In my experience the kind ageism people talk about these days is mostly to do with people in their 50s and 60s, in the eyes of management at least, just not being worth the extra cost compared to younger workers. Saying that companies are getting rid of or refusing to hire people in those ages in favor of people straight out of college is a typical straw man anti-ageism advocates like to trumpet when in reality in their 30s and 40s are still pretty heavily in demand.
You can see this demonstrated pretty well in how a lot of big companies like IBM have over the last few years ended up laying off a lot of older workers, only to immediately re-hire them as contractors to do the same job, except with lower pay and worse benefits. This clearly shows that they definitely want to retain their skills and knowledge, but not at the cost of their preexisting contract. It's also been well known for decades that learning new things gets harder and harder the older you get and this kicks in really heavily once people reach their 50s, which doesn't exactly bode well for older workers in a field where tools and techniques change as fast as they do in tech.
In other words it's not really about ageism, but instead the fact that people in their 50s and 60s have priced themselves out of the field and the well known effects of aging not really being a good fit for a field that changes as fast as tech.
... and that's really the problem. There's been politicians willing to put a stop to the out of control corporate welfare since at least the 1960s, but both parties have been too heavily in the pockets of corporations on welfare for this to ever go anywhere. With Republican control of both houses this is obviously not going anywhere even if Trump, who has blasted Amazon on multiple occasions, by some miracle decides he likes this bill and promotes it.
This bill will obviously die in committee and if by some miracle comes up for a vote it will get have both the republican and democrat establishments opposing it.
My understanding is that it's less about being forgiven and more about being able to get out from under these loans the same way you can get out from other kinds of loads trough bankruptcy.
However you are right in that these are bad loans and should have gone trough way more screening as to if the recipient can pay off the loans. My personal gut feeling is that the clear majority of these bad loans are for people getting degrees in fields with pretty terrible job prospects and they were just auto approving every single loan application regardless if the sum or the chance of failure to repay was so bad that the loan should have been refused. However the sums getting out of hand is probably just worsening the situation rather than being the root problem.
I'm personally from a country where university tuition is free and I still went for a degree in something with actual job prospects even thou the cost of a useless degree wouldn't have been much more than a few wasted years.
Not really... IBM's local subsidiary was nationalized and thus taken out of their control years before the concentration camps opened so IBM couldn't have helped the nazis with the holocaust even if they wanted to.
If Islamic terrorism has taught us anything in the last few decades, it's that people with the will to kill innocents will use the most effective means available to them, be it chemical weapons (ISIS for example has used rudimentary chemical weapons), bombs, guns, cars/trucks or knives. If they can't get access to something they want, they'll just move down the ladder until they get to something they do have access to and carry out their acts of violence with it.
In other words, for any particular type of rampage the pool of potential perpetrators is only as big as the overlap between those with the will and those with the ability to go trough with it. Reduce the size of the pool of people with access to the tool/tools needed for a particular type of rampage and that will obviously decrease the overlap of people with both the means and will to go trough with it to an equal or greater extent.
As for how to actually try to control 3D printed guns, my personal hunch is to go trough the 3D printers themselves and the consumables necessary for making guns with them. A total ban will obviously be too drastic, but if I had to look for inspiration somewhere I'd look at how the equipment and precursor chemicals used to make chemical weapons and particularly hard drugs are regulated. Sure, that's never going to be completely perfect, but nothing ever is.
If you want to dig unnecessarily deep beyond the nice uniform APIs meant for user end applications like Dropbox is doing you can get all kinds of distro differences, but that's pretty much what happens when you do the same thing on pretty much every other OS. Configurations and versions mess it up so you have to do a lot of testing and taking account for the differences between all the factors that can affect you.
I thought Slashdot of all places would be free of the old Microsoft FUD from the 90s about how supposedly fragmented Linux is and how Linux users don't want to pay for software because Linux itself is (usually) free... The reality is that from an application developer's perspective Linux is about as fragmented as Linux and OSX if you can use some pretty basic principles and Linux users do pay for software if good paid software is available. It's also kind of ridiculous for SystemD to be brought up here when application developers don't need to work with it and it's pretty much universally used at this point.
Well the knowledge on how to make chemical, biological and nuclear weapons is restricted, but still available if you have enough time and energy to figure it out. How often do we see people go on rampages with those things compared to guns?
The point here is that restrictions on the knowledge as how to make certain dangerous things is there to set up barriers most people with the will to actually misuse said things can't or won't get over. Today, barring loopholes with practically finished components, you're going to need a skilled machinist to manufacture the complex components required to build a gun more usable than a simple zip gun. What this means is that unregistered and very hard to trace home-made AR15s and other highly dangerous firearms are not really an issue.
While the 3D printed guns of today are pretty much just fancy zip guns, that's obviously not going to be the case in the future as 3D printing using metal becomes cheaper and more commonplace. 3D-printing the critical (and thus controlled) components of an AR15 using the printers we'll have 10 years (or less) down the line will still require some skill, but it's going to be way less than the skill required to be able to manufacture the same components the old fashion way.
If you actually look at the history between AMD and GF, GF being AMD's manufacturing division spun off as it's own company, this is pretty huge for AMD. GF absolutely was going to be their primary supplier of 7nm wafers the same way they're AMD's primary supplier of 12/14nm wafers. Particularly TSMC, who would have been GF's primary competitor in 7nm, simply won't have the capacity AMD needs to spare when Apple, Nvidia, Qualcomm and a whole lot of other companies will all be fighting for their capacity.
The issue isn't made any better by the fact that the new 7nm processes coming along will be utilizing lithography processes with additional patterns and longer times to etch each of the patterns into the substrate. In other words the output of each production line will be considerably lower than current processes.
Seriously, if AMD wasn't already in talks with Samsung for 7nm production, their 7nm rollout is going to be very seriously hampered by low manufacturing capacity and will probably affect their bottom line along with both market and mindshare as a thinly veiled paper launch like the initial launch of consumer Vega isn't exactly good for customer relations.
If you're still paying above MSRP you're obviously not looking very hard. I upgraded my GPU to a 1070 Ti at the start of the year when the bubble was still going, but by paying attention I was still able to get mine at MSRP.
I'm not so sure this has put more money into the pockets of AMD or Nvidia, instead just about about all of the money seems to have gone into the pockets of AIB board partners, wholesalers and consumer facing retailers. Companies who make highly complex computer hardware like GPUs tend to not make much more than exactly what they think they can sell due to months long lead times and the cost of over-producing. The high end semiconductor industry has absolutely gone in for so-called lean manufacturing in the last few years.
Judging by how bad the drought was between June last year and March this year it's pretty clear that neither AMD nor Nvidia increased their production by all that much. This goes particularly for AMD considering this summer only Nvidia found themselves delaying a product launch due to unsold inventory.
Ever heard the story about the boy who cried wolf? Because the over-use of the term, along with other terms like "alt right" and "white supremacist", on people who they really don't apply to has lead to them simply losing their effect and they're now well on their way to becoming meaningless. We're basically heading towards a situation not too dissimilar from Venezuela where "far right" has pretty much lost all meaning after Maduro & Co have turned it into a catch-all for the opposition.
To put it in another way: If you keep repeatedly calling people nazis for the flimsiest of reasons you really shouldn't be surprised when people start rolling their eyes and not taking you seriously when you do it again.
I'm from northern Europe and while the U.S as a whole definitely leans much more to the right than Europe, the state of California however leans far more to the left than the country as a whole. The closest equivalent I can think of is Scandinavia and that part of the world skews pretty heavily to the left even by European standards. Another example of a state with a distinctly different skew from the country as a whole is Texas, which skews similarly except to the right rather than left.
So in other words California skewing to the center-right is absolute hogwash. Sure, if you limit yourself to rural areas you can see some center-right skewing, but as a whole California doesn't skew center-right even by European standards.
The fact that one or two antifa twitter accounts have turned out to be part of Russia's campaign to inflame civil unrest in the U.S really doesn't change the fact that real world violence have been part of antifa's modus operandi since they started in late 1980s West Germany...
Their infamous "black block" tactics were created very specifically to make it very difficult, if not impossible, to prosecute people using violence at their events and ones they crash. We're talking about a movement that doesn't just call for violence and praise it, they're the actual perpetrators of political violence and will go out of their way to protect their violent members from being prosecuted when they commit assault and property destruction.
As hard as it may be for people like yourself to admit it, the "antifa" movement is pretty much the closest thing to the nazi brown shirts since the actual nazi brown shirts!
My personal story is somewhat similar, except still being in my 20s I never had the time to accumulate the enormous amount of physical media my parents' generation have and thank my lucky stars I'll avoid the mess my parents have created with their books, CDs, vinyl records and DVDs. Closest I got to your book situation were with my games, but even those don't take up much more than a single shelf row and the main reason why I haven't sold them is that they're on platforms where emulation is far from perfect.
Don't get me wrong, moving house is still a pain in the you-know-what as I've had to experience having moved house 3 times in the last roughly 2 years (moving to another city and then moving out of the way of a major renovation). However all of my physical media fits into 4 cardboard boxes and takes about 10 minutes to pack while just my dad's physical media would probably take a day to pack and fill a whole moving van.
You really shouldn't just look at income differences on their own, the baseline low income level is just as important, if not more important. Loads of really badly working systems trough history have had low income inequality, but the poor in those systems have still been way worse off than the poor in even the worst (western) offenders on income inequality.
Over here in western Europe the left has moved on from talking about poverty among the poor as social welfare systems do take pretty good care of the most vulnerable in our society to talking about income inequality. In other words it's not about the poor being too poor, it's about the rich being too rich.
As I've already told you, when a plan is literally worse than doing nothing, it's obviously best to do nothing even if doing so feels completely counter-intuitive.
Considering welfare fraud tends to involve relatively small sums (less than $10.000) it rarely leads to big court cases and is usually resolved either by just cutting off the welfare or the recipient agreeing to pay back the benefits they got without being entitled to them, I wouldn't be surprised if that figure is pretty accurate.
After all, the goal of detecting welfare fraud is not to put people behind bars, it's to ensure funds available for welfare payments go to those that actually need it. The only thing achieved by putting people behind bars for welfare fraud is reduce the funds available for welfare payments to those that actually need them.
The basic idea is to welfare systems are supposed to provide baseline living standard for those unable or incapable of being able to work. Particularly in high unemployment areas welfare is a genuine lifeline for the whole community, even those that do have jobs as most of them would be out of a job if nobody had any money to spend on things like basic goods and services.
However you do get a lot of liberals these days who take welfare for granted and not something meant to help people while they're looking for a job or if they can't work because of disabilities. These are the people a lot of conservatives use as straw men to describe liberals in general when it comes to their attitude towards welfare. However even among liberals you get plenty of people who support measures against welfare fraud as that money is intended for people who want to work, but for various (valid) reasons can't do so.
As I said, further adding to the problem is simply not a solution. In reality when you try to fight fire with fire like this it only makes things worse for everyone.
When the board is already a club of people related to or friends with each other and backstabbing assholes you can be damn sure the lady seat is going to be filled by someone who's related to or friends with the rest or a backstabbing asshole. Even in the unlikely scenario a qualified person's seat is used and they try to find a qualified woman to fill that seat this is California and will obviously hit mostly tech companies, meaning that it's still a seat where around 85% of qualified applicants are not eligible.
Even in the unlikely best case scenario where the woman chosen from that 15% subset of the people qualified for the job is the most qualified person there's still the understandable and potentially intense resentment they're going to be subject to. Thus, even in the very unlikely best case scenario you're still going to be putting women into uncomfortable positions where they're going to be resented for completely understandable reasons.
Shooting yourself in the foot is still shooting yourself in the foot even when you haven't come up with a better way to pass the time.
If you have any better ideas then do tell, but this is literally worse than doing nothing. So in a way I have actually proposed a superior solution, it's just doing nothing.
To continue looking for an actual solution? Despite how counter-intuitive it may feel to just sit around and brainstorm, it's more helpful than going out and actively contributing to the problem.
Sure, there are other init systems, but none of them are as well supported as init or SystemD. As for distros without SystemD, they're more of a developer demonstration rather than anything maintained as a proper distro meant for production use.
So your solution to un-deserved board appointments trough nepotism, underhanded corporate infighting, etc. is to make it even harder for the most qualified people to get on corporate boards? Because this sure as hell isn't going to help with any of those issues as the lady seat will obviously be coming out of those assigned based on merit. All it does is create a situation which is essentially gender-nepotism rather than actually making things more equal for competent and dedicated women.
But hey, why fix actually fix something when it's easier to just pretend you're fixing it while only making the underlying issue worse? Because giving the impression you're helping seems to be more important to today's feminists than actually fixing real problems. You can see it pretty well in how feminists actually defend those using false accusations of rape and sexual harassment to further their own goals by arguing that their actions were justified as they were "starting a conversation" or something.
Slashdot Mirror
In my experience the kind ageism people talk about these days is mostly to do with people in their 50s and 60s, in the eyes of management at least, just not being worth the extra cost compared to younger workers. Saying that companies are getting rid of or refusing to hire people in those ages in favor of people straight out of college is a typical straw man anti-ageism advocates like to trumpet when in reality in their 30s and 40s are still pretty heavily in demand.
You can see this demonstrated pretty well in how a lot of big companies like IBM have over the last few years ended up laying off a lot of older workers, only to immediately re-hire them as contractors to do the same job, except with lower pay and worse benefits. This clearly shows that they definitely want to retain their skills and knowledge, but not at the cost of their preexisting contract. It's also been well known for decades that learning new things gets harder and harder the older you get and this kicks in really heavily once people reach their 50s, which doesn't exactly bode well for older workers in a field where tools and techniques change as fast as they do in tech.
In other words it's not really about ageism, but instead the fact that people in their 50s and 60s have priced themselves out of the field and the well known effects of aging not really being a good fit for a field that changes as fast as tech.
That is, if either ever make it into law.....
... and that's really the problem. There's been politicians willing to put a stop to the out of control corporate welfare since at least the 1960s, but both parties have been too heavily in the pockets of corporations on welfare for this to ever go anywhere. With Republican control of both houses this is obviously not going anywhere even if Trump, who has blasted Amazon on multiple occasions, by some miracle decides he likes this bill and promotes it.
This bill will obviously die in committee and if by some miracle comes up for a vote it will get have both the republican and democrat establishments opposing it.
My understanding is that it's less about being forgiven and more about being able to get out from under these loans the same way you can get out from other kinds of loads trough bankruptcy.
However you are right in that these are bad loans and should have gone trough way more screening as to if the recipient can pay off the loans. My personal gut feeling is that the clear majority of these bad loans are for people getting degrees in fields with pretty terrible job prospects and they were just auto approving every single loan application regardless if the sum or the chance of failure to repay was so bad that the loan should have been refused. However the sums getting out of hand is probably just worsening the situation rather than being the root problem.
I'm personally from a country where university tuition is free and I still went for a degree in something with actual job prospects even thou the cost of a useless degree wouldn't have been much more than a few wasted years.
Not really... IBM's local subsidiary was nationalized and thus taken out of their control years before the concentration camps opened so IBM couldn't have helped the nazis with the holocaust even if they wanted to.
If Islamic terrorism has taught us anything in the last few decades, it's that people with the will to kill innocents will use the most effective means available to them, be it chemical weapons (ISIS for example has used rudimentary chemical weapons), bombs, guns, cars/trucks or knives. If they can't get access to something they want, they'll just move down the ladder until they get to something they do have access to and carry out their acts of violence with it.
In other words, for any particular type of rampage the pool of potential perpetrators is only as big as the overlap between those with the will and those with the ability to go trough with it. Reduce the size of the pool of people with access to the tool/tools needed for a particular type of rampage and that will obviously decrease the overlap of people with both the means and will to go trough with it to an equal or greater extent.
As for how to actually try to control 3D printed guns, my personal hunch is to go trough the 3D printers themselves and the consumables necessary for making guns with them. A total ban will obviously be too drastic, but if I had to look for inspiration somewhere I'd look at how the equipment and precursor chemicals used to make chemical weapons and particularly hard drugs are regulated. Sure, that's never going to be completely perfect, but nothing ever is.
If you want to dig unnecessarily deep beyond the nice uniform APIs meant for user end applications like Dropbox is doing you can get all kinds of distro differences, but that's pretty much what happens when you do the same thing on pretty much every other OS. Configurations and versions mess it up so you have to do a lot of testing and taking account for the differences between all the factors that can affect you.
I thought Slashdot of all places would be free of the old Microsoft FUD from the 90s about how supposedly fragmented Linux is and how Linux users don't want to pay for software because Linux itself is (usually) free... The reality is that from an application developer's perspective Linux is about as fragmented as Linux and OSX if you can use some pretty basic principles and Linux users do pay for software if good paid software is available. It's also kind of ridiculous for SystemD to be brought up here when application developers don't need to work with it and it's pretty much universally used at this point.
But hey, gotta bait those clicks somehow right?
Well the knowledge on how to make chemical, biological and nuclear weapons is restricted, but still available if you have enough time and energy to figure it out. How often do we see people go on rampages with those things compared to guns?
The point here is that restrictions on the knowledge as how to make certain dangerous things is there to set up barriers most people with the will to actually misuse said things can't or won't get over. Today, barring loopholes with practically finished components, you're going to need a skilled machinist to manufacture the complex components required to build a gun more usable than a simple zip gun. What this means is that unregistered and very hard to trace home-made AR15s and other highly dangerous firearms are not really an issue.
While the 3D printed guns of today are pretty much just fancy zip guns, that's obviously not going to be the case in the future as 3D printing using metal becomes cheaper and more commonplace. 3D-printing the critical (and thus controlled) components of an AR15 using the printers we'll have 10 years (or less) down the line will still require some skill, but it's going to be way less than the skill required to be able to manufacture the same components the old fashion way.
If you actually look at the history between AMD and GF, GF being AMD's manufacturing division spun off as it's own company, this is pretty huge for AMD. GF absolutely was going to be their primary supplier of 7nm wafers the same way they're AMD's primary supplier of 12/14nm wafers. Particularly TSMC, who would have been GF's primary competitor in 7nm, simply won't have the capacity AMD needs to spare when Apple, Nvidia, Qualcomm and a whole lot of other companies will all be fighting for their capacity.
The issue isn't made any better by the fact that the new 7nm processes coming along will be utilizing lithography processes with additional patterns and longer times to etch each of the patterns into the substrate. In other words the output of each production line will be considerably lower than current processes.
Seriously, if AMD wasn't already in talks with Samsung for 7nm production, their 7nm rollout is going to be very seriously hampered by low manufacturing capacity and will probably affect their bottom line along with both market and mindshare as a thinly veiled paper launch like the initial launch of consumer Vega isn't exactly good for customer relations.
If you're still paying above MSRP you're obviously not looking very hard. I upgraded my GPU to a 1070 Ti at the start of the year when the bubble was still going, but by paying attention I was still able to get mine at MSRP.
I'm not so sure this has put more money into the pockets of AMD or Nvidia, instead just about about all of the money seems to have gone into the pockets of AIB board partners, wholesalers and consumer facing retailers. Companies who make highly complex computer hardware like GPUs tend to not make much more than exactly what they think they can sell due to months long lead times and the cost of over-producing. The high end semiconductor industry has absolutely gone in for so-called lean manufacturing in the last few years.
Judging by how bad the drought was between June last year and March this year it's pretty clear that neither AMD nor Nvidia increased their production by all that much. This goes particularly for AMD considering this summer only Nvidia found themselves delaying a product launch due to unsold inventory.
Ever heard the story about the boy who cried wolf? Because the over-use of the term, along with other terms like "alt right" and "white supremacist", on people who they really don't apply to has lead to them simply losing their effect and they're now well on their way to becoming meaningless. We're basically heading towards a situation not too dissimilar from Venezuela where "far right" has pretty much lost all meaning after Maduro & Co have turned it into a catch-all for the opposition.
To put it in another way: If you keep repeatedly calling people nazis for the flimsiest of reasons you really shouldn't be surprised when people start rolling their eyes and not taking you seriously when you do it again.
I'm from northern Europe and while the U.S as a whole definitely leans much more to the right than Europe, the state of California however leans far more to the left than the country as a whole. The closest equivalent I can think of is Scandinavia and that part of the world skews pretty heavily to the left even by European standards. Another example of a state with a distinctly different skew from the country as a whole is Texas, which skews similarly except to the right rather than left.
So in other words California skewing to the center-right is absolute hogwash. Sure, if you limit yourself to rural areas you can see some center-right skewing, but as a whole California doesn't skew center-right even by European standards.
The fact that one or two antifa twitter accounts have turned out to be part of Russia's campaign to inflame civil unrest in the U.S really doesn't change the fact that real world violence have been part of antifa's modus operandi since they started in late 1980s West Germany...
Their infamous "black block" tactics were created very specifically to make it very difficult, if not impossible, to prosecute people using violence at their events and ones they crash. We're talking about a movement that doesn't just call for violence and praise it, they're the actual perpetrators of political violence and will go out of their way to protect their violent members from being prosecuted when they commit assault and property destruction.
As hard as it may be for people like yourself to admit it, the "antifa" movement is pretty much the closest thing to the nazi brown shirts since the actual nazi brown shirts!
My personal story is somewhat similar, except still being in my 20s I never had the time to accumulate the enormous amount of physical media my parents' generation have and thank my lucky stars I'll avoid the mess my parents have created with their books, CDs, vinyl records and DVDs. Closest I got to your book situation were with my games, but even those don't take up much more than a single shelf row and the main reason why I haven't sold them is that they're on platforms where emulation is far from perfect.
Don't get me wrong, moving house is still a pain in the you-know-what as I've had to experience having moved house 3 times in the last roughly 2 years (moving to another city and then moving out of the way of a major renovation). However all of my physical media fits into 4 cardboard boxes and takes about 10 minutes to pack while just my dad's physical media would probably take a day to pack and fill a whole moving van.
You really shouldn't just look at income differences on their own, the baseline low income level is just as important, if not more important. Loads of really badly working systems trough history have had low income inequality, but the poor in those systems have still been way worse off than the poor in even the worst (western) offenders on income inequality.
Over here in western Europe the left has moved on from talking about poverty among the poor as social welfare systems do take pretty good care of the most vulnerable in our society to talking about income inequality. In other words it's not about the poor being too poor, it's about the rich being too rich.
You forgot to add "/joke" or "/sarcasm" at the end there...
As I've already told you, when a plan is literally worse than doing nothing, it's obviously best to do nothing even if doing so feels completely counter-intuitive.
Considering welfare fraud tends to involve relatively small sums (less than $10.000) it rarely leads to big court cases and is usually resolved either by just cutting off the welfare or the recipient agreeing to pay back the benefits they got without being entitled to them, I wouldn't be surprised if that figure is pretty accurate.
After all, the goal of detecting welfare fraud is not to put people behind bars, it's to ensure funds available for welfare payments go to those that actually need it. The only thing achieved by putting people behind bars for welfare fraud is reduce the funds available for welfare payments to those that actually need them.
The basic idea is to welfare systems are supposed to provide baseline living standard for those unable or incapable of being able to work. Particularly in high unemployment areas welfare is a genuine lifeline for the whole community, even those that do have jobs as most of them would be out of a job if nobody had any money to spend on things like basic goods and services.
However you do get a lot of liberals these days who take welfare for granted and not something meant to help people while they're looking for a job or if they can't work because of disabilities. These are the people a lot of conservatives use as straw men to describe liberals in general when it comes to their attitude towards welfare. However even among liberals you get plenty of people who support measures against welfare fraud as that money is intended for people who want to work, but for various (valid) reasons can't do so.
As I said, further adding to the problem is simply not a solution. In reality when you try to fight fire with fire like this it only makes things worse for everyone.
When the board is already a club of people related to or friends with each other and backstabbing assholes you can be damn sure the lady seat is going to be filled by someone who's related to or friends with the rest or a backstabbing asshole. Even in the unlikely scenario a qualified person's seat is used and they try to find a qualified woman to fill that seat this is California and will obviously hit mostly tech companies, meaning that it's still a seat where around 85% of qualified applicants are not eligible.
Even in the unlikely best case scenario where the woman chosen from that 15% subset of the people qualified for the job is the most qualified person there's still the understandable and potentially intense resentment they're going to be subject to. Thus, even in the very unlikely best case scenario you're still going to be putting women into uncomfortable positions where they're going to be resented for completely understandable reasons.
Shooting yourself in the foot is still shooting yourself in the foot even when you haven't come up with a better way to pass the time.
If you have any better ideas then do tell, but this is literally worse than doing nothing. So in a way I have actually proposed a superior solution, it's just doing nothing.
To continue looking for an actual solution? Despite how counter-intuitive it may feel to just sit around and brainstorm, it's more helpful than going out and actively contributing to the problem.
Sure, there are other init systems, but none of them are as well supported as init or SystemD. As for distros without SystemD, they're more of a developer demonstration rather than anything maintained as a proper distro meant for production use.
So your solution to un-deserved board appointments trough nepotism, underhanded corporate infighting, etc. is to make it even harder for the most qualified people to get on corporate boards? Because this sure as hell isn't going to help with any of those issues as the lady seat will obviously be coming out of those assigned based on merit. All it does is create a situation which is essentially gender-nepotism rather than actually making things more equal for competent and dedicated women.
But hey, why fix actually fix something when it's easier to just pretend you're fixing it while only making the underlying issue worse? Because giving the impression you're helping seems to be more important to today's feminists than actually fixing real problems. You can see it pretty well in how feminists actually defend those using false accusations of rape and sexual harassment to further their own goals by arguing that their actions were justified as they were "starting a conversation" or something.