Rather Polite of Him, Wouldn't You Say?
in [Cobol]
|
From: Kelly Bert Manning on 27 Nov 2006 16:30 "Pete Dashwood" (dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz) writes: > > In my reckless youth it always bothered me that female programmers were rare > (although there were some, and the ones I met were really good programmers). They weren't that rare in the 1970s, about 1 in 3 in my Comp Sci courses. That dropped to 1 in 10, along with a general decline in the numbers and achievement levels, when the first Kindergarten thru Grade 12 victims of an "experimental" math curriculum started arriving at University and college in the late 1980s. Part of the new curriculum was a one size fits all approach and "spiralling". Capable students got bored and quite. Slower students didn't get it the first or second time around the spiral and also quit. My wife started out writing fortran programs on an IBM 1620 in high school. When the local university converted to an IBM 360-145 Academic Math teachers in local high schools were offered the opportunity to have their students use the 1620 while it was still around at the university. A surprising number of those students ended up pushing bytes around for a living, despite starting university in areas such as Math, Chemistry, Physics, or in my wife's case Honours Microbiology. We still work with COBOL, among other duties and assisting our son with his C++, Java, PERL, Oracle, etc. homework from High School Info Tech and Univeristy Engineering Comp. Sci. His smarter sister does it all herself, even uses earplugs or headphones to create an isolation zone and avoid being annoyed by audio or visual clutter or overload. Got to keep that hyperfocus going you know. > When I finally did get around to dating a female programmer, I found that > her other traits (absolutely no sense of humour, snobbery, and smug > superiority (misplaced)) were more than I could stand, so it couldn't > last... :-) (I'm sure she speaks very highly of me, too ... :-)) It was a > very long time ago. > Some of us are just so far out there we simply haven't got a prayer of > finding a kindred spirirt, no matter what occupation they follow :-) You have to work on controlling that hyperfocus. ;) > Having taken a liberal sample of what's on offer, I have now reached the > conclusion that it is better to be on one's own than to be with someone who > is bad for one :-) (took a while... the learning was fun... :-)) Well, getting married is one way to not have to think up polite ways to say no, particularly if your physical appearance says jock, not geek. ;)
From: HeyBub on 27 Nov 2006 17:55 Howard Brazee wrote: > On 23 Nov 2006 08:55:05 -0800, "Alistair" > <alistair(a)ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >> He probably keeps his heart in a jar under the stairs. > > Robert Bloch often said (although only once in my presence), that he > has the heart of a little boy - in a jar on his desk. That's as bad as a newgroup post: I FOUND A NEGRO IN MY FAMILY TREE! So I cut him down and put him out by the curb.
From: Pete Dashwood on 27 Nov 2006 23:38 Thanks for this Kelly. Interesting to see the blip in the statistics regarding women and Maths. I suspect it has been rectified today. The last project I managed had more women than men on the team, and some of them were simply outstanding ..(professionally :-)) Only because this is a specialist newsgroup, and not because I really care, I think that the IBM 360-145 you mentioned, is actually an IBM 370-145... :-) I seem to recall the 360 range having two digit model numbers, but I am getting old and it was a long time ago :-). I'll think on what you said regarding focus, if I can focus long enough.... :-) Pete. TOP POST - no more below "Kelly Bert Manning" <bo774(a)FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message news:ekfldl$kfr$1(a)theodyn.ncf.ca... > "Pete Dashwood" (dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz) writes: >> >> In my reckless youth it always bothered me that female programmers were >> rare >> (although there were some, and the ones I met were really good >> programmers). > > They weren't that rare in the 1970s, about 1 in 3 in my Comp Sci courses. > > That dropped to 1 in 10, along with a general decline in the numbers and > achievement levels, when the first Kindergarten thru Grade 12 victims of > an "experimental" math curriculum started arriving at University and > college > in the late 1980s. Part of the new curriculum was a one size fits all > approach and "spiralling". Capable students got bored and quite. Slower > students didn't get it the first or second time around the spiral and also > quit. > > My wife started out writing fortran programs on an IBM 1620 in high > school. > > When the local university converted to an IBM 360-145 Academic Math > teachers > in local high schools were offered the opportunity to have their students > use the 1620 while it was still around at the university. A surprising > number > of those students ended up pushing bytes around for a living, despite > starting university in areas such as Math, Chemistry, Physics, or in my > wife's case Honours Microbiology. > > We still work with COBOL, among other duties and assisting our son with > his C++, Java, PERL, Oracle, etc. homework from High School Info Tech and > Univeristy Engineering Comp. Sci. > > His smarter sister does it all herself, even uses earplugs or headphones > to create an isolation zone and avoid being annoyed by audio or visual > clutter or overload. Got to keep that hyperfocus going you know. > >> When I finally did get around to dating a female programmer, I found >> that >> her other traits (absolutely no sense of humour, snobbery, and smug >> superiority (misplaced)) were more than I could stand, so it couldn't >> last... :-) (I'm sure she speaks very highly of me, too ... :-)) It was a >> very long time ago. > >> Some of us are just so far out there we simply haven't got a prayer of >> finding a kindred spirirt, no matter what occupation they follow :-) > > You have to work on controlling that hyperfocus. ;) > >> Having taken a liberal sample of what's on offer, I have now reached the >> conclusion that it is better to be on one's own than to be with someone >> who >> is bad for one :-) (took a while... the learning was fun... :-)) > > Well, getting married is one way to not have to think up polite ways to > say no, particularly if your physical appearance says jock, not geek. ;)
From: Kelly Bert Manning on 29 Nov 2006 02:20 "Pete Dashwood" (dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz) writes: > Thanks for this Kelly. > > Interesting to see the blip in the statistics regarding women and Maths. I > suspect it has been rectified today. The last project I managed had more > women than men on the team, and some of them were simply outstanding > .(professionally :-)) In Weinber's 1971 "The Psychology of Computer Programming" he made some mention of women in computing. I remember one annecdote where some of the female members of a project team were working overtime and some security guard tries to shoo them out of the building, informing them that they can't be in the building without a manager's approval, then get's blown away by one of of the women telling him that she is the manager and has approved the overtime work. That was also the book where he describes how some enterprise decided to use a get together of all it's top IT staff to subject them to a barrage of psych tests intended to develop a profile which could be used to predict programming success. The well researched questionaires asked people to answere questions such as "Do you often get headaches because you have to concentrate at work?" Wienberg noted that anyone who answered Yes would probably not make a good programmer. Before the second round of tests the fellow administering them foolishly asked if there were any questions. One of the IT geeks put up his hand and asked if they should use the same personality on the second round of tests they had on the first. The administrator got very upset and stated that all the profound questions were to be answered fully and honestly. The geek's reponse was "what sort of fools do you take us for", at which point the room erupted in laughter. > Only because this is a specialist newsgroup, and not because I really care, > I think that the IBM 360-145 you mentioned, is actually an IBM 370-145... > :-) I seem to recall the 360 range having two digit model numbers, but I am > getting old and it was a long time ago :-). Well, it did have a number of processor registers that didn't seem to be in use with the software that was available when it first arrived.
From: Howard Brazee on 29 Nov 2006 10:57
On 29 Nov 2006 07:20:43 GMT, bo774(a)FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Kelly Bert Manning) wrote: >Before the second round of tests the >fellow administering them foolishly asked if there were any questions. One >of the IT geeks put up his hand and asked if they should use the same >personality on the second round of tests they had on the first. The >administrator got very upset and stated that all the profound questions were >to be answered fully and honestly. The geek's reponse was "what sort of fools >do you take us for", at which point the room erupted in laughter. I've seen similar questions asked in job interviews. Worthless. I suspect a high percentage of those people who answer dumb questions with dumb answers on TV are more knowledgeable than they seem. They know which answers give them a better chance of being on TV. |