Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Why Young Males Are No Longer the Most Important Tech Demographic

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the too-easily-distracted dept.

Handhelds 240

An anonymous reader writes "The Atlantic has an article discussing how 18- to 35-year-old males are losing their place as the most important demographic for tech adoption. 'Let me break out the categories where women are leading tech adoption: internet usage, mobile phone voice usage, mobile phone location-based services, text messaging, Skype, every social networking site aside from LinkedIn, all Internet-enabled devices, e-readers, health-care devices, and GPS. Also, because women still are the primary caretakers of children in many places, guess who controls which gadgets the young male and female members of the family get to purchase or even use?' The article points out that most of the tech industry hasn't figured this out yet — perhaps in part to a dearth of women running these companies."

cancel ×

240 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

This is hardly news (-1, Troll)

ProDeveloper (2657899) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263563)

This is hardly news, and it seems like geeks are offended by normal people using the internet. In fact, normal people are the ones that obviously use internet more, while the geek keeps eating chips and cola in his parent basement.


Judging by TV series and Slashdot, U.S. doesn't seem to have very good men-to-women ratio on IT work. However, this is completely different in other parts of the world. Especially in Asia where students and women actually really want to work in IT and are good at it.


On top of that, women tend to more productive, even if they play Farmville during work time. Men do the same - they just play some other games, watch porn or talk about sports with their colleagues. On IT field it has been discovered that women's ability to multitask is a significant bonus. Men can only concentrate on one thing at a time. If something else happens, they get distracted. This is why you sometimes see people complaining about instant messages and emails during work - they cannot multitask.


Now that aside, there is a third gender which is basically all the good parts of men combined to good parts of women - transponders, or like they are called over here, ladyboys. They are honest, hard-working, cute and great to chat with. And they look good! I had an one night stand with one ladyboy and forgot around $100 to her home. Next time I saw her she promptly gave it back, even while I didn't have so good memory of it. Honest, hard working people.

New tagline (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263595)

"Transponders - more than meets the eye".

Re:This is hardly news (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263615)

NEWSFLASH! No one can multi-task. Only switch between single tasks. Don't know of any evidence women do that better. There is evidence the more people do it the worse they become at it (which is a bit unusual, one expects practice to help on a task).

Re:This is hardly news (0)

BlackSnake112 (912158) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263825)

So you can't pat you head, rub your stomach, and hold a conservation at the same time?

Re:This is hardly news (2)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264035)

So you can't pat you head, rub your stomach, and hold a conservation at the same time?

That is not multitasking. That is a serialized activity. Setting up a repeating event and then engaging in a conversation. In mid conversation try changing the event. For example go from pat head and rub stomach to rub ... uh ... cranium and pat stomach in the middle of the conversation.

Re:This is hardly news (1, Troll)

Gr8Apes (679165) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264221)

There was a study that there are about 4% of the population that are true multi-taskers. The tests were done regarding cell phone talking and driving. I do believe that a small group can do more than one task at a time, such as typing this message and holding a conversation.

Re:This is hardly news (4, Funny)

Mike Buddha (10734) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264331)

There was a study that there are about 4% of the population that are true multi-taskers. The tests were done regarding cell phone talking and driving. I do believe that a small group can do more than one task at a time, such as typing this message and holding a conversation.

Good thing you remembered this nameless study, otherwise you'd have lost this argument! Phew!

Re:This is hardly news (4, Funny)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263853)

Well, the newer models of humans come with dual core, so they can truly multitask. The rest of us just have to wait for the proper timeslices. :P

Re:This is hardly news (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263967)

NEWSFLASH - Man walks and chews gum!

Re:This is hardly news (1)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264181)

NEWSFLASH - Man walks and chews gum!

While that's true for trivial tasks, Man can't read (and understand) a book and write a software program at the same time without timeslicing between them. For tasks that require little thought, more seamless, continuous multitasking is possible.

Walking and chewing gum are trivial tasks that don't require the full coordination of the cognitive part of your brain, so the ability to walk and chew gum is more akin to an operating system offloading the TCP stack handling to its NIC and using a hardware RAID controller so it just needs to do some minimal filesystem processing, but basically just passes off blocks of data to the RAID controller and lets it take care of parity calculations, decide where to physically place the data, etc.

So the computer can read a TCP stream and write it to disk with barely using any of the main CPU at all, the CPU just needs to coordinate the data transfer. Just like you can walk and chew gum at the same time with very minimal use of your brain, though your brain is still active keeping an eye out for obstacles, keeping your tongue away from your teeth, savoring the artificial grape flavor, etc.

Re:This is hardly news (4, Interesting)

FrootLoops (1817694) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264729)

My score on Multitask 2 [armorgames.com] disagrees with you. Practice also improves my play significantly. After not having played for months I only stayed alive for 85 seconds and I fell apart with 5 tasks. My record is 105 seconds with 6 things at once. After a while it's hard for me to gather enough visual information to play each game, and they all use keyboard input which overloads that part of my brain. Towards the end I can "think" what needs to be done, but not cause my fingers to do so quickly enough.

I usually multitask when playing the piano. I...
  * Get fingers positioned right (both hands of course)
  * Decide on little touches like dynamics, stoccato, pedaling, rubato, what emotional content I want to convey, if any; I often make these up anew each time
  * Decide on changes to the piece, like different rhythms, extra grace notes, changed chords, etc.
  * Evaluate my playing--"missed note", "incorrect dynamics", "this emotional arc sucks", "I really like that passage at that speed", etc.
  * Perhaps read music
  * Let my mind wander, thinking about the day or interactions I had with someone or sometimes a math problem (to calibrate difficulty, I was fiddling with pointwise approximations of complex measurable functions by polynomials almost everywhere a while ago, and the non-null-homotopicness of a particular curve yesterday)
  * Listen to people if they're talking around me or listen to TV if it's on; I can tune these out if I wish

Interestingly I can't respond verbally to someone while playing the piano. I can understand someone perfectly and think of a response (nodding if yes/no, for instance), but the verbal part of my brain seems to be engaged with the music. As a rule I can multitask somewhat on simple similar tasks and I can multitask to a large extent on unrelated tasks. Oh, I often juggle or otherwise occupy my hands while doing other things (eg. reading, thinking about math). I vary the patterns somewhat to keep that part of me from getting bored so it's not just tossing and catching in the same basic pattern forever.

If none of this is multitasking to you, you'll have to clarify your use of the term.

Re:This is hardly news (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263651)

New account, eh bonch? You've been awfully quiet lately; I was beginning to think you'd finally given up.

From you only other post in your posting history: "Even Google isn't stupid enough to pull stuff like that."

Fuck off bonch.

Re:This is hardly news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263755)

Whoever you are, I sincerely hope you are dead soon, and that before you die
you suffer the tortures of the damned.

Re:This is hardly news (5, Interesting)

epyT-R (613989) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263957)

This article and your post are both yet more examples of misandric garbage being passed off as science... the article written by a corporate 'empowered' woman of course, and who knows what your interest is, but I doubt it's as altruistic as you want the reader to believe. How many people here would believe an article written by a male saying that men are the be-all end all?

It's not about offense.. it's about these ignorant people demanding that us geeks dumb things down to their level even when it's not really possible to do without sacrificing functionality that we need. There's nothing wrong with ignorance btw, because it implies that one could still want to learn. WILLFUL ignorance however, is THE issue of this society's problems today.

Being part of a dominant consumer group is NOT the same thing as being tech-relevant, or even important in terms of trending new innovations. See, in order to innovate, there needs to be a group of people who are willing to take on early adoption. This is key... most of this is done by men. As to why, I could only guess that, but my limited understanding of psychology tells me that men are the ones who are more willing to take risks to differentiate and gain advantage. Read the list in the article.. all of those things had been used by men long before they were mainstream...ie when they were initially adopted for use. This piece is just an attempt at proving some sort of gynocentric ego.

On top of that, women tend to more productive, even if they play Farmville during work time. Men do the same - they just play some other games, watch porn or talk about sports with their colleagues. On IT field it has been discovered that women's ability to multitask is a significant bonus. Men can only concentrate on one thing at a time. If something else happens, they get distracted. This is why you sometimes see people complaining about instant messages and emails during work - they cannot multitask.

unbiased citation needed, from a study not run by people with huge political conflicts of interest. This is one of those memes that is a load of rubbish. It needs to die. BOTH genders have trouble 'multitasking'.. just ask anyone who's seen a woman driving an SUV while chatting on the cellphone.

Re:This is hardly news (1)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264449)

YHBT
HTH
HAND

Re:This is hardly news (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264535)

That's just unfair. The cell phone obviously has nothing to do with the ability to drive a car. Women just suck at driving, period.

Re:This is hardly news (4, Informative)

Cazekiel (1417893) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264993)

I'd planned a long-winded reply to this, but screw it. I'm just going to say that if you came in and made an Asian joke, another group of people stereotyped as bad drivers, people would look down on you for it. If you ever uttered the n-word, people would look down on you for it. But men will always have the allowances, excuses and bullcrap reasons to make as many jokes bashing women as they want, and it will never change. They'll always laugh when faced with criticism, painting the woman calling them on it as a "humorless bitch" as if it doesn't hurt to see it happen in a forum I enjoy and want to feel a part of, but is always faced with the fact that she doesn't have a bulge between her legs.

And it does... hurt, meaning. Say you're joking if you want and that I'm just a humorless bitch. I'm just tired of hearing this asinine crap, and decided to say something about it. I almost didn't, because I know the reception this might get, but I don't really care.

Re:This is hardly news (0)

Squiddie (1942230) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265327)

You take things much too seriously, so yes you are what would be called humorless. I wouldn't call you a bitch, but whatevs, no?

Re:This is hardly news (2)

Martha Bridegam (1110721) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265339)

Thank you, Cazekiel. Except it will change when enough people understand that misogyny is bad business.

Re:This is hardly news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264843)

the article written by a corporate 'empowered' woman of course

Sorry, what? The author is Alexis Madrigal, who is a man.

Re:This is hardly news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265375)

the article written by a corporate 'empowered' woman of course,

of course..... NOT. the author of the article is, in fact, male...

There's a picture and bio right at the top if you'd have taken the time to, I dunno.. actually click through to the article before making an ass of yourself......

Re:This is hardly news (3, Insightful)

mrex (25183) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264067)

>Especially in Asia where students and women actually really want to work in IT and are good at it.

Thank you for acknowledging that much of the problem isn't discrimination, but peoples' choices. It has always troubled me to hear people talk about how important it is to secure womens' rights, then in the next breath talk about all the ways society needs to impose different thinking on women and girls in order to make them do what we think is best for them. The reality is that there are not very many qualified female IT workers in the US because American women generally do not want to work in IT.

Now someone will bring up social messaging and cultural attitudes towards gender roles, and blame society for the way most American women feel. Because that is totally respectful of women and not patronizing towards them at all.

Re:This is hardly news (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265075)

Now someone will bring up social messaging and cultural attitudes towards gender roles, and blame society for the way most American women feel. Because that is totally respectful of women and not patronizing towards them at all.

Hyperbole much?

behind every powerful man... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263599)

The old adage remains. It's all about eating and mating, and that means pleasing the women, directly or indirectly.

Enjoy your evolution.

Re:behind every powerful man... (3, Funny)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263865)

This is geeks we're talking about. Mating is out of the question.

Re:behind every powerful man... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264247)

"Behind every powerful man there is a great woman, and behind her; his wife."

Re:behind every powerful man... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264337)

It was, back when men cared about propagating the race. But women want to do that on their own now, so us men are free of all that nonsense, and can just enjoy watching the women clamor that they're "empowered', "superior", and all that ancient twaddle. If women were truly serious about all of this, they would take the high ground. Instead they're just proving they're the same human beings they apparently don't want to be. It's a game of double-standards, where the only winning move is not to play.

Gossip - no wonder women dominate (4, Interesting)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263609)

"Internet usage, mobile phone voice usage, mobile phone location-based services, text messaging, Skype, every social networking site aside from LinkedIn, all Internet-enabled devices, e-readers, health-care devices, and GPS." --- Most of these things all revolve around communicating with others. Daughters used to spend all their time talking on the phone (watch an old episode of Gidget for an example). Now it's texting on internet devices.

Healthcare makes sense, since it's usually the mom that deals with sick kids. Ditto GPS/location services since they are driving the kids around. And e-readers are handy to use while waiting for the kids to finish with their doctor appointments or soccer games.

I draw the line at buying some minivan or SUV though.
I like my car.

Re:Gossip - no wonder women dominate (1)

slazzy (864185) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263815)

It will be interesting to see how this changes in the next few years.

Definately! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263861)

It's a proven scientific fact that men who drive minivans spontaneously grow a vagina.

Re:Definately! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264383)

Bzzt. Wrong. There is a correlation between manginas and male minivan driving, but it hasn't been shown which (or whether) one causes the other.

Re:Gossip - no wonder women dominate (1)

epyT-R (613989) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264005)

...or that women need more healthcare and devices to compensate for less ability to deal with the environment around them. The implication being that men don't need as much healthcare, or that they're better able to find their way without a moronic computer telling them what to do. See I can speculate too. If gossip is going to fuel internet growth, all of us should just quit using it now.. gossip is among the most toxic of fallout from human evolution to date.

Re:Gossip - no wonder women dominate (1)

samoanbiscuit (1273176) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264685)

If gossip is going to fuel internet growth, all of us should just quit using it now.. gossip is among the most toxic of fallout from human evolution to date.

Actually, that's not true. Gossip has been studies by a lot of fields (especially psychology) and is considered a useful way of communicating social mores and building alliances. Basically people who were once considered "non-technical" or whatever are using the internet as extensions of themselves more than ever, which is a good thing IMHO.

Re:Gossip - no wonder women dominate (1)

epyT-R (613989) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264875)

Yes, but unfortunately the basis is flawed. argumentum ad populum - everyone is saying this, therefore it must be true/you must comply. Building alliances on such fallacious reasoning is probably one of the primal causes of conflict and mass social failure.

Yeah it would be great, except that instead of extending themselves to what was built (by 'geeks'), they want/are getting it dumbed down to their level by force of ubiquity and/or profit motive.. This is an example of why some think the movie Idiocracy should be considered a piece of speculative fiction.

Re:Gossip - no wonder women dominate (4, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264019)

Most of these things all revolve around communicating with others. Daughters used to spend all their time talking on the phone (watch an old episode of Gidget for an example). Now it's texting on internet devices.

The internet has always been a communications technology, and women tend to communicate more in both frequency and diversity of content. But it's a leap to say that means women are more important. A lot of internet traffic is streaming media and bittorrent. Does that mean those are the first things people think of when you mention the internet? Probably not. Quantity doesn't always equate to importance.

Conversely, men aged 18-35 have never been social movers and shakers; They're the grunts. Always have been. It's never been any different in IT than anywhere else... that age group is always used for something new and experimental because they're disposable. If young men throw away their lives in war, poor career choices, or develop work-related injuries, etc., we just give them a line about how honorable their sacrifice was and then lead them away from the public spotlight.

I guess my point is that studies like this offer neither wisdom nor insight; The conclusions drawn invariably reflect our own prejudices. And they will continue to do so until the social expectations of men and women, young and old, etc., are equal.

Re:Gossip - no wonder women dominate (2)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264133)

Ditto GPS/location services since they are driving the kids around.

I think you meant to say "because men never get lost."

Re:Gossip - no wonder women dominate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264711)

Don't know about the GPS. My wife thinks she knows the directions to everyplace (and she usually does). I just turn on the GPS and zone out.

Adoption, not use. (3, Interesting)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263617)

The young male demographic has already adopted tech, so adoption will be low. New technology will be targeted at people who haven't adopted tech yet, because those markets aren't as saturated and competetive. It was bound to happen in a maturing industry. Young males still use more tech then females though.

Re:Adoption, not use. (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265117)

Bingo. You see the same thing with cars though, and shiny new computer stuff. This really isn't a surprise by any stretch, rather it's that people who have the stuff they want already have it. Just wait for the *next big thing* to come along and it'll change. Well providing that they have a job.

Fuck women (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263653)

So, let me get this straight.
The bitches bitch about being under-represented in the tech industry.
They bitch rudely about booth babes.
They bitch about companies that use hawt female models to sells products.

NOW once somebody figures out they are the most important tech demographic, it's A OK to pander
to the bitches.

LETS ALL START MAKING TECH ADS WHERE THE MAN IS A BUMBLING IDIOT LIKE
IN OTHER INDUSTRIES.

Then, these fucking misandric bitches can say "Fuck you, men, we are the #1 tech demographic,
it's ok to appeal to our vaginas"

Right. Women and their fucking equal rights. Equal rights and special treatment.

Soon, all computers will come with a free dildo and THAT'S JUST FINE!

Fucking cunts. Women are the most unfair of human beings. They are self-entitled
bitches that can only thing me me me me me me me me.
They have ruined EVERY single industry there is, and now with the "brogrammer"
campain they are seeking to destroy one of the last bastions of normality.

What's next, quotas for the bitches? FUCK YOU WOMEN, YOU ARE NOTHING
MORE THAN A VAGINA AND AN OBNOXIOUS MOUTH.

FUCK YOU!

Re:Fuck women (0)

BlackSnake112 (912158) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263859)

*points at the subject* Why yes. As often as possible. Hoping to have as many orgasms (women win with the multiple orgasm thing) as possible too.

Re:Fuck women (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263881)

I know better than to feed a troll, and I'm sure you somehow think you are being funny, but your post reeks of serious psychological problems suggesting that you have a very unhealthy outlook toward women, with rage issues. I hope for the sake of the females in your life, you work on yourself and your outlook. Maybe you've been abused, but you can stop the cycle of abuse by not being abusive.

Evident right here (2, Insightful)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263657)

This is most evident on places like Slashdot, which are dominated by young males 18-35. From OSX to iOS to Windows 8 to Office 2010 and the Ribbon to the iPad to the iPhone to locked bootloaders on Android to custom Android skins (Sense etc.), almost every decision in mainstream tech is cast as "boneheaded" or "backwards" here. Yet almost everything Slashdot has a problem with, the general population eats it up.

Re:Evident right here (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263693)

If everyone eats it up, then obviously there is no problem? Fantastic logic! Do you have a newsletter?

Re:Evident right here (2)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263713)

Problems are relative. The problems we come up with here obviously mean nothing to the majority of tech buyers out there. Is it a problem for me that I can only install Apps from the Appstore on my iPad? Yes. Is it a problem for my mom? No. It doesn't make the complaints we have not legitimate... it just means it's less and less likely anyone is going to care.

Re:Evident right here (2)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263915)

It's not just that. It is also that the general public doesn't recognize time very well. They complain about the problem they are having at the moment, but are unwilling or unable to consider that the actions they took hours, days or months earlier lead to that problem. Watching it is like seeing a drunk driver complain about a tree being in his way instead of recognizing that the bottle of Jack he drank an hour earlier was actually the problem.

Re:Evident right here (2)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264167)

Nah, the problem is slashdotters can't accept that they are in fact part of the general public, it makes us feel ordinary.

Re:Evident right here (1)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263735)

Has there really been a survey to determine the ages and sexes of Slashdot users or do you all just assume everybody is young and male?

Re:Evident right here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263805)

There was a poll... But it was before you made your account.

Re:Evident right here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264249)

Way, way, way before by the looks of it.

Re:Evident right here (1)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264719)

There was a poll... But it was before you made your account.

I believe you, but since I'm relatively new here, perhaps you could clue me in on how to find old Slashdot polling data.

Re:Evident right here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263883)

Given that the tech field is overwhelming dominated by men, and this is a tech site, it's not a great leap of logic to conclude most who come here are male. The question is how old... hard to say but most of the reminiscing of the "good old days" here relates to the 80s and 90s, which points to people who are in their 20s and 30s. Of course slashdot has a firm base of people who think the good old days were the 50s and 60s, but they've been irrelevant in mainstream tech for a long time now.

Re:Evident right here (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264297)

but they've been irrelevant in mainstream tech for a long time now.

Stop masterbating on my lawn and I'll think about giving you a job.

Re:Evident right here (1)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264699)

Given that the tech field is overwhelming dominated by men, and this is a tech site, it's not a great leap of logic to conclude most who come here are male.

That's pretty unscientific.

The question is how old... hard to say but most of the reminiscing of the "good old days" here relates to the 80s and 90s, which points to people who are in their 20s and 30s. Of course slashdot has a firm base of people who think the good old days were the 50s and 60s, but they've been irrelevant in mainstream tech for a long time now.

If you remember the "good old days" of the 80s and 90s clearly, you're pushing 50 or older now.

No, but being visibly female here has consequences (3)

Martha Bridegam (1110721) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265383)

I can imagine that some female commenters here might wish to appear safely ungendered. At Slashdot, the discussion is ordinarily sane, intelligent, mutually respectful and clever, but as soon as the existence of the female sex gets mentioned, a certain proportion of the self-identified males start to grunt contempt at women and girls in general, and the whole sense of an inclusive, honorable community slumps into crud.

Re:Evident right here (1)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264533)

What percentage of slashdotters would tell the truth about their age and sex? here? and does that exceed the number that actually know their own real age and sex? How would anyone know, and why would anyone care?

Come on, there is a lifetime supply of slashpolls here just waiting for deployment! Just think enquiring Google wants to know!

Re:Evident right here (1)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264749)

Why would we lie about our age on Slashdot. We're all using aliases and Slashdot doesn't seem a to get anybody laid.

Re:Evident right here (3, Interesting)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264779)

There's a new subject for a poll right there:

How many times have you gotten laid using Slashdot?

  • Sure, happens all the time.
  • Once or twice, but I'm trying to live it down.
  • I'm trying, but no success so far.
  • I met my husband/wife on Slashdot! So no...
  • It never happened, I swear.

Re:Evident right here (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263739)

There's something to that, the atmosphere on most tech forums is "overly entitled cheeto-encrusted cheap-assed jerk". Slashdot is actually a bit nicer than the completely toxic environments at Gizmodo & so on.

(Also, all these people claim their friends and family rely on them for technical advice, even though that is clearly no longer necessary.)

Perhaps marketers were willing to put up with nerd asshole behavior when they were buying $3000 PCs, but it's just not worth it to sell a $200 cell phone.

Re:Evident right here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264609)

Oh god. Slashdot isn't toxic you say?

It's got one of the worse communities nowadays.
I come here about once a week and all I see in the comments in bile and absolutely nothing of interest.

Er... don't agree (3, Insightful)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263875)

I have never met a member of the general population that liked the office ribbon. It confuses the hell out of my wife - which is a giant pain since it also confuses the hell out of me, who is usually her tech support. This results in routine 5-10 minute "find the option" sessions where we search for what used to be obvious. I predict a very similar reaction to Windows 8, just like Windows 7 confused the heck out of my wife and mom.

The whole problem with these UX designers is they forget that it is 2012 and EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS HOW TO USE COMPUTERS, starting from 8 years old on!

It doesn't matter if something is "easy to use for a novice" to computers when there are no novices remaining on the planet. It is much more important to KEEP CHANGE TO A MINIMUM. People in general do not deal well with change in something they are used to. Anyone who has assisted in an office-wide rollout of a new software program will attest to this.

Re:Er... don't agree (1)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264551)

Anyone who has assisted in an office-wide rollout of a new software program will not be working on UI design

FTFY

Re:Er... don't agree (2)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264625)

Yep - it would be a real shame to let the people who know the most about the everyday support-ability problems with software to be helping with the interfaces. Nope - much better to leave it to self-righteous UX "experts".

Re:Er... don't agree (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264581)

Obigatory car analogy; I've been driving on public roads for 35yrs, I backed a freinds car out of the driveway the other day and then sat there for a good five minutes trying to work out why the car wouldn't let go of the key after I turned it off.

Cars, like computers, used to have a very simple interface and it was common for non-mechanics to do their own repairs because you could open any bonnet and point to the caby, the distributor, the coil, etc, under the bonnet of my current car there is a large black plastic cover with holes where you put the oil and water, taking the cover off doesn't help much. Sure old cars/computers make me go all misty eyed with nostalgia for their 'simplicity', but lets face it, they were unreliable crap compared to what is available today.

Re:Evident right here (1)

tsotha (720379) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265185)

I seriously doubt slashdot is dominated by men 18-35. Men, yes, but I think the age bracket is much higher than that.

Finally, the women rule, as it should be. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263659)

Great. Now women rule the internet too. This is clearly a much better situation, closer to the way the great feminist god intended it.
Done. Good.

Now leave me alone and let me tend to my garden.

It's easy to herd of cattle (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263665)

It's easier to control a herd of stupid cattle than it is to try and wrangle up cats. Young males are usually somewhat educated, curious, and skeptical about technology where there is almost a social stigma against smart women in ANY field of science. It's sad, and I don't like it, but the primary enforcing factor for this seems to be women themselves, so I don't feel so bad for pointing it out.

Re:It's easy to herd of cattle (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264647)

It's easier to control a herd of stupid cattle than it is to try and wrangle up cats.

Yes, but cats rarely stampead.

So, what are they saying? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263765)

The most popular color was pink?

Re:So, what are they saying? (1)

chadenright (1344231) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263951)

Don't you mean Fuchsia [xkcd.com] ?

wat? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263801)

This sounds like a bunch of PC horseshit.

ah (2)

ILongForDarkness (1134931) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263827)

So all the things I really don't care much about. They can have them. I'd dispute the internet thing (by bandwidth I suspect guys win what with gaming and porn). But otherwise: location based apps? I see it more as a privacy risk for little benefit, FB and other narcissistic tools: no use and I really don't care what my cousin's friend found funny so can't be bothered with other people's personal BS.

Also of tech demographic means relatively simple to use "chatty" services than girls might win. How about hard (for mainstream user) tech adoption? Setting up a home server, remote backup, dual booting systems etc.?

Back to the Future (1)

NicknamesAreStupid (1040118) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263833)

Slackers all! With no draft, manual labor out of fashion, Ritalin, and most physical activities in decline, young men have turned into slackers. I've seen it coming ever since 1985. For those of you who don't know -- http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=slacker [urbandictionary.com] and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ndJNXCkNxg [youtube.com] . Hell, most are not even getting laid! Women are taking over. When they do, they will have to deal with a nation half-full of slackers. Be careful what you wish for.

Re:Back to the Future (2)

couchslug (175151) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264599)

Conscription didn't instil anything in recent decades but resistance to conscription and desire to GTFO the military. The Hollow Force era demonstrated that thoroughly and well. I served during the Reagan recovery and

Manual labor sucks unless its for yourself or you get well paid for it. The cult of working yourself do exhaustion so you can get shitcanned next time FuckyouCorp right-sizes its workforce understandably went away.

There is no point in work without reward.

The elites don't give a fuck, the poor get government monies, so why should they want to carry everyone else and be chumps?

I get the "slackers" point. Martyrdom is a virtue in others.

Re:Back to the Future (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265301)

When they do, they will have to deal with a nation half-full of slackers. Be careful what you wish for.

Everyone here will tell you that women have been calling men lazy since [poster's year of birth].

Male != Clueless (1)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#40263837)

Does anybody really think that Apple doesn't know their market? Does anybody think Google and Amazon and Facebook don't know what users want? Just because the heads of these companies are male doesn't mean they don't know how to women.

Re:Male != Clueless (3, Funny)

Farmer Tim (530755) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264447)

Just because the heads of these companies are male doesn't mean they don't know how to women.

I hope that's not the latest term for cross-dressing...the thought of Steve Ballmer in drag gives me the screaming meemies.

Re:Male != Clueless (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264621)

Well Zuckerberg might not know how to women now, but wait until the SEC finishes with him!

Re:Male != Clueless (1)

Shavano (2541114) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264659)

Does anybody really think that Apple doesn't know their market? Does anybody think Google and Amazon and Facebook don't know what users want? Just because the heads of these companies are male doesn't mean they don't know how to women.

Sorry about the missing verb. I intended "sell to" but you can insert whatever verb pleases you.

Women are playing catchup (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263879)

Women are currently leading adoption only because the men have already adopted said technology and the women are catching up.

perhaps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40263931)

perhaps its because no one thinks like this anymore???..........

Biology has changed (1)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264043)

news at 12

Social Butterflies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264117)

This makes sense to me. Women are social butterflies. Tools that allow them to be social anytime anywhere are bound to be widely adopted.

For men, texting *GRUNT* back and forth is has diminishing returns.

Drivel (3, Insightful)

pkinetics (549289) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264203)

This is basic diffusion model of business. Innovators, Early Adopters, Early Majority, Late Majority, Laggards.

Here's what I recall with the adoption trend of mobile device consumption.

It started with the geeks, and then the guys.

Then teenagers adopted it. Holy buckets, text messaging went through the roof.

Smart devices came out. Mostly geeks, guys and the group of teenagers. Parents were still playing catch up to why their child sent 2000 text messages and now they owed $1k to the cell phone company.

Social media explodes onto the seen. The teenagers are growing up. They are consuming and in turn demanding more enhancements. Companies are responding because they need to keep adding adopters.

Social media became a status symbol. Note: I did not say cool. Cool is attitude, not imaginary friends, followers, tweets, etc. Cool is measured in binary, yes or no. There is no magical calculation that establishes cool. No amount of bling makes someone cool. You are either Fonzy or Richie. Analogy stolen from Dennis Miller.

Now there are apps, web and mobile, for all social sharing for everyone. It is going from saturation to supersatured as the industry tries to secure all the late adopters.

The next innovation is coming.

Rinse repeat recycle.

Men are not potted plants (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264229)

This suggests that men are nothing more than potted plants in the household. Just because women may be the primary caregivers doesn't mean men have no say in what goes on, perhaps to the dismay of feminazis everywhere.

so now that tech (-1)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264257)

Allows women to talk more, they are using it more, I mean more thank half the examples given are technology to enable more yappin, are we supposed to be surprised?

Single Use Devices (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264259)

These are, for the most part, single predefined use devices. Women use them more because they tend to do those single things more. Men prefer open ended devices that they can use to extend and make other things. This isn't really "adoption" so much as purchasing something like you would a toaster.

Disagree (2)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264481)

For every 10 women who buy a GPS, or a phone, or a Kindle - there is a trusted geek they asked for advice before they bought it.

And those geeks are usually male.

Just because the overall market penetration skews toward women doesn't make them the influencers.

Mark Penn (1)

Presto Vivace (882157) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264585)

made the same point in his book Micro Trends. [blogspot.com]

Sounds like discrimination... (1)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264641)

How can we fix this massive problem of men getting77 gadgets on the 100 compared to women?

Even G+? (1)

k(wi)r(kipedia) (2648849) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264643)

... categories where women are leading tech adoption: internet usage, mobile phone voice usage, mobile phone location-based services, text messaging, Skype, every social networking site aside from LinkedIn ...

I can understand women leading in Facebook adoption. But G+? I was under the impression that G+ was still a more tech-oriented social networking site (If at all, I see the G+ button more often on tech sites like Slashdot than more mainstream sites like the BBC or E Online). BTW I'm sure that Slashdot is still a predominantly male networking site.

Most important? (1)

skine (1524819) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264681)

I don't know if I really agree with calling any one segment of the population the "most important demographic" in any industry.

Rather, it might be more accurate to say that technology has expanded beyond the hobbyist level to near ubiquity.

Just look at the number of people today who call their mp3 players iPods or smart phones iPhones, and I'll tell you about my mother who said I played too much Nintendo as kid - despite the fact that I didn't own a Nintendo system until I was in my 20's.

The listed applications are geared toward women. (2)

Kaz Kylheku (1484) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264761)

No surprise.

Skype, voice, social networks: This is just a continuation of the millennia-old girl network, now happening over the electronic network. As a heterosexual male, I want to be talked *about* on that network (whether it be on or offline), but not actually be there.

Health: I'm a guy! I go for years without seeing a doctor.

E-reader: Most paperback pulp at the supermarket is aimed at women; now it's on devices. Inevitable.

GPS: Ask for directions? No way, I know where we are. I'm a guy! Furthermore, I don't care that it's a creepy area and it's getting dark.

Re:The listed applications are geared toward women (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265065)

E-reader: Has large quantities of ALL types of books. I've read tons of sci-fi/fantasy on my e-reader. I've also got a library that includes about 5-10 different classical books loaded on it at any given time. I've seen plenty of tech books in the marketplace as well. And we all know that the primary market for Tolkien, Asimov, Homer (Greek), and anything related to CS/IT is primarily women.

Re:The listed applications are geared toward women (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265109)

Cool, but what kind of guy reads on an ereader?

I think you're missing the point (2)

goldcd (587052) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265163)

most of those technologies are old/established and a great deal of money is being made selling those to the mass-market - and I'm quite willing to admit whilst as a "dink-y" 35-year old male I'm important to, but not the sole focus of the vendors. My ilk will not decide the market success of particular 'products'.
Damned if I'm not going to fight the imputation that I'm not responsible for the success of the underlying 'tech' though.
GPS - I was wearing the Casio GPS watch, I was dangling a GPS MMC out of my PocketPC (plus external magnetic aerial) when the luddites thought mobiles had to have buttons. Now I'm quite prepared to admit there was a lot of swearing, wasted money and bluntly it wasn't due to necessity but rather it clearly being the cool-as-fuck-future - and that's ignoring the pile of dead-end tech that was accumulated in parallel - but I really resent this slur.
I'll restrain myself from listing everything else - but there is absolutely no piece of 'tech' that hasn't been launched on the sci-fi-tinged dreams of a 20-something-year old male with slightly too much disposable income.
I perhaps do consider in these later years, that it wasn't 'me' but the age/ideal - I still steadfastly hold to the opinion that twitter is pointless - despite the bleatings of the youth below me and the easily-lead marketing execs above.

Not Tech but Social Media and Gadgets (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265207)

Men, especially nerds, tend to find technology cool. In that case technology as such. An iPhone, however, is no longer technology as such. It is a gadget. You do not need to understand or want to understand the technology to use it. So in the end the text is comparing apples with pears.

Ho-hum (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265239)

Social media and devices used to access social aren't the only "tech"s that exist. Maybe it meant more women use consumer electronics for social media more often than men do? I don't see the point of this article, as it doesn't contain any real information. It does come off as a "You go, girl! Geek is hot!" piece, though.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?