Slashdot Mirror
You've Got Male: Amazon's Growth Impacting Seattle Dating Scene
reifman (786887) writes "San Francisco's gender imbalance is so bad that a startup recently proposed flying women in from New York City for dates. But, if you're a straight male thinking of moving to Seattle to work in technology, think again. Seattle's gender ratio is even more imbalanced and it's about to get much worse for men. Amazon is building out enough space to employ 5% of the city population and its workforce is 75 percent male. By the end of 2014, Seattle will have 130 single men for every 100 single women."
Tell me ladies, are you not very attractive, given to big glasses and serious introspection?
COME TO SILICON VALLEY, learn useless coding techniques, give out buggy code and ask the nerdiest soon-to-be-billionaire to help you grow in the profession.
After the divorce, you won't ever have to work again!
Will it have 13 men per 10 women? 26 men per 20 women?
Will it even have... 30% more men than women???
So.... just to throw this out there. Why the presumption that Amazon's new hires will be 75% male?
As a woman I think this must be great news! But as a foreigner - should I aim for Seattle or San Fransisco?
I'll take that ratio any day over my time in the Navy, where the ratio on a ship was about 50:1 male to female.
Ever date one of those guys at Amazon? All work and no play.
Queue the legion of people who will insist that Seattle companies be forced to hire less-qualified people who happen to be women.
If this bothers you: stop telling little girls that they're pretty, and instead tell them that they're smart. Don't ask them their favorite princess, ask them what they want to be when they grow up.
I suppose if you're a gay male that sounds like Utopia. Welcome to Seattle, the new San Francisco.
The Space Needle will take on new allegorical significance as a monument!
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Everett, Tacoma-Lakewood-Puyallup, and Kitsap County have massive military populations (figure around 80-90% male for the military subpopulation). There's a tendency for the junior enlisted men to marry the local girls right out of high school, then they move away with their young wives on their next assignment. (These women often divorce their husbands when they find a place they like better than their hometown). ...And around 50% of the women left behind aren't worth dating.
Give every programmer a secretary?
Yeah, until she decides she wants that eat pray love lifestyle at your expense.. Then you'll be in the divorced and destitute husband rat race.
This is symptomatic of the gender inequality of their hires and hiring for this sector in general. Instead of "blaming" Amazon, we should insist that all tech companies (including Amazon) support more education amongst the underrepresented genders, races, etc.
It's in their best long-term interests, anyway, since working for Amazon (for example) is now less attractive because it's now... less attractive literally. At some point the increase collective pay they'd have to offer will be greater than the amount they could use to fund these sorts of initiatives.
.
(*) Said author of the original debunked article also has the same user name as the submitter here - such a coincidence! I also note his last Slashdot submission was the also-debunked "OMG! Skydiver catches meteor falling on camera!" thing that was proven false a few days later. The Force is not strong with this one, fellow Jedi...
Seattle proper is actually relatively small, and surrounded by dozens of smaller cities and towns. I would wager that the overall metro area has close to a 1:1 ratio, but that young, single men tend to move into the city to be close to work, especially before starting a family. Housing in the city is expensive, but more livable for someone in a 1-bedroom or studio apartment. Once you need more space than that, the suburbs are much more appealing.
William George
If this is not debunked, then it's not a new issue for Seattle.
The Mercer Girls were an 1860s project of Asa Shinn Mercer, an American who lived in Seattle, who decided to "import" women to the Pacific Northwest to balance the gender ratio.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
Which inspired the TV series:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...
The bluest skies you've ever seen are in Seattle
And the hills are green as green in Seattle
Am I the only one that remembers that 70's western comedy show?
I suspect this isn't so bad for American men as the OP lets on. Consider the effect of H1Bs on these numbers... I live in Seattle; all the large tech companies here (and even a lot of the smaller ones) hire a disproportionate number of H1B holders, most from India. Most Indians aren't after American women, they either come here with a wife already, or their family back in India arranges a marriage, they fly home for a few weeks and come back married.
I know plenty of single girls, and I've never had a problem finding a date. It does require leaving work at work and going out to places where other single people congregate, and it helps to not be a total jackass, but I don't think we're really anywhere near as unbalanced as this would lead one to believe.
I think you missed the point -- the ratio is projected to get around 30% worse in the near future. Same number of women, 30% more jackasses.
When the contacted me about a job in Seattle after I checked the box on their application that said I would not relocate I ignored the email. I got another one from the same recruiter a week later that was acting as though I were the rude one and that she had done me a favor by showing interest in hiring me for a totally undefined job in a location that I had no interest in moving to.
I have no idea why anybody works for them... they sure don't make the company seem appealing.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
> If this bothers you: stop telling little girls that they're pretty, and instead tell them that they're smart. Don't ask them their favorite princess, ask them what they want to be when they grow up.
This! I asked my ex-wife's 17 year old daughter what she wanted to do for a living and they way she looked at me, it seems nobody had ever asked her that question before. She has no idea. My daughter, who is now one week old, will be able toanswer that question by the time she's five (and change her mind six times after that).
I gave up.
Look, masturbation's more efficient anyway.
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
Like, say, men who make random generalizations about women?
for obvious reasons
Difficult yes, but it would be a solution to issues like this.
It is 2014. It is not 1974. The whole tabula rasa myth is a proven lie. The whole "politically correct protected class is a social construct and is oppressed due to evil white men" is a lie. We have vast genetic studies across the world that disprove all of this.
Women are not interested in technology, period. As with any natural law, there are exceptions. In this case, they are very few. The reason is simple: the intelligence and creative drive that lends itself to technology and art evolved in humans as male display of genetic fitness. Just as the peacock has feathers, and songbirds sing their songs, it is our raw intelligence that is the best predictor of deleterious genetic load. Yes, the evil geneticists can predict the deleterious genetic load of animals based upon their mating displays. Human females, like virtually all female animals, have evolved to judge genetic fitness based upon whatever is the characteristic of a particular species or subspecies. Technology is such a display that simply does not interest the vast majority of females.
This is old news now. The first book to delve into it, before the human genome was decoded, came out in 2001. Behavioral genetics and evolutionary pscyhology have become such important fields, the former editor of the Science section of the New York Times just released a whole book on the subject last week.
Strangely, slashdot type geeks appear to be the least amenable to evolutionary theory. Sure, they like Dawkins. They think people who believe in God are stupid. They believe apes evolved into humans, but THEN. evolution stopped. And, all people became equal. Especially nerdy white guys with aspergers.
In my experience, this is due to the very naive hope that belief in this strange geek religion of human equality will get said geeks laid. It doesn't. It never has. It never will.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
...and change her mind six times after that).
Well, you know what they say about a woman's perrogative. Wait. Stop throwing things at me. Ow. Ow. Ow.
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
...for smart business-orientated women to start-up the world's oldest profession in the Seattle area.
oh...Tinder's already covering that base.
never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
Sorry to crush your dreams but prostitution is not dating.
So it pushed ugly, unhealthy, and otherwise undesirable males out of the gene pool. Good! Have you seen what happens to the genetic disadvantages and diseases and average IQ in small, isolated communities? It's the same thing when it's 1:1. Imbalance in either direction ensures that adaptation and fitness improvements occur.
When I was going to Georgia Tech, I would have given anything for a 1.3:1 ratio.
Balancing workforces is an interesting problem. I would also like to see more balancing but in a different
area. It would be nice if you could balance jobs so that they are 50% desk and 50% physical instead of
a majority of jobs being either 100% sitting on your butt or 100% physically exhausting.
If you created jobs with varying attributes and varying responsibilities then it might also help issues like
gender issues as alot of gender biases in occupation come down to gender differences. Women are
more likely to chose a job where they interact and help people and are less likely to chose a job where
they stare at a screen all day with minimal interaction with other people.
I lived in Seattle, had no problem dating women and even found one silly enough to marry me. Don't worry about it, if you're not a tool, you'll be fine.
.
Dang, ladies..
Time to put on those knee-pads .. there is a line of men for each of you every day.
I know you are women enough to shine!
Considering that the number of H1Bs is limited to 0.0002% of the population, they might make a good scapegoat, but tthey make essentially zero impact on anything.
It may be .0002% of the total US population, but it's not a uniform distribution across all states, cities, and companies.
Its irrelevant, at least 30 of those men will be tech works and we all know that us nerds don't have girlfriends so that leaves 100 guys for a 100 women...
>Men should have jobs avoiding people.
I think you're projecting your social phobia onto other men. Many of us are fine dealing with people.
Why the fuck should a 17 year old be able to answer that?
When I was 17 I couldn't answer that question. I certainly couldn't have answered that I wanted to go and do a PhD in computer engineering, or that I wanted to move to Colorado.
In fact, when I was 22 I still couldn't have told you that.
I think you missed the point -- the ratio is projected to get around 30% worse in the near future. Same number of women, 30% more jackasses.
Actually, it's you who missed the point:
"By the end of 2014, Reifman projects, there will be 130 single men in Seattle for every 100 single women — up from a ratio of 119 single men to 100 single women in April 2010."
So, it's not "Same number of women, 30% more jackasses," it's "Same number of women, 9% more jackasses."
a lot of women = a number of human females greater than an arbitrary number larger than 2, depending on context
a lot of Woman = one human female with a big personality or big physical measurements of one sort or another, or both.
More music, fewer hits
In other words: The odds are good that goods are odd...
By the end of 2014, Seattle will have 130 single men for every 100 single women.
Worst. Orgy. Ever.
Of all time.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
This is even worse than the situation in China where it's reported there are 122:100 men to women.
http://www.globalpost.com/disp...
Have a Day!
A company called Amazon has a mostly male work force.
The *should* in that original sentence is a bit excessive, but it's true that many men are fine working by themselves, while women tend to like working with other people -- have you ever noticed that female-dominated jobs tend to be jobs interacting with other people (e.g. nurse, teacher) and get people-related degrees (e.g. communications, psychology, sociology, education, ...)?
Over analyzing the idea.
There are 40 year olds who live in their parent's basements and have no idea what they will do.
There are 40 year olds who are very successful, who still don't know what they want to do.
Very few people know precisely what they want to do.
But by the time they are juniors in high school, they should have some set of skills that can help them move forward as opposed to "being a princess". That is a very limited position, with few available openings, and an excessive amount of competition.
Funny you should say that, as the rate of female computer science graduates was apparently higher back then.
Whatever biology says, we see that the gender ratio varies greatly with time and place. Our biology hasn't changed much since the 70s, so we can at the very least get the gender ratio back to what it was then. Probably, our biology is flexible enough to support pretty much any gender ratio.
This means we can probably change things, if we really go for it. The question is should we? The issue is that a society can score high on gender egalitarianism, and high on opportunities for everyone, and yet that seems only to make people make more traditional choices when it comes to education. What does that mean?
I haven't got an answer. But this is a "should" question - so no naturalistic fallacy, please.
xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
not against women...the stereotypes about how "tech" work has to be autism-inducing, basement dewelling, spaghetti coding, geek competition
1. Culturally: Tech jobs, even coding, involves directly working with the people in your workplace. Even if you telecommute you still do tons of human interaction...furthermore, all tech is ultimately for the *human user*
2. Geeky Culture: "geek culture" has never been more popular among women, especially smart younger women who would be the logical next cadre of tech new hires. The problem is stereotypes and systemic dead weight...not 'geek culture' or women's access to it...also: more women gamers now than ever
3. Catch 22: Men who tend to make assumptions will tend to assume the wrong causes for women's behavior...especially men in tech who don't usually work with women
4. Peer pressure: Everything in our media tells women that if they want to get married they have to **look like a pornstar** and be permiscous but not "slutty" and find the right man before they turn 30...when a woman says she thinks she can have a career, party, look good AND have a family their friends will try to dissuade them.
get a clue...everyone...all techies....everywhere....talk to women about this...not just the opinionated ones...ask them how they feel and you'll seem I'm right
tech alienates women...it's a dorky version of a Country Club mentality
Thank you Dave Raggett
At least a 15% imbalance for 30 and younger after better family planning technology came along. I've heard of unrest in some of China's factories by bored young men. I dont know about India.
Sounds like a recruiting firm was hired for these and not internal HR. Recruiting firms are more interested in filling body counts and getting people to interview, and finally placed within the company.
Dunno... I'll like Seattle more when they get an NHL team.
Unless they're all working for the same few companies... I worked at Microsoft for several years, and my group was easily 50% H1B workers, and probably closer to 60-70% in reality. So, when we're talking about local statistics and the local effect of companies hiring, we need to look at the local H1B population for relevance. H1Bs might make up a tiny percentage of the national population, but at the local level it's a very significant percentage, especially in Bellevue/Redmond/Kirkland and parts of Seattle.
Suppose one area had 1000X as many H1B as average. That area would have 0.2% H1B.
83% of people think they are smarter than average.
Which means that nearly half of the people who THINK they are smart are actually dumb. All of those people search for some expanation of why they didn't get hired. They are certainly smart enough, they think.
And if half of that 9% are H1Bs, it's really "9% more jackasses, of which 4.5% are potentially serious competition."
And if half of that 9% are H1Bs, it's really "9% more jackasses, of which 4.5% are potentially serious competition."
Let's assume that those 4.5% aren't all single.
The headline then becomes "Women have to deal with a 3% increase in jackasses in the Seattle singles scene."
Sounds about right.
...produce a musical comedy.
Oh the Irony of someone who claims to have strong social skills missing an obvious sociological/cultural argument, not a personal argument.
Are they Amazon Prime eligible?
I have to agree. When I was there, it was easily 40% H1B workers in my department. Walking around the halls and cafes, I could see even more. I never actually sat down and counted anyone, but I would say that 40-50% of the people were H1Bs, easy.
Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. But light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
In 1974 the percentage of computer science graduates who were female was about 16.5%; slightly lower than today
With enough force we could make the gender ratio almost anything we want; we could simply set hard limits for men, for instance; we could ban men from the field entirely. That doesn't mean biology isn't involved.
It's not an example of the naturalistic fallacy to argue that the gender ratios are the way they are because of human nature. It's also not the naturalistic fallacy to argue that if people are free to choose, they will choose according to their nature and so it is OK for the ratios to be what they are; the value here is freedom of choice, not adherence to nature.
It might be a little excessive for people in general, but not for children.
Poor baristas. Think of how desperately these guys are going to be flirting with the gal whipping up their grande latte.
> couldn't have answered that I wanted to go and do a PhD in computer engineering, or that I wanted to move to Colorado.
> In fact, when I was 22 I still couldn't have told you that.
I bet that at 17 you knew you wanted to go to college and study computers. That's what you wanted to do when you were 17 or so. Maybe later you decided exactly how MUCH college - a PhD. I doubt that at 17 you had no idea what direction you wanted to head. I say that because seventeen year olds with no plan whatsoever are more likely to end up with convictions than with PhDs.
It's likely that it does... by datable I mean "interested in an actual relationship (not just sex), low drama, low maintenance, mature and smart enough to hold an intelligent conversation and not just prattle on about what so-and-so said on facebook." Those type of girls can be found anywhere... usually behind the counter at the local Starbucks, or working at the grocery store, or wherever. It takes time to get to know them, and you have to show that you actually care about them and are somehow different from the other 200 guys trying to get their attention - usually that involves talking to them and not just telling them they're hot.
Cross Cultural Sex Differences put men as more introverted. The sex differences are larger in more egalitarian societies. Probably because men and women are freer to do what they like.
Perhaps do a split second of research before jumping to conclusions? Your subtle shaming of the introverted is equally as retarding as the phobia you're projecting.
Sounds like a bit of a sausage fest. Like (say), mining towns, where no self-respecting woman would live, bar fights start at a drop of a hat, and hookers come in on a fly-in-fly-out basis... And where most entertainment is paid-for.
Actually, I've been to Seattle, and it's not that bad at all, and quite a nice part of the world (apart from the weather). But still, you have to broaden your horizons if you want to find a mate...
Those ratios are terrible. No wonder I had to snatch up someone soon after they moved in from out of town. If we have sons, they're sure be getting the stick and twist living here.
Here is a study looking at the reasons that women don't go into tech jobs, even after studying in technical subjects: http://studyofwork.com/files/2...
There are a variety of reasons, but the ones you point to are not major ones. Well, maybe the lack of women in tech jobs, but only indirectly. It's mostly a mix of the same reasons men hack (including lack of interest), but quite a lot cite problems with sexism and an unfriendly working environment.
Also, citing "peer pressure" is rather patronising, don't you think?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It has nothing to do with a "strange geek religion of human equality". What it has to do with is that most evolutionary psychology is non-falsifiable. You can't use it to make predictions. Here's an example:
Observation: Women go for geek guys.
Reason: Humans evolved intelligence, because intelligence confers many advantages, so displays of intelligence attract mates.
Observation: Women don't go for geek guys.
Reason: Geek guys tend to work out less, because they're so obsessed with technology, and physical fitness is a good predictor of health, which is a good predictor of good genes, so women tend to prefer people who work out more. Also, intelligence has only recently become important to human success, so women haven't had enough time to evolve attraction based on intelligence.
Do you get it? Evolutionary psychology "sounds nice", but it's so soft that it very often (perhaps not always, but very often) falls on the "bullshit" side of the science/bullshit line. Many smart people on Slashdot can see that, so we don't buy into it.
It's not all bullshit. I remember reading one study in AP Psychology in high school where they actually did a bona fide scientific experiment related to evolutionary psychology, using it to make a hypothesis that they didn't know the truth of, and then testing it. I don't remember at all what it was, unfortunately, but I remember being impressed.
One other aspect that turns us off about evolutionary psychology is that a lot of (typically amateur ) proponents of it seem to promote the naturalistic fallacy: even if you're a dick because evolution made you that way, it doesn't mean you're not a dick.
Also, fuck beta.
vi ~/.emacs # I'm probably going to Hell for this.
And tired of how their politicians waste money on mega-projects, the city's citizens just voted down a tax increase that would have kept the number of bus routes from being slashed.
It wasn't Seattle. The thing was King County Prop 1, and Seattle voted for it by a wide margin, they just couldn't get the rest of us out in the hinterlands to sign on. So the mayor is whipping up an exact repeat, but its only city-wide. Folks there wanna pay more for their tabs, more power to 'em. Ain't democracy grand?
Sure, and conversely, saying men and women 'should' behave a certain way 'because' biology might be a naturalistic fallacy, if it contained no other premise.
Not to mention that the poster ranting about 'tabula rasa' doesn't seem to grasp that he's cherry picking and making a straw man, and the argument is far from over. Wake me up in a few hundred years when we have a sizable amount of human brains fully mapped and modeled from both genders. At the present all we have is some very interesting correlations, and outside of the brain we can't even agree on how sex hormones affect human behavior, let alone how biology fully interacts with socialization. We're in uncharted territory all around, and egalitarian behavior on this widespread a scale is a very, very NEW thing. Give that a couple hundred years as well and see what happens.
"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." George Bernard Shaw
If you have a gender-balanced population, and you add an extra 5% that is 75% M, your M/F ratio changes to 102.5/100. The real-life impact of Amazon expanding is almost necessarily lower than that. If you go to TFA and then click through to the original blog post, you can see that the 130/100 estimate is largely based on other factors, but the author goes out of his way to blame Amazon, who according to my estimate is only a minor contributing factor to an existing trend. And of course, he has a wildly inaccurate clickbait title on top of his piece, happily copied by GeekWire and Slashdot. I'm more and more starting to feel that if bloggers want to enjoy the same legal protection a journalists, they should be required to have some journalistic standards in return. Call it a favor to society in turn for a favor from society. And the same goes for actual journalists. Once upon a time, they were the protectors of democracy, while all that remains now is a privileged class that works for the public image of the higest bidder and has limited accountability.
But hey, whatever you think.
Oh, and stop bugging my roommate when she says no, cause she really doesn't care if you're rich or not, and that was a really really weird date she was on with you.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Seattle voted for Prop 1.
It's the whiny suburbs that didn't.
Oh, and that is not a great attitude to take into dates. My roommate tells me about these deathly dates she goes on where the guy is boring the heck out of her, and talking about stuff like this ranks way up there on the boring scale.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
You should have gotten rid of your wife's high heels. The simple explanation is that your daughter is taking after your wife. Now if your wife dresses like a coal miner, and your daughter still fancies Barbie, only then can we safely assume that "girly" things are indeed baked into some girls' DNA.
When I was in college, the dorm I lived in (co-ed by floor) has a 8 to 1 female to male ratio. I used to say that some asswipe dude had 16 of them.
I hope my math is correct. :)
Have gnu, will travel.
It is harder then it seems.
There are a lot of Woman who just don't want to go into technology.
For many reasons.
1. Culturally: Woman should have jobs working directly with people, Men should have jobs avoiding people.
2. Geeky Culture: A lot of it is very male centrist, the idea of going to technology means you will need to interact with a culture many do not find appealing.
3. Catch 22: Woman do not want to go into technology because their isn't enough women in technology.
4. Peer pressure: If a woman shows an interest going to technology, their friends will try to dissuade them.
Like, say, men who make random generalizations about women?
Reason 5.
Sexism: +3 insightful
Calling out said sexism: -1 Off Topic.
Why the fuck should a 17 year old be able to answer that?
Goals. It may not be the same thing they want to do when they are 22 or 30. But they are thinking about something and working toward it.
Dating hint for all you high school guys: Ask a girl what she would study in college and do as a profession. If she doesn't have an immediate answer, run like hell.
Have gnu, will travel.
thanks for the heads up.
Amazon have spammed me 3 times on linked in about hiring events in Melbourne. I went once but didn't get past the hiring process.
Bullshit. H1B's are a tiny fraction of the workforce even in Seattle. I think many people confuse immigrants and people with foreign appearances as H1B workers.
..any place I worked since 1980
Engineering offices are very close to 100% male
No, I don't quite get the relevance, either.
1970's TV series, "Here Come the Brides" about Seattle. Isn't it time for a reboot?
Cranky educator.
I guess she can't leave me without a new sponsor.
I didn't say IQ, but if you want to use IQ as a numerical measure of "smart", IQ is DEFINED based on the median. Each standard deviation from the median is defined as 15 IQ points. So I'm not ASSUMING, that's true by definition.
We just discovered one person who is in the 40%.
All so some introverted geeks don't have to go out in public to meet and interact with women?
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
I'm intrigued that the feminists aren't demanding that Amazon employ more women to do a low paid physically demanding and boring job.
Guess they don't want equality after all.
You know, with this little jab you probably hit the nail on the head (that must hurt, btw). One thing is the intrinsic properties of a given trade, and how they play with sex-dependent preferences, and another is the group culture that builds up within a trade. That very much depends on history, and... the gender ratio of that field, to begin with.
Gravitation is a theory, not a fact.
Clearly, remote workers back in the flyover states have a surplus of girls.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Let me ask you a really simple question: Why is it that when anyone else intends to join a new group they are expected to assimilate to that group's culture UNLESS they are a woman? Why do we expect men to alter their behavioral norms and culture to whatever women deem acceptable rather than the other way around? Why are women so infantilized and robbed of personal agency that they're not expected to be actors at all, but merely static pawns for everything else to rotate around?
In short, why do we blame men when women don't enter engineering, but completely ignore the fact that women staggeringly outweigh men in terms of overall college graduates? Why do we blame men for women being a small percentage of engineers, but not blame women for men being as little as less than 1/3rd of college graduates in the first place?
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
"them is" here's one guy who didn't get the job "because H1B stole it from him".
quiet racist
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Let me ask you a really simple question: Why is it that when anyone else intends to join a new group they are expected to assimilate to that group's culture UNLESS they are a woman?
That isn't the case anywhere I have ever been. Can you point to specific examples that are backed up by law, or are you saying that a few anecdotes about bad people is evidence of a systemic problem?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I have no idea why anybody works for them... they sure don't make the company seem appealing.
It's pretty much a stepping stone. People who have worked there tell me that the average length of employment is around 18 months before you'll leave for someplace better or be booted out in the toxic review process. Still, it's a job and you know you won't be there forever and will get experience out of it.
What's the implication here? That all that's going to be left in S Fran is gay males? And most of Seattle's are too? Well.. Seattle *is* darn close to Vancouver and Davie Street...
When I found myself in the pool about ten years ago, it was tough. Google "Seattle freeze". I don't know if it's Scandanavian reticence or what, but time and again I saw deliberate walls built by women. Online was the only way to get traction, and even then only with eHarmony, whose fees and entry questionnaire seem to weed out the window-shoppers. If one is 6'0" things open up a bit, or if one works for MSFT, which is a closed ecosystem.
The solution is to genetically engineer and breed a new type of women that are attracted to geeks and ('god-damn-it') even nerds.... ....We could even make them pretty too., and intelligent enough so that we don't want to strangle them after the first week. :D
(Or in my case men too,....)
Haven't got time to work on it now, still working on getting that pig flying....
Below the speed of light Special Relativity is one of the most accurate theories in physics - above the speed of light..
I seriously believe my point has been missed.
Even if you work your ass off, it's not going to bring back your blue collar job from overseas.
Even in a technical field, working your ass off is not automatically rewarded, unless you *ask* for more rewards, and even then, with a verbal agreement in place, you can end up not getting the promised rewards.
You have exactly the same "risk" of children believing the world works, automatically, to reward hard work, as you do having them believe the world works, automatically, to reward intelligence. There is absolutely *nothing* automatic about it.
Similar phenomena occur in smaller cities (like Troy, NY) that host big engineering universities and companies and at the same time are not geographically close to bigger/more balanced cities. I've lived in such a city in Germany for several years (200.000 people and two HUGE engineering universities). The problem is less than in ages 20-35 men significantly outnumber women, but rather that virtually all men come from a similar background, have above average intelligence, are well educated, good in math and analytical thinking etc. The result is -especially if we are talking about a 'top tier' university- that a single guy's competition in such a place are freaken bodybuilders with PhDs in electrical engineering who also play 2 musical instruments. And these guys are everywhere. So you can only imagine what kind of entitlement women in such places develop...
Du kan glomma dina ensama stunder, du kan lita paa teknikens under - Wilmer X