Slashdot Mirror

The argument is a lie. The dominant male jobs are the trades, plumber, electrician, carpenter, brick layer et al automation in that regard requires full robotics and AI. Labourers will lose jobs but it depends on the labour, some rural industries more than others and that affects women equally,

That begs the question "does automation in that regard require full robotics and AI?"

Automation can't eliminate those jobs outright, but it can reduce their number by making those jobs easier, in the form of partial automation. For example, if homes are pre-fabbed, they'll come with the wiring built into them, meaning less work for electricians. (The work is easier if done while the walls are being assembled on a table.) And if they're being pre-fabbed anyway, they can easily be assembled in another country! And if you make enough identical structures, you can begin to think about automating that work.

So really, if you needed full robotics and AI, that would affect women equally, but you don't (at least to make an impact) so the situation will not affect women equally. It will affect men first.

Your argument also depends on the idea that the dominant jobs, those with the most workers involved, will be affected first. But that's not the claim. The claim is that male-dominated jobs will be affected more than female-dominated jobs. You could be only affecting the fourth or fifth or even tenth-largest job sectors and still affect men more than women.

While North Carolina probably does not serve as the best proxy for the nation, it ought to be adequate. I found a very nice page on their web describing the situation for NC in 2013, which is probably recent enough to be relevant in this case, so I'll go ahead and use it. Their #1 male-dominated job by number of employees was truck driver, with 75,000 employees, and only 6% female. You didn't even mention this job, which is one of the jobs expected to be automated first. That alone is enough to torpedo your argument. #2 is miscellaneous managers at 57k and 35% female, excess managers are going to stick around for a while unfortunately. That's two male-dominated professions and we still haven't gotten to any of your examples. The next most common job for men by sex is First-line supervisors, that's actually 48% female so it's not male-dominated. Men's fourth most common job is freight/stock mover, 34k and only 15% female, and that's a job that's already being automated right now.

So what are the most common jobs for women in NC? Elementary and Middle school teachers (71k and 82% female), RNs (69k and 92%), Secretaries and Admin. Assistants (67k and 96%)... As you can see, these are jobs which are much harder to automate.

So in summary, you don't actually know what male-dominated jobs employ the most people, and that means you don't know what you're talking about.

Now that's out of the way, let's go back and look at your claim that we'll need "full robotics" (WTF does that even mean?) "and AI" to automate jobs. I say nonsense. You could probably replace 100% of people on a road crew with robots with modern technology — they usually fuck it up anyway, so how badly would a robot do it? Also, just like work is done by specialists in the real world, robots can be specialists too. For example, on a road crew you've got the sign guy*, asphalt guys, gravel guys, dump truck drivers, grader drivers, etc. and none of these guys are interchangeable. You would need strong general AI to have one robot do all of those jobs, but that's not how it would be done. So yeah, some jobs would require that, but many don't.

* The sign guy may be a sign gal. Everyone else on a road crew is all but guaranteed to be a guy.

See online: The Facebook Dilemma That's an excellent documentary, especially Part 2. The Facebook system is seriously flawed, Part 2 says. In several countries people have died because of Facebook posts by destructive people.

As is explained in the documentary, people are accepting social media as news. But social media has no editor, in many cases. So, often people, especially those with little education, are accepting fake news stories on social media as true.

Problem: Most Slashdot readers are more logical than the average person in the world. Slashdot readers are much more likely to have developed methods of avoiding fake or unreliable news. But, apparently Slashdot readers are unlikely to realize how often it is that other people are not logical.

Social media managers, especially the Facebook managers interviewed for that Frontline documentary, say they have no responsibility.

"News" without an editor is a social problem that existed far less before the Internet became available because it was too expensive to distribute fake news.

Facebook abuse: Look at the 2nd part of the documentary starting at 43:11. Zeynep Tufekci of UNC Chapel Hill (University of North Carolina), Associate Professor, UNC School of Information and Library Science; Adjunct Professor, Department of Sociology says this about deaths as a result of people accepting a Facebook post as news:

"years and years of people begging the company [Facebook] ... and basically being ignored."

She indicates that Facebook cannot be trusted.

As is explained in the documentary, people are accepting social media as news. But social media has no editor, in many cases. So, often people, especially those with little education, are accepting fake news stories on social media as true.

Social media managers, especially the Facebook managers interviewed for the linked PBX Frontline documentary, say they have no responsibility.

"News" without an editor is a social problem that existed far less before the Internet became available because it was too expensive to distribute.

Look at this in the 2nd part of the documentary, The Facebook Dilemma, starting at 43:11. Zeynep Tufekci of UNC Chapel Hill (University of North Carolina), Associate Professor, UNC School of Information and Library Science; Adjunct Professor, Department of Sociology says this about deaths as a result of people accepting a Facebook post as news:

"years and years of people begging the company [Facebook] ... and basically being ignored."

MachineShedFred opined:

Nope. It's completely about access. People don't want to have to subscribe to 10 different services, and go searching through 10 different services because of some contractual agreement that nobody outside of the lawyers and content producers know about.

So they'll go to the one place they know they'll find it, with the benefit of having extremely low cost: The Pirate Bay.

While I think your explanation of the motives for bittorrent piracy is incomplete, my real disagreement is with your conclusion. Have you actually tried acessing TPB recently?

The MPAA and the TV folks (at least, I assume it's their doing) have their third-world contractors DDoS-ing the living shit out of it. If you use a standard browser, it's all but inaccessible - although it's easy enough via Tor. They also have those same hirelings barfing screen after screen of bullshit torrents that contain only malware all over the movie sections.

Pretty much all of that activity is coming from India, of course, because it's not illegal there to deliberately obstruct website access or distribute malware on a for-hire basis.

The thing is, while it is unquestionably a Federal felony to do either of those things in the USA - and masterminding an international conspiracy to DDoS websites and deliberately distribute malware is arguably an even more serious crime - every U.S. law enforcement agency deliberately turns a blind eye to this asshattery, because Hollywood's income must be protected at all costs, despite fairly clear evidence that bittorrent piracy doesn't diminish their profits in any meaningful way.

Which, of course, doesn't keep business journals like Forbes from uncritically parroting the MPAA's claims to the contrary, because facts simply don't matter any more.

Or so I hear.

Anyway, Tor ...

According to Oxford dictionary, a billion is now a thousand million in both British and real English.

Indeed UK used to have so called 'long scale' but now sticks with short.
More on names of large numbers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Another link with some historical details: https://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/u...

To me the long scale seems more logical 'ards' as thousands (10^3) and 'lions' as millions (10^6), but unification is more important in this case, and we all know which one will win.

In the context of the First Amendment, such a meeting is called a limited public forum, and is subject to some restrictions by the government that organized it. http://www.firstamendmentcente... goes into more depth about what is and isn't allowed.

I very much doubt that the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account will be held to be either a traditional or limited public forum for the purposes of First Amendment analysis. It meets the usual criteria for a nonpublic forum, and any "public" uses of it align closely with Perry Educ. Ass’n v. Perry Local Educators’ Ass’n, 460 U.S. 37 (1983) as described at https://canons.sog.unc.edu/lim....

"A method for routing multicast packets in a network is disclosed July 1993 "IP multicast was first introduced in Steve Deering's Ph.D. dissertation in 1988" ref

I'm unsure what you are going for - but if you invented a new way of routing TCP/IP that was new and unique you could still patent it today. When the protocol was invented or even made public has no relevance to a patent on how to route said packet. (this post is not intended to support software patents)

"A method for routing multicast packets in a network is disclosed July 1993

"IP multicast was first introduced in Steve Deering's Ph.D. dissertation in 1988" ref

Yeah, then do the same with booze. Wow, how come nobody has thought of this before? We'll be so healthy!

Alcohol taxes reduce consumption and reduce incidents of drunk driving. There is no reason to believe that a "sugar tax" wouldn't also reduce consumption. Mexico has a "soda tax" and has seen a decline in soda consumption. A 10% tax resulted in a 6% decrease in consumption.

The Inquisition killed about 3,000 people over the course of 350 years.

"The inquisition" comprises a combined series of undertakings beginning with Pope Lucius III's instigation in 1184 CE and terminating in 1834 CE - a span of about 650 years. The Spanish Inquisition was one chapter of this, but by no means can be reasonably considered an isolated or peak event.

Perhaps you'll find this of interest.

Historically speaking, Christianity, between the inquisitions, the crusades, the pograms, blood libel, and just general oppression of various and sundry kinds, has a great deal of theism-based violence to answer for.

I'll be darned if I can reliably tell whether that hot chick I see on the street is 24 or 14.

It's not just you. They sure don't look like they did when I was younger.

I see young women in stores and yeah, they could be 15 or they could be in their 20s. And they're a lot more curvy or buxom or whatever than I remember them being when I was in high school or junior high. Some scientific studies are claiming that the age of puberty is dropping, so maybe that's it.

https://www.theguardian.com/so...
http://sph.unc.edu/age-of-pube...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/0...

"At the turn of the 20th century, the average age for an American girl to get her period was 16 to 17. Today, that number has plummeted to less than 13, according to data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey."

So yeah, there's something going on.

Do you honestly think that Google/Samsung/HTC/LG, et al. DON'T make concessions

So it's A-OK as long as everyone's doing it? This is the bandwagon fallacy. Here's a list of common logical fallacies which you may find useful.

That's not what I meant, and you should know that.

I was bitching about the piling-on against Apple, not attempting to excuse the sort of behavior that those me-too Apple-Haters were alluding to.

Do you honestly think that Google/Samsung/HTC/LG, et al. DON'T make concessions

So it's A-OK as long as everyone's doing it? This is the bandwagon fallacy. Here's a list of common logical fallacies which you may find useful.

Jefferson was wrong and ignorant about blacks. He couldn't imagine an educated black; yet slave narratives existed in his day that provided proof. Jefferson was willfully blind.

And after all of that struggle and suffering, how do blacks value education? Black kids that try to study in school and do well get beaten up - not by racist whites but by other blacks! They get beaten up for "acting white". Studying isn't thuggish enough. Sad.

Jefferson was wrong and ignorant about blacks. He couldn't imagine an educated black; yet slave narratives existed in his day that provided proof. Jefferson was willfully blind.

The audit trail shouldn't rely on matching each vote to a specific individual voter.

That's literally the only way to verify that each voter only voted once, and that no votes were cast by persons who don't exist or didn't vote.

If there is fraud involved, it will show up through other patterns, because they don't match what reality would be expected to generate, and tend to stand out as massive statistical outliers.

Knowing that there were extreme statistical outliers did nothing in the case of the 2000 election. Clearly, it's not enough. People need a smoking gun.

Banning things does us no favor, but getting the message out does

http://www.amazon.com/How-Powe...
http://www.computerworld.com/a...
https://www.psychologytoday.co...
http://www.unc.edu/~healdric/P...
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04...

The summary of all of these articles is that Powerpoint has a limit to how much information it can place on a slide, this is largely a function of screen resolution and visible font size

This limit is resolution results in 'high level' 10,000 display of topics that does not adequately represent the subject matter
The result is that people give presentations at a high level and then send out the powerpoint as the notes for the presentation, when in fact any real detailed information would be either omitted or glossed over at that high level

What we really need is to demand improvements to Powerpoint, like
1. displaying at legible resolution on a 6ft high by 30 ft wide screen (remember those old blackboards from college Calculus class, that is the level of information density that we need)
2. Providing linking and drill down like would would expect to see on an executive dashboard. Sure, start at the summary level, but allow the speaker to drill down to the details at any point in the diagram. Also, make this all print out as the 'notes' with footnotes and references to the linked information
3. Train the presenters to not be satisfied working at the outline level

I guess that we should not simply blame Powerpoint for making us stupid, when we are stupid for relying on it as it is

The shuttle disasters Richard Feynman, the late Nobel laureate and CalTech physicist, saw that "bulletized" thinking contributed to the Challenger disaster, where 7 crew members died and a multi-billion dollar craft destroyed due to an O-ring failure. The big problem was that NASA management wasn't really listening to the engineers - and breaking issues up into bullets helped them do that.

The engineers who worked on the Challenger O-rings knew they weren't qualified for cold weather. But management didn't want to hear it and OK'd the launch despite the engineer's opposition.

As sometimes happens, disaster ensued.

In the 2003 Columbia shuttle disaster, Prof. Tufte dissects the PowerPoint slides that buried important information - such as volume, mass and velocity - about the large piece of foam insulation that penetrated the Columbia's heat shield. Creating useful engineering reports in PowerPoint is difficult if not impossible.

And of course, powerpoint makes you stupid

The good news: Independent creation is a complete defense to copyright infringement.

The bad news: You can still be liable for subconscious copying.

The upshot: You are statistically unlikely to make enough money to raise the ire of $label_with_a_song_that_sounds_like_yours, but if you do and that song got even modest play in your region, they could come a-knockin.

The bottom line: If you're going for safety over listenability, maybe try weird chord progressions in odd time signatures. That will help your song sound less like any other song ever, and also help keep you from making too much money from people buying it.

As a former smoker, while some of what you say may be true, your post seems to be just about as equally dangerous and misinformed. There are basically no long term studies that demonstrate the safety of e-cigarettes and there have been several recent reports highlighting the danger of them. For example, here, here and here. Two wrongs by the FDA (e.g., fully endorsing vaping) wouldn't make a right.

Any author may explain the truths of a science or the methods of an art that are the property of the entire world and get a copyright in the work. That copyright, however, does not extend to the method or use of the system described. A system is simply not subject to copyright protection. To protect a system, the author would have to apply for a patent and meet the patent requirements.

This is where the method of operation language comes from in the EFF document. They are arguing that that API is a method of using the system.(java) They are arguing that you can't protect java by copyrighting the API. That it should be protected with patents instead.

American units are different, their pints are smaller (16 vs 20 fl.oz.)

But the US fluid ounce is bigger (about 29.573531mL vs about 28.413063mL). A US liquid pint is about 473.176mL while an Imperial liquid pint is about 568.261mL. The ratio is about 6/5, while implying equal sized fluid ounces would give 5/4 as the ratio. Check definitions at this site, as Google occasionally gets it wrong.

So, scientists say "Earth is warming but we can't find the few percent of excess heat expected".

Deniers "Proof there is global cooling!! Alarmists showed wrong!"

If this was about gravity it would go, "There needs to be Dark Matter and Dark Energy to explain some of the things we observe at large distances"

Gravity deniers would say "Proof that Earth is Flat! Gravity does not exist! It's a push, not a pull! The spaghetti monster is touching us all! Scientists can't explain it!"

So why are flat earthers laughed out and AGW deniers not? Perhaps it has to do with our inability, as a society, to actually plan for the future. We live in this la-la world of "Whatever will be, will be. The future is not for us to see". Maybe we can't plan for the future after all and just need to die off like bacteria in a Petri dish, dying in their own shit.

I find that hilarious because cosmology is so close to religion it's getting hard to tell the difference. 40 years of people insisting things were black holes and now they don't happen.

http://uncnews.unc.edu/2014/09...

The (current, at any rate) lack of geographic identification probably hurts emotional engagement a bit. The more successful team sports have a nearly magical ability to grab the audience in some primitive part of their little hominid brain that used to handle inter-tribal combat and allow them to experience, by proxy, the emotional indulgence of victory or defeat against the away tribe. It's really pretty weird. Especially weird is how easily the affect of the game bleeds over into other things, like the traditional rioting and setting cars on fire, or the stock market...

Until they come up with a way of inspiring the same large-scale insanity in their audience, 'e-sports' are going to have a difficult time competing.

What are calld "Arabic" numbers are more properly called "Hindu-Arabic" "Hindu-Arabic" numerals were invented by Hindu mathematicians in India thus called "Indian numerals" by Persian mathematician Khowarizmi. They were later called "Arabic" numerals by Europeans, because they were introduced in the West by Arabized Berbers of North Africa.

http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/un...

Oddly not a liberal. And the thread is on legal immigration, not illegal.

The case for legal immigrants is clear. They contribute far more, more in fact than the average native.

For illegal immigrants the case is a bit more murky. Hard to get good data on illegal activities. However the evidence is still suggest that they are net contributes. While they may not be the best educated, they do have “get up and go”, tend to be young, healthy, in the most productive years of their lives, and use social services (welfare, hospital, prison, etc.) at a lower rate than natives.

As you state liberals tend to be a bit mushy on the facts and logic. I am not a liberal.

http://www.cato.org/publicatio...

http://balanceofeconomics.com/...

http://www.kenan-flagler.unc.e...

http://www.cato.org/blog/herit...

Because it's not. The kilogram is the base SI unit of mass (unintuitive as that may seem, given the included scale prefix.)

Too lazy (or stupid) to use a search engine?

Here's one to get you started... http://cs.unc.edu/~fabian/pape... Feel free to continue down the rabbit hole from their references.

I dont know maybe google "unc finacial records" Oh wait, here we go, http://www.unc.edu/finance/fd/... 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, lets see, change the 2 to a 3 and now we have the 2013 one... That is just one school... but...Yep can do it for all of them...http://www.fis.ncsu.edu/controller/financial_reports/ Gotta hate lazy people...

Indeed, this paper finds that 23% of the variance in educational attainment is due to heritability, and 41% is due to shared family environment. The heritability of education attainment is less than is typically found for cognitive outcomes (such as IQ) for young adults.

Modern phones, including Android, iPhone, etc. etc. etc. have this ability. Whether or not a given navigation app uses it is another matter.

You don't have to use wheel sensors or the odometer (did you mean speedometer?), although those are useful inputs.

A more applicable and general term than "dead reckoning" is "sensor fusion".

Here's what Wikipedia has to say about dead reckoning:

"In navigation, dead reckoning (also ded (for deduced) reckoning or DR) is the process of calculating one's current position by using a previously determined position, or fix, and advancing that position based upon known or estimated speeds over elapsed time and course."

But we can do better than that, today, and there are a number of sensors that - with the right math - can be "fused" to provide a more accurate estimate of position than would be possible using any one. GPS, then, is just one potential input.

Wikipedia gives a very broad definition, as this isn't just applied to navigation:

"Sensor fusion is the combining of sensory data or data derived from sensory data from disparate sources such that the resulting information is in some sense better than would be possible when these sources were used individually. The term better in this case can mean more accurate, more complete, or more dependable, or refer to the result of an emerging view, such as stereoscopic vision (calculation of depth information by combining two-dimensional images from two cameras at slightly different viewpoints)."

Phones today typically have GPS, accelerometer, magnetometer, and gyro sensors. While additional inputs such as auto speedometer (not very accurate, though, by law only required to be +- 1.5% or so) and wheel sensors might be useful, they certainly aren't required.

I'd assume that major navigation apps already do this, probably using Kalman Filtering:

http://www.cs.unc.edu/~welch/k...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K...

So, this is nothing new. But, then again - there's no claim that it is. (Just the incorrect reading between the lines here...) They've just conveniently put the needed sensors and a means of performing the calculations in a single chip.

You know, just like Apple did for the iPhone 5S...

I hate to break this to you, but that is only part of the picture. That is how state and federal funds are appropriated not the entire school budgets. The fist paragraph even makes this clear in the second sentence. "This booklet presents charts
and tables which describe how state and federal funds are distributed to North Carolina's Public Schools."

North Carolina, like most states, raise the bulk of their funding for schools at the local levels through property taxes and other similar sources. It does appear that if you include nutritional assistance programs (free and reduced lunch and breakfast), local funding in NC averages only about 24% of the schools budgets. But looking deeper into the page, it seems that about 33% or federal funding goes to nutritional support. This page sheds a little more detail on the role of local funding in NC.

I still don't see the massive drain from administration as the parent suggests in the NC budget. Here is a budget from the durham public schools which might clear some things up. It gave me a headache so I'm done reading for the day.

Except the woman who wrote the article, Karyn Hede, is actually an instructor of scientific writing at UNC Chapel Hill in the Medical and Scientific Journalism Program. At the very least this should discredit the the UNC-CH scientific writing program...

> I should also, really, think about my extraneous/incorrect comma usage.

Helpful

Quote: "Normal/Small produces small files by using advanced compression techniques. Image quality is acceptable but some quality degradation and character substitution errors may occur with some originals"

Source: http://www.cs.unc.edu/cms/help/help-articles/files/xerox-copier-user-guide.pdf

Very interesting find, although that warning only appears in the "Fax" section of the manual, and not in the "Copy" or "Workflow Scanning" sections.

Quote: "Normal/Small produces small files by using advanced compression techniques. Image quality is acceptable but some quality degradation and character substitution errors may occur with some originals"

Source: http://www.cs.unc.edu/cms/help/help-articles/files/xerox-copier-user-guide.pdf

Page 129 for those incapable of searching a PDF.

But, seriously dude, this is scientific research! You can't seriously expect the man to RTFM.

Quote: "Normal/Small produces small files by using advanced compression techniques. Image quality is acceptable but some quality degradation and character substitution errors may occur with some originals"

Source: http://www.cs.unc.edu/cms/help/help-articles/files/xerox-copier-user-guide.pdf

So, strategies towards social change are better off being legal and transcendent (e.g. Bucky Fuller's idea of creating alternatives that make the status quo obsolete). So a lot of the focus on encrypted communications misses the big picture of the vast 21st century changes we are seeing towards post-scarcity...

Or as I say here:
http://www.pdfernhout.net/on-dealing-with-social-hurricanes.html
---
Our biggest advantage is that no one takes us seriously. :-)

And our second biggest advantage is that our communications are monitored, which provides a channel by which we can turn enemies into friends. :-)

And our third biggest advantage is we have no assets, and so are not a profitable target and have nothing serious to fight over amongst ourselves. :-)"

Let's hope those advantages all hold true for a long time. :-)

. . .

On dealing with the social hurricane of the CIA

If we thought about the CIA, or Al-Qaeda, or really many other agencies or organizations around the globe dealing in intelligence or covert operations as hurricanes in history, it is foolish to think one person can stand against a hurricane. What is likely to happen is you will get a 2X4 ripped from a house driven through your brain at 150 mph, such as, essentially, (spoiler) in the ending of the Directors' Cut of Brazil (though by other means). But, maybe there are other ways to approach this situation?

There are at least eight ways that I can see at the moment to deal with the hurricane of the CIA (or other global hurricanes, including to some extent Al-Qaeda, Mossad, MI6, or whoever):

* To begin with, for an official organization sponsored by a state like the CIA, one could hope for democratic oversight, which presumably exists in some form, as a first line of reigning such an organization in. But in practice such control is subverted by, as the above example with Obama suggested by Wayne Madsen, the fact that you are looking at an overall system where the agency protects its own existence. See Langdon Winner's "Autonomous Technology: Technics-out-of-control as a Theme in Political Thought" for examples of how this "reverse adaptation" happens for all sorts of organizations. If the CIA is running its own candidates, and all choices have such ties, well, then there is not much to choose from, right? As with Kerry vs. Bush, both Skull and Bones alumni whoever wins:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skull_and_Bones
So, it's not even the foxes guarding the chickens. It is the fox guarding itself... If we just accept that the agency is not going away, and can not be directly overseen, then we can move on to other ways of looking at the situation of how to co-exist with it.

* Historically, humans have survived hurricanes even with few resources like in Haiti. One can study how they have done that:
"In Haiti, the Art of Resilience "
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/In-Haiti-the-Art-of-Resiliance.html
Perhaps the very notion of having less makes one have a stronger community? The CIA has had difficulties infiltrating strong tribal communities, although while that may work for Afghans as a close-knit tribal culture knowing people from birth, that probably won't work for the internet (where no one knows both if you're a dog and if you work for the CIA.)
"On the Internet, Nobody Knows You're a Dog "
http://www.unc.edu/depts/jomc/academics/dri/idog.html
"CNC Machinist job related to custom bicycles & CIA version & comments"

No, you got it exactly backwards. Read the article.

http://www.unc.edu/~nielsen/soci708/cdocs/Berkeley_admissions_bias.pdf

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/187/4175/398.abstract

Science 7 February 1975:
Vol. 187 no. 4175 pp. 398-404
DOI: 10.1126/science.187.4175.398
Sex Bias in Graduate Admissions: Data from Berkeley

        P. J. Bickel1,
        E. A. Hammel1,
        J. W. O'Connell1
        Abstract

Examination of aggregate data on graduate admissions to the University of California, Berkeley, for fall 1973 shows a clear but misleading pattern of bias against female applicants. Examination of the disaggregated data reveals few decision-making units that show statistically significant departures from expected frequencies of female admissions, and about as many units appear to favor women as to favor men. If the data are properly pooled, taking into account the autonomy of departmental decision making, thus correcting for the tendency of women to apply to graduate departments that are more difficult for applicants of either sex to enter, there is a small but statistically significant bias in favor of women. The graduate departments that are easier to enter tend to be those that require more mathematics in the undergraduate preparatory curriculum. The bias in the aggregated data stems not from any pattern of discrimination on the part of admissions committees, which seem quite fair on the whole, but apparently from prior screening at earlier levels of the educational system. Women are shunted by their socialization and education toward fields of graduate study that are generally more crowded, less productive of completed degrees, and less well funded, and that frequently offer poorer professional employment prospects.

Well you know something might be hookey when an article describing a biological response to oceanographic variables gets published in Geology. Add to that the article, Marine calcifiers exhibit mixed responses to CO2 -induced ocean acidification was published Dec 2009, it bumps the Hookey-meter up a couple more points as well!

if you had, you would see this is , sadly, all to typical of mainstream journalism - totally un warranted sensationalizim of a modest, very modest, scientific finding.
The idea that the paper in geology
http://www.unc.edu/~jries/Ries_et_al_09_Geology_Mixed_Responses_to_Ocean_Acidification_full.pdf
has anyting to do with supersized blue crabs is total BS

really sad: don't any of you people bother to read ???
don't any of you people bother to check sources >??????

oh, wait, this is slashdot

Another histrionic headline about global warming. Here's the actual report, which documents the change in calcification of a variety of marine animals under increasing levels of CO2 dissolved in the water. Nothing in there at all about "giant crabs". Critters with hard shells -- crabs, lobsters, etc. -- will develop thicker shells as you increase the levels of CO2. News at 11.

I'm not a Scientologist. I've encountered a few (to the best of my knowledge, fairly low ranking), and they on average seemed no better or worse than most anyone else. And as far as their belief system goes, I'm not sure it's any crazier than any other religious belief system.

A friend of a friend, though, came up with an excellent evaluation rubric to determine how dangerous it was to belong to any organization, regardless of their beliefs. This has been used by law enforcement as well as cult survivor organizations. The tool is the ABCDEF, short for Advanced Bonewits (the inventor's name) Cult Danger Evaluation Framework.

The idea here is that you don't rate the groups beliefs at all. Instead, you rate their behavior. Groups that score low on the ABCDEF are those that are open about what they believe and stand for, have rights and reasonable expectations of members, and make it easy to leave. Which means that if they or their leadership start getting really crazy, normal people can see that and leave.

So a reasonable position might be that Scientology is a belief system like any other, but the Church of Scientology is dangerous.

more than 1,000 miles away (1609 kilometers)

Seriously, if you have one rough rounded number you can't do an exact convert and add false precision to the statement...

At least they didn't quibble about the difference between the UK Statute mile and the US Survey mile (the US mile is longer by 3.2mm), or even the rounding error of over a third of a km in their conversion.

... I know Mexico has strict laws that simply don't work.

Do I have to remind you that the so-called "Fast & Furious" ATF gunwalking scandal provided a lot of guns to Mexicans???? Mexico may have strict gun laws, but thanks to USA ATF those laws don't work!

Aw, jeez, here we go again with this old trope. This has already been debunked six ways from Sunday numerous times, but still gets repeated ad nauseum by gun control proponents.

How about we look at the actual numbers as reported by the GAO? (US Government Accountability Office for non-USians)

According to the June 2009 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report to Congress on U.S. efforts to combat arms trafficking to Mexico (the particular report that is cited for high percentages of guns in Mexico being from the US), some 30,000 firearms were seized from criminals by Mexican authorities in 2008. Of these 30,000 firearms, information pertaining to 7,200 of them (24 percent) was submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for tracing. Of these 7,200 guns, only about 4,000 could be traced by the ATF, and of these 4,000, some 3,480 (87 percent) were shown to have come from the United States.

This means that the 87 percent figure relates to the number of weapons submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF that could be successfully traced and not from the total number of weapons seized by Mexican authorities or even from the total number of weapons submitted to the ATF for tracing. In fact, the 3,480 guns positively traced to the United States equals less than 12 percent of the total arms seized in Mexico in 2008 and less than 48 percent of all those submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF for tracing. This means that almost 90 percent of the guns seized in Mexico in 2008 were not traced back to the United States.

Therefor, your claim is disingenuous at best, and outright propaganda and lies at worst.

Here's another set of numbers.

Twice as many children are killed playing football in school than are murdered by guns. Thatâ(TM)s right. Despite what media coverage might seem to indicate, there are more deaths related to high school football than guns. In a recent three year period, twice as many football players died from hits to the head, heat stroke, etc. (45), as compared with students who were murdered by firearms (22) during that same time period.*

Strat

* For football deaths, see Frederick O. Mueller, Annual Survey of Football Injury Research: 1931-2001, National Center for Catastrophic Sport Injury Research (February 2002) at http://www.unc.edu/depts/nccsi/SurveyofFootballInjuries.htm. For school firearms murders, see Dr. Ronald D. Stephens, "School Associated Violent Deaths," The National School Safety Center Report (June 3, 2002) at http://www.nssc1.org./ In addition to the 22 murders which occurred on school property or at school-sponsored events, there were another two shooting deaths which were accidents and twelve which were suicides.

Just look at this report: Cross-VM Side Channels and Their Use to Extract Private Keys

Pretty clear that the virtualized server aren't as safe as physically separated servers.

I shall try not to advertise too much on this but the technology to secure multiple VM's on the same system has been around for Vmware at least as long as vsheild has in the first place, in fact vsheild was co-authored by a very well known security company. In fact you not only have inter VM firewalling you have full IPS, file integrity monitoring, virtual patching just about all you could want. It's even agent-less all bar the FIM element, there is no excuse gents, virtualising does create new security problems but the answers are most certainly there !

Just look at this report: Cross-VM Side Channels and Their Use to Extract Private Keys

Pretty clear that the virtualized server aren't as safe as physically separated servers.

The gravity of the effects of viruses is not something that will increase due to evolutionary pressure.

In fact, most viruses have very little use for their host dying or functioning particularly badly. After all, a dead host is pretty bad at spreading the viral RNA or at least worse than one walking around. That is why Ebola is such a fail of a virus and viruses with mild effects are such a success (when looking at population count and age).
Some would point to HIV as having really bad effects on the host and being really successful, but the reality is that it's a very young virus and that if no countermeasures would be developed against it, it would have very little future (because pretty much all humans would eventually be dead). Its probable ancestor SIV is much more successful exactly because it generally has very little adverse effect its hosts.

Bacteria are much more resilient and generally have fewer issues in spreading themselves or even reproducing out of host bodies. Most viruses deteriorate pretty quickly outside of a host body (and out of water, see: Virus survival in the environment ... ), whereas bacteria can linger on non-organic materials for long times. They have fewer problems with a malfunctioning or dead host, although having their host work for them and collecting all the food is still a pretty sensible strategy.

You've been reading too many nutjob blogs.

The Qur'an has a variety of statements supporting resistance against aggression. However it contains very strict admonitions against taking actions against innocent people; that is terrorism.

http://kurzman.unc.edu/islamic-statements-against-terrorism/

"k" and "K" are different.

k = kilo = 1000
K = 2^10 = 1024. (also represented by "kibi")

Not many people seem to bother about these details though.
https://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/dictK.html