I was going to say that, since Rio Tinto is a mining company, that it probably originates in Brazil. But actually it is an Anglo-Australian company named after a mine in Spain. (Which, according to Wikipedia, started operations 5000 years ago).
This is my exact situation right now. Our website is made in Django, and we use Pyenv to manage our python versions. We'll likely be going to route of a docker image/ pyenv install script. It takes trial/error to figure out some of the packages you need if they aren't installed already, a single binary would be far easier for sure.
He can’t—or, rather, he can’t provide any scientific sources to support his false claim—but a 10-second search on google for some combination of the words “female”, “male”, “infants”, “study”, “preferences”, “toys”, etc will yield an entire literature that lends extremely strong support to the (already obvious) proposition that men and women are—gasp!-innately different. Proceed at your own risk (that is, risk to your feel-good, false beliefs).
There were numerous deconstructions of the sexist manifesto from a (now-ex) Google engineer who made similar claims. I recommend those as a good starting point. I also think that claims such as "men make better engineers" need to be proven, and I've yet to read any evidence that suggests this is the case.
So, I’d heard of the manifesto, but I’d never read it. I just read it, and it seems perfectly reasonable to me. Given that some of the smartest left-leaning individuals in the world—Google employees—apparently read and rejected what is clearly nothing more than a measured call for common sense, I have to wonder if there’s any point to debating you folks online. We—intelligent right-leaning and left-leaning individuals, respectively—appear to have simply parted ways.
If you want to link to a “deconstruction” of the manifesto, I’ll read it, but I’m not expecting much. I’ve already read well-designed studies that show the author’s assertions to be correct. I’m not sure how these alleged “deconstructions” get around such studies, but if I had to guess, I’d say sophistry, probably.
I'm afraid if you read the manifesto and considered it reasonable then there's not much I can do. It's not about the facts (on that front the manifesto has been fully debunked), it's about what's acceptable in how we treat women in tech, and that manifesto was entirely unacceptable.
To me, my friends, my colleagues, and my peers on the internet, it was clearly the writing of a very sexist man with no interest in understanding the experiences of women or other minority groups in tech. He not only had no interest in understanding these experiences, he clearly did not believe they even existed, whitewashing all other experiences with his own, and his very naive and ignorant view of what diversity initiatives do and the reasons they exist.
Studies have shown time and time again, including studies conducted at Google, that diverse teams are higher performing and happier.
I think you need to take a long hard look at your biases, as they are not acceptable in today's society. I hope that you can change your views before you push women out of tech. These views are something that society wholeheartedly rejects today, and if you don't realise that they are wrong, you are going to struggle more and more in life.
>It's not about the facts (on that front the manifesto has been fully debunked)
Indeed, it truly isn’t about the facts for you.
>These views are something that society wholeheartedly rejects today, and if you don’t realise that they are wrong, you are going to struggle more and more in life.
I appreciate your concern, but I’m actually doing quite well, wrongthink and all.
I like how easy it is to browse through other people's solutions and find neat tricks or ask for explanations on parts of code you don't understand. From my experience people will gladly reply with helpful answers.
It's also a cool way to be exposed to some lesser known mathematical concepts or problems that often make it into the questions.
