Let's get a little louder - <AUTHOR> http://juliaelman.com/blog/2012/jun/3/lets-get-little-louder/ <comment><USER3> Somehow I see no causation between a conference and the drunken comments by its attendees at a bar. Trying to argue that a conference organizer should hold some moral responsible for the people attending seems to me just ridiculous. _He looked at me and sighed, confessing that he never should have allowed this guy to come to the conference._ Here the _Wait. What? Really?_ seems to be better placed - is there somebody really demanding the banning people from conferences who potentially may or may not be saying stupid things while being drunk at a bar?

Apparently the world is full of idiots, but it makes a difference if something is said/done/etc in a closed work environment or at some random bar among random people who just meet at some random event. Just because they like the same kind of things (music, coding languages, other "stuff") doesn't make them having some supreme ethical and moral standard. Demanding stronger sexual harassment laws is a legitimate request, but trying to paint the tech community as misogynist because of some random bar encounter is in my opinion unacceptable.

<comment><USER4> It is hardly "some random bar encounter". This is the latest in a string of publicly described issues with sexual harassment in the tech community, both at conferences and elsewhere. The same rule applies here as with bugs reported by users: if one person is talking about this out loud, it means dozens are probably running into it and staying silent.

 _That_ is unacceptable. And to consider conference organizers responsible for expelling people who are tarnishing the experience of their conference is hardly out of line. Conferences are not something that stops when you leave the conference area, because people travel to them. They are social experiences both on the conference grounds and outside of them.

Nobody is saying it should be illegal for a conference organizer to allow people like this. But it's perfectly fair as a developer going to a conference or as a company sending developers to a conference to require that they have a policy of banning such members.

Oh, and "he was drunk" is _not an excuse_. It is _never an excuse_. It is never an excuse for _anything_. I cannot stress this enough. Drunkenness is an excuse only because we allow it to be, not because there is any legitimacy to it.

If you know you're an ass when you're drunk, well, it turns out, you can work on _not being an ass when you're drunk_ , or, alternatively, you can simply _not drink_. If you do neither of these things, then you are responsible for every stupid thing you say and do while drunk.

To be clear, I am aware you did not explicitly mention drunkenness as a valid excuse; however, your phrasing strongly implied it by correlating the saying of stupid things with being drunk at a bar. As such, I picked at that point because it's an attitude I've seen before, and I think it's a problem. My apologies if you didn't explicitly mean it that way.

<comment><USER5> The other uncharitable interpretation is: "What did you expect when you get drunk men and women together at a bar?" But focusing on the GP's general point, I feel like this was more of a failure of the bar (shouldn't they be on the lookout for these things?) than the conference. Also, if you're being harassed at a bar, why don't you immediately tell the bar owner/tender/bouncer or police instead of waiting a full day before telling the conference organizer? (You can do the latter too, but the former was left out of the given narrative which makes me think it wasn't done.) [Edited for clarity.]

<comment><USER6> The OP doesn't specify, but her alleged harasser is well known in the community already. So I would assume he's not just a regular conference attendee; he's probably got some technical reputation, and may be a featured speaker. That's usually what makes these things extra extra difficult.

As for whether the bar is really part of the conference, I agree it's a bit of a grey zone. But in every such gathering, the unofficial parts are where most of the important stuff happens. If you have a conference where the women feel unwelcome doing that stuff, you don't really have a woman-friendly conference.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Maybe I'm missing something but why not handle it with the safeguards at the venue? The conference is not in the business of protecting its attendees from unwanted advances, especially outside of the conference areas/sponsored events.

Why not speak to the manager of the bar and have him escorted out? If it happens at the hotel, do the same with the hotel manager. People in the service/hospitality industry know how to deal with these situations and do so all the time. If it happens again call the law.

There are much better mechanisms for dealing with harassment than a conference organizer.

<comment><USER8> Agreed. Why is the development community (this conference in specific) being held responsible for the acts of an individual who happens to reside within? This is clearly something that should be taken care like an adult of outside of a private community. The story is a bummer, but the author's response to the situation is quite childish and this blog post seems somewhat irrelevant.

<comment><USER9> And the response from the organizer should have been very simple and straight- forward: Ask the person to leave the conference and ideally, if it still had to take place, canceling their talk as well.

I doubt anything but praise would have resulted from that, even though the best outcome would be that it was kept private and became a little piece of background gossip floating around the Django-community.

<comment><USER10> Sorry to go all patriarchy here, but the little Schneier on my shoulder just explained to me how to get anyone's talk cancelled at a conference that institutes this sort of policy.

I'm not sure that's a workable fix, either. This is sort of a hard problem.

<comment><USER9> Judging from the organizer's response there was little doubt concerning the validity of her claims in this case though.

In other cases, pulling said person into a room, asking him if the claims are true and _if so_ asking them to leave is already a big step forward.

<comment><USER10> It seems like you assume everyone to be honest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I am really quite disturbed by all of the people who are responding something along the lines of "this isn't the conference organizer's problem, it's happening outside of the conference." I've seen several such replies, so rather than responding to one, I'm responding to the whole sentiment here.

At a conference, there is a lot that goes on during unofficial off-hours, that is really an integral part of the conference. We shouldn't consider it acceptable for women to feel unsafe going to such off-hours events. If there is someone who is a guest at that conference, and showing up to off-hours events associate with the conference, that is still the conference's problem, as it significantly negatively affects an important part of the conference, and could be avoided by making that person unwelcome at the conference.

And this is not a court of law. We regularly ban people from online communities with a much lower bar of proof than would be required in a court of law, because those people are harmful to the community. Yes, any particular process could, in theory, be abused. But that isn't, as far as I know, a problem here. I have never heard of someone being banned from a conference unjustly. And we have a lower bar in these cases because the consequences are not as severe as criminal sanctions. We are not trying to lock someone up. We are not trying to get them arrested. We are just saying "this behavior is unacceptable, and you are not welcome in our community if you are going to behave this way."

All the original post is asking is that conferences have a clearly defined policy on what is unacceptable, and what will happen if someone crosses that line. It doesn't sound like there's any dispute about what happened. It sounds like the person in question had a history of problems, as the organizer said he shouldn't have allowed this person to come to the conference.

There isn't a problem here of people being unjustly accused and cut off from conferences because of it. There is a problem of women being harassed, seriously creeped out, feeling unwelcome and unable to do anything about it because of the actions of a few, and the lack of any clear policy or action on the part of conference organizers. And heck, a clear policy can help. Perhaps it can specify that the first time, someone will be warned, and only banned if they have already been warned. Perhaps it can specify a dispute resolution procedure. A clear policy will help everyone. We need to do better, because this keeps coming up and it is a serious problem.

<comment><USER12> > It sounds like the person in question had a history of > problems, as the > organizer said he shouldn't have allowed > this person to come to the > conference.

Even then, it may be far from clear-cut. We don't know what those problems are. Have there been reports of harassment regarding this guy? If so, that's fairly clear-cut. But maybe this is just kind of a jerk, but hasn't done anything over the line before.

While conference organizers certainly shouldn't put their heads in the sand, realistically they're a small part of the potential solution. The community at large really has the most power here - it has many more eyes and ears than the (usually overworked) conference organizers.

I'm wondering where the rest of the community was when this harassment was going on at the bar. The victim says they were there in a group. So a whole group of conference attendees was just standing around, letting this victim be harassed?

Unlike the conference organizers, they were there. At the bar. In close proximity.

<comment><USER11> > Even then, it may be far from clear-cut. We don't know what those problems > are. Have there been reports of harassment regarding this guy? If so, that's > fairly clear-cut. But maybe this is just kind of a jerk, but hasn't done > anything over the line before.

All of this is idle speculation that is really besides the point. The point is that conferences should have a policy for how to deal with these kinds of situations. Those policies are probably going to depend on a certain amount of judgement from the conference organizer. They make all kinds of other judgements, about who to include as keynote speakers or accept for talks. One of their criteria should, perhaps, be whether the person in question has stepped seriously out of bounds at previous events.

> I'm wondering where the rest of the community was when this harassment was > going on at the bar. The victim says they were there in a group. So a whole > group of conference attendees was just standing around, letting this victim > be harassed?

You have been to a bar before, right? Many of them are dark, and loud. There can be many conversations going on at once. It's pretty easy, even with a large groups present, for people to have a conversation that no one else can hear, because there's music playing, and they are involved in their own conversation.

If people did overhear, there's always the bystander effect. In groups, people are sometimes less likely to intervene in a situation, because they expect someone else to intervene, or because they see no one else intervening and feel some social pressure not to break the ice.

And we've seen several other incidents like this. Sometimes, it happens off in a corner where no one else is around; or in a hallway in the conference hotel. Those are situations we need to deal with just as much, and we can't depend on there being a helpful bystander.

The only point is that we need a policy. The policy does not need to be bulletproof. These are human situations. There will always be cases that slip through the cracks. Some of them might just turn into a he-said, she-said that can't be resolved. Some people might never come forward to the conference organizers. Some people might abuse a policy to just get someone kicked out that they don't like. But you do your best to try and provide the best, most accepting environment that you can.

And right now, we have a real problem. We have people abusing the lack of any policies, the lack of will of organizers to do anything, to continue coming to events without repercussion for repeated behavior that is clearly unacceptable. We can do better.

You know, the policy might be a warning at first. It might include some form of adjudication if the events are in dispute. It might give someone a cooling off period, and allow them back after a certain amount of time. There are lots of options, and a large space to explore. But it is fundamentally unacceptable that we just say "well, we can't tell what really happened with a legal level of proof, so we're going to keep inviting creeps to our conferences and let anyone who feels uncomfortable with that stay away."

<comment><USER13> Sure, I perfectly understand how bars work. Like you say, it's totally possible nobody at the bar knew this woman was being harassed. Especially if this guy has plenty of experience being a creep and has gotten good at doing without attracting attention.

What I'm saying, though, is that the people around them at the bar are far more likely to be able to assist than a conference organizer who's not physically there.

"The point is that conferences should have a policy for how to deal with these kinds of situations. Those policies are probably going to depend on a certain amount of judgement from the conference organizer."

I totally agree that there need to be policies. But policies are just words, and they won't get the job done alone.

What will get the job done is looking out for each other. In social situations, particularly bars, we should all be looking out for each other, especially women, since they're disproportionally the ones on the receiving end of predatory/harassing behavior.

If she went to the bar with a group, every single one of them ought to have been looking out for each other. And yes, I've been in scores of similar situations where I and others have looked out for the welfare of others. You don't need to be an obnoxious "white knight" about it; you don't even need to be overt. Creeps tend to look for girls whose friends aren't paying attention.

Example: Your female friend is caught in a conversation with a potential El Creepo. Play dumb and introduce yourself to the guy in a purely friendly way. Heck, maybe buy a round of drinks. Just knowing that somebody noticed him will often nip things in the bud.

<comment><USER11> OK, sure. If your response is not "it's not the conference organizers problem" but "we should also try to look out for each other in social situations," I will agree wholeheartedly with that.

Yes, there are things that we should do while we are there in person. And there are things that should be handled at the conference organizer level, if there is someone who has demonstrated unacceptable behavior at the conference. And, of course, there is also the police level, for things that go so far beyond the bounds as to be able to make it to that level.

I was just concerned that a lot of people were saying things like "well, she doesn't have proof, so we should do nothing" or "well, this should be a police matter, so we should do nothing," and I thought that your comment might be along those lines, "the other people in the bar should have done something, so we shouldn't do anything." Sorry for having misinterpreted you, and yes, I agree that we should fight this kind of behavior at all levels.

<comment><USER12> I'll drink to that!

As somebody who's organized community gatherings himself (and made plenty of mistakes in this area himself) I do feel that organizers play an important role as you say.

To put it in really literal terms, when I organized my first meetup, we had a mix of under- and over-21 members. I was really concerned about underage drinking. I really strongly let our members know what was expected of them. I think I stopped just shy of threatening to beat them up and/or report them to the FBI if I caught one whiff of something bad happening to anybody, especially the underage members. I definitely got the message across, at least.

While that kind of approach obviously doesn't directly scale/translate to a professional conference, I think the overarching principle is the same. The organizers set the tone, outline accountability, and (if it's a multi-year event) weed out repeat offenders. The rest is up to the community.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> This sucks, period - there's no two ways about it. Things like this are why I am glad PyCon (us.pycon.org) has a code of conduct in place (<https://us.pycon.org/2012/codeofconduct/>) which is enforced by staff. There is no place for this type of behavior, anywhere.

I am sorry this happened to you Julia, it should not have, and the conference organizers should not have blinked before ejecting the responsible party from the conference.

<comment><USER15> > _"and the conference organizers should not have blinked before ejecting the > responsible party from the conference."_

So just assume guilt and throw him out, sans investigation?

That's completely unreasonable and why these are sticky situations. It isn't black and white. Even with an air-tight sexual harassment policy, you can't automatically assume that the accused is in the wrong.

<comment><USER16> Not blinking doesn't mean that one can't investigate. It just means that one shouldn't flinch at it.

<comment><USER14> What wpietri said - conference and other event organizers need to not balk at taking action, investigation, etc. This is a problem, and not a world I want my wife or two daughters to be part of, that simple.

<comment><USER15> Original quote:

> _"the conference organizers should not have blinked before ejecting the > responsible party from the conference."_

Shoot first, ask questions later?

This is a problem, and not a world I want my wife or children to be part of, that simple.

<comment><USER16> That's one way to interpret that, but not the only way. You shouldn't complain about someone potentially rushing to judgment at the same time you're rushing to judgment.

<comment><USER15> Oh, I see. You're interested in having an argument about the semantics of a straight forward sentence.

> _"the conference organizers should not have blinked before ejecting the > responsible party from the conference."_

Not much to "interpret" there. I've been wrong before, but I'll bet he meant exactly what he said; this individual should have been removed from the conference immediately. That's all well and good for a discussion on an internet message board, but in reality it could be extremely harmful to reputations, both of the accused and the conference.

Now, if jnoller meant what you are _implying_ he meant, he could have easily written:

 _the conference organizers should not have blinked before [taking action/investigating/speaking with/questioning etc] the [accused] party._

or even:

 _the conference organizers should have investigated, then not have blinked before ejecting the responsible party from the conference if determined to be guilty._

And that's something I could support. I think the conference representative's reaction to such a major accusation was reprehensible. But that isn't what he wrote. And I really don't think that's what he meant, either. Note the language. Responsible? At what point was that determined?

And by the way: jumping to conclusions about a sexual harassment charge is dangerous, and not _at all_ analogous to doing the same with regards to a sentence on HackerNews.

<comment><USER14> Even though it's against my better judgement to keep this thread going, I'll hopefully clarify something for people reading this later.

In short; you're right - I could have spent more time wording it differently, and your second proposed text:

> "the conference organizers should have investigated, then not have blinked > before ejecting the responsible party from the conference if determined to > be guilty."

Is closest to my thoughts on this. However, I feel the second half of that - "determined to be guilty" puts a flair on the statement that ignores the knowledge expressed in the article from the conference organizer - namely they expressed to the author prior knowledge that this individual might be a _known issue_ and therefore, the second portion of your sentence puts an undue burden of doubt on the author's claims.

For the sake of clarity; here's the exact steps I would have taken as a conference chair for a conference sitting at around 2500 attendees:

1> Once approached, I would have immediately noted the code of conduct outlining our policy and thoughts on issues such as this, and explained that we would immediately look into the situation, as the accusations are indeed serious, and taken seriously.

2> I would take copious notes and asked the author to confirm my summary of the events. If they were serious enough, I would then ask if the author wished for me to summon law enforcement.

3> If a No was indicated to #2 - I would ask for any witnesses and immediately pull the accused party aside, without the attendance of the accuser, with at least one other senior staff member to ask the accuser about the events, and once again point out the stated code of conduct and ask for their side of events. During the investigation portion of this, the accused would not be allowed to speak or represent the conference in any way, to allow that would further open the door to further risk or an implicit endorsement of the actions under investigation.

4> If, upon discussing with senior staff, and any witnesses we felt that the issue being faced violated with our outlined code of conduct and indeed created a hostile environment, I would ask the accused to leave the conference per the stated code of conduct.

"Without blinking" was indeed meant to "take action" without blinking - whether that is to immediately pull all parties aside to investigate and discuss, or eject the accused.

However with the evidence provided in the post - most notably the fact that the conference organizer(s) seemingly knew that this individual posed a problem prior to the events occurring, _I would have a responsibility to immediately act and isolate the accused to discuss, and in all probability ask them to leave._

A "zero tolerance policy" has a bad name in the news due to the concerns you outline. It does not, however, have to be enacted in the way we are all familiar with - namely skipping the investigation and discussion portion.

I wouldn't want my child or myself ejected from school stupidly from school or an event due to some written zero tolerance policy without discussion and proper investigation - I would not do that to anyone else.

I hope that helps.

<comment><USER17> No matter how it is modified to fit the context, that is not how it's taken <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_tolerance>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I've gotten into a bar fight to protect a woman I did not know. I almost got into a fight in the subway for the same reason, twice. However I can't stand these kinds of stories. All I hear is one socially awkward guy trying really hard in the worst possible way.

I'm conflicted because on the other hand the guy seemed like an asshole but I have only one side of the story and feel like it would be jumping to conclusions to judge this guy just from this.

<comment><USER19> It seems to me that it might have been worthwhile talking to a bouncer or other member of staff to warn the guy to stay away from her, or risk being thrown out.

Whether or not that's reasonable, I don't know; but if the guy was a real problem for her (and from her side it sounds like he was), then "telling people" at that point in time, rather than afterwards, would have been more prudent.

There's absolutely no reason for _anyone_ to put up with this kind of shit from someone else.

But further to that, this can't and shouldn't be painted as another story about sexism in tech. This is a story (from one side) about a guy having a few drinks and trying it on in his own cringeworthy way, and lacking the forethought to quit with some dignity intact. His choice of career has fuck all to do with that, and neither does the conference.

(I'm all for policies and legislation that prohibit this sort of thing, by the by, but they're not going to stop some guy who thinks he's god's gift from making pervy remarks on a night out. Neither is walking away and hoping you get left alone.)

<comment><USER20> _His choice of career has fuck all to do with that, and neither does the conference._

It kind of does, though. According to Julia's account, this was not simply an isolated incident.

When she talked to the organizer, he admitted that this individual who behaved in a harassing way had shown a previous pattern of behavior of this type. Since the organizer knew of this, this behavior presumably took place at other events related to this professional community. It makes sense for this community to expel people who behave this way.

<comment><USER19> I may have read the organiser's quote the wrong way, so I'll concur on that count, and agree that some degree of responsibility is required so that this behaviour is weeded out.

However, I'm still loathe to apportion blame or make anyone except the individual accountable for their own behaviour, insofar as it's suggested that the organiser doesn't condone that behaviour, and merely wasn't sure what to do in lieu of the ability to refer to existing policy.

That problem, with this particular conference, has been solved, I would think. However the individual will still very much be under the impression that he's not being a dick. Because he wasn't properly called out on it as and when it was happening.

(Given that we only have one account of this, I want to keep this general, because even if the story doesn't add up at the end, we know that such people do exist and that it does go on.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Honestly, I don't think the conference should be in charge of this (specially when it doesn't happen where the conference takes place). This is a very general problem and should be handled by state/federal laws rather than arbitrary decisions taken by conference organizer.

<comment><USER22> Surely it doesn't hurt to have the conference take a stand?

<comment><USER23> Take a stand against what? Unproven claims?

<comment><USER6> Pretty much. This isn't a court of law or a public gathering. This is a privately organized event. It's totally okay to exclude disruptive people, and to act on stuff you're reasonably sure is true.

Imagine there was some emacs guy who routinely went around harassing people who used vim. To the point where he got so offensive that the vim people felt they weren't being respected as professionals, even humiliated and demeaned. Some were hounded by him at offsite gatherings. The conference organizers had multiple reports of this occurring. Do the vim people need to "prove" something before it's appropriate for conference organizers to take action? Should their claims be more suspect than anyone else's?

I suggest that you re-examine why the 'unproven claims' thing is so important to you. If you start with the assumption that women and men, just like emacs and vim users, have equal interests in having a good technical conference, and are equally competent to determine when someone's being disruptive, why wouldn't you trust their reports?

<comment><USER24> Let's look at the flip side. Someone who _does_ go around making life miserable for others by falsely accusing them of things. In a case where nobody knows both parties well, what are you supposed to do? I'm not saying what happened was OK. I'm saying the flip side is something we need to beware of also.

<comment><USER6> I think the OP is arguing that there should be a procedure in place, so you're not improvising, or making arbitrary rules that aren't fairly applied.

If nobody saw it happen and nobody knows either party well, I would say, record it and move on. If you have multiple reports, have a planned way to escalate, involving friendly warnings, going all the way up to removing the person and/or banning them.

Where it gets really bad - and I think everyone has seen this situation before - is when the guy is some sort of alpha geek, and may even be the kind of person that draws attendees. Everyone is inclined to bend the rules. I think that's why a standard procedure would be important.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> That really sucks, and maybe the conference organizers could have been better at coming up with a way to deal with this, but I don't know what a sexual harrassment policy would solve. Sexual harrassment is immoral and depending on the nature punishable by law. Spelling that out would be like spelling out that you'd prefer people not to defecate in the hallways. We need to find solutions, not add organizational scar tissue (see [http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/dont_scar_on_the_first_cu...](http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/dont_scar_on_the_first_cut.php)).

<comment><USER26> The difference is that defecating in the hallways isn't a routine practice in our industry, but sexual harassment of the sort she describes is. There's a need for more awareness and action _within_ the community -- and a hands-off "let the law take care of it" attitude ignores that a lot of this happens out of the public eye, and can only be stopped when people close to it take a more public stand against it.

<comment><USER27> The point is that sexual harassment shouldn't be routine and we shouldn't tolerate it. I sort of understand where the anti-harassment policy folks are coming from, but I vehemently disagree that it's appropriate to codify common decency and respect, especially in technical circles, where we should all know better. We should strive to treat each other with respect regardless of gender, race, or anything else for that matter and where we fail, we should call each other out and work to fix it.

<comment><USER16> I don't think a policy is just about codifying respect. It's also about putting together a mechanism for handling the inevitable failures. Consider the model policy from the Ada Initiative:

[http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/index.php?title=Conference_ant...](http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/index.php?title=Conference_anti- harassment_policy)

A good chunk of that is about how the working-to-fix part works. I think that's really valuable to have thought through in advance. I have banned people before (never for this, thank goodness) and in the moment it's incredibly hard to avoid over- or under-reacting if you have to think everything through from first principles.

<comment><USER27> Yeah, I get that--in crisis mode, a playbook is almost required to make sure you make no missteps as someone in charge. This is pivotal in, say, security incident response, or a corporate setting where there are all kinds of legal issues, but at a conference, which is mostly among friends, I don't know. Maybe if you can appropriately genericize the policy, but most of the policies I've seen have almost unilaterally been specifically tailored to protect women (which is great, for me--but maybe not for others who are being singled out). Or they'll talk about "feeling safe."

But, you know, when that guy walked up to me when I was talking to my (male) colleagues and specifically singled me out to ask that I allow him to photograph my "tits" as part of a conference "scavenger hunt," I told him off. Then he came back, and I told him off again. I never felt "unsafe," just angry and humiliated. If you're looking at "reporting someone if you feel fear," then it's likely that poor guy had a high possibility of being the one reporting it had he come back a third time.

tl;dr: Most of these policies make women and minorities out to be victims vs. ensuring that people just treat each other with common decency and respect. Not a fan of singling any of us out and I don't think it's productive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Careful that she is making an accusation here, but it is not proven, and prior bad behaviour (that's also an unproven accusation) is not an indicator of present guilt.

I don't think we should ban people from conferences based on unproven accusations.

<comment><USER28> This isn't the stock market. Past behavior _is_ an indicator of present/future behavior. It's not the only indicator, certainly, but when a large number of people are telling you the same thing, then you have a responsibility to discover why that is.

The organizer's reaction made it sound like he had reservations about inviting this person, due to older reports similar to the author's.

<comment><USER29> >Past behavior is an indicator of present/future behavior.

But a pretty bad one. I wouldn't mind if a murderer would give talk (if it was good). And not about the murdering, but about let's say ReiserFS.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I've been in this conference organizer's shoes before.

On one hand, running a conference/convention is difficult enough without being asked to referee personal conflicts. It almost inevitably devolves into a he- said/she-said kind of argument.

But on the other hand, if we take that kind of an attitude, that's essentially a signal for predatory men to go ahead and harass women (or worse). That's pretty much what predatory men have been doing since the beginning of history - acting with impunity since claims of rape or harassment are almost impossible to prove if there are no additional witnesses or physical evidence.

What we've done is to stress proper conduct before the event, and if there are repeat complaints about somebody they're removed from the community permanently.

It's not a perfect process and we've given some "second chances" to people that we've later regretted.

<comment><USER29> No, that's just the signal "That's beyond my scope", a sign of professionalism. If you try to be hobby cop and judge you will fail. That's a job for the pros.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> _it is clear to me that there is a definite lack of policies and procedures in place for sexual harassment at conferences and events._

FWIW, O'Reilly has had a policy - <http://conferences.oreillynet.com/code-of- conduct.csp> \- for a while now. RailsConf also has one and I saw discussion about another Ruby event's policy recently on HN too (where people were saying 'is this really needed!?'.. answer is yes).

</comment><comment><USER31> So, if the response from the conference director was that they should never have allowed the guy to come then it sounds like he was a known quantity in this regard.

When I've run conventions there has always been a note that the committee reserved the right to reject anybody's membership and did not have to give a reason. We've never had to use this but we've always had it as the nuclear option and had one person who we were ready to use it on.

If the person is already at the conference then you may need an acceptable behaviour policy that allows you to act, and you need it to be worded such that it applies to all conference attendees for the duration of the conference regardless of whether they are in conference facilities at the time. It's also best if it is short and broad, it's very easy to spot acceptable behaviour policies that have grown in response to specific events, and they are deeply discouraging when viewed by newcomers and outsiders.

</comment><comment><USER32> If someone started a fistfight in the conference's bar after hours, would you be surprised if the conference chose to not invite that person back again, ever? Would you come to his defense by saying "It's not the conference organizers' responsiblity what happens in the bar afterwards!" Some of the commenters have this idea that if you behave like a jerk to someone, ONLY that person has the right to distrust you. WTF?

</comment><comment><USER10> > Let's stop talking about apologies too. "After the fact" doesn't really do > any good. Sexual harassment should not happen in the first place. There > should be a clearly-defined set of standards in place to prevent it.

I'm not sure how standards in place at a conference can prevent individuals from deciding to break the law.

Sure, you might deter the weak-willed or fearful, but these sorts of asshole moves aren't generally perpetrated by those kinds of people.

Unfortunately, for a lot of this kind of stuff, after-the-fact is all we have. I would love a better solution but the items listed don't actually _prevent_ this.

</comment><comment><USER33> Excuse me but I am surprised. I read a lot on HN and on several planets (feed aggregation) about harassment, but in my field (engineering) I have never seen/experienced/heard about such cases even if the ratio female/male is pretty low is some of these conferences. Is it something specific to the coder community? Or maybe chemical/process engineers are just an exception? Or is it specific to the US in this field (I have been to a couple of coder oriented conferences in Europe without experiencing such cases but only engineering confs in the US)?

<comment><USER34> Sexual harassment does happen, but very few people talk about it in public. In fact, most people don't even talk about it in private. It's very much possible that it is common, but noone ever told you about it (except for bloggers who are not ashamed of speaking up).

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Maybe the reason that there is no policy at the conference is that harassment doesn't happen as often as its portrayed?

Going to a bar and then being hit on is hardly the end of the world. Its one thing to respect office/professional decorum, its another to start setting rules where men can only speak when spoken to.

<comment><USER20> Did you read the blog post? The guy was rebuffed multiple times and turned up his verbal offensiveness each time, finishing off by describing his daughter as a slut.

Discouraging men from speaking this way - in a professional community - <USER2> women who are their peers, is hardly equivalent to "setting rules where men can only speak when spoken to".

Hitting on woman = fine.

Turning up the verbal heat when she's already turned you down = obnoxious.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Would a harassment policy spell out the appropriate ways to approach a woman? Or would flirting become some kind of Russian Roulette?

<comment><USER30> In most of these stories, someone does something stupid, and the target doesn't immediately blow up.. they instead ask the other person to stop or leave them alone _first_.

So "flirt" by all means but as soon as someone tells you to leave them alone, that's the absolute end of it. Sadly, that doesn't seem to be happening in most of these stories.

<comment><USER36> That's true - in a story like this it seems obvious. I just worry that it might not always be so obvious in effect. In fact looking to the US across the pond, some of the rules around dating and sexual harassment already seem quite scary. Basically it seems really easy to ruin somebody's life with twisted interpretations of their behavior.

Another example of such laws gone wrong is maybe the sexting teenagers who are now on file as pedophiles.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I'd like to note that "groping" is not mentioned in the article. No other touching either. Just that some creep started to make "inappropriate sexual advances" towards the writer.

So it seems to be one time unpleasant conversation. I'd hardly call that harassment.

If one time unpleasant conversation with persistent person is harassment, then I was once police-harassed. This officer wanted me to go to police academy. I said no but he didn't stop. He was quite drunk. And last weekend I was oil- change-harassed, my dad kept insisting that I'd do an oil change to my car this summer. He was drunk too.

But I have to admit that this kind of behavior towards women should stop. What is causing it? Let's go after the source, not just try to heal the symptoms.

<comment><USER38> FYI, if, within the realm of reason, you ask someone to stop doing something that bothers you and they continue to do so, that's usually harassment.

<comment><USER37> "within the realm of reason" Thats the point I was making.

"Although the law doesn't prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision" <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_harassment>

So in my view, if the author would go to another conference, and the same creep would try again, that would be harassment. There should be a pattern of some kind. If you count single incidents as harassment, your going to have serious problems with freedom of speech.

FYI, using "FYI" feels arrogant to me. Please stop, you would not want to FYI- harass me?

<comment><USER38> You refer to it as a single incident; she does not.

 _"My colleague started making inappropriate sexual advances towards me. He singled me out and would not leave me alone, even when asked. I tried to shake it off, change the conversation and even moved away. He would not stop."_

I'm not suggesting laws were broken, but there is no question in my mind that harassment is the proper term to use here.

"FYI" was an unproductive way to begin my comment. My apologies.

<comment><USER37> Apology accepted. I'm sorry I didn't find a more mature way to respond.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Since this does happen, (even if we don't _know_ that this guy did anything to this girl.) then I think a bigger question to ask is pretty simple and will surely do better in the long run. When someone around you acts like a pig, girl or guy (I've seen some girls act downright crazy when alcohol gets into the mix, it's the thing to do when you want to act out your deepest desires, liquid courage I call it.) call them out at it. If you see someone groping someone else when they don't want, let them know it's not cool and you won't stand here while they do it. Same thing for any sexual advance that is unwelcome. You can usually tell when it's unwelcome when the receiving party looks nervous and tries to politely get out of the situation.

The below kinda-quote (it's disputed if it was Burke, or if it was said exactly thus.) comes to mind and rings pretty loud.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" - Edmund Burke

As an exiting thought, the pressure to be civil needs to come from peers. Meaning, guys don't let guy friends harass, and girls don't let girl friends harass.

</comment><comment><USER40> That is a bit redundant, as it would fall under the general don't be an asshole policy.

Also this happened at a bar. So it would seem the problem is that the bar didn't handle it, not that the conference didn't.

</comment><comment><USER41> Since when are "zero tolerance" policies a good idea. They always end up marginalizing someone.

</comment><comment><USER17> i am only here to look for a reference to "lighten up"

</comment><comment><USER42> He must have been ugly.

<comment><USER43> Common ground.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> If the lady says she was harassed we should totally ban the criminal from any future conferences, jobs and parties. Forget the due process, she was disgusted by everyone associated with the rapist. Disgusted! Zero-tolerance means we don't even need Obama to look over the kill-list. The pedophile must pay.

P.S.: at last year's EuroPython conference in Italy we were greeted by a menacing organizer threatening to call the cops if we make inappropriate jokes. I blamed it on the fascist ideology still present in this country, but it seems to run deeper. Let's see how it will escalate this year: <https://ep2012.europython.eu/code-of-conduct>

<comment><USER17> from the CoC is fuck a sexual language?

<comment><USER44> fuck yeah

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Unfortunate story and only recommend that others walk away sooner and try not to provoke the situation. Alcohol is a dangerous drug and can seriously impair people's decision making. It is always best to walk away.

I always wonder what would happen if a man was subjected to the same treatment. Sadly I doubt anyone would take them seriously. But we should...

</comment><comment><USER43> Everyone deals with / runs into assholes in their lives, this guy was just another one. If you politely told him to fuck off several times and he did not, why not call the cops rather than crying about it on the internet? Oh yeah, free publicity for your blog and business.

</comment><comment><USER46> Pics or it didn't happen.

Seriously. YouTube is worth a thousand zero tolerance policies.

<comment><USER46> Why the downvote hate? A few videos demonstrating the problem would eliminate the controversy, as well as let the offenders punish themselves in their own words.

<comment><USER47> Because if I was being sexually harassed, I wouldn't stay around the harasser long enough to pull out a camera phone and record the (horribly vulgar) advances - especially considering the risk of the harasser becoming violent when recorded. I would get the heck away.

<comment><USER46> But she did not flee. She engaged and escalated. He attempted a 5 second caveman courtship, and she _responded_ to it, teasing him about his wife to check if his testosterone really was turned up to 11. Soo-prise, it was! Maybe even 12. So then she teased him about his daughter, to see if he would virtually castrate himself to impress her. Soo-prise, it turns out Mr. Caveman does not live to sexually impress his daughter.

What she should have done was to record his overtures for public amusement, then turned her back on him.

<comment><USER48> Sigh. She mentioned his daughter and wife not to engage and escalate, but to remind him he was a human being. Fail.

Personally, this guy deserves filming and posting, but a lot of women like being nice. Even with people being utter and complete sociopaths. She gave him some consideration, like a lot of women would. He was drunk, and she kept nicely attempting to redirect his attention away from her. Even now, she is not outing him. She has kept the details vague enough so that few probably could guess who this was.

Not everyone enjoys being obnoxious. Even with determined assholes, even with dangerous sociopaths (not saying he was one, just saying in general).

That wasn't a tease or a challenge she was throwing out to him. That was a "I said no. And by the way, you're married, so even if I was attracted to assholes, it would still be a no. And by the way, you're married with children, so even if I was attracted to assholes, it would still be a no. Oh, and by the way, have I mentioned, no? No? Then, let me say it again no."

I think it's interesting that you see her actions as engaging and escalating. I'm sure there are a significant number of males who would agree with you on that. I'm curious, because I've encountered a fair number of guys who don't seem to hear the word "no" or follow-up phrases that indicate "no": say I'm having a great time in a bar after the conference, and here comes the father with a slut for a daughter looking for some action. Are my only options to get the bartender to throw the guy out, or to leave the bar in order to have this guy -- if not to hear and respond to my "no" -- act as if he did? Or is there something magical phrase that a woman can tell a guy where he will hear "no" and actually respond as if he respected that?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Erlang: It's time to be uncomfortably parallel - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yH_j8-VVLo

<comment><USER2> Thanks for the laughs. PARALLEL DATABASES!</comment>


A British actor left Hollywood to fight ISIS. Now he's a man without a country - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2019/10/15/british-actor-left-hollywood-fight-isis-now-hes-marooned-belize-its-quite-story/ <comment><USER2> So much of this makes no sense.

For example, how was he able to get into _and out of_ the USA so easily on expired visitor visas? Did he not have to clear American immigration when he flew out to Iraq? Why would he fly then from Iraq ("sold his Porsche for a one way ticket _to Iraq_ ") all the way to England and back just to buy combat gear, again all without visas? Hiw did he enter Belize? Does Belize not require a Visa, or at least consistent stamps on his passport, to enter and stay there indefinitely? Etc.

It all reminds me of John Kerry's "secret missions to Cambodia".</comment>


1,000 (bad) ideas - <AUTHOR> http://blog.jgc.org/2010/10/1000-bad-ideas.html

<comment><USER2> I think having ideas is actually linked to writing them down.

If you write an idea down and think about it, you show your brain interest in ideas so you will get more ideas over time.

I think it's an essential habit, to write and think about your ideas, when you want to be more creative and have many ideas.

Then the value in actually realizing all your ideas, is much less than picking the good ones and realize them.

<comment><USER3> Ideas sparking ideas is the whole premise behind IDEO style brain storming. You get a handful of people to start thinking of ideas for whatever problem you want to solve and one idea always inspires more. Crazy ideas are encouraged since they might also lead to good, tangible ones.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Brake lights that show intensity: check. I have read of at least 2 proof-of- concept implementations - one is two red bars plus a white bar (white bar should be instantly recognizable as "reverse") another goes circle->triangle (warning) -> large hexagon (stop!)

Update: I believe that some Mercedes models actually have brake lights that flash during strong braking. Google "adaptive brake lights" for more info.

<comment><USER5> Many recent european cars automatically flash warnings when braking strongly.

<comment><USER6> I'd be astonished if blinking braking lights were allowed in a country like Germany. I once read that a truck driver was fined in Germany because he had a small illuminated Christmas tree in his cockpit, by which he was breaking the specific part of their traffic laws that regulates vehicle lights. That must truly have felt like the most wonderful time of the year for that poor guy.

<comment><USER5> In Europe braking lights and turning lights are distinct and of different color (red vs orange). Many cars now flash the warnings (both turning lights together) when strongly braking, following a common usage among european motorists.

<comment><USER7> Yeah, at least here in Italy it's pretty common that if you have to slow down suddenly because the road is blocked (due to a traffic jam or whatever), you turn on the emergency blinking lights so the people behind you will be aware of the need to slow down and stop.

<comment><USER8> I do this (Ontario, Canada), but I don't know if I've ever actually seen it done by anyone else. Our 400-series highways tend to have very good forward visibility, though—there isn't really such thing as a jam just over the crest of a hill.

<comment><USER9> I do this in Ontario too, someone saved my life by doing this as I was entering the fog from around a corner and didn't have time to adjust my speed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The starter-less engine.

If the ECU knows the position of the crank (because of the encoder on the crank these days) it also knows which piston is past top-dead-point.

Inject some fuel in to the air already present in the cylinder, spark and go!

No starter motor required.

Regarding the ideas, I think the way you are organized and how you have this set up is at least as impressive as the fact that you've had 1000 (not so bad) ideas. My way of 'filing' an idea is usually to register a domain name in the hope that when the time to fish for a new project comes around that I still remember what it was about.

</comment><comment><USER11> Great post - but I kinda disagree that an idea can be bad.

A system that pauses music when you remove headphones would solve a problem, thus it's a good idea - it's just a small issue of the implementation.

Probably most of those 1000 ideas are not bad, but might be difficult or infeasible to implement.

RE: headphones - there could be many possible solutions to this - I think Casio makes a watch that activates the backlight when you raise you rist to look at the time - same technology.

<comment><USER12> It may solve a problem, but it creates a new one. Before listening to my mp3 player on a train, I leave the buds out of my ears and hold them in front of me, to gauge volume so as to not annoy my fellow passengers.

This practice is rendered impossible by this proposed technology.

That said, as an idea, it isn't bad. However, I contend that the statement that ideas can't be bad, is wrong. The idea of eliminating all Jews, gays and Gypsies to fix Germany's economic problems strikes me as a pretty bad idea.

<comment><USER13> > This practice is rendered impossible by this proposed technology.

Put a fifteen second delay on it. Problem solved.

I have that habit too, actually, in the workplace for instance.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I like _not_ writing my ideas down, because it acts as a simple filter.

If an idea is actually compelling, then it will stay with me even if I don't write it down (and I'll continue to think about it, expand upon it, tinker with it, etc.). If I don't remember it, then it probably wasn't that interesting to begin with.

<comment><USER15> A "bad", or perhaps more accurately "marginal" or "nifty but unprofitable" can still help the creative process leading to "good" ideas. The marginal one may end up as a feature of the killer app you build later, or the unprofitable one may see some future profit potential as other factors change.

I track all mine, good or bad, and when I'm feeling uninspired or burned out on what I'm working on, I like to go back and at least have a laugh at all the old ideas.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> _In-ear headphones that automatically pause music when removed._

Sony Ericsson has already implemented this! <http://www.sonyericsson.com/putyourearsincontrol/>

</comment><comment><USER17> Here's a nice public list of ideas from one person: <http://iotd.patrickandrews.com/>

Here's another one: <http://stealchoofsideas.blogspot.com/>

</comment><comment><USER18> I regularly record my ideas like this. Most have never been implemented, but I find the exercise of writing them down and thinking them through helpful and rewarding in itself.

If anyone is interested, the site is free and hosted here: <http://idealogue.heroku.com>

Source here: <http://github.com/robinator/ideas>

<comment><USER19> You may want to know that input isn't filtered: <http://idealogue.heroku.com/ideas/54>

Look page source Line 70 to 94.

<comment><USER18> Thanks, I'll check it out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Like the post a lot. Don't think they are "bad" ideas. Worse ideas are successful every day.

Not exciting to say, but ideas are a small part of success. Or said another way, to implement one idea, you need 1000 good ideas.

</comment><comment><USER21> There are companies out there making money selling paper and water. Having a great idea helps, but just creating _something_ is the hardest part.

<comment><USER22> Selling it is more important than creating it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> How do you make it so neat? As soon as I write an idea, I start to iterate (generalizing, specifizing, implementing, MVP, MVImplementation, niches, copy, trying to find the essence of the idea, and how to express it). I'm not saying my way is better, since it's very difficult-impossible to later read as a reference. The only useful result is in my mind.

</comment><comment><USER24> _Does anyone else generate ideas like this? And if so, what percentage turn out to be good?_

Yes, though regrettably without your level of discipline and patience, so reviewing my old notebooks makes me feel scatterbrained. One thing I'm going to steal from you is the practice of numbering concepts: quantifying them is a great way to mitigate over- _and_ under-confidence.

Of course, a lot of 'bad' ideas only seem so because it's not obvious _at the time_ how the cost of implementation would justify the benefit. For example, I like your idea of pausing the music when the headphones are off. Downside: the requirement for sensors in the headphones, signal infrastructure going back to the sound source, and so on. Possible workaround: ability to measure micro- variations in power consumption consistent with worn/unworn pressure differentials.

</comment><comment><USER25> For a couple of years, my lab managers would rely on my idea rate in setting quarterly goals for number of invention disclosures filed. Yes, we did MBO and OKR even in research labs.

Fortunately, I was able to keep my filing to disclosure ratio quite high (21/36) (even if it was never tracked officially). Agree that just because the company decides to file a patent does not automatically make it a good idea.

Eventually I got back to coding and went away from ideas. The gulf between ideas and implementation is not just time, its also mindset. I am learning how to balance the two.

</comment><comment><USER26> I'm still wondering if this idea is good: <http://techneur.com/post/635311152/announcing-mindspread> Call it 'Pay-It- Forward for Books'

It's essentially a webapp where you give someone a book with the promise that when they are done reading it, they will then give it someone else, and so on and so forth. You could then visualize your 'impact' upon the world by seeing how many books you've spread and where they've gone.

Any input?

<comment><USER27> Similar idea: <http://www.bookmooch.com/>

You're supposed to trade books, you use points to order books, get points by sending them, etc.

<comment><USER26> Thanks for pointing this out. There is one major difference, Mindspread is suppose to be completely altruistic.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Actually, every one of hose ideas is a good one since they all speak to an underlying problem- that taking off your headphones means you miss your song, or that sudden braking leads to crashes. These ideas are only a quick proposed solution to the problem, but as anyone who has ever done a startup knows, it takes a long time to refine your product. So don't label these ideas as bad- I bet most of the problems they intended to solve still exist today.

</comment><comment><USER28> > _In-ear headphones that automatically pause music when removed. The details > mention using either a proximity detector to discover when the headphones > are in the ear, or a strain gauge to detect the pressure of the ear canal._

The general idea is good but the implementation is odd. It should be enough to do like the ipod/iphone, that pauses the music if you _unplug_ the earphones. I don't know if it's a original idea by Apple, but I love it.

<comment><USER29> If you're going to talk to someone, the natural action would be to pull the buds out of your ear, rather than pull the lead out. This is why John's idea is different to (and probably better than) Apple's implementation (which is great).

It would even work for giving someone else the buds to hear a song you're listening to. Pauses while you hand them over.

<comment><USER30> Yeah, but I can't think of two similar actions where it would be difficult to define the expected behavior: sometimes you just take one bud out momentarily to be able to listen to something external and you don't really want the music to stop. The other one is common in teens, when they share one bud with a friend to listen to some track together and the music should be stopped while that bud is not put.

<comment><USER29> Both are solved by only pausing when both buds are removed (which is the most polite thing to do anyway).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> The Sony MH907 ear plugs

<http://www.sonyericsson.com/putyourearsincontrol/>

I don't think they ever shipped, though.

</comment><comment><USER32> The number of ideas one has is a moot point really. More important is ability to discern quality. Most important is to bring the good ones to fruition!

</comment><comment><USER33> This is a good place to post and critique these sorts of ideas: <http://www.halfbakery.com/>

</comment><comment><USER34> I agree with the theme in a lot of these comments: It's a good idea if you have a plan of attack. I've had lots of ideas (eg battery powered heated wetsuit! damn, it's been done) and am now working on one where I have the unique combination of training, opportunity, luck, etc.

</comment><comment><USER35> What does the HN community think of having a public ideas website? Sort of like ASK HN: Rate my startup. Users can post their ideas from inception and receive creative input, reassurance that someone would buy that, or no-way don't waste your time building that.

<comment><USER24> I've seen a few sites like that over the years but they die fairly quickly. This is not to say it's a waste of time, but to point out some basic problems such a site needs to overcome.

One problem is that a general forum is not attractive to specialists (who might have to invest time just to explain why something would be useful in the first place), with the result that suggestions trend towards a blend of trivial and naive. Another is the nagging sense that the more well-specified an idea is, the more likely it is to be be exploited for private gain, and since one can't patent or copyright an idea _per se_ , and building a prototype plus filing an application for a patent is quite expensive, there's not much economic incentive to develop ideas to that point, even if the goal is to make the patent public domain (so as not to allow private monopolies).

<comment><USER36> "one can't patent... an idea per se"

Actually, this is precisely what patents are for. You don't need to implement an invention in order to obtain a patent, you just need to describe it in sufficient detail "as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use [the invention]" [1]

[1] <http://www.bitlaw.com/source/35usc/index.html>

<comment><USER24> This is true, though the patent office can require a model (s.114 via the same link), so in practice you'd probably want that on hand. I was just trying to distinguish between the 'cool' basic idea that's not patentable and the expensive detailed recipe that is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Adaptive brake lights: <http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ece549/spring10/team7/index.html>

Currently licensed by Bosch and integrated into at least one test vehicle.

</comment><comment><USER38> i write my ideas down, but mostly to get them _out_ of my head. or, more accurately, _less in_ my head. i am often 'distracted' / overwhelmed by them. putting them on paper (well, textedit to be precise) makes it easier for me to let go of them.</comment>


MasterCard will approve purchases by scanning your face - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/01/technology/mastercard-facial-scan/

<comment><USER2> Thats why I now wear a ski mask when I go shopping.</comment>


Bad Science (book) - <AUTHOR> http://us.macmillan.com/badscience

<comment><USER2> This is a great book. Anyone from the UK will know Ben Goldacre from the Guardian where he writes a regular column exposing... well bad science.

His Bad Science blog[1] will give you a flavour of his humour and style.

[1] - <http://www.badscience.net/></comment>


A plane flying over Germany drawing a Christmas tree - <AUTHOR> https://www.flightradar24.com/AIB232E/fd1fd63 <comment><USER2> Apparently a test flight of an Airbus 380 by the Emirates airline according to Spiegel Online: [http://www.spiegel.de/reise/aktuell/emirates-testflug- ueber-...](http://www.spiegel.de/reise/aktuell/emirates-testflug-ueber- deutschland-airbus-fliegt-einen-weihnachtsbaum-a-1183167.html)

So, yes, looks like somebody having a blast during Advent season. :-)

</comment><comment><USER3> [https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/940959604896358400](https://twitter.com/flightradar24/status/940959604896358400)

> _@Airbus is almost finished with their A380 Christmas tree. Will they put a > star on top?_

<comment><USER4> Looks like they opted to fly over Denmark and draw a penis instead.

<comment><USER5> I wonder if they just couldn't get clearance to criss-cross Hamburg's airspace enough for the star.

<comment><USER6> That, or had to get out of the way for other traffic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> While this seems legit, it's worth noting that ADSB, the RF message protocol used for most 'live' location stats in FlightRadar24, has no form of authentication. Nevermind the network protocol weaknesses, trolling FR24 would require little more than a $300 radio and some free software.

<comment><USER8> Yes, and it's not just for these sites but ATC too... although that's been true of all aviation coms and nav technologies. Someone with some radio gear and a basic understanding of how these systems work could mess things up big time. That's why, at least in the US, unauthorized broadcasting on aviation Nav or Com frequencies is a deadly serious thing that the Feds don't take lightly.

<comment><USER9> I think in Germany it's just as serious.

<comment><USER10> It's serious everywhere.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Screenshot of the flight shape at the moment [https://i.imgur.com/oPk8XY8.png](https://i.imgur.com/oPk8XY8.png)

</comment><comment><USER12> That's pretty cool, ornaments and all. Boeing flew in the shape of an airliner once [http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/08/boeing-plane-flies- test-r...](http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/08/boeing-plane-flies-test-route- in-shape-of-a-plane.html)

</comment><comment><USER13> Today in Sweden the military flew a couple of jets in xmas tree formation over Stockholm :)

[https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/oRpj10/darfor-flog- jas-...](https://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/oRpj10/darfor-flog-jas-plan-i- formation-over-stockholm)

<comment><USER14> *It looks like 'a couple' was correct usage - apologies!

'a couple' = 2, 'a few' would be more accurate :)

<comment><USER15> Both couple and few can mean either a specific number (2 for couple, 3 for few) or an indeterminate small number. They are synonyms for the second usage.

<comment><USER14> I hadn't known a couple to mean more than 2, but the Cambridge dictionary does seem to agree[1].. however the Oxford Dictionaries site only seems to indicate only 2[2]. In this case, I'll update my correction ;)

[1]([https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/couple](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/couple))

[2]([https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/couple](https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/couple))

<comment><USER16> In the US, "a couple" is synonymous for a "a few" or "several". One would say, "it'll take a couple of hours" or "I'll be away for a couple of days" and mean two or more. This might be specific to American English.

<comment><USER17> Where I come from (US) a couple means 2.

<comment><USER15> You could also have said that where you come from, couple means two people in a romantic relationship. This doesn't mean that it can't also have other definitions. Every US English dictionary I checked has "an indefinite small number" listed as one of the definitions, and that's a much more common usage in my (US) experience than using couple to mean exactly 2.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Speculating here, but pilots have flight hour requirements for various certifications. Maybe this is a flight that had to happen to log hours but isn't otherwise necessary so the pilot decided to have some fun.

<comment><USER19> It is the Airbus Flight Test Team[0].

The Hamburg XFW Airport is used by Airbus to test their new A380 just before delivery. This Christmas flight was the First Flight of this Tail ID so I would guess that it is a new A380 being tested.

The second flight of this A380 looks more like what we usually see here for these kinds of Test flights[1]. Back and forth usually near Hamburg or over Berlin.

[0] [https://twitter.com/Airbus/status/940962395463266305](https://twitter.com/Airbus/status/940962395463266305)

[1] [https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/f-wwae/#fcc5ca7](https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/f-wwae/#fcc5ca7)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Reminds me of last August when a 787 drew a US-sized 787 with it's flight path over 18 hours.

[https://www.wired.com/story/boeing-787-8-drawing-test- flight...](https://www.wired.com/story/boeing-787-8-drawing-test-flight/)

</comment><comment><USER21> This type of thing is popular with runners and cyclists. Search for "strava art" The hard part is finding roads that match your desired picture. Or findind a picture with the given roads. Planes have it easy.

</comment><comment><USER22> As someone who doesn't look at flight radars often, I'm always surprised by how many planes are flying simultaneously.

Is there an estimation about how many more planes are possible before it gets too crowded?

<comment><USER23> If you watch on a clear night from the roof of my building in Manhattan, you can see about 3-4 planes at a time lined up to land at Newark. Sometimes it seems like the Berlin airlift because they just keep coming.

<comment><USER24> One of the great things about the Berlin airlift is the way that they invented a huge amount of what is now standard high-capacity aircraft handling, on incredibly short notice (and in order to accomplish something fairly heroic). This includes things like standard routes and approaches, diversion procedures, pure-IFR (instrument) operations, and more. The family resemblance between arrivals to Newark Airport and Tempelhof is not accidental.

(Which reminds me, cycling down the runway at Tempelhof is still on my bucket list. I should go to Berlin this summer...)

<comment><USER25> You should. It's very nice there during summer and there are a ton of pretty cool and informative info panels on the history of Tempelhof and the airlift. Bring a grill and a kite!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> What a pleasant sight to watch on the map. But I guess the travellers won't be relishing the experience as much as we do. :-)

</comment><comment><USER27> I wonder how much extra would it cost for this Airbus A380 test route in Xmas tree vs. a circle path?

<comment><USER28> I think they have to get in a certain amount of mileage, time and different movements. Flight testing is probably something we don't want bean counters trying to skimp money on.

<comment><USER29> I wish I had saved the URL, but when the 787 was being tested, the flight test team had a public-facing website that gave a lot of very interesting information about the test protocols and how they were being run.

Imagine a flight team basically waiting with bags packed, for the right atmospheric conditions to appear anywhere in the world to fly there and go through a set of test cases.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> In america we draw dicks.

</comment><comment><USER31> That's bad ass, Merry Christmas Germany.

</comment><comment><USER32> #oneplanetsummit

</comment><comment><USER33> Shouldn't it be "an" xmas tree?

<comment><USER34> Technically abbreviating "Christ" as "X" is actually the letter χ or "Chi". So it shouldn't be pronounced X-mas, as it's really χ-mas.

Same thing with LaTeχ, actually.

<comment><USER35> The capital Chi is Χ, which is indistinguishable from X in most fonts, and even more so in handwriting.

<comment><USER34> Yes, I was using the lowercase to make it stand out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> "plane"

That's Santa Claus making a test run.

</comment><comment><USER37> One HN launches drawing-cultural-symbol-with-plane-as-a-service

<comment><USER38> Can't wait to see all the disrupt presentations talking about how their company is a DCSWPaaS

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Waste of fuel and adding more CO2 to the atmosphere

<comment><USER40> Have you considered the time you spent typing this, the energy your computer and the HN server processing and storing it, the bytes that had to be transmitted to thousands (hundreds of thousands??) of computers around the world across who knows how many hops along the way for the routes to each of those computers, the expense of CPUs and graphics cards processing and displaying it around the world, on mobile devices, etc.

Seems you've also wasted power and contributed CO2 as well? And now so have I :)

<comment><USER41> "Seems you've also wasted power and contributed CO2 as well?"

CO2 alone assuming there are no hot chilli involved:)

edit: on a more serious note, companies don't waste fuel for no reason, so I'm sure it was a test flight which they decided to fly in a creative way to bring more eyes to the brand. People wandering around every day, every year, in elephant sized pickups doing things a small car would be enough for are a much worse source of pollution.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Anyone know the reason for this? To promote this website? :P

<comment><USER43> I assume it's a test flight....other wise it would a very expensive thing to do

<comment><USER44> Well it is still a very expensive thing to do :)

<comment><USER28> Well yes, but not testing an aircraft and having it crash and kill people is likely even more expensive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Is this a joke? If not what would be the point of this, seriously? Reminds me of drones writing the name of a Pharmaceutical product into the blue sky of Toronto, a few years back.

<comment><USER46> > If not what would be the point of this, seriously?

A publicity stunt, fun, or just spreading Christmas cheer.

> writing the name of a Pharmaceutical product into the blue sky of Toronto, a > few years back.

And then there was the US Navy [http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/17/politics/navy- aircrew-obscene-...](http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/17/politics/navy-aircrew- obscene-skywriting/index.html)

<comment><USER47> "In case there was any doubt, the US Navy has confirmed that there is 'zero training value' in drawing penises in the sky."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> Is he really drawing a Christmas tree? Or is this just another poorly executed penis drawing?</comment>


Ask HN: How do I start contributing to open source projects? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> Second the suggestion of OpenHatch: [http://openhatch.org/](http://openhatch.org/)

If you are a college student, try getting into the Google Summer of Code next year: [https://www.google- melange.com/gsoc/homepage/google/gsoc2014](https://www.google- melange.com/gsoc/homepage/google/gsoc2014)

If you are a high school student, The Google Code-In contest may be of interest (dates for 2014 haven't been announced yet): [https://developers.google.com/open- source/gci/](https://developers.google.com/open-source/gci/)

</comment><comment><USER3> This may be overkill, but if you want to learn a lot about the overall history/culture/etc. behind open source projects, I just wrote a blog post linking to a number of great resources. You may find some of this stuff useful, especially if you're interested in the licensing aspect.

[http://fogbeam.blogspot.com/2014/08/starting-points-for- lear...](http://fogbeam.blogspot.com/2014/08/starting-points-for-learning- about-open.html)

</comment><comment><USER4> Find a github repo of an interesting project an read CONTRIB file at the root (ex. [https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.m...](https://github.com/TryGhost/Ghost/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)).

</comment><comment><USER5> Go to github, fork something (anything you like really), add something cool to it (or fix a bug, whatever), then submit a pull request. Boom, you're a contributor!

</comment><comment><USER6> The simple answer is: look through bug trackers, find an issue you can tackle, send a patch or pull request.

However, you might also want to check out OpenHatch.

</comment><comment><USER7> Find an open source library you've used in a previous or current project.</comment>


Information Theory in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition - <AUTHOR> http://www.springerlink.com/content/978-1-84882-296-2 This post is suggestive. ;-) <comment><AUTHOR> This post is supposed to be suggestive. ;-)</comment>


President Trump claims Google is rigging search results to make him look bad - <AUTHOR> https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/trump-news-google-search-results-twitter-rigged-us-president-a8510736.html <comment><USER2> He doesn't just complain about Google. In the tweet, he threatens that the issue "will be addressed."

This shouldn't happen in a country with a free press. We're (yet again) moving into authoritarian territory. So why is everyone acting so non-nonchalantly here? This is not normal behavior for a democratically elected leader.

I hope everyone who can plans on voting in the mid terms. Only congress can rein this guy in. The congressional races are more competitive than normal this year, so we have a real chance of making a change.

<comment><USER3> Because, other than yelling on Twitter, there's been no action from his administration that's relevant. I doubt they have any legal standing to regulate search algorithms, so this is all a show

<comment><USER2> > I doubt they have any legal standing to regulate search algorithms

The first amendment would prevent them from regulating search results.

The problem is, many authoritarian countries have something like the first amendment in their constitutions. Constitutions mean nothing unless they're enforced. This president has already shown disdain for our constitution and the rule of law.And his public behavior is slowly eroding the democratic norms that reinforce our constitution.

Just look at all the newbie GOP politicians who imitate him, the senators who make excuses for him, and all his supporters who cheer on his authoritarian tendencies. They're not going to stop him if he crosses the line. So who will?

That's why we can't just sit back and pretend things will fix themselves. You have a chance to change things this November. Don't waste it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The Ministry of Truth is setting its sights on Google

<comment><USER5> 2 + 2 equals whatever The President wishes it to equal.

<comment><USER6> How Trumps multiply 17 By 6:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMIKzUAY8n4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMIKzUAY8n4)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I was under the impression his staff carefully collates positive stories for his perusal, which probably gives him a an unreasonably rosy sample of news coverage. Even a perfectly unbiased sample would appear negative relative to that.

</comment><comment><USER8> ...yes, by making what he says and does easy to find?

</comment><comment><USER9> If search results are shaped by browsing history, doesn't this imply that Trump is reading the negative stories and ignoring the positive ones?

<comment><USER10> People in general are biased to ignore sources that don't agree with their existing opinions. Trump may be an extreme example.

This is probably what still allows Trump supporters to exist -- I have no other way to explain how 30% of population can ignore the things that happened recently and keep declaring support for Trump. Certainly it is not intelligence because roughly 50% of voters elected Trump and there had to be a lot of people with above-average intelligence who voted for him regardless of completely incoherent campaign.</comment></comment>


Bromite v83 Released - <AUTHOR> https://www.bromite.org/news/2020-05-12-bromite-v83-release <comment><USER2> I skipped this forever because it's not on the Play Store. But it's easy to keep up-to-date by following the GitHub releases atom feed [https://github.com/bromite/bromite/releases.atom](https://github.com/bromite/bromite/releases.atom)

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a good approach; the other alternative is to use F-Droid client, but it comes with its own bugs.

[https://www.bromite.org/fdroid](https://www.bromite.org/fdroid)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Just use Brave. It is more widely compatible with similar if not better privacy.

<comment><USER4> No way. Braves built in ad blocker is trash. I don't don't need or care about their brave token stuff either.

I love Bromite, been using it for about 4 months now and have no complaints or issues.

The maintainer of Bromite is a HN user and who I discovered Bromite through, gladly keep supporting them.</comment></comment>


Weekly group calls to discuss business ideas - <AUTHOR> I am thinking of creating weekly calls with whoever would be interested in discussing business ideas or side-projects. The call will only happen once per week and anyone can hop on. Interested? <comment><AUTHOR> Have some ideas on communities and communication tech</comment>


Enterprise 2.0 To Become a $4.6 Billion Industry By 2013  - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/enterprise_20_to_become_a_46_billion_industry.php <comment><USER2> History repeats. Web 2.0 will get into the enterprise the same way the PC did. Through that back door.

IT directors wanted nothing to do with the PC. It threatened their ivory tower. But users wanted simple solutions to their problems without waiting years in the IT development queue. Once they were able to buy a PC with spreadsheet software without higher budget approval, the "man behind the curtain" was exposed forever.

A generation later, it's all about to happen again, with or without the IT department. Even if IT fights it by blocking sites users want to use, they'll get around it with proxies or by bypassing corporate networks. You can't stop progress. Enterprise IT departments would be better off in the long run by embracing what their users already know.</comment>


C# 7.0 – What to Expect - <AUTHOR> http://www.dotnetcurry.com/csharp/1286/csharp-7-new-expected-features <comment><USER2> This article is out of date.

Feature such as With expression has been pushed to version 7+. They have also trim down the ambition of pattern matching for c# 7.

The best way to keep track of C# 7 feature is through their public roadmap [https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/blob/master/docs/Language%2...](https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/blob/master/docs/Language%20Feature%20Status.md)

</comment><comment><USER3> The feature below amazing, I wonder how Visual studio will display it, I like it when above Properties it adds the ref count across the Solution:

          3 references
          public int Damage { get; }
          4 references
          public int Durability { get; }

      public class Sword(int Damage, int Durability);

This single line will result in a fully functional class:

      public class Sword : IEquatable<Sword>
      {
          public int Damage { get; }
          public int Durability { get; }

          public Sword(int Damage, int Durability)
          {
              this.Damage = Damage;
              this.Durability = Durability;
          }

          public bool Equals(Sword other)
          {
              return Equals(Damage, other.Damage) && Equals(Durability, other.Durability);
          }

          public override bool Equals(object other)
          {
              return (other as Sword)?.Equals(this) == true;
          }

          public override int GetHashCode()
          {
              return (Damage.GetHashCode() * 17 + Durability.GetHashCode())
                  .GetValueOrDefault();
          }

          public static void operator is(Sword self, out int Damage, out int Durability)
          {
              Damage = self.Damage;
              Durability = self.Durability;
          }

          public Sword With(int Damage = this.Damage, int Durability = this.Durability) =>
              new Sword(Damage, Durability);
      }

</comment><comment><USER4> C# continues its tradition of stealing the good stuff from other languages. I'm really impressed. Pattern matching and immutable objects? This is great!

<comment><USER5> It doesn't always steal, AFAIK is was the first language to introduce "async" and the compiler magic that goes with it, i.e. so you don't have to use callbacks everywhere.

<comment><USER6> Alice ML¹ had that in 2000², and the idea of promises/futures dates back to the 70s. async/await to flatten promise hierarchies is decidedly _not_ a new idea.

¹ [http://www.ps.uni-saarland.de/alice/manual/futures.html](http://www.ps.uni- saarland.de/alice/manual/futures.html)

² Well, it used "spawn" instead of "await". The semantics are very similar though.

<comment> Const-me The innovation was to combine async/await to flatten promise hierarchies with asynchronous callback-based IO under the hood to implement those promises without using background threads.

That was the new idea that suddenly made those decades-old promises useful for the software industry, as it allowed both blocking-style code simplicity and callbacks-style IO scalability.

The ML link says "evaluates the expression exp in a new thread and returns immediately with a future of its result" which translates to "not scalable".

<comment><USER6> Alice ML "threads" are more like Erlang threads than C# threads. They're lightweight userspace threads and you can have thousands of them. That's quite scalable.

Also, that's not a new idea. Blocking-style code with async I/O scaling was pioneered by Oz in 1991. (It did it a little bit differently from Alice ML.)

<comment> Const-me "They're lightweight userspace threads and you can have thousands of them." — can I use 1000 lightweight userspace threads to run 1000 concurrent kernel- space IO operations on files or sockets, one thread each?

<comment><USER6> Yes, that's precisely the point.

<comment> Const-me MS implemented IOCP in Windows NT in 1994, then BSD implemented kqueue in 2000, then Linux implemented epoll in 2002 (they all functionally very similar).

That means outside Windows, asynchronous event-based IO was only possible after 2002 (that's when the first version of libevent was released).

And yet you're telling me the ML threads in 2000 were capable of high- performance async IO? You sure about that? In 2000, which kernel API you think that runtime used for IO?

<comment><USER6> Yes, and VMS had asynchronous system traps for I/O in 1977.² ³

And yes, of course? Erlang could do scalable async I/O in 1988.

Alice ML and Erlang both emulate async I/O by having a few OS level threads each switching between a large number of userspace/VM threads. They queue I/O operations then preempt VM threads when results are ready. For a while that was the only sane way around the clusterfuck that is async I/O on *nix. It still scales fine and I think there's rather little interest in converting either Alice ML or Erlang to libevent/libev/libuv.

¹ The initial Erlang VM was very slow, but the I/O model was there. BEAM was created in 1992 and was fast enough for Ericsson to use in production.

² NT and VMS were both designed by David Cutler, who is more or less the father of asynchronous I/O at the OS level.

³ Incidentally, if you think async I/O in 1977 was advanced, you should look at AS/400 or VOS sometime.

<comment> Const-me > It still scales fine

Only 1024 sockets per select because FD_SETSIZE constant? How's that scales fine? You have 10k sockets = you need 10 native threads, with 10 native stacks, on a quad code machine each of them is guaranteed to be out of CPU cache when IO completes. Not fine, very inefficient.

> there's rather little interest in converting either Alice ML or Erlang to > libevent/libev/libuv.

Well, Erlang developers don't care about windows. And for BSD, Linux and Solaris they already support native event-based async IO for many years. They call the feature "kernel poll".

> if you think async I/O in 1977 was advanced

I aware on some systems it was widely used. Just not on the mainstream *nix systems where that Alice ML ran in 2000.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Amoungst other things, this article covers Pattern Matching, Record Types and Non-Nullable Reference types. All of which are great features but all of which will likely not be in C# 7 unfortunately due to shipping timelines [0].

0: [https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/blob/master/docs/Language%2...](https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/blob/master/docs/Language%20Feature%20Status.md)

</comment><comment><USER8> Object orientation and pattern matching is not an obvious mix. A lot of OO is about dependency inversion, which is more or less the exact opposite of what pattern matching gives you. It can be a powerful tool in the right hands but could also lead to absolute horror. Sometimes it feels like Mads and co. are too focused on making C# functional-like and in the process encourages a lot of foot-shooting.

<comment><USER9> "Sometimes it feels like Mads and co. are too focused on making C# functional- like and in the process encourages a lot of foot-shooting"

I agree. When they added dynamic and functional concepts, I though: great, a dynamic/statically typed imperative/functional oo language. Too many different ways to do things, makes it harder to understand code written in a different style. Basically the opposite of python's "pythonic way" idiomatic style.

I do love functional programming, which is why I am trying to move to f#. People at work are open to the idea!!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Since I haven't see many new Windows apps the recent years, who is actively developing new apps in C# and if yes, what kind of apps, which platforms, etc.? Is it mainly games?

<comment><USER11> .NET has won the war over the desktop in what concerns native applications for Windows on the big corporations.

On all enterprise customers that we work with, think DAX, if the application is to run native on the desktop, which is usually means Windows workstations, the software stack tends to be .NET with some C++ here and there.

Sun never managed to understand the desktop and Oracle even less.

So unless the customer has requirements for portable desktop applications, the solution is .NET.

<comment><USER10> Totally clear that mainstream desktop is Windows, native and .NET but the question again and since there are rarely new apps on Windows: who is actively developing new desktop apps in C#, .NET on Windows which are not games?

<comment><USER12> > _who is actively developing new desktop apps in C#, .NET on Windows which > are not games?_

Almost everybody doing in-house enterprise desktop apps (and those are a heck of a lot) and tons of people doing desktop Windows apps that don't need to be C++ (e.g. not Photoshop, Office and co).

Again, those are in the tens or hundreds of thousands. Check any Windows app review site or repo for examples.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> In addition to the new language features there are some very exciting new APIs being designed at: [https://github.com/dotnet/corefxlab](https://github.com/dotnet/corefxlab)

Including a new higher performance/lower allocation text formatting API: [https://github.com/dotnet/corefxlab/wiki/System.Text.Formatt...](https://github.com/dotnet/corefxlab/wiki/System.Text.Formatting)

</comment><comment><USER13> No biggie, but I do miss rotate, partition, nth_element from STL. Its just that when I came to C# i came with an expectation that it would have all of STL covered and more.

</comment><comment><USER14> I'm curious how array slicing is any different from ArraySegment<T>, which is very old.

<comment><USER7> ArraySegment<T> is just a array reference with range delimiters. Slice/Span gives you a low overhead, type safe window into a block of memory that can be reinterpreted without allocating new memory. It's implementation involves some IL level pointer hacks to keep it fast.

Joe Duffy's first implmentation of it is here: [https://github.com/joeduffy/slice.net](https://github.com/joeduffy/slice.net)

The more recent work for CoreFX is here: [https://github.com/dotnet/corefxlab/tree/master/src/System.S...](https://github.com/dotnet/corefxlab/tree/master/src/System.Slices)

<comment> premium-concern So instead of improving the implementation of ArraySegment they just add yet another way of doing it?

This is of course expected for languages which keep piling up stuff but still disappointing.

<comment><USER11> Because of backwards compatibility.

<comment> premium-concern How is that impacted by a faster implementation technique?

Are you arguing that some people rely on ArraySegment being slow?

<comment><USER11> No, it isn't compatible with any of the existing APIs that accept array or strings.

So making it compatible would probably require breaking its semantics.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> C# is basically becoming Scala

<comment><USER16> Minus the type system that is itself Turing complete.

In all seriousness, the culture behind C# is way too conservative for it to ever to become like Scala. They add features, but they're nowhere near as bold and daring as the Scala team. As a language, Scala's is both incredibly impressive and terrifying from an Abstraction Astronaut's perspective. Even F# is very conservative compared to Scala.

<comment><USER7> I had a lot of hope for some wilder C# changes with the .Net core change. But i see a lot of hold back from established codebases. I almost wish we could fork the language to target the Java-esque crowd and the Go/Swift/Scala crowd.</comment></comment></comment>