4 ms·

In 10 years as a "professional" I've never heard it until the last 6 months. I'm EE so different circles, but closer to pure SW people in those last 6 months.

In 10 years as a "professional" I've never heard it until the last 6 months. I'm EE so different circles, but closer to pure SW people in those last 6 months. I'm not a fan.. I don't know why.

what-the-grump 3y ago
Likely because it’s from an old book that few in the gen xyz have read. It’s been transformed to mean ‘understand’ and it’s pretentious to use in regular settings. I’m a fan of the movie Kin-dza-dza it doesn’t make it acceptable for me to walk around saying ‘Ku’ to strangers.
- bgro 3y ago
  Glocking The Coding Interview
  - borner791 3y ago
    That'll get you a call from HR
- GoldenRacer 3y ago
  And if you do read that old book it has a lot of overt sexism and to me it felt like some sort of incel fantasy (I really enjoy older scifi so understand times were different back then but Stranger in a Strange Land felt over the top). So now I associate that word with all the problematic aspects of the book and assume the person using it is either using the word without having read the book or didn't see a problem with the book when they did read it. Neither really makes me think highly of the person.
  - what-the-grump 3y ago
    The book was progressive for its time, shocking to publishers for openly discussing sexuality, religion, establishment. People reading it 60 years later and finding it sexist I think are projecting a bit of their own insecurities. Considering the book, the current dominant religious institutions on the planet, the scriptures behind those beliefs and institutions, and what’s been going on in America over the past 4 years as far as women’s rights.
    - GoldenRacer 3y ago
      “Pipe down, Anne. Close your mouth, Dorcas. This is not a time when women have the vote." I'm projecting insecurities because I think interactions like that are sexist?
      - what-the-grump 3y ago
        >So now I associate that word with all the problematic aspects of the book and assume the person using it is either using the word without having read the book or didn't see a problem with the book when they did read it. Neither really makes me think highly of the person. You cannot separate the book and person reading the book. Its ok to disagree, its ok to have different views.
        GoldenRacer 3y ago
        Where are you getting the idea I can't separate the book from the person reading it? I've personally read the book. I have no problem with people reading it or even enjoying it. My comment was on people who are regularly referencing the book by using the word "grok". When you do that, you are intentionally associating yourself with the book and implying other people should read the book if they don't want to feel left out.
- nh23423fefe 3y ago
  > it’s pretentious to use in regular settings. so its fine anytime because regular means nothing
oh_sigh 3y ago
I think it would be like a youngish person today walking around using 1980s slang. It seems pretty clear in use that it is a conscious, affected choice.

In 10 years as a "professional" I've never heard it until the last 6 months. I'm EE so different circles, but closer to pure SW people in those last 6 months. I'm not a fan.. I don't know why.

what-the-grump 3y ago

Likely because it’s from an old book that few in the gen xyz have read. It’s been transformed to mean ‘understand’ and it’s pretentious to use in regular settings. I’m a fan of the movie Kin-dza-dza it doesn’t make it acceptable for me to walk around saying ‘Ku’ to strangers.

bgro 3y ago
Glocking The Coding Interview
- borner791 3y ago
  That'll get you a call from HR
GoldenRacer 3y ago
And if you do read that old book it has a lot of overt sexism and to me it felt like some sort of incel fantasy (I really enjoy older scifi so understand times were different back then but Stranger in a Strange Land felt over the top). So now I associate that word with all the problematic aspects of the book and assume the person using it is either using the word without having read the book or didn't see a problem with the book when they did read it. Neither really makes me think highly of the person.
- what-the-grump 3y ago
  The book was progressive for its time, shocking to publishers for openly discussing sexuality, religion, establishment. People reading it 60 years later and finding it sexist I think are projecting a bit of their own insecurities. Considering the book, the current dominant religious institutions on the planet, the scriptures behind those beliefs and institutions, and what’s been going on in America over the past 4 years as far as women’s rights.
  - GoldenRacer 3y ago
    “Pipe down, Anne. Close your mouth, Dorcas. This is not a time when women have the vote." I'm projecting insecurities because I think interactions like that are sexist?
    - what-the-grump 3y ago
      >So now I associate that word with all the problematic aspects of the book and assume the person using it is either using the word without having read the book or didn't see a problem with the book when they did read it. Neither really makes me think highly of the person. You cannot separate the book and person reading the book. Its ok to disagree, its ok to have different views.
      - GoldenRacer 3y ago
        Where are you getting the idea I can't separate the book from the person reading it? I've personally read the book. I have no problem with people reading it or even enjoying it. My comment was on people who are regularly referencing the book by using the word "grok". When you do that, you are intentionally associating yourself with the book and implying other people should read the book if they don't want to feel left out.
nh23423fefe 3y ago
> it’s pretentious to use in regular settings. so its fine anytime because regular means nothing

oh_sigh 3y ago

I think it would be like a youngish person today walking around using 1980s slang. It seems pretty clear in use that it is a conscious, affected choice.