That's the thing though - how many kids kill themselves *every day* racing or otherwise driving like idiots in their Civics and Corollas? We don't need high performance cars to put ourselves in very dangerous situations.
This is a case of armchair accident analysts demanding something be done before knowing what the problem is.
But why? This isn't some mass market car, it is is an exotic meant for sitting outside of Starbucks and admiring (and also track days...). Stability control systems aren't simply a computer you plug into the car's CAN bus which magically glue the tires to the ground. There are design considerations for the entire vehicle suspension that are impacted by stability control. Heaps of sensors and other devices to control the motor, brakes, and more.
On top of this, we're talking about a car that costs what... 250k? More? (I didn't look up the price...). There will be a handful of these on the streets, typically owned by rich people who don't drive them anyway. You're trying to force nannies into a rich man's toy in an attempt to save one, maybe two people - people who by nature would have disabled the nannies anyway.
You can't credit non-specific neurological differences and turn around and call my arguments ignorant. Well, I mean, you can, but that's just silly. Fact is, women used to be far more prevalent in mathematics and computing than they are today. It's not that their "puny female minds" can't comprehend the work, it's that society pushes them toward more "feminine" pursuits than computers. Given a depressing perusal of the/. commentary here, I'd say the industry is also doing a bang-up job of pushing them out as well.
Can't tell if serious or... oh god, you are serious.
If this were Jalopnik I'd post an image captioned "Bitch, are you for real?" It would get so many recommends. But alas, this is/., and I gotta say, given though the discussions on tech topics is usually quite enlightening, reading a lot of commentors views on this story is excruciatingly depressing. My only solace is that most of us don't leave our basements and as such don't influence others with our ridiculous world views.
Yes, we should. If you see a male hair stylist, what's your first impression of him? What about a man who really loves working with children? We lose out on a great deal of talent by assuming gender roles apply to careers.
This is spot on, though I did want to add a bit...
My gf, who predictably enough works in education, is absolutely desperate to get more men into the field. As teachers, as volunteers, as just about anything we are willing to do, just to get more interaction between children and adult men. Society is slowly becoming aware of gender gaps in those fields and starting to provide incentives.
As for social aspects of software engineering, I posted about it before I read what you wrote. I think computer-related jobs get that reputation because they are some of the few fields where anti-social people can excel. I think that's great, but that reputation has clouded the view of software engineering, which in general is a very social task requiring a great deal of interaction among the team. To repeat myself, your anti-social programmers are going to be brilliant because the *have* to be. Where I am, a programmer who's merely pretty good but can't work with the team is going to fail.
How is software engineering not social? I work as a part of a team and frequently interact with my team to see how my little piece of the pie needs to talk with their pieces. Are there times I need to hide away and crunch some numbers work hammer out some documentation? Absolutely, but by far my most productive time at work is when I'm in the lab working directly with the other engineers.
The whole "anti-social software guy" as the norm is absolutely untrue. I work with a handful of them, and while they generally do brilliant work (they have to, they can't count on the team to help fill knowledge gaps), they are handled carefully and given tasks they can crunch on without much interaction.
I'd also argue that the rockstar programmer is a myth, but that's a rant for another time.
Men may be more suited to worth that involves heavy lifting, but writing code? No way. In the early days of computers, you had a far more even split (if not more women than men programming).
It's more an issue of societal views on gender roles influencing young people. Society gives the impression that men should be the nerds sitting at their computers designing whatever, so women shy away from engineering, math, and sciences. Society gives the impression that women should nurture youth, so men shy away from elementary education.
Suitability has absolutely nothing to do with it. Yes, men and women may "think" differently, and while that may impact an individual's style of code or design, it doesn't have an effect on their ability to do so.
How is it a depressing topic? If I do something nice for somebody else - I'm not sitting there thinking "man, I'm gonna feel so damn good about this!" I'm thinking about what they get out of it. If it makes me feel good too, that's gravy. Is that selfish? Maybe in some small way, but it seems you're trying to put negative connotations on that which really don't apply. In the end, everybody wins.
Maybe we should shy away from the specific term "altruistic" because the pedants jump all over it as there are benefits on both sides. There may not be such a thing as a truly "selfless" act - but people for damn sure perform acts knowing the recipient gets far more out of it than they do. That's the essence of it, working toward a disproportionate benefit for others. Hell, it's far less depressing knowing nobody was entirely hosed.
Having not read TFA and barely skimmed TFS, I do feel like adding an anecdote here regarding American culture. I have many friends that brew beer. They generally enjoy the process and really like sharing their beers with their friends, even those of us who don't brew. Sure, they're probably more likely to get invited to bbqs and dinners, but it's not like they actively expect something in return. These guys are definitely treating more often than they are treated.
You may notice among your friends that some of them host bbqs or dinner parties more often than others. It's not that they're after some tangible gain from you, it's usually that they either genuinely enjoy cooking or your company. Or they want to sleep with your wife.
Definitely offtopic though... The question is what MMORPG do you recommend - not what social activities do you prefer.
Contrary to popular belief, you *can* play an MMO or other video games and still enjoy many weeknights of hanging out with other people or working on your hobbies.
Let's put it another way. If I'm good friends with my neighbors, spent last night playing trivia at the bar with a bunch of friends, have weekend plans to snowshoe if the weather permits it, and don't feel like wrenching on my project car, what MMO would you guys recommend for a relaxing evening at home?
I've played some WoT and truly enjoyed it - but it isn't the same experience you get from WoW. It's more similar to a game like League of Legends. Couple of major changes from a typical "MMO"
Each game is self-contained, makes it easy to play a game or two and log off instead of facing an open-ended grind. The flip side is you don't have any storyline to progress in, just more tanks to unlock, which I found rather tedius
You can only form teams of two or three people unless you get into forming companies.
Steep learning curve. Most MMOs hold your hand for a while in single player stuff. Expect at least an evening of getting beat on before you get the hang of it. On the bright side, nobody expects folks at Tier I to have the game mechanics nailed down.
Slashdot Mirror
God I'd love to have a 240z...
That's the thing though - how many kids kill themselves *every day* racing or otherwise driving like idiots in their Civics and Corollas? We don't need high performance cars to put ourselves in very dangerous situations.
This is a case of armchair accident analysts demanding something be done before knowing what the problem is.
Be fair - most of them only kill themselves.
But why? This isn't some mass market car, it is is an exotic meant for sitting outside of Starbucks and admiring (and also track days...). Stability control systems aren't simply a computer you plug into the car's CAN bus which magically glue the tires to the ground. There are design considerations for the entire vehicle suspension that are impacted by stability control. Heaps of sensors and other devices to control the motor, brakes, and more.
On top of this, we're talking about a car that costs what... 250k? More? (I didn't look up the price...). There will be a handful of these on the streets, typically owned by rich people who don't drive them anyway. You're trying to force nannies into a rich man's toy in an attempt to save one, maybe two people - people who by nature would have disabled the nannies anyway.
There are plenty of cars sold through normal retail channels without stability control. Plenty more where it's defeatable with the push of a button.
Shoulda clarified... Dinosaurs that don't yet know they're extinct.
You can't credit non-specific neurological differences and turn around and call my arguments ignorant. Well, I mean, you can, but that's just silly. Fact is, women used to be far more prevalent in mathematics and computing than they are today. It's not that their "puny female minds" can't comprehend the work, it's that society pushes them toward more "feminine" pursuits than computers. Given a depressing perusal of the /. commentary here, I'd say the industry is also doing a bang-up job of pushing them out as well.
Can't tell if serious or... oh god, you are serious.
/., and I gotta say, given though the discussions on tech topics is usually quite enlightening, reading a lot of commentors views on this story is excruciatingly depressing. My only solace is that most of us don't leave our basements and as such don't influence others with our ridiculous world views.
If this were Jalopnik I'd post an image captioned "Bitch, are you for real?" It would get so many recommends. But alas, this is
...so they go into education and other fields with lower earnings potential and more work hours?
Bravo my friend, brilliantly executed!
I'm guessing he's merely pointing out that bigotry is certainly alive and kicking on /.
Yes, we should. If you see a male hair stylist, what's your first impression of him? What about a man who really loves working with children? We lose out on a great deal of talent by assuming gender roles apply to careers.
This is spot on, though I did want to add a bit...
My gf, who predictably enough works in education, is absolutely desperate to get more men into the field. As teachers, as volunteers, as just about anything we are willing to do, just to get more interaction between children and adult men. Society is slowly becoming aware of gender gaps in those fields and starting to provide incentives.
As for social aspects of software engineering, I posted about it before I read what you wrote. I think computer-related jobs get that reputation because they are some of the few fields where anti-social people can excel. I think that's great, but that reputation has clouded the view of software engineering, which in general is a very social task requiring a great deal of interaction among the team. To repeat myself, your anti-social programmers are going to be brilliant because the *have* to be. Where I am, a programmer who's merely pretty good but can't work with the team is going to fail.
How is software engineering not social? I work as a part of a team and frequently interact with my team to see how my little piece of the pie needs to talk with their pieces. Are there times I need to hide away and crunch some numbers work hammer out some documentation? Absolutely, but by far my most productive time at work is when I'm in the lab working directly with the other engineers.
The whole "anti-social software guy" as the norm is absolutely untrue. I work with a handful of them, and while they generally do brilliant work (they have to, they can't count on the team to help fill knowledge gaps), they are handled carefully and given tasks they can crunch on without much interaction.
I'd also argue that the rockstar programmer is a myth, but that's a rant for another time.
Men may be more suited to worth that involves heavy lifting, but writing code? No way. In the early days of computers, you had a far more even split (if not more women than men programming).
It's more an issue of societal views on gender roles influencing young people. Society gives the impression that men should be the nerds sitting at their computers designing whatever, so women shy away from engineering, math, and sciences. Society gives the impression that women should nurture youth, so men shy away from elementary education.
Suitability has absolutely nothing to do with it. Yes, men and women may "think" differently, and while that may impact an individual's style of code or design, it doesn't have an effect on their ability to do so.
And what "male rights" are you talking about that females wouldn't have as well?
But you got a new one this year, because despite those flaws they are just so *cool*!!!
How is it a depressing topic? If I do something nice for somebody else - I'm not sitting there thinking "man, I'm gonna feel so damn good about this!" I'm thinking about what they get out of it. If it makes me feel good too, that's gravy. Is that selfish? Maybe in some small way, but it seems you're trying to put negative connotations on that which really don't apply. In the end, everybody wins.
Maybe we should shy away from the specific term "altruistic" because the pedants jump all over it as there are benefits on both sides. There may not be such a thing as a truly "selfless" act - but people for damn sure perform acts knowing the recipient gets far more out of it than they do. That's the essence of it, working toward a disproportionate benefit for others. Hell, it's far less depressing knowing nobody was entirely hosed.
My god you people are depressing.
Good lord, first I grow up jealous that all the Jewish church songs are so much better than Christian hymns, now you tell me this!?!
I may have to seek religion again...
Having not read TFA and barely skimmed TFS, I do feel like adding an anecdote here regarding American culture. I have many friends that brew beer. They generally enjoy the process and really like sharing their beers with their friends, even those of us who don't brew. Sure, they're probably more likely to get invited to bbqs and dinners, but it's not like they actively expect something in return. These guys are definitely treating more often than they are treated.
You may notice among your friends that some of them host bbqs or dinner parties more often than others. It's not that they're after some tangible gain from you, it's usually that they either genuinely enjoy cooking or your company. Or they want to sleep with your wife.
Definitely offtopic though... The question is what MMORPG do you recommend - not what social activities do you prefer.
Contrary to popular belief, you *can* play an MMO or other video games and still enjoy many weeknights of hanging out with other people or working on your hobbies.
Let's put it another way. If I'm good friends with my neighbors, spent last night playing trivia at the bar with a bunch of friends, have weekend plans to snowshoe if the weather permits it, and don't feel like wrenching on my project car, what MMO would you guys recommend for a relaxing evening at home?
I've played some WoT and truly enjoyed it - but it isn't the same experience you get from WoW. It's more similar to a game like League of Legends. Couple of major changes from a typical "MMO"
Each game is self-contained, makes it easy to play a game or two and log off instead of facing an open-ended grind. The flip side is you don't have any storyline to progress in, just more tanks to unlock, which I found rather tedius
You can only form teams of two or three people unless you get into forming companies.
Steep learning curve. Most MMOs hold your hand for a while in single player stuff. Expect at least an evening of getting beat on before you get the hang of it. On the bright side, nobody expects folks at Tier I to have the game mechanics nailed down.
...except for the infidels
You can't infect The Doctor.