No one's pointing a gun to this Mauro person's head and forcing him to interact with Linus. I doubt Linus ever took a vow to love, honor, or respect Mr. Mauro. If someone with whom I am only interacting by choice says something mean to me, you know what I do? I take my ball and go home.

You are being an idiot and should get the fuck over this nonissue.

Well, someone isn't in touch with their emotions. You apparently run away from conflict and try to bully others into doing the same.

It's not bullying.

Yes it is. Refer to this:

"You are being an idiot and should get the fuck over this nonissue."

The word "bullying" implies repetition. And that's not the only aspect missing from its definition in his posting.

Twisting the definition so it benefits one person is not helpful here.

Huh? I'm not twisting the definition, and my comment isn't benefiting anybody. You make no sense.

You're an idiot and should get the fuck o--KIDDING! I'm not sure why you bothered replying to me other than to play the "I am more mature than you" game, so I hope this reply entertained you.

Are you trying to act like Linus?

I feel like this comment came straight out of Middle School..

>I‘ve written here before about the ongoing puzzle of improving the ratio of women to men in the tech sector.

That's nice, but when are we going to address the real barriers faced by women? Women are vastly outnumbered by men in many sectors, including workplace injuries and fatalities, acute and chronic homelessness, suicides, mental illness including schizophrenia, violent crime victimization, recruitment into gangs and child armies at a young age, legal genital mutilation, false imprisonment, unfair estrangement from children, involuntary celibacy, and a host of other exciting fields. When are we going to stop pussyfooting around and demand a better ratio of women to men in the really important sectors? If we work together, I know we can do it.

But what about free ponies?

>People are stupid, so when warned, the will still act stupid. Despite this it is still the responsibility of whoever is able, to protect them, even against themselves.

Is this really a mainstream political philosophy on HN?

We keep smoking when we know it is unhealthy, we keep drinking and driving, we vote on politicians based on one liners and the amount of media attention they get, we believe that the evolution theory is 'just a theory', we get in huge debt because of loans we cannot pay and we keep posting things on Facebook despite knowing better.

We are stupid in the sense that we do very stupid things even though we, in many cases (should), know better. It is the task of 'us' (people who know about internet privacy) to protect other people around us from being stupid with Facebook just as I would like to be protected by others in the things I am stupid at.

Wait, then what's the problem?

He is 'outed' in meatspace by his cyberspatial identities trough the irresponsibility of FB and himself, and all of the other none the wiser users enabled through this product to harm themselves.

But isn't that just as fascinating (as long as you know what it means)? I just finished my first college-level physics course a few weeks ago and I'm already fuzzy on the thermodynamics stuff, but the entropy of this gas shouldn't decrease with increasing energy, should it?

Maybe people will start to refactor the worst offenders. It takes more than a slight improvement to displace software that's widely used, but I'm sure there are things that we use that could be an order of magnitude better (according to some metric). Gmail was able to win converts because it was an order of magnitude better than the competition.

Uh...no?

Are you saying that crpyto is not available to people who aren't white guys?

>By using the phrase "big bad men" you are engaging in precisely the sort of gender-oriented down-talking that she is complaining about.

But that's absurd. He only used that phrase in response to a claim that men in tech are incorrigibly sexist and hostile.