Only 11% of open source participants are women

What can be done to correct this?
redhat.com/en/about/women-in-open-source?sc_cid=70160000000wxWPAAY

Other urls found in this thread:

news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801646
youtu.be/tiJVJ5QRRUE?t=22m17s
washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/03/30/lots-of-coders-are-self-taught-according-to-developer-survey/?utm_term=.10ed78a885c7
arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/02/data-analysis-of-github-contributions-reveals-unexpected-gender-bias/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Does it say what percentage of those women are men?

>11% of open source contributors are women
That explains why open source are so shit as of lately.

Is that by self-reported gender or by medical data?

(((women)))

How many % are real women?

PS: I identify as gnugender. GNU/Linux

0%! (｡>‿‿

>What can be done to correct this?

Don't allow women to take programming classes.

(((documentation editors)))

strange, just like
it became downward trend since 80s

There's no correcting since it isn't out of sorts. This isn't something like an automated door staying open and then closing when someone walks up to it, this is simply participation. This is just how it is, plain and simple.

Is this just a meme? I've seen a few examples here and there but is there genuinely a plague of progressive documentation editors on github?

>What can be done to correct this?

This should not be corrected as women are terrible when it comes to thinking in terms of Logic and by that, I don't mean social logic but rather, the actual study of Logic, Game Theory, Computational Models, Assembly and all sorts of other things.

They make things plain which are actually retarded, more complex and waste more time.

They should not be allowed in.

The only way to increase that number is to kill all men on earth because women don't really like tech jobs

>(｡>‿‿

This is one of the things that made me a Trump supporter. I'm not joking.

I'm a web developer. I have no problem with women being in the field. What I can't stand is these efforts to make the field 50/50. It will NEVER be 50/50, unless capable men are FIRED to make way for less capable employees, just because they're female.

There's a very important scientific reason why development will never be 50/50. Males produce more testosterone. Higher testosterone levels are associated with a greater interest in understanding systems, from a very early age. It is certainly possible for females to develop this interest - there are females that have abnormally high testosterone levels compared to other females. And especially the daughters of developers / STEM types are more likely to be interested in those fields.

But in general, males tend to be far more interested in technical subjects. In Norway, the most gender-equal country in the world, 90% of engineers are male, and 90% of nurses are female - despite repeated efforts by the government to get the opposite sex into each industry. Interestingly, in less developed countries, engineering is MORE gender-balanced than in developed countries. People who research this stuff suggest this may be because in developing countries, there's more pressure (from poverty and such) to get a well paying job, so both males and females are attracted to engineering. But in Western countries people don't have such great financial worries, so they pursue what they enjoy instead.

So yes. Please let's just stop this political correctness crap.

John Carmack was quizzed on this topic at an event once (the video's on YouTube) - he was asked, by a woman, why there weren't more females on the Oculus team. His reply was something along the lines of "we hire whoever is best for the job - we don't care what sex they are". That's the attitude that tech should always take, now and forever.

>people aren't influenced by social norms

>few women choose to major in a STEM field
>few women end up working in STEM
Woah

>What can be done to correct this?
Absolutely fucking nothing. Now quit shitposting.

>have 11℅ girls in one of my cs class
>100℅ poo

Exactly this, and we need to get this cancer out of the industry.

By which I mean we need to encourage a genuine MERITOCRACY, an open door for anyone who is good enough. Stop the bullshit of crowbarring people in, it's fucking MORONIC. And it genuinely threatens the jobs of talented people who could be fired because their only crime was being white and male.

You've seen the multiple examples of GitHub progressive wankery right? If not, pic related is just one example of the cancer, but there are others. A few projects did this change of dropping "master"/"slave" (you know, terms that have been used in technology for FUCKING DECADES)

Thankfully hacker news had some sense on the matter, most of them thought this was idiotic:

news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7801646

I don't mind letting women in - if somebody is talented, no matter their sex, they should be able to get the job

What I object to is special dispensation

I object to that more strongly than anything I can possibly think of

>This should not be corrected as women are terrible when it comes to thinking in terms of Logic and by that, I don't mean social logic but rather, the actual study of Logic, Game Theory, Computational Models, Assembly and all sorts of other things.
Not sure I buy that. Sounds like a meme to me.

>They make things plain which are actually retarded, more complex and waste more time.
If that's true, they should be kicked out based on the poor quality of their work, not their gender. Gender shouldn't even be taken into account.

>They should not be allowed in.
They should be allowed in, if they're able to demonstrate their competence. Rejecting people based on something other than the quality of their work or ability to participate in a project (if someone writes really good code, but creates excessive drama with other contributors, a case can be made for kicking them out) goes against the open source philosophy.

>What I can't stand is these efforts to make the field 50/50. It will NEVER be 50/50, unless capable men are FIRED to make way for less capable employees, just because they're female.
That's assuming that women are indeed less capable then men. Not sure I buy that. Too many people, when they reject the idea that men dominating CS is ENTIRELY because of sexist discrimination, go to far in the other direction and assume that there is ZERO actual discrimination. I'm inclined to think the real answer is somewhere in between, unless someone can provide conclusive evidence that it is indeed entirely one or the other.

When's the last time you've witnessed a girl being made fun of for being an engineer like a guy gets made of fun of for being a nurse?

>You've seen the multiple examples of GitHub progressive wankery right? If not, pic related is just one example of the cancer, but there are others. A few projects did this change of dropping "master"/"slave" (you know, terms that have been used in technology for FUCKING DECADES)
I don't think we should keep terms around JUST because they've been around for a while. People have been saying "knots per hour" when measuring the speed of ships for over a hundred years, but it's still just plain incorrect and shouldn't be encouraged. And I'm not familiar with Redis, but just in terms of semantics, "primary/replica" doesn't seem appropriate as a replacement for "master/slave", because the words don't mean the same thing. It might make sense if we're talking about a process that uses a fork call, or an object that creates copies of themselves (and certainly such constructs could USE a master/slave protocol, but master/slave is about control, while primary/replica seems to be talking about something orthogonal to that).

Apparently Django's first replacement for "master/slave" terminology was "leader/follower", and I'm not sure why they switched from that to "primary/replica". Leader/follower expresses the same concept as master/slave, but doesn't have the unfortunate implications of non-consent/exploitation. And I definitely think it's silly to oppose "master/slave" as having racial implications (which are specific to a given culture/environment) rather than just the fact that it implies one process/object/component is controlling the other without its consent.

What do you mean?

Top
Fuggin
Kek.

>who is good enough
you sound like pretty much a retard

if you "genuinely" belive in meritocracy you should evalutate based on the merit of a proposal not based on who is "good enough"

I'm not into the political correctness wankery, but to be fair "master" and "slave" are awful terms, and replacing them requires little effort. Stop being such a contrarian, people don't like that.

Firstly, social norms are grounded in biology. Do you think they just fall out of the sky?

Secondly, the reason most women aren't interested in technology is grounded in biology. It's hormones, mainly. Testosterone affects the development of the brain, and explains why men (on the whole) are more logically minded. Yes I do have a source - watch this, for about 3 minutes, from 22:20 - youtu.be/tiJVJ5QRRUE?t=22m17s

Or if you don't want to, a brief explanation - Simon Baron-Cohen, Cambridge Professor, has been doing this long-term study on children that he's been studying from when they were in the womb. He measured their testosterone levels constantly, and found that babies with higher test levels had certain traits:

>Less eye contact
>Greater interest in understanding systems
>Take longer to learn language / social skills

Also he did an experiment on these babies on the first day of life - he showed them a mechanical object and a face. He found that the babies with higher prenatal (in the womb) testosterone spent more time looking at the object. Those with lower levels spent more time looking at the face.

Females can have unusually high test levels - they also can be interested in technical things, for sure, but it looks like hormones play a big part in determining our behaviour, and our patterns of interest. And males (on average) produce twice as much testosterone in the womb. As adults, males produce TWENTY times as much.

>muh patriarchy
Can't you just accept that women have different interests than men and no one is oppressing them?

This.

Well we could do background checks to make sure nomore get in and the blacklist the ones that are already in from editing anything without approval.

>Firstly, social norms are grounded in biology. Do you think they just fall out of the sky?
They arise from acknowledgement of biological differences. But their effect goes beyond that of what biology has in the first place, it basically exerts an averaging effect. For example, "masculine behavior" is biologically influenced, that's why it's more common in men than women in the first place. But when it becomes a social norm, it basically enforces that trait beyond biology - without social norms, a non-masculine male wouldn't be "wrong" (because biology itself does not make value judgements), but with societal norms it adds a value judgement, males are ashamed to have traits seen as feminine, and parents are unlikely to want a feminine son. Not saying this is either good or bad, but that social norms are an EXTENSION of biology, and if we somehow went back in time and prevented social norms from forming, culture would have turned out differently, even if on a basic biological level things were exactly the same.

See the bottom paragraph of . I think it's silly to assume it's ALL oppression or ALL "just having different natural interests". I suspect that some sexist social discouragement whatever is going on, and it explains part of, but not all of, the numerical disparity between men and women in CS.

If we made mandatory penis inspections I'm sure that 11% would fall drastically.

>implying 0% of women have penises

>but with societal norms it adds a value judgement, males are ashamed to have traits seen as feminine, and parents are unlikely to want a feminine son.
That's because women aren't attracted to feminine males. Gender roles, in that sense, are *helping* you to become reproductively successful. Just like you parents teach you how to succeed at a getting a job, and succeed at managing your money, they try and teach how to succeed at attaining a partner and having a family as well.

>do what everybody else says
That's genuinely the most pathetic post I've ever read

I feel sorry for you

What is there to correct and why?

>That's because women aren't attracted to feminine males.
And that too is something partially extended by social norms. There is a biological root to it all, some of the traits that are considered "feminine" are considered undesirable in a woman's partner for evolutionary reasons, but "femininity", as a category, doesn't even really exist in nature, and a woman is likely to consider a man less attractive if she hears others consider him "feminine", without even knowing what those "feminine" traits are.

This isn't "gender roles are bad mmkay", it's just pointing out that gender roles, despite arising from biology, have an effect beyond what biology itself does.

Not them, but contrarian behavior is itself a version of conformity.

Underrated

I'd marry a GNUgender woman.

Nothing, it's not a problem at all. Not everything has to be 50% females.

I wouldn't mind.

Mfw I realise Sup Forums is turning to Sup Forums

Women should stop hoarding their source?

t. friendless turbo autist

Revoke their github access rights.

Sup Forumstards are just noisy and prone to spamming memes and shitting all over the place.

Except barely anyone of any gender goes into gender studies.

>implying 'consent' applies to inanimate things like processes, objects, or components

Thinking this way would be incredibly silly. Do we really want to deal with this kind of autism when we're trying to make software?

>I see what you did there

Yeah special dispensation is stupid behavior and gets us nowhere.
The master slave github thing was petty, that shit has no place in real work.

In Let Over Lambda, Hoyte says of legendary common lisp hacker Edi Weitz
> "When other people are talking, Edi is coding; code speaks louder than argument."

Avoid normie bs, disdain for plebs etc.

I'm not even saying it's a big deal. I'm just saying it maeks more sense than saying the terms have "racial" implications, and there's really no reason to use "master/slave" apart from tradition when "leader/follower" conveys the idea just as well.

ayy lmao

no it doesn't, the abstraction is different in our mind because we spent years of our lives studying this shit.

>there's really no reason to use "master/slave" apart from tradition

I disagree. Giving in to people's silly demands like this just creates a culture where they feel dignified in complaining about pettier and pettier grievances. You get nowhere by appeasing them.

See: whitelist/blacklist drama.

Triggered much? Point stands. Women are just being selfish. We don't need their code anyway. Man code works fine without theirs.

>wanting to do the norm and use master/slave is being a contrarian
eat a dick, master and slave don't even have racial connotations on their own

...

wew

Except that is irrelevant, because instead of actually tackling the problem by focusing their attention on the root issue, the educational system. Which fails to foster an interest in STEM from an early age (for both boys and girls).
Feminists will scream and whine at companies to hire more women, an impossible task when the pool of competent women employees is so tiny.

>Stop the bullshit of crowbarring people in, it's fucking MORONIC.

Exactly. I don't belong, so I don't deserve to be in. I'm working to get there, but I'm not going to bother anyone until I have the skills to match my work ethic.

This applies to other fields, of course. It's a wonder people's fucking heads don't explode in everyday life due to the stupidity human resources shits on to a payroll.

>tfw when she has dried fecal matter on her stockings and gloves and cunt
>missing erection poster goes up

Seem an appropriate face for a nü-male beta faggot. Better start the HRT now.

>sour grapes

But besides the supposed racial issue, the master/slave terminology has connations of exploitation, beyond merely expressing how control is organized. As , "consent" isn't really meaningful within computers (at least not until we get real AI), but likewise "exploitation" doesn't either, so using a term with that extra baggage is kind of silly.

Whining about Sup Forums does not mean /lgbt/ is any more welcome here.

The first guy is suggesting that women don't get into FOSS software development because social norms influences their decisions to learn how to program/be a software developer.

The second guy is saying that this isn't the case. He says that there are no social norms precluding women from becoming good software developers, BUT there are social norms precluding men from performing non-traditional male jobs such as being a nurse.

All I can say to that is I have a niece and I plan on buying her Lego and chemistry sets and the kinda shit I liked when I was a kid. It is my hope this will at least expose her to the world of logic and science. If she follows that path, that would be great. If not, that's fine too.

What is wrong is parents saying "no let's get her a girly thing instead of lego" or whatever. Get the kid things that will help them develop and learn, whatever that may be.

was actually meant to reply to

tell them they have germs and to stop contributing

problem solved, open source software gets better

stackoverflow survery says 69 percent of programmers are self taught washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/03/30/lots-of-coders-are-self-taught-according-to-developer-survey/?utm_term=.10ed78a885c7

educated people might realize teaching themselves is a good idea, but i think education is not the number 1 issue

can spot these prison-trans developers from just their avatar thumbnails these days.

guess it's a bit like learning how to tell the sex of baby chicks. See enough of them and you just know instantly.

I know liberals hate the truth, but the vast majority of women just aren't technologically-minded. There's a reason that women have contributed virtually nothing to mathematics and computer science, both historically and in modern times.

FPBP

You owe my waifu an apology /pol kun.

Women study anthropology.
Men study Engineering.
One is more important on the market than the other.
Stop blaming men or society for women's shitty choices. It's as inane as women whining about there not being enough women in politics. They make up more than half of the electorate for fuck's sake and as long as women don't vote they can go fuck themselves, suck my dick and go make me a sammich.

>What can be done to correct this?
Stop them from using GitHub.

>open source
>women

There's nothing to "correct" other than your goddamn face you filthy nigger

>Only 11%
>talking like it's a small number
That's a goddamn a lot and too much, is extremist but has a point.

(｡>‿‿

Maybe only 10~%ish percent of women are interested in CS?

Most women i know don't care about or "get" computers, and thats perfectly fine, they have their own interests, their own skill sets. I really hate how it's almost illegal to say "men are better at X" or even "more men are interested in Y"

reminder that meritocracy is cancer and sexism is built into open source

>not liking SJW bullshit means you're turning into pol

that isn't a female

...

>women
>pic related
pick one

Virtually everything has some kind of negative connotation and negative history behind it. It's virtually impossible to create something 100% sunshine and happiness.

Rename "executable" because of all the religious honor killings while you're at it.

>especially in north america
No, retard. Every nation in history has enslaved people and what the US did was a far sight better than what the rest of the world would have done.

There's more slaves alive right now then there have ever been in history.

Only 9% of nurses are male. What can be done to correct this?

But women dont care about open source, they care about having the latest iPhone and latest emojis and dumb social media apps. They are not interested in this, what there is to correct? If there is even a single real woman in those 11%, they probably participate only because it makes them look nerdy or something like that

Remove all those women to reduce that percentage to 0%.

Are you new or something?

did they count
>women
too?

>Correct this
This is the only thing "wrong" here. The assumption that there "needs" to be more women in open source.
People should be free to do what they want, stop trying to force people into roles to soothe your autism.

>Higher testosterone levels are associated with a greater interest in understanding systems, from a very early age.

Young black men have higher testosterone levels than other races.

I love how some people keep pushing the "there is not enough women working in tech because muh soginy" meme, yet this open source stat proves that in fact the opposite is true, most women just don't want to work in tech. I mean if you want to participate in open source, you don't have to get interviewed by a bunch of racist sexist misogynistic fucking white males, just start writing programs and contributing to projects.

contributors with obviously feminine names get fewer merges and more resistance

it's v common for women to use gender neutral names online for reasons like this

arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/02/data-analysis-of-github-contributions-reveals-unexpected-gender-bias/
>Women's contributions to open source are more likely to be accepted than men's.
nice troll

are you illiterate

>What they discovered was that women's contributions were actually accepted more often than men's—but only if the women had gender-neutral profiles. Women whose GitHub profiles revealed their genders had a much harder time.

>When a woman offered a pull request on an open source project where she was an outsider—in other words, where none of the project leads knew her—her contributions were far less likely to be accepted than ones from outsider men.

we've all seen the same study

Sup Forums has hated this shit since ~2009.
Get over yourself.

Yeah, but Weitz is a fucking God amongst Germen.

Now why would this be?
Could it be because of the current push to get women into coding has led people to be more skeptical of female contributions?

Or is it because we all hate the 3dpd?