Laurel Fan wrote:
>
> It seems to me that the approach most of those
> get-girls-to-like-technology programs seems to be very oriented towards
> industry, ie they say "Look, computers are a good career, you can make
> lots of money"; they promote technology as work, not fun. I'm not sure
> this works.
Two female friends of mine.
One is a hacker - she does it because she loves it. She isn't paid a hell
of a lot, but that's because she owns a startup company. She's happy, if
overworked.
The other is a professional - she does it because she can get paid a lot.
She's not really happy in her job, but won't move to a friendlier company
because they can't pay her enough.
Me, I'd rather be the first....
> On a completely different subject, what is a better, non-adversarial way
> of analyzing a design? The whole "you point out problems and I'll tell
> you why they're not" thing seems to work pretty well for me...
I tend to get them to explain it to me, and I keep asking questions.
'how will this work', 'how will that work', 'what if X happens'.
So long as you give them thinking time and don't frustrate them
with too many questions too quickly, it seems to work well.
Jenn V.
--
"We're repairing the coolant loop of a nuclear fusion reactor.
This is women's work!"
Helix, Freefall. http://www.purrsia.com/freefall/
Jenn Vesperman [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.simegen.com/~jenn
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
