Blog powered by Typepad

« Ignorance is not bliss, it's a bloody nuisance! | Main | Rat Finks of the Year, nay, the Decade »

Wednesday, 16 August 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

We are in full agreement and your enlightened attitude shouldn't go without compliment. Well done, sir.

Crikey! I had better re-read what I wrote!

I am every bit as horrified as you.

I hate nutmeg with a vengence and could cheerfully strangle those who put it on custard pies until a beautiful goddess in Lisbon put some on one of their custard confections and I succumbed to her offering while my wife looked on in amazement.When in Rome and all that.

No, no, Bob, I'm not 'horrified' just gob-smacked!

Peter, you are an out and out nutmegist, you should be ashamed!


Ditto, what Bob said on Wednesday, 16 August 2017 at 14:48.

I would, however, add that such sentiments apply only in public gatherings. In a private gathering, as, for example, in the living room of my own home, I am not obliged to tolerate anything any visitor says that I consider being offensive.

I too hate nutmeg with a passion too. My wife passionately hates it worse than i do!

About hate...there is a flow to it. Hate crime, hate speech and eventually hate thought. Orwell knew what he was writing about. The first 17 years of this new century proves it throughput the
western world. If any disagreed with speech can be called "hate speech" by anyone else and they get away with it...I promise anybody that doesn't understand what comes next, they will not like it. I know what it can look like and how fast a body count can rise.

Duffers beautifully put, that is absolutely it

OK, David, I'll admit to exaggeration for effect. Why are you gobsmacked?

Spot on, as usual, Henry.

Bob, I was gob-smacked to find you agreeing with me, er, not that disagreeing with me counts as hate speech, natch!

For the fans of Burke:


Freedom of speech, including being free to make a hate speech, applies where the listener has the ability to not listen if chooses too.

When the listener is coerced into listening, for example: my living room, a workplace, then restrictions can and should apply.


And then we end up with the possibility of everyone "hearing past" what the other is saying. The thing about "hate speech" is that it is often not hateful, it is that we hate to hear what is being said.

And then it is also misinterpreted - case in point, Jame Danmore did not launch into a hateful rhetoric about how women are useless at coding. What he actually said was that a case could be put forward that women are more interested in concerns which differ from men. Who remembers that now? For those of us who actually studied his memo, it was well-presented and he offered a great number of valid arguments (he did actually offer some studies to prove his point, but these were apparently removed from some publishings). However, some of the research may have been flawed. It doesn't matter. What does matter is that some of these haters should have read what he said, and opened themselves up to the possibility that he might be right. Instead, a whole swathe of people simply said, "We hate him", and they have the right to do so. It doesn't help the issue though. Google should have countered his arguments (apparently, it's easy to do so) but instead they showed what an echo chamber really is by removing him completely. It seems to go unnoticed that people in Google saw this memo for weeks before anyone took any notice.

Charlottesville was a just a whole heap of awfulness which did nothing to educate - just the whole thing, wrong. Anything that was valuable to be learned from this has been obliterated by the death of Heather Heyer, in circumstances which one can't pin the blame on, in one sense. I was overjoyed to see that the man in question was to be charged (should maybe have been murder, but I'll go with manslaughter) except I hear he may have had mental issues. If he knew right from wrong, then he needs to be prosecuted. Fully. But then it'll be blamed on his mental health, and the violence presented by leftists, Alt-right, whoever, can be forgotten about until the next person is mown down. And so it continues....

Congratulations you've finally figured out what the ACLU has been saying for decades.

Mayfly, well said re Google. That corporate behavior on their part was chilling. "Hate speech" is all part of a larger narrative that is part of a larger goal and that goal will be unpleasant. University professors will be fired or literally driven away for perceived heresy of holding a different view if only to challenge students who may never have confronted a contradictory point of view in their young lives.

Business executives have been fired for the same thing as this Google tech. There is such a pins and needles culture in so many institutions today that a massive backlash will soon form from people who will have had their fill of uttering any here-to-fore unknown heresy. This conform or perish always ends badly.

What Danmore got wrong is historical fact. What he displayed was a profound ignorance of the field in which he himself worked. He should have known that in the beginning virtually all programmers were women because the male engineers who designed the hardware thought programming it beneath them. One could, of course, make a case that differences in gender are real. In which case Danmore is again wrong, because one of the things in which women are known to have superior capabilities is language. And programming is nothing but executing formal structured language. Finally his conclusions, even presuming he was right about gender differences, are wrong. He declaresc that these statistical gender differences should not be used to exclude individual job candidates for the individual must be judged own capabilities. And then he insists that his own female coworkers suffer from their gender differences and are inferior.

I would not hire this asshole to program a VCR. And yes it is because of his opinions. His opinions prove he is an ignorant asshole.


On the subject of speech: I've rarely looked at Carpenter's blog since I signed off about a year ago but did read your goodbye comment today. You should admit to yourself that while you've raised some legitimate points there, you've mostly made noises calculated to make leftist heads explode. I was often as amused by the reactions as you, but for different reasons.

One thing you should understand is that PM's site doesn't represent either leftism or liberalism. He holds Edmund Burke as his hero and has long had contempt for the left. He demonstrated that by deriding Bernie Sanders on a daily basis while refusing to take Trump seriously. His commenters are an odd lot that would take too many words to describe.

You should also understand that the divisions in American society have been far worse than now. The Civil War is an obvious example. Part of what we have now could be described as a cold civil war; the tapering down of the original. You needn't fear for America any more now than you did in the 1960's. You may be sure that lessons were learned because of Charlottesville.

The main underlying problems for both the US and UK are globalization and technological advances. It's an upset similar to the industrial revolution but on a larger scale. I could probably claim to fear for Great Britain with at least as much justification.

Bob, my comments 'over there' were always germane and, above all, polite. That they caused heads to explode says much more about the owners of the heads than it does about my comments. Needless to say, most of the responses were of the 'shouty/sweary' type that advanced their cause barely an iota.

Nor do I accept that PMC himself is much of a Burkean. Perhaps his recent illness has shortened his temper, or perhaps due to the PTSD which struck all of them 'over there' when the impossible happened and 'HillBilly' lost, he has temporarily lost his marbles, whatever, his language has become increasingly hysterical and verging on savage.

But worse than all of that, it became endlessly repetitive and totally boring-snoring. So 'I made my excuses and left'!

Is that right Bob? So Duff's regular forays over to Carpenter's to drop pithy derogatory comments about Ol' Big Ears and Shillary and Fauxcahontas and say literally nothing else had what merit exactly? What point did Duff make that needed to be made? That killing unarmed Black teenagers was a good thing? Polite my ass. They were classic troll. He was invited on numerous occasions to explain his vision for the future and not once did he offer a cogent explanation. I will offer my opinion since free speech is a wonderful thing. David Duff is a coward who is afraid to offer his real opinions and prefers to hide his racism and alt right nationalism behind a screen of pure wimpiness.

"David Duff is a coward who is afraid to offer his real opinions and prefers to hide his racism and alt right nationalism behind a screen of pure wimpiness."

I will leave regular readers of this blog, over its 12 years of existence, to decide on the accuracy of Peter's remarks.

I will leave readers of this blog to decide on the accuracy of your remarks elsewhere. But then they really wouldn't go there would they? Outside the bubble and all that? Perhaps it will be enough for them to know that I model my behavior here on yours elsewhere. Polite isn't it? And ever so much better informed.

Peter, I can only recall that David made a few valid points. My memory isn't good enough to recall them. His claim to politeness represents either "British irony" or an outre concept of manners.

I have lived on several continents (and one ocean), within the territories of several different nation states. Never before have I witnessed such insufferable behavior as that exemplified by Gallic gall.

"David Duff is a coward who is afraid to offer his real opinions and prefers to hide his racism and alt right nationalism behind a screen of pure wimpiness."

I seriously doubt there is an ounce of cowardice in our host. A man who will parachute from an aircraft in service to his country is not likely to wince at the words and accusations of little men.

Re carpenters blog, I went there a few times a couple of day ago. Most here know I don't overflow with F words and such when I write. I offered a couple of differing ideas on two threads. Each well reasoned and no bad language. Guess what I got? F bombs, troll Nazi etc. This week was the first time I had been over there in two years. Quite a change in attitude and tone. Something must have changed.

Quite a change in attitude and tone. Something must have changed.

It's become your classic "Let's bash Trump" blog.

Well pompous you've ratcheted up the offensiveness up to 11 - wow you must have an enormous penis, or is it just that you are an an enormous dickhead?

by all means insult me, I am no more and no less than you here, a guest; but it is rather common to insult your host in such a gratuitous fashion. I can only suppose your mother was a communist and failed to teach you the basics of common decency. I have no idea about your father, and most likely neither have you. And quite possibly neither has she.

Anyway while I can admit that your first twenty million gratuitous adhoms did rather spoil my reading pleasure on this fine blog, which is marked by wit decency and intelligence (look 'em up in a dictionary), lately your visits have been the occasion for all of us old tomers to indulge in some splendid wit at your expense, some of it so suble you have missed the insult, and the best bit is you keep coming back for more.

It's great, dont go away please! I feel 10 years younger!

Hey here's 20 dollars; get yourself a quart of rat poison, on me.

Cheers. Bottoms up!!

Young Pompous,

You don't seem to be getting the message in English. You boast that you speak more than one language, yet despite being such a cunning linguist, you quite clearly don't get it in French. Ok, let's try it in Russian...

пиздуй нахуй долбоеб!

Richard, I just used Google Translate on your Russian phrase - I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!

So Peter G, perhaps you can explain the above?

Particularly with this statement : "However, unlike the company’s wage issues, nothing has prevented women from competing in the Code Jam at its highest levels."

And once again, it's not about women's ability. It's about differences and whether we should acknowledge that there are some. It's like the Australian army, stating that they are not allowed to hire men because they need to up the stats for diversity. They need to hire the best people for the job. Oddly, the people who do best in all the tests

The comments to this entry are closed.