in the West and Northeast there are far more hippie/granola girls who are quite keen on sex.
If that's true, it's sad. Having someone to share your life with is a blessing. Having someone to have a family with adds a whole other dimension of joy and meaning. Also, and most people don't talk about this, the sex is much better because of the unparalleled level of intimacy, emotional connection, and trust.
Nothing magically happens, though. You have to seek that kind of relationship. If you find a person, you then have to work at it because everyone has their foibles, including you. It takes time (and yes, sometimes fights) to reach detente. It's worth the effort, though. Dying alone sucks.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 25 2017, @06:07AM
That "womyn" shit does get annoying. Why don't you learn English, like most of the rest of us? Or, learn Greek, like Aristarchus. Then, you could use an archaic language and alphabet that all the rest of us would just ignore.