It seems pretty self evident that what the BLM hashtag means (at least originally) is "black lives matter as much as white lives", as fueled by the many instances of blacks being killed in questionable circumstances, with no consequences at all for those that caused the deaths.
So rebutting this by saying #AllLivesMatter comes across (to some) like saying "all houses matter", ignoring the fact that one of the houses is burning.
While I personally think 90% of social justice political correctness is bullshit, criticizing BLM while ignoring the context of where it's coming from seems misguided.
One problem Amazon has is that they can't simply take down a product with fake reviews, because that further weaponizes the creation of fake reviews - bad actors would start generating obviously fake positive reviews for their competitors to suppress the product listing.
Google has done a similar thing by recently weaponizing "bad links" (counting them against a site instead of ignoring them), and this has resulted in a sh*t storm of bad links as people try to downgrade their competitors in the search results. It's been a disaster for honest websites.
It sounds like it may be even worse than that. Someone isn't likely to "clap" unless they agree with an article, so it will be maximum echo chamber as writers tailor content for their readers viewpoints.
The fact that women, for example, are half of the general population is irrelevant if they aren't represented that way in the applicant pool.
ie. if 25% of qualified applicants are female, you should be hiring approximately 25% women. If you hire much less, you're unfair to higher qualified women, if you hire much more, you're unfair to higher qualified men. This obviously will vary widely by which field you're discussing. Engineering/tech has pretty much been 80% male for the past 40 years.
Pay equity is a much more difficult problem to solve.
Hopefully you acknowledge that women and blacks were generally kept out of leadership positions in the 20s in the real USA. So then the question is, does it make sense that magical folk were 100 years more enlightened than everyone else? I'd say its pretty arbitrary. Most Potter characters in the original books don't seem any more socially advanced than the rest of us.
Wonder Woman was about a Goddess, and much of the fish-out-of-water plot was about how little regard she was given as a woman by men in the military. Did you even see the movie?
Any Western that features a gunslinger that is female or a person of color, and no other characters bat an eye. Entertaining yes, realistic no.
Or recently, Fantastic Beasts. Set in the 1920s, a time when women had just barely gotten the right to vote. And the president of the American magical folk is a black female, and 50% of the magical "enforcers in trenchcoats" are female. Clearly a choice by Rowling and the producers to give the magical folk 21st century levels of diversity, despite the time period. Not saying their choice was wrong, but it does seem like a bit of an anachronism.
You should read the article more closely, as he is not saying "all women" this or "all men" that. He specifically says that there is significant overlap between the sexes, and is only speaking to the large-number trends of gender percentages.
So in no way is he saying that all women are less suitable/inclined for leadership or for tech.. that would be laughable. He is just saying that when you look at the large trends, that part of the numbers may be in fact due to the biological traits which put the bell curves in different places with respect to success attributes for those professions.
And yes I think he stretches in places, but he is making an argument at least worthy of debate. Unfortunately the whole subject just gets everyone's hackles up, and both sides tend to start labeling rather than discussing particular points..
Fact is you're probably going to want that new motherboard for all the upgraded ports, memory support, features, etc. that your 4 year old motherboard simply doesn't have.
TFS sounds like a typical conspiracy theory to ascribe greedy intentions to what is more than likely just technological progress.
Had a cheap Lumia with Windows 8.1 mobile and it was a great little phone. Snappy well designed UI. I figured the apps would come eventually.
So I upgraded to another Lumia with Windows 10 mobile and it was a buggy, laggy mess. It would constantly show me outdated "live" tiles, and basic functions stopped working after an automatic update. Furthermore it was a dual sim phone, and they stupidly designated the sims as 1 and 2 instead of A and B. So the message and phone tiles would always have a 1 or 2 on them and it appeared like you had 1 or 2 messages - what a stupid design decision. Ended up literally throwing it against a brick wall in frustration. Completely smashed with satisfying chunks of the screen missing.
Got an iPhone. Way more expensive but you get what your pay for. Very happy. Oh and it has every app you could want.
If the bathroom law had simply indicated allowed gender as indicated by government issued photo ID (rather than birth gender), then I can't see there being any major issue. Making it birth gender clearly is discriminatory to genuine transsexual persons. And on the flip side, nobody wants casual cross-dressers having absolute rights to the public washroom of their choosing.
As for school washrooms, that is probably more nuanced and should be left to the school administrators. (And a bathroom with private stalls is obviously a different, ahem, ballgame than a locker room/shower situation.)
It's been done for many decades for newborns so as to serve as an unambiguous identification in case of potential mix-ups or disputes re. the baby. As a parent I would probably appreciate it.
1) Lets stop calling games as "sports". This includes poker, chess, and anything involving computer button pressing. Not to denigrate such things, but they are competitive games, not sports.
2) Live televised sports have become so "monetized" with commercials that many are virtually unwatchable. For a generation used to Netflix and adblocked Youtube, it's a non-starter. Have you tried to watch a football game in the past few years? There is a commercial almost every whistle. Constant bombardment.
3) Most Millenials grew up playing video games, not playing a pickup game of baseball/football/tennis/whatever with their friends. So watching such sports lacks the vicarious thrill of people who did play them. Simply not as interesting to them on a primal level as older generations. Vice-versa with the eSports games.
What is traditional reading? It is a model of learning in which a book possesses the knowledge on a given topic and disseminates it to students. This model dates to the beginning of education, when it was the only way of sharing information. In fact, you occasionally still see the book presenting the reading called a book, because way back before the internet and even the printing press, a book would literally be a book so students could read it.
Now, don't get me wrong. The traditional reading model worked wonderfully for eons. But it is an outdated idea for millenials (free pass for adblockers).
Close your eyes and imagine yourself as a millenial in a college physics course with a book giving a traditional reading. Now open your eyes. Did you envision The Best Physics reading EVAR? I doubt it. You probably pictured a book droning on and on in front of you. No way that is more engaging or interesting than an episode of Empire, and if you're a book who uses traditional readings, just stop and play the show instead. Everyone will be better off.
You may think by now that I think most physics books are dolts. I promise that's not the case. But traditional reading simply isn't effective for millenials. Research shows that millenials are completely incapable of learning by hearing or seeing, they only learn by being entertained, a model often called early childhood education. Physics books should start thinking about how they can go beyond just a traditional reading. There are some easy things they can do (or millenials can ask them to do) to make learning more engaging. First, make millenials read the book outside of class, rather than in class. If your reading merely covers the material in the textbook, why make millenials buy the textbook when they can download it free? Now, you may put a different spin on the material, but still. You're merely repeating what millenials can read on their own. Let them do that on their own time, and use the classroom for texting and gaming and so forth.
Um, no. App stores increase competition because all the apps are directly lined up against each other and it is trivial to comparison/price shop (as opposed to each vendor having their own website or other commercial channels). Just look at Apple's app store or Google Play.. it's a pricing race to the bottom.
Since you're restricted to one store it stifles competitive pricing for apps and games.
I think you mean the opposite. The Apple and Android app stores have been a competitive race to the bottom for pricing, to the point where almost everything is now freemium.
Who would have guessed that an article written by a vendor of AI software says not only that it gives you superpowers, but if you don't jump on the train now your business is totally f*cked.
I have a social site that uses several Cognitive AIs from the big three (Amazon, Google, Microsoft) to analyze images that users upload.
The false categorizations from these AIs are often baffling to the human eye. Like WTF can't you tell that is a human face partially obscured by a ball cap? Nope.
It seems that the way humans perceive images is to compare what our eyes tell us to internal 3D models we carry around of the real world - ie actual intelligence of what we are seeing. The AIs are blindly categorizing based on combinations of pixel shapes/colors found in the training set images - so they easily fall for the tricks outlined in TFA.
The tiny-functions-are-panacea meme has got to die, for exactly the reasons you stated. It's trading function simplicity for system complexity. And all of those thousands of needless function interfaces you need to maintain, refactor, and potentially unit test... it's just crazy town.
Ironically the book "Clean Code" promotes this stylistic disaster. Yes each function might be "clean" taken by itself, but the system as a whole is anything but.
Slashdot Mirror
Too Exensive, Didn't Read.
It "starts" at $390 in Canada. That's almost halfway to an iPad Pro.
It seems pretty self evident that what the BLM hashtag means (at least originally) is "black lives matter as much as white lives", as fueled by the many instances of blacks being killed in questionable circumstances, with no consequences at all for those that caused the deaths.
So rebutting this by saying #AllLivesMatter comes across (to some) like saying "all houses matter", ignoring the fact that one of the houses is burning.
While I personally think 90% of social justice political correctness is bullshit, criticizing BLM while ignoring the context of where it's coming from seems misguided.
One problem Amazon has is that they can't simply take down a product with fake reviews, because that further weaponizes the creation of fake reviews - bad actors would start generating obviously fake positive reviews for their competitors to suppress the product listing.
Google has done a similar thing by recently weaponizing "bad links" (counting them against a site instead of ignoring them), and this has resulted in a sh*t storm of bad links as people try to downgrade their competitors in the search results. It's been a disaster for honest websites.
It sounds like it may be even worse than that. Someone isn't likely to "clap" unless they agree with an article, so it will be maximum echo chamber as writers tailor content for their readers viewpoints.
The fact that women, for example, are half of the general population is irrelevant if they aren't represented that way in the applicant pool.
ie. if 25% of qualified applicants are female, you should be hiring approximately 25% women. If you hire much less, you're unfair to higher qualified women, if you hire much more, you're unfair to higher qualified men. This obviously will vary widely by which field you're discussing. Engineering/tech has pretty much been 80% male for the past 40 years.
Pay equity is a much more difficult problem to solve.
Hopefully you acknowledge that women and blacks were generally kept out of leadership positions in the 20s in the real USA. So then the question is, does it make sense that magical folk were 100 years more enlightened than everyone else? I'd say its pretty arbitrary. Most Potter characters in the original books don't seem any more socially advanced than the rest of us.
Wonder Woman was about a Goddess, and much of the fish-out-of-water plot was about how little regard she was given as a woman by men in the military. Did you even see the movie?
Any Western that features a gunslinger that is female or a person of color, and no other characters bat an eye. Entertaining yes, realistic no.
Or recently, Fantastic Beasts. Set in the 1920s, a time when women had just barely gotten the right to vote. And the president of the American magical folk is a black female, and 50% of the magical "enforcers in trenchcoats" are female. Clearly a choice by Rowling and the producers to give the magical folk 21st century levels of diversity, despite the time period. Not saying their choice was wrong, but it does seem like a bit of an anachronism.
But only aggrieved right-wingers whine about something as trivial as entertainment.
Please. LIke all the people complaining about the white-washing of the Oscars? Check your bias. We all whine.
You should read the article more closely, as he is not saying "all women" this or "all men" that. He specifically says that there is significant overlap between the sexes, and is only speaking to the large-number trends of gender percentages.
So in no way is he saying that all women are less suitable/inclined for leadership or for tech.. that would be laughable. He is just saying that when you look at the large trends, that part of the numbers may be in fact due to the biological traits which put the bell curves in different places with respect to success attributes for those professions.
And yes I think he stretches in places, but he is making an argument at least worthy of debate. Unfortunately the whole subject just gets everyone's hackles up, and both sides tend to start labeling rather than discussing particular points..
Fact is you're probably going to want that new motherboard for all the upgraded ports, memory support, features, etc. that your 4 year old motherboard simply doesn't have.
TFS sounds like a typical conspiracy theory to ascribe greedy intentions to what is more than likely just technological progress.
Had a cheap Lumia with Windows 8.1 mobile and it was a great little phone. Snappy well designed UI. I figured the apps would come eventually.
So I upgraded to another Lumia with Windows 10 mobile and it was a buggy, laggy mess. It would constantly show me outdated "live" tiles, and basic functions stopped working after an automatic update. Furthermore it was a dual sim phone, and they stupidly designated the sims as 1 and 2 instead of A and B. So the message and phone tiles would always have a 1 or 2 on them and it appeared like you had 1 or 2 messages - what a stupid design decision. Ended up literally throwing it against a brick wall in frustration. Completely smashed with satisfying chunks of the screen missing.
Got an iPhone. Way more expensive but you get what your pay for. Very happy. Oh and it has every app you could want.
How would the victim get the decryption key? Just curious.. I'm sure there is a way, but it doesn't seem obvious.
If the bathroom law had simply indicated allowed gender as indicated by government issued photo ID (rather than birth gender), then I can't see there being any major issue. Making it birth gender clearly is discriminatory to genuine transsexual persons. And on the flip side, nobody wants casual cross-dressers having absolute rights to the public washroom of their choosing.
As for school washrooms, that is probably more nuanced and should be left to the school administrators. (And a bathroom with private stalls is obviously a different, ahem, ballgame than a locker room/shower situation.)
It's been done for many decades for newborns so as to serve as an unambiguous identification in case of potential mix-ups or disputes re. the baby. As a parent I would probably appreciate it.
1) Lets stop calling games as "sports". This includes poker, chess, and anything involving computer button pressing. Not to denigrate such things, but they are competitive games, not sports.
2) Live televised sports have become so "monetized" with commercials that many are virtually unwatchable. For a generation used to Netflix and adblocked Youtube, it's a non-starter. Have you tried to watch a football game in the past few years? There is a commercial almost every whistle. Constant bombardment.
3) Most Millenials grew up playing video games, not playing a pickup game of baseball/football/tennis/whatever with their friends. So watching such sports lacks the vicarious thrill of people who did play them. Simply not as interesting to them on a primal level as older generations. Vice-versa with the eSports games.
What is traditional reading? It is a model of learning in which a book possesses the knowledge on a given topic and disseminates it to students. This model dates to the beginning of education, when it was the only way of sharing information. In fact, you occasionally still see the book presenting the reading called a book, because way back before the internet and even the printing press, a book would literally be a book so students could read it.
Now, don't get me wrong. The traditional reading model worked wonderfully for eons. But it is an outdated idea for millenials (free pass for adblockers).
Close your eyes and imagine yourself as a millenial in a college physics course with a book giving a traditional reading. Now open your eyes. Did you envision The Best Physics reading EVAR? I doubt it. You probably pictured a book droning on and on in front of you. No way that is more engaging or interesting than an episode of Empire, and if you're a book who uses traditional readings, just stop and play the show instead. Everyone will be better off.
You may think by now that I think most physics books are dolts. I promise that's not the case. But traditional reading simply isn't effective for millenials. Research shows that millenials are completely incapable of learning by hearing or seeing, they only learn by being entertained, a model often called early childhood education. Physics books should start thinking about how they can go beyond just a traditional reading. There are some easy things they can do (or millenials can ask them to do) to make learning more engaging. First, make millenials read the book outside of class, rather than in class. If your reading merely covers the material in the textbook, why make millenials buy the textbook when they can download it free? Now, you may put a different spin on the material, but still. You're merely repeating what millenials can read on their own. Let them do that on their own time, and use the classroom for texting and gaming and so forth.
Um, no. App stores increase competition because all the apps are directly lined up against each other and it is trivial to comparison/price shop (as opposed to each vendor having their own website or other commercial channels). Just look at Apple's app store or Google Play.. it's a pricing race to the bottom.
Since you're restricted to one store it stifles competitive pricing for apps and games.
I think you mean the opposite. The Apple and Android app stores have been a competitive race to the bottom for pricing, to the point where almost everything is now freemium.
Sorry but a propeller in a cowling is not a "jet engine". (stupid marketers)
Not that I wouldn't want one of these...looks pretty cool.
Who would have guessed that an article written by a vendor of AI software says not only that it gives you superpowers, but if you don't jump on the train now your business is totally f*cked.
I have a social site that uses several Cognitive AIs from the big three (Amazon, Google, Microsoft) to analyze images that users upload.
The false categorizations from these AIs are often baffling to the human eye. Like WTF can't you tell that is a human face partially obscured by a ball cap? Nope.
It seems that the way humans perceive images is to compare what our eyes tell us to internal 3D models we carry around of the real world - ie actual intelligence of what we are seeing. The AIs are blindly categorizing based on combinations of pixel shapes/colors found in the training set images - so they easily fall for the tricks outlined in TFA.
Canadian Customs will also go through your phone and/or computer looking to verify your story. Don't know about social media accounts.
Because all the good names such as "Placenta" were already taken.
The tiny-functions-are-panacea meme has got to die, for exactly the reasons you stated. It's trading function simplicity for system complexity. And all of those thousands of needless function interfaces you need to maintain, refactor, and potentially unit test... it's just crazy town.
Ironically the book "Clean Code" promotes this stylistic disaster. Yes each function might be "clean" taken by itself, but the system as a whole is anything but.
This bug affected my windows phone (ya... I know...).
Connected fine after a re-start. Guessing that the problem update tried to patch things without a restart, and their testing protocol missed it.