Horvath has a background in marketing and virtually no examples of code to be found anywhere. Being able to sprinkle a little script onto some markup does not make you an engineer.
And keep in mind that this is not the first time she's played the sexism card. Horvath led a 'geek feminism' campaign to get rid of a rug (yes, a rug) because she objected to the word 'meritocracy'. Because we all know that meritocracy is a myth and that everyone's contribution to Open Source is equally important. Focusing on the people who actually write code is just sexism. *Gag*
The feminist argument is that women are interested in programming and capable, but cannot get into the industry because they are being discriminated against. According to them, the work environment is hostile. But how can that be true?
If you write code, the ultimate judge of your job performance is a machine. The compiler doesn't magically switch to hard mode because the coder lacks a penis. An executable won't somehow crash in the presence of a vagina. This is as ridiculous as the argument that women fall behind in math because an equation will be solvable or not depending on who is trying to solve it.
As mentioned elsewhere, IT/Software is about as close to a meritocracy as you can get, in large part because the work involves unthinking machines that simply cannot be biased. It is also heavy on independent work. Your coworkers are keeping you from writing code? Did they steal your keyboard?
Mr. Haselton, we already - from your previous articles* - know that you are a statist. Please go shill for the state/ administration / party elsewhere.
I am curious about why you (or anyone) would cheerlead for totalitarianism. You are never going to be able to turn off your telescreen while you enjoy cigarettes and coffee. You will never be a member of the Inner Party. You will never be the boot. You will be the face under it. So answer, if you can, why are you pushing for your fellow citizens to be stripped of their rights? What is in it for you?
* Your first 'question' cannot be answered because you have set conditions that preclude any answer other than the one you are looking for. Your second was equally flawed. All of your rants omit essential facts concerning the history and context of the fifth amendment and indeed the first eight amendments.
This is clearly a case where one party's reasonable expectation of privacy is violated by the actions of another party.
The Supreme Court has ruled that you have no expectation of privacy when disclosing information to a third party not covered by privilege. Boyfriends/girlfriends are not covered.
People (women, according to the FA and others) may have copyright claims, but a better suggestion would be to have enough common sense to not distribute intimate pictures to third parties. But, that's "victim blaming", and we can't have that, can we?
As predicted in Slate, Guido Barilla (yes, that's his name) issues meaningless apology. For those counting at home, this is actually the forth one. Now what?
Tracking and blackmailing rich and powerful people is not new. Hoover's personal files were used to do just that*. It was the entire point of COINTELPRO. The NSA is simply following the path of other alphabet soup agencies to consolidate power for themselves and their political masters.
* For example, we know that Jackie O. had a lesbian fling because an item of her correspondence obtained for Hoover's personal safe was misfiled. Can you think of any reason for the FBI having a love letter like that other than blackmail?
Unfortunately, Slashdot doesn't provide a " -1: Commenter is an idiot option", so I'll have to try to provide you with a clue. Brace yourself.
We are not discussing health insurance, and the ACA does not provide for it. The ACA is about health care coverage, and that is different.
Insurance is intended to protect against unforeseen or rare events, not expected costs. Auto insurance covers against collisions and theft, but it doesn't provide payouts for oil changes, tune-ups, tire rotation, etc. Homeowner's insurance will pay to repair or rebuild your home in the event of fire or disaster, but does not cover costs associated with maintaining the property or structure.
Actual heath insurance would cover serious injury or illness but would not cover regular doctor visits, routine check-ups, most medications and so forth. But that we don't have health insurance, we have a sorta-kinda-halfassed subsidy program for heath care we mistakenly refer to as insurance. And it is price opaque. In other words, you do not see the actual amount of the subsidy. You have no idea what the true cost of service is.
And that is the problem AlphaWolf was talking about. If it was obvious up front that you would be charged twelve dollars for a generic aspirin, no one would pay. If you knew that you were going to be billed 175 bucks for waiting an hour and than having a fifteen minute chat with a doctor, no one would go. Health care coverage hides cost and distorts the market, driving prices up.
Imagine that auto insurance worked the same way as so-called heath insurance. When you needed an oil change, you would take your car to an approved facility, hand over your insurance card, pay a co-pay and then get a paper saying 'paid by insurance'. With no dollar amount. An oil change might cost a hundred dollars. And why not? If you only pay the co-pay, what do you care if your insurance company gets bilked? It's not your money, after all.
When a minority group is under represented in a particular field, the explanation is always bias, without regard to any other possible causes. My examples were intended to illustrate the logic failure of that argument.
Only an idiot would claim that men are discriminated against in maternity wards because it ignores the fact that men can't get pregnant. Likewise, claiming that one of every two Americans are women and therefore one of every two software developers must be a woman or else sexism is also absurd. *
Not everyone has the talent or inclination to work in a given career. The fact that some groups seem sparsely included in some jobs does not mean there is bias in the field.
The argument that because group A constitutes Y percent of the population and therefore should/must also make up Y percent of persons in group B, otherwise group B must be hostile to group A is absurd.
It is like claiming that because 40 percent of all voters are Republican, then 40 percent of Democratic Party members should be Republicans.
Using the same logic as proponents of institutional bias, one could argue a pattern of discrimination against males because they do not make up half of all maternity ward patients despite being half of the population.
Well's Fargo shall of Nov 16th be charging for checking accounts, at least in California, between $3 and $100 a month.
November 14. The lowest fee is five dollars, highest fee is thirty. Can be waived via minimum balance, qualified direct deposit or a linked Wells Fargo loan account.
Eugenics was widely accepted in the U.S. academic community.[6] By 1928 there were 376 separate university courses in some of the United States' leading schools, enrolling more than 20,000 students, which included eugenics in the curriculum.[12] It did, however, have scientific detractors (notably, Thomas Hunt Morgan, one of the few Mendelians to explicitly criticize eugenics), though most of these focused more on what they considered the crude methodology of eugenicists, and the characterization of almost every human characteristic as being hereditary, rather than the idea of eugenics itself.[13]
By 1910, there was a large and dynamic network of scientists, reformers and professionals engaged in national eugenics projects and actively promoting eugenic legislation. The American Breederâ(TM)s Association was the first eugenic body in the U.S., established in 1906 under the direction of biologist Charles B. Davenport. The ABA was formed specifically to âoeinvestigate and report on heredity in the human race, and emphasize the value of superior blood and the menace to society of inferior blood.â Membership included Alexander Graham Bell, Stanford president David Starr Jordan and Luther Burbank.[14][15] The American Association for the Study and Prevention of Infant Mortality was one of the first organizations to begin investigating infant mortality rates in terms of eugenics.[16] They promoted government intervention in attempts to promote the health of future citizens.[17]
Offenders caught driving without an interlock -- by driving a buddy's car or renting a vehicle, for example, could land in jail for up to a year. Those who try to help an offender by blowing into an interlock are subject to the same penalty. Most models will be equipped with a camera.
Honestly, you are wasting your time behind a camera. There is no innovative technological solution to immortalizing the dead. Everyone who suffers that kind of loss winds up forgetting, and later recalling little moments.
Take a cue from the movie 'Up'. Keep photos and cherished items. Use the tokens you preserve to jog your memory once in a while. But spend the time you have left with your wife fully engaged and enjoying every tiny slice of life as much as you can.
When I submitted the article, the summary included the following:
Of all the findings in Deloitte's market research, the most poignant was its profile of electric car "non-adopters." They have average household incomes of $54,000, live in the suburbs and rural areas, and depend heavily on their cars. There are millions and millions of non-adopters all across America. They are the middle class.
Put simply, the is no large market for production of all-electric cars to scale up to, because all-electric vehicles do not - and likely will not - meet the needs of the vast majority car buyers. Because the subsidy will not stimulate widespread demand, and because early adopters are likely to be affluent, it is misguided.
Of all the findings in Deloitte's market research, the most poignant was its profile of electric car "non-adopters." They have average household incomes of $54,000, live in the suburbs and rural areas, and depend heavily on their cars. There are millions and millions of nonadopters all across America. They are the middle class.
In case you are missing the point, the middle class represents the vast majority of those who buy cars, and all electric vehicles do not - and will not- meet their needs. So unless you are going to force them to buy, there is no large scale market to drive down costs.
Slashdot Mirror
Horvath has a background in marketing and virtually no examples of code to be found anywhere. Being able to sprinkle a little script onto some markup does not make you an engineer.
And keep in mind that this is not the first time she's played the sexism card. Horvath led a 'geek feminism' campaign to get rid of a rug (yes, a rug) because she objected to the word 'meritocracy'. Because we all know that meritocracy is a myth and that everyone's contribution to Open Source is equally important. Focusing on the people who actually write code is just sexism. *Gag*
The feminist argument is that women are interested in programming and capable, but cannot get into the industry because they are being discriminated against. According to them, the work environment is hostile. But how can that be true?
If you write code, the ultimate judge of your job performance is a machine. The compiler doesn't magically switch to hard mode because the coder lacks a penis. An executable won't somehow crash in the presence of a vagina. This is as ridiculous as the argument that women fall behind in math because an equation will be solvable or not depending on who is trying to solve it.
As mentioned elsewhere, IT/Software is about as close to a meritocracy as you can get, in large part because the work involves unthinking machines that simply cannot be biased. It is also heavy on independent work. Your coworkers are keeping you from writing code? Did they steal your keyboard?
Oh, wait, we're already there:
Selfies at funerals
Seriously, people, learn some respect and manners. It won't kill you.
Mr. Haselton, we already - from your previous articles* - know that you are a statist. Please go shill for the state/ administration / party elsewhere.
I am curious about why you (or anyone) would cheerlead for totalitarianism. You are never going to be able to turn off your telescreen while you enjoy cigarettes and coffee. You will never be a member of the Inner Party. You will never be the boot. You will be the face under it. So answer, if you can, why are you pushing for your fellow citizens to be stripped of their rights? What is in it for you?
* Your first 'question' cannot be answered because you have set conditions that preclude any answer other than the one you are looking for. Your second was equally flawed. All of your rants omit essential facts concerning the history and context of the fifth amendment and indeed the first eight amendments.
From the fine article:
And what we found was that you could really measure influence very well online, and you could tell who was influential and who wasn’t influential...
If you are looking to nudge or control popular opinion, knowing who is at the center of a sphere of influence makes the job a lot easier.
This is clearly a case where one party's reasonable expectation of privacy is violated by the actions of another party.
The Supreme Court has ruled that you have no expectation of privacy when disclosing information to a third party not covered by privilege. Boyfriends /girlfriends are not covered.
People (women, according to the FA and others) may have copyright claims, but a better suggestion would be to have enough common sense to not distribute intimate pictures to third parties. But, that's "victim blaming", and we can't have that, can we?
"Aplology"?! *facepalm* Sorry, ladies and gentlemen, I think I need more coffee...
As predicted in Slate, Guido Barilla (yes, that's his name) issues meaningless apology. For those counting at home, this is actually the forth one. Now what?
Tracking and blackmailing rich and powerful people is not new. Hoover's personal files were used to do just that*. It was the entire point of COINTELPRO. The NSA is simply following the path of other alphabet soup agencies to consolidate power for themselves and their political masters.
* For example, we know that Jackie O. had a lesbian fling because an item of her correspondence obtained for Hoover's personal safe was misfiled. Can you think of any reason for the FBI having a love letter like that other than blackmail?
Unfortunately, Slashdot doesn't provide a " -1: Commenter is an idiot option", so I'll have to try to provide you with a clue. Brace yourself.
We are not discussing health insurance, and the ACA does not provide for it. The ACA is about health care coverage, and that is different.
Insurance is intended to protect against unforeseen or rare events, not expected costs. Auto insurance covers against collisions and theft, but it doesn't provide payouts for oil changes, tune-ups, tire rotation, etc. Homeowner's insurance will pay to repair or rebuild your home in the event of fire or disaster, but does not cover costs associated with maintaining the property or structure.
Actual heath insurance would cover serious injury or illness but would not cover regular doctor visits, routine check-ups, most medications and so forth. But that we don't have health insurance, we have a sorta-kinda-halfassed subsidy program for heath care we mistakenly refer to as insurance. And it is price opaque. In other words, you do not see the actual amount of the subsidy. You have no idea what the true cost of service is.
And that is the problem AlphaWolf was talking about. If it was obvious up front that you would be charged twelve dollars for a generic aspirin, no one would pay. If you knew that you were going to be billed 175 bucks for waiting an hour and than having a fifteen minute chat with a doctor, no one would go. Health care coverage hides cost and distorts the market, driving prices up.
Imagine that auto insurance worked the same way as so-called heath insurance. When you needed an oil change, you would take your car to an approved facility, hand over your insurance card, pay a co-pay and then get a paper saying 'paid by insurance'. With no dollar amount. An oil change might cost a hundred dollars. And why not? If you only pay the co-pay, what do you care if your insurance company gets bilked? It's not your money, after all.
You may notice that many of the replies so far advocate population control* as the solution to climate change, aka anthropogenic global warming (AGW).
* Forced sterilization, mandated use of birth control and so forth.
A quick question for AGW proponents: do you want to give control over who can and cannot have children to the same people who gave you the TSA?
Only an idiot would claim that men are discriminated against in maternity wards because it ignores the fact that men can't get pregnant. Likewise, claiming that one of every two Americans are women and therefore one of every two software developers must be a woman or else sexism is also absurd. *
Not everyone has the talent or inclination to work in a given career. The fact that some groups seem sparsely included in some jobs does not mean there is bias in the field.
*Substitute minority group or career as needed.
The argument that because group A constitutes Y percent of the population and therefore should/must also make up Y percent of persons in group B, otherwise group B must be hostile to group A is absurd.
It is like claiming that because 40 percent of all voters are Republican, then 40 percent of Democratic Party members should be Republicans.
Unless, of course, you find a way to make computers care about what the person writing code on them looks like. Good luck with that.
Using the same logic as proponents of institutional bias, one could argue a pattern of discrimination against males because they do not make up half of all maternity ward patients despite being half of the population.
Well's Fargo shall of Nov 16th be charging for checking accounts, at least in California, between $3 and $100 a month.
November 14. The lowest fee is five dollars, highest fee is thirty. Can be waived via minimum balance, qualified direct deposit or a linked Wells Fargo loan account.
Eugenics was widely accepted in the U.S. academic community.[6] By 1928 there were 376 separate university courses in some of the United States' leading schools, enrolling more than 20,000 students, which included eugenics in the curriculum.[12] It did, however, have scientific detractors (notably, Thomas Hunt Morgan, one of the few Mendelians to explicitly criticize eugenics), though most of these focused more on what they considered the crude methodology of eugenicists, and the characterization of almost every human characteristic as being hereditary, rather than the idea of eugenics itself.[13]
By 1910, there was a large and dynamic network of scientists, reformers and professionals engaged in national eugenics projects and actively promoting eugenic legislation. The American Breederâ(TM)s Association was the first eugenic body in the U.S., established in 1906 under the direction of biologist Charles B. Davenport. The ABA was formed specifically to âoeinvestigate and report on heredity in the human race, and emphasize the value of superior blood and the menace to society of inferior blood.â Membership included Alexander Graham Bell, Stanford president David Starr Jordan and Luther Burbank.[14][15] The American Association for the Study and Prevention of Infant Mortality was one of the first organizations to begin investigating infant mortality rates in terms of eugenics.[16] They promoted government intervention in attempts to promote the health of future citizens.[17]
Source.
Office 2010 Home and Student costs 150 USD and includes Word, Excel, Powerpoint and One Note.
You think Nine Inch Nails is a lame, sucky, douchebag band?
Offenders caught driving without an interlock -- by driving a buddy's car or renting a vehicle, for example, could land in jail for up to a year. Those who try to help an offender by blowing into an interlock are subject to the same penalty. Most models will be equipped with a camera.
Emphasis mine. And yes, I must be new here.
Right now I can't see anything that the dominance of IE have left us.
Microsoft IE 5 included XMLHTTP, the foundation for AJAX.
Honestly, you are wasting your time behind a camera. There is no innovative technological solution to immortalizing the dead. Everyone who suffers that kind of loss winds up forgetting, and later recalling little moments.
Take a cue from the movie 'Up'. Keep photos and cherished items. Use the tokens you preserve to jog your memory once in a while. But spend the time you have left with your wife fully engaged and enjoying every tiny slice of life as much as you can.
When I submitted the article, the summary included the following:
Put simply, the is no large market for production of all-electric cars to scale up to, because all-electric vehicles do not - and likely will not - meet the needs of the vast majority car buyers. Because the subsidy will not stimulate widespread demand, and because early adopters are likely to be affluent, it is misguided.
Seems the summary I wrote for the story has been truncated.
From the FS:
In case you are missing the point, the middle class represents the vast majority of those who buy cars, and all electric vehicles do not - and will not- meet their needs. So unless you are going to force them to buy, there is no large scale market to drive down costs.