"bitch"? really? there's no need to call anyone that.
Yes, there is, of course. As described in TFA, the woman certainly qualifies for the term. Anybody abusing their power over others is a bad person ("bitch", "asshole" — pick your gender-specific name). And, in addition, malicious prosecution — which she threatened to bring upon him — is a felony, you know...
and perhaps that is the reason: the flight crew considered the tweet intimidation or threatening.
If complaining on Tweeter about rudeness can be considered either "intimidating" or "threatening" — or, indeed, "interfering" — then the First Amendment is null and void. Is that, what you are telling us?
"No person may assault, threaten, intimidate, or interfere with a crewmember in the performance of the crewmember's duties aboard an aircraft [emphasis mine -mi]] being operated under this part."
The gate-agent being talked about was not aboard the aircraft (nor part of the crew). In other words, your citation is invalid and inapplicable even if it were appropriate for a stewardess or a pilot on board.
the tweet identified someone by name.
Her name is publicly displayed. There is nothing "intimidating" about repeating it — or even taking pictures.
there are more reasonable ways to lodge a complaint, and that ain't one of them.
Whether the victim was "reasonable" or not is not being discussed. The agent threatened him with arrest over his accusing her of rudeness. What else would you blame a victim for? How about posting a negative review of a restaurant? Maybe, we "should be more like Europe" and punish people for that too?
NOT mean that the passenger doesn't have to follow crewmember instructions. if the passenger was being particularly difficult because he had his two snowflakes in tow and did not want to abide by Southwest's procedures, he should not be allowed on the plane.
But he did follow all instructions — and was allowed to board. What the bitch didn't like was him tweeting about the encounter afterwards.
Personally, I found out the hard way, what these assholes mean. I once pointed out to a New Jersey Transit conductor, that he is closing the doors one minute too early. He demanded, I leave the train in reply... I kid you not, he called police, who ordered me out and interrogated me on the platform (three uniformed bums plus one plain-clothed "detective"). They found nothing to arrest me for, but said (sternly): "You'll have to wait for the next train" (and left me on the empty platform as the train closed its doors — again — and left). It was all "legal": the rules, which you wish all of us to obey, are posted in every car. And they require passengers to "cooperate" with the conductors. Whether or not a particular passenger cooperates, is entirely up to each conductor. And, yes, he still works there — despite my complaining several times.
No flight-attendant — nor a train conductor, for that matter — should have the power to evict a passenger from a plane (or train). Other than for an offense, that's, indeed, subject to arrest.
given what's happened recently in aviation, one would think safety is important.
What has recently happened in aviation, that makes you think, safety is important?
Employing a Marxist theory of capitalism to refute socialism? Fascinating.
Yes, employing an opponent's own theory to prove him wrong is, usually, the most reliable way to deliver defeat in detail to him. Because, although all of us may have different views on life, the views must be self-consistent to be respectable.
- The ad says, you offer a quest, said Halfelf to the Mayor. But it does not explain, what sort of quest. Could you clarify?
- It is really simple - shrugged the Mayor. See that hill? There is a goblin on top of it with a grenade-launcher. Periodically he begins shooting at the town. That's, basically, the problem...
- Ok, understood. We must kill the goblin...
- Oh, no! Mayor's eyes widened and he started waving his hands. He can must not be killed under any circumstances!
- Why? - asked Gnome? He is a goblin!
- That's just it! If we kill him, the world community will say, it was genocide and we are all racists.
- So what? Let them whatever...
-... And send in troops, - gloomily added the Mayor.
- Khm... - thought Halfelf aloud - So, this shithead shoots at you from a grenade-launcher, and you tolerate it and would not hit back?
- Right, admitted the Mayor. Otherwise, we'll be called "aggressors".
- Alright, how about, perhaps, not kill him, but push him out some place far?
- From his hill? Impossible! Then they'll call us "occupiers".
- Catch him and take the grenade-launcher away?
- "Expropriators".
- Lock him up together with the weapon?.. Ok, Ok, don't answer, - quickly added Halfelf, when the Mayor started opening his mouth. - I understand. An interesting case indeed.
- So, what do you want from us? - asked the Princess? Can't kill him, can't disarm him, can't be chased away either — what's left? Counsel him? That's not what we do...
- Oh, no... For counseling we would've called for a psychiatrist. But then, by the way, the world community would've accused us of applying psychological pressure.
- And defiling the ancient traditions, - added Gnome, nodding his head. - Shooting at people from a grenade-launcher is part of goblins' traditional pastimes!
- Yes, yes - said the Mayor, - no you understand.
- So, what do you want from us? - asked the Princess again?
- Deliver a parcel to him, - sighed the Mayor.
- To whom? The goblin?
- Yeah. You see, up there on the hill, there is not much food. In about an hour he'll get hungry, announce a cease-fire and begin negotiations. He does that every day. Demands food, wine, weapons, sometimes other things. And then, we eats his full, proclaims, that the negotiations are at a dead-end and he is forced to resume fire. The world community is very sympathetic — they consider him very principled.
- And if you decline to bring him food?..
- Then they'll say, that...
- Ok, ok, we get it, - Poluelf waved his hands. So, why do you need us — why not send your own?
- We have — none came back...
- What? Did goblin kill them all?
- He claims, he did not.
- Huh?..
- And the world community believes him.
- Erm...
- Then they'll accuse us of provocations. You see, it is he, the goblin, who demonstrates peaceful initiative. It is his gesture of good will. If anything went wrong, it can only be our fault. It is obvious... But you are foreigners, maybe, he will not touch you.
- Ok, - summarized Halfelf. - If we shred the political wrappings, we must take the parcel from the customer and deliver it to client, right? A usual mail-quest. And everything else is your own problem. Right?
- Right, - confirmed the Mayor, - agreed?
- One question, - Princess raised her hand. You are so afraid, that the world community will call you "aggressors", "militarists", and worse — what are they calling you now?
- "Idiots," - answered the Mayor with sadness.
Seriously? Twitter? Even if your link really lead to an accusation of a strike on hospital (which it does not), would it have been credible? How about a more reliable source? Oh, sorry, you can't use that, because that page begins with Israel's explanation: "The Israeli military said it had targeted a cache of anti-tank missiles in the hospital's "immediate vicinity".
The only lies exposed by that fiasco is that of the mortgage applicants lying on their loan-applications. Most of those folks have never been to Wall Street.
High Frequency Theft.
No lies there. In other words, fail.
I don't believe that socialism (or capitalism) inherently create more cheating.
I simply believe that once people believe the system is unfair
Your two paragraphs contradict each other. Socialism — with it promise of equal results, rather than opportunity — is unfair, hence, it would create more cheating. Having grown up in the USSR, I still carry the notion, that cheating the government is perfectly Ok (as long as you can get away with it, of course). Because the government was a repressive beast, that cheated its citizenry on everything... My person may be anecdotal evidence, but the Economist's article puts more solid statistics behind it.
Fascism was the one from Italy, remember? It was the nazis with the gas chambers.
While not all Fascists were Nazis, all Nazis were Fascists. And, whenever your kind uses the term "fascists" to denounce someone, they never bother with the fine distinctions between Hitler, Mussolini and Franco — instead attributing the very worst features of all of them to whatever/whoever it is they are denouncing. Hence my question: Where are the gas chambers? And until you can present anything remotely similar, using the term is not called for. Mildly speaking.
The fascists were content with torture chambers, executions and shipping the "undesirables" to other countries to do the dirtiest work.
Oh, if that's, what's bothering you, then Eastern Germany (and the rest of USSR-dominated regimes) were far more "fascist" than the US ever was. Because they were using these methods not on (very) special occasions, but routinely and on massive scale.
From experience; I would be willing to bet that ANYONE living with scarcity threatening day to day living is willing to cheat, lie, con, finagle and it can get so bad that you steal, mug, burgle,injure and could possibly kill, dependent on circumstances.
From my experience — growing up in the USSR — it was perfectly Ok and morally acceptable to cheat the government. Because the repressive beast cheated the citizens far worse — when it was not outright killing them.
Sadly, modern Western government — hell-bent on income redistribution (known affectionately as "spreading the wealth around") — increasingly arouse the same sentiment...
How about automating virtually all production, as is rapidly beginning to happen?
It is beginning to happen, you'd observe, in Capitalist countries. Socialism, which was, officially, the first step towards that post-scarcity nirvana of Communism, would never have been able to achieve it.
And if you don't come up with some way for the other 99 men to earn a living you're going to have some serious social problems.
That same Capitalism, where everybody is not just allowed, but encouraged to do whatever other people are willing to pay for, will solve that problem. Whether it is creating entertainment, or growing healthier foods, or designing fancier gadgets — as long as people are allowed to profit from their ideas (rather than be told "You didn't build that!"), we are fine.
Spread the remaining jobs across 4-10 times as many people and everyone on the planet has the option of living a life of leisure where no-one has to work more than a few hours a week to provide for everyone, freeing everyone to focus their energy on art, philosophy, family, or even just recreation.
Unless some tyrant somewhere manages to drum-up some old butt-hurts of some reasonably powerful nation to divert those riches to war... Starting by invading his small neighbors and annexing provinces, for example...
no socialism [...] that was fascism with a tiny bit of communism-appearence thrown in.
Hair-splitting... Both are Collectivist ideologies valuing the Collective over the Individual. Eastern Europe — under Soviet domination — simply went (was taken rather) further down that road banning all private ownership of the means of production, whereas the countries you listed retained some measure of private enterprises.
Wow, I wonder, if my fellow citizens of the command-and-control persuasion still think, the government mandating the higher speeds would've been more effective in delivering the bandwidth to consumers...
There are as many liars in Washington DC as there are in Moscow.
Except American media is, decidedly, not controlled by American government. DC's liars may be lying to us and each other, but other liars stand ready to catch them at it.
Not in Moscow — where anti-government speech is non-existent.
That is only true, when you are programming (today's) machines
When you are giving instructions to (programming) a human — or anything/anyone else with intelligence (artificial or otherwise) — humor may become available as a construct both for the instructions of the programmer and messages from programmed.
My argument was and remains: algorithms are the most important part of programming. Before you need to put in writing (or even verbalize it), you need to consider all (or most) of the possibilities. Block schemes are language agnostic...
Before you can start formulating them — in any language, even in a spoken one — you need to think through the decision-trees and handling of exceptions and errors.
A "Hello world" program — in any programming language (except, maybe, the assembly) — is vastly simpler than a list of errands you may get from your spouse on a weekend. Heck, a single errand of shopping may be more complex:
Buy two pounds of X, if it is fresh, otherwise buy only 1 pound and another pound of Y.
Honey, what if they are all out of Y — should I get two pounds of X regardless of freshness or not buy it at all?
'Rachel From Cardholder Services,' was a large robocall scam the agency took out in 2012
Sure, the "Rachel" didn't kill anyone. Probably. But with the number of calls placed, the overall damage — even if spread among millions of people — certainly exceeded that of a serious bodily injury or even death of one person.
Was any of the scammers sent to prison? I mean, I'd recommend impalement, but prison would've been good enough. Did it happen?
By appealing and not agreeing to "settle" with the prosecution — in fact, I did not even want to "talk to them" other than during a hearing and in judge's presence. This made it necessary for the actual officer, who (supposedly) reviewed the ticket before it was issued, to appear in court — which he didn't do. Maybe, I was just "lucky" at that and, maybe, Chicago would've allowed the prosecution to avoid presenting the officer for testimony, but...
The automatic cameras allow for issuing a massive number of tickets — because human police don't need to do much work. If more people appealed — thus necessitating the human policemen's presence in court for each such ticket, maybe, they wouldn't be such a valuable proposition for the local authorities.
That Russia's officialdom is lying is a given. What is truly troublesome is that the vast majority of citizenry not only accept these lies, but are passionately spreading them around. Decades ago this phenomenon was blamed on the "Iron Curtain" — which no longer exists. Though Russian ISPs are blocking certain sites, most of the Internet is perfectly accessible to Russians. But they choose to believe the TV instead — and independent TV-channels no longer broadcast in Russian Federation.
It would seem, neither the Iron Curtain nor even the Great Firewall are necessary — as long as the government controls the media, whatever foreigner enemies, spies, and subversives may say on the Internet will be derided and discarded.
I follow the data. In numerous other countries, this is not the case.
Could you share a link to the data, so I can follow it too? Do those countries have a better number of female Grandmasters? Nope...
Otherwise -- buying into the idea of female inferiority with no data to support your assertion
You've already conceded, that men are stronger: "testosterone helps". Why would not they also be, no, not smarter — able to concentrate deeper on a single problem, for example?
buying into the idea of female inferiority with no data to support your assertion
I do have the data — merely 1% of Grandmasters are women — and not for lack of trying for there is a large number holding the title of Women Grandmasters. But most of them can't match the males. You are trying to dismiss this 1:99 discrepancy with "prejudice" — and that's nonsense. Nothing prevents girls from takin up chess. No large investment is required to keep practicing — even the poorest can do it.
If it were mostly due to prejudice, the countries with more such prejudice would have fewer prominent female players — but the opposite it true. Most of these ladies come from former USSR and China, where the prejudices are, if anything, worse — but the girls do learn the game, and do get fairly good at it. Just not as good as males.
I don't know, why that is. Women are from Venus. Some researchers have suggested, evolution made females develop better handling of many small and tedious tasks (gathering foods while avoiding snakes, numerous chores of child-rearing), whereas men got better at solving a single problem (killing the mammoth). Again, I don't know. But the "data", which you profess to follow, is irrefutable.
centralized arbiter to analyze network traffic holistically and make routing decisions based on that analysis, in contrast to the more decentralized protocols common today
Central planning works rather poorly for humans. Maybe, it will be better for computers, but I remain skeptical.
Oh, and the term "holistically" does not help either.
Slashdot Mirror
What country equates complaining about rudeness with intimidation and harassment? Probably, not even North Korea...
Yes, there is, of course. As described in TFA, the woman certainly qualifies for the term. Anybody abusing their power over others is a bad person ("bitch", "asshole" — pick your gender-specific name). And, in addition, malicious prosecution — which she threatened to bring upon him — is a felony, you know...
If complaining on Tweeter about rudeness can be considered either "intimidating" or "threatening" — or, indeed, "interfering" — then the First Amendment is null and void. Is that, what you are telling us?
The gate-agent being talked about was not aboard the aircraft (nor part of the crew). In other words, your citation is invalid and inapplicable even if it were appropriate for a stewardess or a pilot on board.
Her name is publicly displayed. There is nothing "intimidating" about repeating it — or even taking pictures.
Whether the victim was "reasonable" or not is not being discussed. The agent threatened him with arrest over his accusing her of rudeness. What else would you blame a victim for? How about posting a negative review of a restaurant? Maybe, we "should be more like Europe" and punish people for that too?
But he did follow all instructions — and was allowed to board. What the bitch didn't like was him tweeting about the encounter afterwards.
Personally, I found out the hard way, what these assholes mean. I once pointed out to a New Jersey Transit conductor, that he is closing the doors one minute too early. He demanded, I leave the train in reply... I kid you not, he called police, who ordered me out and interrogated me on the platform (three uniformed bums plus one plain-clothed "detective"). They found nothing to arrest me for, but said (sternly): "You'll have to wait for the next train" (and left me on the empty platform as the train closed its doors — again — and left). It was all "legal": the rules, which you wish all of us to obey, are posted in every car. And they require passengers to "cooperate" with the conductors. Whether or not a particular passenger cooperates, is entirely up to each conductor. And, yes, he still works there — despite my complaining several times.
No flight-attendant — nor a train conductor, for that matter — should have the power to evict a passenger from a plane (or train). Other than for an offense, that's, indeed, subject to arrest.
What has recently happened in aviation, that makes you think, safety is important?
What's new about this advice? Was it not as useful and applicable 50, 100, and 1000 years ago?
Yes, employing an opponent's own theory to prove him wrong is, usually, the most reliable way to deliver defeat in detail to him. Because, although all of us may have different views on life, the views must be self-consistent to be respectable.
All of this is true. But your excellent write-up does nothing to justify the AC's attempt to call US "fascist"...
- The ad says, you offer a quest, said Halfelf to the Mayor. But it does not explain, what sort of quest. Could you clarify? ... And send in troops, - gloomily added the Mayor.
- It is really simple - shrugged the Mayor. See that hill? There is a goblin on top of it with a grenade-launcher. Periodically he begins shooting at the town. That's, basically, the problem...
- Ok, understood. We must kill the goblin...
- Oh, no! Mayor's eyes widened and he started waving his hands. He can must not be killed under any circumstances!
- Why? - asked Gnome? He is a goblin!
- That's just it! If we kill him, the world community will say, it was genocide and we are all racists.
- So what? Let them whatever...
-
- Khm... - thought Halfelf aloud - So, this shithead shoots at you from a grenade-launcher, and you tolerate it and would not hit back?
- Right, admitted the Mayor. Otherwise, we'll be called "aggressors".
- Alright, how about, perhaps, not kill him, but push him out some place far?
- From his hill? Impossible! Then they'll call us "occupiers".
- Catch him and take the grenade-launcher away?
- "Expropriators".
- Lock him up together with the weapon?.. Ok, Ok, don't answer, - quickly added Halfelf, when the Mayor started opening his mouth. - I understand. An interesting case indeed.
- So, what do you want from us? - asked the Princess? Can't kill him, can't disarm him, can't be chased away either — what's left? Counsel him? That's not what we do...
- Oh, no... For counseling we would've called for a psychiatrist. But then, by the way, the world community would've accused us of applying psychological pressure.
- And defiling the ancient traditions, - added Gnome, nodding his head. - Shooting at people from a grenade-launcher is part of goblins' traditional pastimes!
- Yes, yes - said the Mayor, - no you understand.
- So, what do you want from us? - asked the Princess again?
- Deliver a parcel to him, - sighed the Mayor.
- To whom? The goblin?
- Yeah. You see, up there on the hill, there is not much food. In about an hour he'll get hungry, announce a cease-fire and begin negotiations. He does that every day. Demands food, wine, weapons, sometimes other things. And then, we eats his full, proclaims, that the negotiations are at a dead-end and he is forced to resume fire. The world community is very sympathetic — they consider him very principled.
- And if you decline to bring him food?..
- Then they'll say, that...
- Ok, ok, we get it, - Poluelf waved his hands. So, why do you need us — why not send your own?
- We have — none came back...
- What? Did goblin kill them all?
- He claims, he did not.
- Huh?..
- And the world community believes him.
- Erm...
- Then they'll accuse us of provocations. You see, it is he, the goblin, who demonstrates peaceful initiative. It is his gesture of good will. If anything went wrong, it can only be our fault. It is obvious... But you are foreigners, maybe, he will not touch you.
- Ok, - summarized Halfelf. - If we shred the political wrappings, we must take the parcel from the customer and deliver it to client, right? A usual mail-quest. And everything else is your own problem. Right?
- Right, - confirmed the Mayor, - agreed?
- One question, - Princess raised her hand. You are so afraid, that the world community will call you "aggressors", "militarists", and worse — what are they calling you now?
- "Idiots," - answered the Mayor with sadness.
Seriously? Twitter? Even if your link really lead to an accusation of a strike on hospital (which it does not), would it have been credible? How about a more reliable source? Oh, sorry, you can't use that, because that page begins with Israel's explanation: "The Israeli military said it had targeted a cache of anti-tank missiles in the hospital's "immediate vicinity".
And we know very well, from sources both impartial and even those biased towards the Arabs, that Hamas does use such civilian buildings for weapons-caches.
Duly punished by bankruptcy and prison time.
The only lies exposed by that fiasco is that of the mortgage applicants lying on their loan-applications. Most of those folks have never been to Wall Street.
No lies there. In other words, fail.
Your two paragraphs contradict each other. Socialism — with it promise of equal results, rather than opportunity — is unfair, hence, it would create more cheating. Having grown up in the USSR, I still carry the notion, that cheating the government is perfectly Ok (as long as you can get away with it, of course). Because the government was a repressive beast, that cheated its citizenry on everything... My person may be anecdotal evidence, but the Economist's article puts more solid statistics behind it.
While not all Fascists were Nazis, all Nazis were Fascists. And, whenever your kind uses the term "fascists" to denounce someone, they never bother with the fine distinctions between Hitler, Mussolini and Franco — instead attributing the very worst features of all of them to whatever/whoever it is they are denouncing. Hence my question: Where are the gas chambers? And until you can present anything remotely similar, using the term is not called for. Mildly speaking.
Oh, if that's, what's bothering you, then Eastern Germany (and the rest of USSR-dominated regimes) were far more "fascist" than the US ever was. Because they were using these methods not on (very) special occasions, but routinely and on massive scale.
You must've tried to make some point there, but I don't get it. Could you try again, perhaps?
Citation needed.
According to TFA, it does indeed. But far less than Socialism.
From my experience — growing up in the USSR — it was perfectly Ok and morally acceptable to cheat the government. Because the repressive beast cheated the citizens far worse — when it was not outright killing them.
Sadly, modern Western government — hell-bent on income redistribution (known affectionately as "spreading the wealth around") — increasingly arouse the same sentiment...
It is beginning to happen, you'd observe, in Capitalist countries. Socialism, which was, officially, the first step towards that post-scarcity nirvana of Communism, would never have been able to achieve it.
That same Capitalism, where everybody is not just allowed, but encouraged to do whatever other people are willing to pay for, will solve that problem. Whether it is creating entertainment, or growing healthier foods, or designing fancier gadgets — as long as people are allowed to profit from their ideas (rather than be told "You didn't build that!"), we are fine.
Unless some tyrant somewhere manages to drum-up some old butt-hurts of some reasonably powerful nation to divert those riches to war... Starting by invading his small neighbors and annexing provinces, for example...
Fascism, huh? So, where are the gas-chambers?
Hair-splitting... Both are Collectivist ideologies valuing the Collective over the Individual. Eastern Europe — under Soviet domination — simply went (was taken rather) further down that road banning all private ownership of the means of production, whereas the countries you listed retained some measure of private enterprises.
Wow, I wonder, if my fellow citizens of the command-and-control persuasion still think, the government mandating the higher speeds would've been more effective in delivering the bandwidth to consumers...
Except American media is, decidedly, not controlled by American government. DC's liars may be lying to us and each other, but other liars stand ready to catch them at it.
Not in Moscow — where anti-government speech is non-existent.
That is only true, when you are programming (today's) machines
When you are giving instructions to (programming) a human — or anything/anyone else with intelligence (artificial or otherwise) — humor may become available as a construct both for the instructions of the programmer and messages from programmed.
My argument was and remains: algorithms are the most important part of programming. Before you need to put in writing (or even verbalize it), you need to consider all (or most) of the possibilities. Block schemes are language agnostic...
Before you can start formulating them — in any language, even in a spoken one — you need to think through the decision-trees and handling of exceptions and errors.
A "Hello world" program — in any programming language (except, maybe, the assembly) — is vastly simpler than a list of errands you may get from your spouse on a weekend. Heck, a single errand of shopping may be more complex:
Sure, the "Rachel" didn't kill anyone. Probably. But with the number of calls placed, the overall damage — even if spread among millions of people — certainly exceeded that of a serious bodily injury or even death of one person.
Was any of the scammers sent to prison? I mean, I'd recommend impalement, but prison would've been good enough. Did it happen?
By appealing and not agreeing to "settle" with the prosecution — in fact, I did not even want to "talk to them" other than during a hearing and in judge's presence. This made it necessary for the actual officer, who (supposedly) reviewed the ticket before it was issued, to appear in court — which he didn't do. Maybe, I was just "lucky" at that and, maybe, Chicago would've allowed the prosecution to avoid presenting the officer for testimony, but...
The automatic cameras allow for issuing a massive number of tickets — because human police don't need to do much work. If more people appealed — thus necessitating the human policemen's presence in court for each such ticket, maybe, they wouldn't be such a valuable proposition for the local authorities.
That Russia's officialdom is lying is a given. What is truly troublesome is that the vast majority of citizenry not only accept these lies, but are passionately spreading them around. Decades ago this phenomenon was blamed on the "Iron Curtain" — which no longer exists. Though Russian ISPs are blocking certain sites, most of the Internet is perfectly accessible to Russians. But they choose to believe the TV instead — and independent TV-channels no longer broadcast in Russian Federation.
It would seem, neither the Iron Curtain nor even the Great Firewall are necessary — as long as the government controls the media, whatever foreigner enemies, spies, and subversives may say on the Internet will be derided and discarded.
Could you share a link to the data, so I can follow it too? Do those countries have a better number of female Grandmasters? Nope...
You've already conceded, that men are stronger: "testosterone helps". Why would not they also be, no, not smarter — able to concentrate deeper on a single problem, for example?
I do have the data — merely 1% of Grandmasters are women — and not for lack of trying for there is a large number holding the title of Women Grandmasters. But most of them can't match the males. You are trying to dismiss this 1:99 discrepancy with "prejudice" — and that's nonsense. Nothing prevents girls from takin up chess. No large investment is required to keep practicing — even the poorest can do it.
If it were mostly due to prejudice, the countries with more such prejudice would have fewer prominent female players — but the opposite it true. Most of these ladies come from former USSR and China, where the prejudices are, if anything, worse — but the girls do learn the game, and do get fairly good at it. Just not as good as males.
I don't know, why that is. Women are from Venus. Some researchers have suggested, evolution made females develop better handling of many small and tedious tasks (gathering foods while avoiding snakes, numerous chores of child-rearing), whereas men got better at solving a single problem (killing the mammoth). Again, I don't know. But the "data", which you profess to follow, is irrefutable.
Central planning works rather poorly for humans. Maybe, it will be better for computers, but I remain skeptical.
Oh, and the term "holistically" does not help either.