Not sure you understand what "scientific theory" actually implies.
"A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation."
The reddit link is to a men's movement forum, so expect conspiracy theory and misinformation to be rife - it goes with the territory ... And feminism suffers from the same problem. Any prejudiced movement will suffer from victim mentality and reality distortion.
That's not saying that sexism doesn't exist - but "taking a gender preference" leads to bias in one's views and ultimately creates more prejudice from those who believe in a gender superiority.
The best solution is to think of everyone as people. Only accept a gender difference if it's essential. For example, avoid giving jobs based on gender as many companies do today ... Unless there is an absolute need, doing so is sexist (and quotas/targets to reach 50% are almost always sexist).
That doesn't make any sense: "French men often circumvent these laws by sending samples of DNA to foreign laboratories". Did you mean foreign labs lobbying in France?
From DanBC above: At will, secret, testing is banned. Parents can get court orders if they want a paternity test.
The "labs lobbying" comment was kind of tongue-in-cheek: making fun of the "crazies" being paranoid about "crazy feminists"...
The real reason's probably more about bioethics: no dna profiling of people who don't consent without a court order (and children being too young to consent, you need a court order for a paternity test).
> So not really what you would expect from a union in the west
Oh, you know, these days in the West, the big unions are more partners with the governments/employers than they are on the side of the workers.
Many unions have become tools that exists only to perpetuate their own existence, instead of being tools for workers to organize and collectively defend their interests against those of their employers and governments.
Downvoting isn't equal to censorship. The content remains available for anyone with an account.
The commit history of this project remains available too... however, they forbid the authors to use the word in the live version if they want their project to be hosted on github. Now, I guess it's their prerogative to set the rules for people using their service. But I think it's also fair to say that being the facebook of programming it feels like they're kind of bullying the authors into compliance...
I'm pretty sure it's a really a non-story. Someone at github overreacted when a complaint was received. Big deal. If they started blocking accounts for reasons like this on a regular basis, many people would move somewhere else. It's not like they don't have competitors with equally good solutions. Their only advantage is their large userbase.
Except when it is. Given sufficient downvotes, a post will fade to the same color as the background, making it easy to scroll past and not see it. Whether you want to admit it or not, brigading happens here too, and once in a while a perfectly valid, thoughtful, and reasoned response is silenced because it doesn't fit in with the group mentality here.
The only solution for this issue would be for everyone to adopt a personal policy of only downvoting trolls, intentionally misleading comments, off topic comments, spam, and "me too!" style comments that don't contribute to the discussion. Unfortunately we're only human, and instead of rebutting a comment one disagrees with, many of the users here take the lazy path and downvote. There's no easy fix for that, so the brigading continues, as does the censorship of valid but controversial ideas.
As for the topic at hand; while I agree with most people that the word "retard" is offensive and derogatory towards a specific group of people, I find it hilarious that its use is being questioned by people running a site/service named after an equally offensive and derogatory word.
> Except when it is. Given sufficient downvotes, a post will fade to the same color as the background, making it easy to scroll past and not see it.
It doesn't change anything. The content is still available for anyone to see if they want to.
Censorship is about making content unavailable. Not giving the exact same visibility to everything out there isn't censorship. Or upvoting is also a form of censorship, since it moves content above less-upvoted comments making less-upvoted comments more likely to be missed by people who won't scroll to the end of the page.
And for anyone used to HN's way of doing things, it's not hard to spot faded comments and highlight them if they seem of interest given the context around them.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. For me, attempting to whitewash something you don't agree with is censorship, and Merriam-Webster agrees with me, given their definition of "censor" means to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable (emphasis mine):
"Full Definition of CENSOR
transitive verb
: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable <censor the news>"[1]
Git is not equivalent to retard. Git is an everyday word. You can definitely get away with calling a pal a grumpy git. You're not going to get away with calling peoe retards unless you know them very well. And don't do so in public.
And 100 years ago you could get away with calling someone who was mentally impaired a "retard". That's the wonderful thing about language, it's always evolving.
Personally, if someone called me a "git" or a "retard" I would take it exactly the same way, since they are both connotations for "idiot" or "slow thinker".
yes, language evolves. Now we recognise that retard was used to define people as sub-human and then to murder them; experiment upon them; forcibly sterilise them against their will and without their knowledge; deny them medical treatment (which often leads to their slow painful death); to bully and harass them; deny them employment; deny them opportunity; segregate them; abuse them; rape them.
Using the word retard against people who do not have LD is a weak insult to them, but does cause hurt to a large number of weak, dis-empowered people.
Retard as an insult is fucking stupid and lazy because it misses the mark.
In every thread about downvoting ever you have people who strongly feel that downvoting anything other than flagrant rule-breaking posts is censorship - it makes the content less available.
> The content remains available for anyone with an account.
Github are not magically destroying content. They're just removing it from their servers. Since they own those servers it seems reasonable that they are allowed to chose what goes onto them. We can disagree about where they draw the line, but some people in this thread seem to think that Github does not have the right to draw that line anywhere.
Down-voting can be used as censorship, if not used properly. As in downvoting because you don't agree with the opinion, rather than because the post is irrelevant, ad-hominem, or content-free. If you don't agree, post a rebuttal.
I'm not sure they'll find a buyer... they managed to ruin them pretty badly.
Now, for slashdot, the slashdot crowd definitely has some responsibility. Still, they did pretty much anything they could to antagonize them (although, I'm not sure what they could have done not to, it seems like it's a pretty important part of being a slashdotter to hate on the staff).
it seems like it's a pretty important part of being a slashdotter to hate on the staff
I wouldn't go that far. I was on Slashdot for a very long time and witnessed many changes of ownership. Sure, there are always a few people that will grumble when anything is changed, but I don't think any of the ownership changes caused that much uproar before Dice came along. Auto-playing video ads of models walking down runways on Slashdot? Adware/malware bundling on SourceForge? Dice made it really clear that they didn't have an ounce of respect for the community. I think the bulk of the community would have tolerated reasonable efforts at monetization, but Dice went way beyond reasonable.
> One of the most well known examples was when the FBI used a FireFox 0-day to target and eventually dismantle a child pornography ring.
Funny... that's when they took down Freedom Hosting right? If I recall correctly, they didn't use a 0-day, they targeted a vulnerability that had been patched in the regular tor browser so only people using an outdated version of the browser were hit by it.
Plus, calling Freedom Hosting a "child pornography ring" isn't representing accurately what it was. Sure, their was child porn hosted there. Maybe even most of what was hosted there was child porn, I don't know... but that was a web host. There was no encouragements from Freedom Hosting to host cp there (apart from not doing anything to prevent it).
Plus, apart from busting the guy responsible for FH, I'm not sure they got anyone of interest with this operation... at least, I haven't heard of it and I'm sure they wouldn't have been too shy to brag about it if they had made any high-profile cp bust from this.
Nothing strange at all, congrats!