Slashdot Mirror

Not all discrimination is bad? Then before we go any further:
1. Explain why it's morally wrong and detrimental to society for women to be discriminated against.
2. If it's wrong then give concrete examples with supporting evidence to show how women are currently being discriminated against-- no need to be exhaustive, three examples will do.

1. I'm assuming you mean discriminated against based on societal prejudices. If you mean discrimination such as giving them different bathrooms or private areas to pump breast milk then I find nothing morally wrong about that.
a. Providing equal opportunity is a moral imperative for most people in the western world, especially the United States.
b. Society is improved when every member has equal opportunity to fulfill their full potential. When someone does not fulfill their full potential because of lack of opportunity, gender roles, socio-economic factors, etc. society loses the extra benefit this person could have provided to society.
(people are not forced to meet their full potential based on a moral desire for personal freedom)

2.
Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students
How stereotypes impair women’s careers in science
Gender Bias Against Women of Color in Science
Do sexist organizational cultures create the Queen Bee?

It is far more reasonable to just ignore the research showing these biases than to claim you cannot find the research. It doesn't take much digging.

Could you be so kind to actually mention that evidence that shows that "this is an overwhelmingly wrong argument", unless it's just the fact that there are more than X% of people of gender A in particular field.

While you probably won't take the time to read any of these and/or will claim all research you disagree with is biased, here you go. Most of the research where double blind tests are easily done includes using identical resumes other than the gender of the applicant. It is pretty hard to see how people still claim these biases do not exist, but here we are.

Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students
How stereotypes impair women’s careers in science
Gender Bias Against Women of Color in Science
Do sexist organizational cultures create the Queen Bee?

Don't feel too bad when you ignore all of this, because other research also shows men evaluate the research that confirms gender bias within STEM contexts as less meritorious than do women

Here's the proposed law as voted on by California voters in 1994. You can go to page 64 to read it yourself.

From the law, "...if a defendant has been convicted of a felony and it has been pled and proved that the defendant has one or more prior felony convictions, as defined in subdivision(b), the court shall adhere to each of the following:..."

To be pled and proved means the district attorney has to present evidence to the jury that the defendant has committed the prior felonies that would impose the harsher sentences and the jury would have to agree; the jury would have to convict the defendant of violation of the three strikes law.

My "opinion" is based on the text of the law and having first-hand knowledge of the jury instructions that go with a three-strikes trial.

If those references aren't good enough for you then you can look at the following link to California Penal Code 1025(b) which reads:

...the question of whether or not the defendant has suffered the prior conviction shall be tried by the jury that tries the issue upon the plea of not guilty...

I'll take the actual text of the law over your vaunted article in Rolling Stone. Didn't you notice a slightly biased position in the article you read?

The laws for audio and video are different in many areas. I assume that is why most video surveillance gear does not have audio capability.

A quick google search turned this up that gives one example
http://w3.uchastings.edu/plri/96-97tex/video.htm

(d) "Trade secret" means information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that:

(1) Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to the public or to other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and

(2) Is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy.

yes, it's true, I am a "scum sucking bottom feeder." lol. I'm currently attending as a student and also working half-time in the school's IT dept. developing the school website at a below-market but not unreasonable hourly rate. It's a nice, stable monthly check that basically takes care of my expenses other than tuition. On the side, I do more profitable misc. projects for people who need websites done or other design work. When I get in a check from those projects I just treat it like bonus money and end up spending it on hardware, clothes, car stuff, even dress shoes. A law professor at school saw my biz card on my office door and hired me to do her new edition book cover. Other professors who self-publish are interested as well. There's no substitute for word of mouth, but craigslist gigs section is a good place to start. Unfortunately almost all of those are "I was hoping to get it done for free" (i.e. clueless) people posting. Many of us in this thread are probably at the point where we can turn down projects that aren't "just right" since we're not depending on that money to subsist.

if you have a stable 9-5 and some knowledge of web dev, try hiring a couple of college students part time to do larger side projects that you find. After saving some moderate amount of money you can get into property management (borrow to buy an apartment building, then pay the loan with the rent money from tenants), or even open your own dive bar in a college town (my dream). All the skills you get in the side businesses help in your regular job too-- managing people or money, getting things done, handling problems, and so on. The great thing about running small businesses is that everything you make is yours, and you can make a lot of extra cash in the right business. The great thing about law school is it's fairly empowering. You know how to solve big problems.

I think the absolute worst tech support aside from AOL or Dell has got to be college/graduate school computer help. Often the law students are from fairly privileged families where the standard op. procedure was to call a contractor to fix every little problem at home rather than trying to get things done themselves. So you have a lot of people coming in FRANTIC and DEMANDING that you fix their computer problems right that second. I would say "sorry, drop-in tech support hours are wednesdays 3:30-5" and the typical response is "but it's an EMERGENCY!!!!" yeah. I've never heard that one before. asshole. I have nothing but contempt for the vast majority of my classmates. Yes, these people will soon be the ones you despise oh-so-justifiably. It's nice to have that quiet confidence of being able to fix things yourself, which is one attribute of a successful lawyer. So I got that going for me, which is nice.

Some people at school made the jump from IT to law school thinking they'd be "marketable" to the intellectual property law firms that run rackets in IP litigation. They're probably right, but I'm not sure if they'll be able to look in the mirror at the end of the day. Those places often require a CS/E degree. Many private law schools have a night program, so maybe you can do your IT day job and attend law school at night, though it does take 4 years....

In my school job, I decided to try a triple monitor setup because there are a lot of CRTs just lying around unused after the acquisition of flat panels. Ultimately I settled on my assigned flat panel and two 17 inch trinitron CRTs.

My main screen has always been the flat panel. At first I tried using one of the extra monitors for my email and IM client, and using the other as a preview window so I could have vim open in fullscreen mode on the flat panel and see my changes in the web browser on the extra monitor. After a few months of usage I'm pretty sure that I would prefer a single widescreen flat panel over my current setup. For one thing, I don't get so many emails and IMs that I can justify having an entire display devoted to it and running all the time. I end up using the preview monitor a lot less now that I have tabbed browsing in Firefox. Also, looking from the flat panel to the CRT is sort of a painful transition because of the differences in sharpness, brightness, and contrast.

At home I wouldn't mind having dual LCDs: my current 17" flat panel for studio/development work plus a 15 inch for browser windows, palettes, IM, and email (or DVDs) would be a great combination. As the parent post says, energy use is a concern. I doubt that radiation levels are that much worse with two displays than one but it can't be great for your eyes to have to constantly switch between the two. The flat panels are certainly easier on the eyes and probably consume less power to boot.

If I had to do it over and I had the cash I would have bought a single SGI 1600SW or Apple 23 inch cinema display for the ultimate single monitor setup. At work I still have the triple setup but I leave the CRTs off most of the time and turn them on when I get an IM and every so often to check email, or when I actually need them to preview in a browser. It seems to be a pretty good compromise.

I would find it very obnoxious that a record was created showing who was visiting my apartment and exactly when they came and left. It wouldn't help if everyone in the building could see the video. The legal situation is unclear, at least to me. There's lots of precedent that you can shoot video of comings and goings a public street or sidewalk. However, I'm under the impression that you're not allowed to point the camera into private property. Here's a link called Continuous Video Surveillance that has a bunch of citations and further links, but doesn't have a clearcut answer. I found it in about half a minute of Googling, so there might be better stuff out there that's still easy to find.

California, Colorado, Maryland, Florida, and several other states have a similar single subject requirement for legislation. The scope in each state varies; sometimes the single subject rules apply only to acts of the legislature, other times only to the acts of the people in a referendum, still other times to both.

If your state doesn't have such a rule, the Hastings School of Law has information about making a change.

In an admittedly short search, I couldn't find any current movement to enact a federal single subject law or constitutional ammendment. I believe such a rule is necessary to avoid repeats of just such actions as those of Senator Hatch, despite what this guy has to say about it.

This sort of thing is not new; I am, frankly, surprised that there isn't more of an outcry for federal single subject rules. I guess the people who work the system for a living don't want it to change.