Shopify, Pulling Strings at Ruby Central, Forces Bundler and Rubygems Takeover

In the world of "I'm sorry to that man" this seems like a given about literally everything.

Not knowing something happened is called being uninformed, and it doesn't change things or make the person right just because they don't know about something that occurred.

> There will be a lot of amazing Rubyists that leave

We agree. Listen, WebObjects still has a somewhat active community. Ruby's community won't be helped by recent events, but recent events happened because the Ruby community has been backstabby for a long time and no one has stopped it because there's too much money to be made in the meantime to care about things like people.

I developed with Ruby from the beginning and loved Ruby on Rails for many reasons. The community's backstabbing nature and callousness toward people who put a lot of work in was not something I ever admired and it's led us here.

Bad things happening to contributors year after year for a decade shows a toxic community that doesn't change even over a long period of time

The latest harm is just the continuation of what has been happening since the beginning

> some of which are well resolved

Resolved? Decisions were made, but the tensions were never resolved and people were hurt.

> He left public programming [...] entirely.

Yeah. That's what happens when someone is destroyed after years of their hard work is treated like nothing.

Discussing Engine Yard now does not seem fruitful if you do not address the quotes provided by Katz which refute your own prior comments

https://andpad.co.jp/

It's funny how far removed it is to all of this drama.

What instead often happen when they hear I'm Norwegian is a complete mask-off moment where they start explaining their favorite racist thinking to me, assuming that since I'm from a group they like, apparently I'm expected to agree with them (I do not).

My main exposure to anti-immigrant thinking face to face in London over the last 25 years have been repeated incidences of people who "just have concerns about immigration" revealing their racist motivations to me without me even asking them.

In other words: I don't buy it for a second when people try to insist it's immigration they care about, rather than seeing non-white faces.

The table doesn't distinguish "British" from "non-British" for non-white people, so it would be rather hard to account for that.

But if he's referring to an ethnicity (really a narrow group of ethnicities) rather than a nationality then of course that would entail a range of skin tones what people would normally call "white". And yes, that thinking would necessarily exclude Idris Elba.

But then if this is really about worrying about "white people", then why is he also excluding the non-British white people from his figure? Can it really not just be that there exists an English ethnicity (and Scottish and Welsh) that has been there for centuries and has nowhere else to go?

> This isn’t about mass immigration, it’s just about immigration as such.

There is no such distinction.

You ask "after how many generations are you native British"; I can equally well ask "after how many immigrants is it mass immigration".

The point is that the rate of immigration has been sufficient to completely overwhelm the native birthrate, causing a rapid demographic shift.

When the UK colonized India in the first place, the population did not become minority-Indian at all, let alone within the space of a couple of generations.

> After hie many generations are you native British or is it impossible if you are not white?

Consider the existence and meaning of the term "Native American", then ask yourself these questions again.

And it's not a principled position on open borders nor open migration but instead part of a double standard. These same people probably cheer on the protests in Mexico City against white gringos in Condesa.

That's how I'd summarize the far left position. The far right one is probably that migrants are bad. And I suppose the middle position is that there's a problem when immigration rate outpaces cultural assimilation.

damn, you are really catching the straws here to defend a racist

It's obvious he meant brown people or anyone that isn't white/european looking.

There is no genetically pure or distinct native British phenotye to set apart other europeans.

Europeans have been mixing themselves for centuries, he obviously knew what he was talking about (non-whites)

Then he goes on about 'Pakistani rape gangs' and 'abuse of British girls'–oh look, the classic trope of the nasty browns and blacks preying on our precious white children.

Then take this: 'There's absolutely nothing racist or xenophobic in saying that Denmark is primarily a country for the Danes, Britain primarily a united kingdom for the Brits, and Japan primarily a set of islands for the Japanese.'

These words would not be out of place in 1066 Britain ie 'this is a country of the Saxons, not the Normans'. Britain has seen this exact brand of xenophobia for millennia, in fact they even had periods of bigotry against Danes! If dhh had gone to London at the wrong point in history, he might have experienced racial prejudice.

Interesting, right?