>The hurdle partly stems from the growing ubiquity of drug testing, at corporations with big human resources departments, in industries like trucking where testing is mandated by federal law for safety reasons, and increasingly at smaller companies.
>With the software industry already plagued by a shortage of skilled workers, especially female programmers, some software companies think now would be the wrong time to institute drug testing for new employees, a move that would further limit the available talent pool.
I don't place any value at all in these awards anymore, not after what the puppies showed to be true regarding the Hugos. And that sucks for the actual and talented authors out there that no longer get the spotlight they deserve for doing an excellent job.
I'm not sure if that's a win for the ideologues, but it's damn sure a loss for the actual writers.
"We found the evidence, we set it on fire, and now we can't find any evidence that this report is true. Rest assured that we will not stop until we can no longer find any evidence that this was ever true".
You make it sound like a bad thing. I would welcome any form of fairness doctrine regardless of how it affects the political situation. The end result can only be positive for the voters, short-term and long.
Unless Reddit explicitly stated that it was a platform for free speech, then I guess it has some sort of (moral) obligation to stand by that. Has Reddit ever said anything like that?
I don't give a rat's ass about the socio-economic status of the people affected.
I do care about net neutrality.
The idea that penalising certain data sources is harmful to a free internet seems well accepted. The fact that our retarded legislators couldn't figure out what so many were shouting at them is the real problem. There is no goddamn difference between penalising source A and "helping" every source *except* A. These zero-ratings is the exact thing we said would happen. It's penalising the companies that do not pay for "premium" services.
Yes, I'd say it's a re-occurring "coincidence" that the accomplished and successful ones never place the blame on "everyone-but-me" (or, in this day and age, "the-patriarchy-wherein-all-collaborate-in-secret-to-keep-me-down-because-I'm-a-special-snowflake"). Maybe it's because they were taught to "get up, dust yourself off, and try again" instead of "cry a lot, get an adult to do it for you". Whatever the reason, it's obvious that there is no pandemic of inequity. Perhaps one should instead look to things like merit, attitude, and performance?
That's also funny, because 'merit' is nowadays considered hate-speech by certain people (and the 'meritocracy' rug was removed from Reddit HQ as it was considered "triggering" and "excluding" by the same type of certain people).
Maybe I'm jaded because I've been raised by people that never blamed "everyone-but-me" for their own failures, or because in my workplace everyone lives and breathes "get up and try again (or get your grants pulled and be fired)". Regardless, it seems that the ones competent enough to 'do' are managing just fine without placing the responsibility of their own well-being onto everyone else.
Funny how you complain about people being young and childish, and then act that way yourself.
Randi Harper is gainfully employed on the board of directors of a non-profit.
She founded it herself, and it's stacked only with other professional victims. Her "gainful employment" consists of begging for money on Twitter.
Periods of inactivity on open source projects does not disqualify someone from being a developer.
It kinda does since a developer is a job position, and a job requires that you 'do' stuff. Thus, Randi might qualify as a professional victim, or a beggar, but not as someone that actually develops.
Your dismissal of complaints about being unable to advance don't address any of the points being made. You seem to be arguing that because you peaked the same reasons must apply to everyone else, which is absurd.
He argues that reality applies to all of us. You seem to disagree. This reminds me of a recent South Park episode on safe spaces.
Wu's game was widely praised by critics. Your superficial critique of the visual style suggests you haven't played it.
HAHAHAHAHHA. Seriously? Come on, no one actually believes that. Not even Wu herself.
The "critics" that reviewed her game wanted to signal what side of the debate they were on. The reviews were more about Wu than the game. Heh, now that I look for it on Steam, it seems to have been pulled. Maybe it was too "good" for Steam, eh?
Heh, I've used all of those except 'amazing' in almost every paper I've written (and the few times I missed an opportunity, someone else suggested I add them in). It really is important to note that your stuff is super-mega-new (novel/innovative/unprecedented/modern/current/concomitant to something else that is new) and that it does something radical.
Some even show this 'radical'ness by using completely irrelevant measurements for their comparisons with established mainstream algorithms/procedures. It's pretty fucking low, but they do get published, and getting published means your chances of research grants increase...
I have never used 'amazing' though. My mother taught me that describing myself or my work with 'amazing' may come off as mildly narcissistic.
I think you are conflating evolutionary theory (such as Darwin fathered) with genetic evolution (or heredity). That which Mendel showed is not a theory, but well understood and proven fact. The specifics of evolutionary theory however is still very much a debate.
Slashdot Mirror
Except they are above the ethnic distribution.
If they wanted to match they would need to hire more native americans and fire a whole bunch of black people and asians.
Is there a -1 Trump option?
Go directly to jail, do not pass Go(ogle)
Dey duuk arr duuuur!
Is there any outcome here where both parties get sent to jail? Cause that's the one I'm rooting for.
>The hurdle partly stems from the growing ubiquity of drug testing, at corporations with big human resources departments, in industries like trucking where testing is mandated by federal law for safety reasons, and increasingly at smaller companies.
>With the software industry already plagued by a shortage of skilled workers, especially female programmers, some software companies think now would be the wrong time to institute drug testing for new employees, a move that would further limit the available talent pool.
I guess the number of female truckers is A-OK.
I don't place any value at all in these awards anymore, not after what the puppies showed to be true regarding the Hugos. And that sucks for the actual and talented authors out there that no longer get the spotlight they deserve for doing an excellent job.
I'm not sure if that's a win for the ideologues, but it's damn sure a loss for the actual writers.
"We found the evidence, we set it on fire, and now we can't find any evidence that this report is true. Rest assured that we will not stop until we can no longer find any evidence that this was ever true".
You make it sound like a bad thing. I would welcome any form of fairness doctrine regardless of how it affects the political situation. The end result can only be positive for the voters, short-term and long.
Or we can throw them in the ocean to see if they float or drown.
Unless Reddit explicitly stated that it was a platform for free speech, then I guess it has some sort of (moral) obligation to stand by that. Has Reddit ever said anything like that?
I sure hope so otherwise you'd be the worst stalker ever.
I don't give a rat's ass about the socio-economic status of the people affected.
I do care about net neutrality.
The idea that penalising certain data sources is harmful to a free internet seems well accepted. The fact that our retarded legislators couldn't figure out what so many were shouting at them is the real problem. There is no goddamn difference between penalising source A and "helping" every source *except* A. These zero-ratings is the exact thing we said would happen. It's penalising the companies that do not pay for "premium" services.
"Therefore, balancing calories in to Calories out is not so stupidly simple as it seems to the underweight layperson "
Using my impressive array of mental superpowers, I predict that fatties will use this as an excuse for not exercising.
"Slashdot"
Using my impressive powers again, I predict hilarious fat jokes will be forthcoming in this very thread.
Had I wanted someone else to administrate my computer I would have installed WIndows 10.
Yes, that's why all the good books are 140 characters or less.
Ha, that's two for one.
Yes, I'd say it's a re-occurring "coincidence" that the accomplished and successful ones never place the blame on "everyone-but-me" (or, in this day and age, "the-patriarchy-wherein-all-collaborate-in-secret-to-keep-me-down-because-I'm-a-special-snowflake"). Maybe it's because they were taught to "get up, dust yourself off, and try again" instead of "cry a lot, get an adult to do it for you". Whatever the reason, it's obvious that there is no pandemic of inequity. Perhaps one should instead look to things like merit, attitude, and performance?
That's also funny, because 'merit' is nowadays considered hate-speech by certain people (and the 'meritocracy' rug was removed from Reddit HQ as it was considered "triggering" and "excluding" by the same type of certain people).
Maybe I'm jaded because I've been raised by people that never blamed "everyone-but-me" for their own failures, or because in my workplace everyone lives and breathes "get up and try again (or get your grants pulled and be fired)". Regardless, it seems that the ones competent enough to 'do' are managing just fine without placing the responsibility of their own well-being onto everyone else.
Funny how you complain about people being young and childish, and then act that way yourself.
Randi Harper is gainfully employed on the board of directors of a non-profit.
She founded it herself, and it's stacked only with other professional victims. Her "gainful employment" consists of begging for money on Twitter.
Periods of inactivity on open source projects does not disqualify someone from being a developer.
It kinda does since a developer is a job position, and a job requires that you 'do' stuff. Thus, Randi might qualify as a professional victim, or a beggar, but not as someone that actually develops.
Your dismissal of complaints about being unable to advance don't address any of the points being made. You seem to be arguing that because you peaked the same reasons must apply to everyone else, which is absurd.
He argues that reality applies to all of us. You seem to disagree. This reminds me of a recent South Park episode on safe spaces.
Wu's game was widely praised by critics. Your superficial critique of the visual style suggests you haven't played it.
HAHAHAHAHHA.
Seriously? Come on, no one actually believes that. Not even Wu herself.
The "critics" that reviewed her game wanted to signal what side of the debate they were on. The reviews were more about Wu than the game.
Heh, now that I look for it on Steam, it seems to have been pulled. Maybe it was too "good" for Steam, eh?
No, this is basic SJW stuff.
"I cannot dispute your argument, so I'll pretend it doesn't exist and try ad hominems instead."
It's not so much trolling as just funny and/or sad.
Twitter is labelling dissenting opinion as trolling if Twitter prefers one side of the argument.
Heh, I've used all of those except 'amazing' in almost every paper I've written (and the few times I missed an opportunity, someone else suggested I add them in). It really is important to note that your stuff is super-mega-new (novel/innovative/unprecedented/modern/current/concomitant to something else that is new) and that it does something radical.
Some even show this 'radical'ness by using completely irrelevant measurements for their comparisons with established mainstream algorithms/procedures. It's pretty fucking low, but they do get published, and getting published means your chances of research grants increase...
I have never used 'amazing' though. My mother taught me that describing myself or my work with 'amazing' may come off as mildly narcissistic.
"In order to better serve our customers, we have decided to charge more for the same features."
Which goddamn customers asked for higher licensing fees?
I think you are conflating evolutionary theory (such as Darwin fathered) with genetic evolution (or heredity). That which Mendel showed is not a theory, but well understood and proven fact. The specifics of evolutionary theory however is still very much a debate.
Yes! Shutdown Facebook! Shut down Twitter! Shutdown those damn emojis and skateboards too! And don't forget the damn rap music!
I will vote for that!