Since I expressed how I hated Mozilla today...
....
https://www.therebel.media/mozilla_exec_eliminate_meritocracy_because_it_s_pr oblematic They will now be fighting the evil of meritocracy. |
Since I expressed how I hated Mozilla today...
Doomsdrzej wrote:
... https://www.therebel.media/mozilla_exec_eliminate_meritocracy_because_it_s_pr oblematic They will now be fighting the evil of meritocracy. Corporate experiments happen all the time. All corporate experiments come to an eventual end. If the board doesn't do it, the "customer" will see to it. Even that not-for-profit has a customer. Of course, if you're running a private corporation, then the only limits are employment law. Wrongful dismissal. It's easier to prove "just dismissal", if you've been doing employee evaluations. So there are other reasons for measuring employee performance, as protection in court. Enjoy. Paul |
Since I expressed how I hated Mozilla today...
"Doomsdrzej" wrote
| ... | https://www.therebel.media/mozilla_exec_eliminate_meritocracy_because_it_s_pr oblematic | | They will now be fighting the evil of meritocracy. Interesting stuff. I wasn't aware of this "meritocracy" buzzword. It's unfortunate that the writer you linked couldn't make his case better. His piece is nasty and adolescent, even attacking people based on their names. Diversity, MeToo, etc have become so extremist. Yet there are so few *reasonable* voices questioning them. There was Matt Damon, asking for some perspective. And then a number of powerful, extremist women with media access said he should just shut up because as a man he has no perspective on gender/power issues. (Hey... sometimes sexism has to be used to destroy sexism. :) I can only think of one evenhanded, thoughtful piece on MeToo: https://harpers.org/archive/2018/03/...per-network-2/ What I'm saying is that it doesn't help your case to reference nasty, poorly thought out pieces by writers who want to lob grenades when all they need to do in order to be helpfully insightful is to hit the side of a barn with some kind of reasonably coherent criticism. The anti-meritocracy bunch seem, at best, jargon- hypnotized high school kids: https://postmeritocracy.org/ Their "manifesto" (which I found linked in the Mozilla newsgroup discussion about this) is incoherent and displays an inability to think analytically at all. (I've noticed the idea of "toxic people" comes up a lot with these fanatics. They're rabidly fighting for inclusion and kindness, but only toward those who share the same mindset. Everyone else... anyone who questions their dogma... is "toxic". Not just wrong or different but actually poisonous and harmful. *Those people must be excluded!* :) They do seem to mean well. Like many young college students, they're at a stage of pre-adulthood, and very earnest about wanting to develop into decent, empathetic people. Almost inevitably, their first steps are dogma and a kind of liberal fascism; trying to be good by rejecting what they think of as bad. But it gets very awkward for the PC types. They leave themselves no place to stand. Non-PC types are the new blacks for them. That is, if everyone is equal in all ways and we're not even allowed to be aware of gender or race, then the only candidate for bad guy is people who persist in discerning such things.... And people who are doggedly devoted to being good guys *must* have bad guys as reference point. Otherwise there's no way to confirm their accomplishment. But if we don't discern gender and race then how can we give extra points to women and minorities? Goodness, it's confusing. :) On Scandinavian PC (attacked at your link): After several years of seeing claustrophobically PC movies from places like Denmark about such topics as the evil of male aggression, I saw an amazing movie awhile back called The Square. It made me think that maybe Scandinavian culture has gone through PC and is emerging out the other side, more sophisticated for having gone through that reactiveness. But as it applies to browsers..... It gets pretty sticky if the things you buy and use have to be provided by people you admire. Bill Gates is trying to take over American education, but I'm not going to throw out my computers. The diced, canned tomatoes I buy at Whole Foods are from Muir Glen, but that's a pseudonym of 365, which is the WF house brand, which is now owned by Amazon. It's not easy to even figure out these things. I don't want to support Amazon. But what's my choice, since WF decimated the small natural foods stores? The American retail economy is designed to thwart accountability. (And don't get me started on Trader Joes.) To my mind, for all its faults, Mozilla browsers are *by far* the closest thing to a clean, honest and functional browser that one can get. Mostly because there's a lot of info about how to make it that way. (For the average person who knows nothing of extensions and about:config it is going downhill fast, though.) Chrome is spyware. Microsoft browsers have become limited niche products of no consequence. Ditto for Safari. What does that leave? Mozilla. Maybe Iron. Not much else. Vivaldi may not be as much spyware as Chrome, but neither does it act honorably: https://www.ghacks.net/2018/01/30/vi...owser-privacy/ They claim to only be collecting personal info in order to help them make a better browser. But it's not optional. The very idea that they have a right to clandestinely collect data on people who use their product is unredeemably dishonest. And their extensions are Chrome extensions. Can they be trusted? I'm certainly not going to the Google Store. So if you think Vivaldi is better then I can understand your choice. But if you're trying to find the most morally produced browser I think you're skating on thin ice. One advantage of the anti-meritocracy crowd is that they at least *want* to be good people. They might have to kill you to save your soul, but at least they mean well. That should help, at least a little, to keep the Mozilla product honest. |
Since I expressed how I hated Mozilla today...
In article , Mayayana
wrote: The diced, canned tomatoes I buy at Whole Foods are from Muir Glen, but that's a pseudonym of 365, which is the WF house brand, which is now owned by Amazon. It's not easy to even figure out these things. I don't want to support Amazon. But what's my choice, since WF decimated the small natural foods stores? certainly there are other stores near you that sell diced canned tomatoes. whole foods can't be the *only* option. and since they're canned, you could order it from whatever seller you wish to support. The American retail economy is designed to thwart accountability. (And don't get me started on Trader Joes.) perhaps you should live on a farm and grow your own food. that way, you won't have to support anyone other than yourself. To my mind, for all its faults, Mozilla browsers are *by far* the closest thing to a clean, honest and functional browser that one can get. Mostly because there's a lot of info about how to make it that way. (For the average person who knows nothing of extensions and about:config it is going downhill fast, though.) Chrome is spyware. Microsoft browsers have become limited niche products of no consequence. Ditto for Safari. What does that leave? Mozilla. Maybe Iron. Not much else. write your own browser with exactly the features you want and none of the ones you don't. that's obviously more work than downloading an existing browser, but then you won't need to worry about what it's doing behind the scenes. Vivaldi may not be as much spyware as Chrome, but neither does it act honorably: https://www.ghacks.net/2018/01/30/vi...owser-privacy/ They claim to only be collecting personal info in order to help them make a better browser. But it's not optional. The very idea that they have a right to clandestinely collect data on people who use their product is unredeemably dishonest. except that they go out of their way to anonymize it. there is also nothing dishonest about analytics. nevertheless, there are ways to block it and other apps from phoning home. what's amusing is that the ghacks site has a banner that states: We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it. in other words, the site you linked is also clandestinely collecting data on people, something which you believe to be unredeemably dishonest. And their extensions are Chrome extensions. Can they be trusted? I'm certainly not going to the Google Store. it depends on the extension. it's no different than any other software. how do you know firefox extensions are trustworthy? how do you know any app is trustworthy? unless you do a packet trace, you have *no* way to know what any software is sending, and even if you did do that, the data it sends could be encrypted, so all you know is it sent something but not what. |
Since I expressed how I hated Mozilla today...
"Wolf K" wrote
| Interesting stuff. I wasn't aware of this "meritocracy" | buzzword. | [...] | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ri...he_Meritocracy | Yes, but notice that's just a single usage that was satirical. The anti-m people have imported the negative connotation to attach to the real meaning of merit. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2004 - 2006 PCbanter
Comments are property of their posters