Boy, that wording rubs me the wrong way. This stuff is known as "research". Yes, that makes it highly uncertain. No, that does not make it an illegitimate project.
The software was written by The Rand Corporation and the System Development Corporation (SDC) and employed about 20% of the world’s programmers at the peak of the project.
I tried Chrome, Safari and Firefox on OS X and it looks terrible in all of them.
The system had been designed in the mid 1960's, and this particular core array had been running since 1970 or so, and this was 1985. So 14 or so years of continuous uptime. There's something to be said about building hardware at the macro size, not the micro size. ;)
Just our grandfathers, and not our grandparents as a whole?
I'm sorry you think it is more productive to call out perceived slights to your gender, rather than doing something awesome. I guess it's a lot easier kvetching than, you know, actually doing something.
That's the cat food factory hard at work.
Nitpicking over grandfathers in an article that wasn't about gender with regards to an era where it was probably an accurate statement?
Must one distort reality in order to be a good feminist now? This sort of behavior damages the cause and just promotes the stereotype of shrill feminists.
It's embarrassing and I don't want to witness it anymore.
As the piece is not talking about literal grandfathers, there are plenty of non-gendered terms for ancestors that can be used here, and they should be.
Sexism is subtle, and its wounds come from thousands of tiny cuts. Using "grandfather" seems innocuous to you, but it perpetuates the idea of an all-male environment, with wisdom being passed from father to son.
Sexism is a flaw in our environment. If we can't fix even minor bugs like this without dealing with hoonloads of "works for me!" and "feature not a bug", we will never be able to fix the crashers that result in conferences being derailed.
How much did you have to resist correcting the grammar of that sentence? Are you nitpicking over grammar where it isn't actually important? Do you need to "distort reality" to be a good grammarian now?
What is embarrassing in our world is people shying away from the discussion of unintentionally sexist language. The words we use shape the thoughts we have. The thoughts we have influence the words we use. It's a reinforcement cycle.
Rather than "grandfathers" what about "forebears"? Since we're not talking about parental relationships any father/mother/parent talk is misleading.
Rachel has a valid criticism. Portraying that criticism as "distort[ing] reality in order to be a good feminist" is disingenuous.
And no, it makes me (and probably most others) want them to leave.
And a top-level comment isn't a hijack.