Male agression against women is slightly higher, but we're only looking at a 40/60 split. That is, of course, reported, but then the statistics don't seem to be that different for injuries caused (I did see a figure very close to 50% here but I think that might actually be misreading of the statistics).
The main problem here is lack of awareness. The police seem very reluctant to prosecute women, and men are reluctant to apear weak.
If you need to think of something closer to home, read about domestic violence, in "the west," today.
In the UK men make up 40% of domestic violence victims, and pretty close to 50% when the abuse involved "severe force". There are 7500 refuge places in the UK for women, and 60 for men.
How dare you lecture others on equal rights when you totally disregard the millions of male victims of domestic violence!
I broadly agree with most of your points but I hate this sort of thing. When you start getting into one-upmanship over who's the most opressed you come across as that social justice peasant in Quest for the Holy Grail. "Help, help, I'm being opressed!"
Women often have to deal with prejudice. So do men. Work together, and tell the SJWs and MRAs to get stuffed.
Cutting certain businesses or even entire countries out of the Internet is not nearly as difficult from a technical point of view as cloud-dreaming geeks like to think, and taking billions out of a national economy by blatantly playing the system is a very strong motivator.
Didn't mean to imply that it was trivial. Google obviously sees a business need for a presence in the UK. More the observation that it is genuinely a lot harder to claim conclusively that a transaction with Google happens in any specific place. Sure a British company advertising to British customers paying Google UK is a British transaction, but what about a Canadian company that does 17% of its business in Europe paying Google US for international advertising? And with multinationals selling to other multinationals things get even more complicated.
I'm a man. I'm not a fortune 500 CEO! Why the hell not! I was promised there's be privilige!
I have a 99.9999% chance of not becoming a fortune 500 CEO. A woman has a 99.99999% chance of the same thing. Fact is neither of us are going to become CEO. But this is petty trivial shit.
Yes, it is a problem that women are opressed in a lot of the world. I'll go on marches and sign petitions because that shit matters. Whining that women don't become CEOs (when most women don't want to be CEOs) is so trivial that it makes a mockery of the things that do matter!
Honestly, I don't have that much time for most of this. It comes across as a whine in response to a whine. Yes, we're not toally equal but there aren't any barriers to you not becoming a miner. Maybe the imbalance in college attendance is something we should care about, but there are bigger issues.
What is a big problem is men are more likely to commit suicide, much more likely to end up as criminals and likely to die younger. A man will typically get a much higher sentence than a woman charged with the same crime. If he does go to prison, the idea that he might be raped is tereated as a joke.
Separated fathers often have difficulty having access to their children. Men are victims of 40% of cases of spousal abuse but there are hardly any shelters for them, and a lot of the time they're scared to call the police because they're scared they'll be seen as the agressors.
So I don't really give a fuck about the imbalance of men doing heavy lifting. There are much more important issues to worry about. I get that you;re trying to point out the hypoocrisy but it's backfiring. Whining about petty shit trivialises the important issues.
That's roughly what they're doing already. This law addresses that. Charging for server farms would be considered "economic activity" and therefore these payments would be taxed at 25%.
Not sure if it will be as easy as that, but it's certainly true that it's a lot easier for entirely online firms to avoid this sort of thing than companies that have physical products. Ultimately, Google can operate in a country with zero physical presence.
Still, it's not just Google. Starbucks and Amazon also came in for a lot of criticism, and it's a lot harder to charge a customer in US dollars for a cup of coffee along Kensington High Street.
His speciality is physics. He knows more than I ever will about black holes and cosmology, as well as life with motor neurone disease, but he is not an expert on AI.
While academics are very smart, they're not giant brains in jars. The best engineers, surgeons, and entrepreneurs are every bit as smart. They just apply their intelligence elsewhere.
He doesn't know about AI. He's not an expert. The media has this idea that every genius is a polymath but can we please not subscribe to the same fallacy here!
Right. Worked at these places and worked for bland corporate offices. After a while, the idea of working an 8 hour day and going home to relax appeals a lot more than a pool table.
Really what I want is a staff canteen, and an HR department that will respond to complaints of overwork. Going out with colleagues for beers once in a while is nice and so is interesting work but that should be as well as rather than instead of a healthy work-life balance.
So don't try and have a rational debate with her then. She's clearly not interested and if you make it into a game then you're just being a childish troll.
It's not an ideal. It's not even optimal. There are arguments for imbalance. Net neutrality is a solution to a problem in the US- that of a small cartel having undue control over the internet.
There are reasons you might want to have a two tier internet, and even if there aren't it's not impossible that we might want them in the future. Most countries there's enough competition for this to self regulate to a degree.
Imagination is not optional for intelligence. Intelligence is the ability to build mental models and manipulate them.
I like this thought. Not quite sure what counts as imagination though. Does the ability of a chess algorithm to model hypothetical future board positions count?
My experience - writing a very simple rubik cube solver as an undergraduate project - I rejected the two simple solutions for a trivial case (requires 1 turn to solve). So it turned the opposite face, then turned the first face, then turned the opposite face back. This had the appearance of a creative solution even though the algorithm was dumb.
It was Turing's first attempt to answer the question "what makes a machine intelligent?". As a mathematician he wanted an empirical answer so he felt that the Turing Test would be a good test. A decent idea, but remember, computers had only been around for a few years. I don't know if he'd ever written a program.
But what he had was a user requirements list. He didn't have a working implementation. He had "computer must be able to respond like a human to questions asked", so we have software that fits those requirements. But it's not obvious that it's intelligent. Personally I think computer chess shows more signs of intelligence. It requires imagination, prediction and abstraction. These seem much more important than ability to communicate with a human.
Seriously, I quite enjoy it, but please give me a UI designer, or at least an artist with UI experience to work with! I've worked on some cool interactive display stuff.
It's a devious ploy to step people from mobbing the review site with bogus 1-star reviews.
Although I checked yesterday and ther were 150 negative reviews, and the three newest ones looked fairly legit. I think Trip Advisor is deleting any review added since this story hit the interwebs.
Slashdot Mirror
GTA 1 & 2 didn't. Well, I guess some of the blobs might have been female but it was pretty indescriminate mindless violence.
Male agression against women is slightly higher, but we're only looking at a 40/60 split. That is, of course, reported, but then the statistics don't seem to be that different for injuries caused (I did see a figure very close to 50% here but I think that might actually be misreading of the statistics).
The main problem here is lack of awareness. The police seem very reluctant to prosecute women, and men are reluctant to apear weak.
In the UK men make up 40% of domestic violence victims, and pretty close to 50% when the abuse involved "severe force". There are 7500 refuge places in the UK for women, and 60 for men.
How dare you lecture others on equal rights when you totally disregard the millions of male victims of domestic violence!
I broadly agree with most of your points but I hate this sort of thing. When you start getting into one-upmanship over who's the most opressed you come across as that social justice peasant in Quest for the Holy Grail. "Help, help, I'm being opressed!"
Women often have to deal with prejudice. So do men. Work together, and tell the SJWs and MRAs to get stuffed.
Didn't mean to imply that it was trivial. Google obviously sees a business need for a presence in the UK. More the observation that it is genuinely a lot harder to claim conclusively that a transaction with Google happens in any specific place. Sure a British company advertising to British customers paying Google UK is a British transaction, but what about a Canadian company that does 17% of its business in Europe paying Google US for international advertising? And with multinationals selling to other multinationals things get even more complicated.
I'm a man. I'm not a fortune 500 CEO! Why the hell not! I was promised there's be privilige!
I have a 99.9999% chance of not becoming a fortune 500 CEO. A woman has a 99.99999% chance of the same thing. Fact is neither of us are going to become CEO. But this is petty trivial shit.
Yes, it is a problem that women are opressed in a lot of the world. I'll go on marches and sign petitions because that shit matters. Whining that women don't become CEOs (when most women don't want to be CEOs) is so trivial that it makes a mockery of the things that do matter!
Honestly, I don't have that much time for most of this. It comes across as a whine in response to a whine. Yes, we're not toally equal but there aren't any barriers to you not becoming a miner. Maybe the imbalance in college attendance is something we should care about, but there are bigger issues.
What is a big problem is men are more likely to commit suicide, much more likely to end up as criminals and likely to die younger. A man will typically get a much higher sentence than a woman charged with the same crime. If he does go to prison, the idea that he might be raped is tereated as a joke. Separated fathers often have difficulty having access to their children. Men are victims of 40% of cases of spousal abuse but there are hardly any shelters for them, and a lot of the time they're scared to call the police because they're scared they'll be seen as the agressors.
So I don't really give a fuck about the imbalance of men doing heavy lifting. There are much more important issues to worry about. I get that you;re trying to point out the hypoocrisy but it's backfiring. Whining about petty shit trivialises the important issues.
That's roughly what they're doing already. This law addresses that. Charging for server farms would be considered "economic activity" and therefore these payments would be taxed at 25%.
Not sure if it will be as easy as that, but it's certainly true that it's a lot easier for entirely online firms to avoid this sort of thing than companies that have physical products. Ultimately, Google can operate in a country with zero physical presence.
Still, it's not just Google. Starbucks and Amazon also came in for a lot of criticism, and it's a lot harder to charge a customer in US dollars for a cup of coffee along Kensington High Street.
His speciality is physics. He knows more than I ever will about black holes and cosmology, as well as life with motor neurone disease, but he is not an expert on AI.
While academics are very smart, they're not giant brains in jars. The best engineers, surgeons, and entrepreneurs are every bit as smart. They just apply their intelligence elsewhere.
He doesn't know about AI. He's not an expert. The media has this idea that every genius is a polymath but can we please not subscribe to the same fallacy here!
Right. Worked at these places and worked for bland corporate offices. After a while, the idea of working an 8 hour day and going home to relax appeals a lot more than a pool table.
Really what I want is a staff canteen, and an HR department that will respond to complaints of overwork. Going out with colleagues for beers once in a while is nice and so is interesting work but that should be as well as rather than instead of a healthy work-life balance.
Maybe she is, maybe she isn't. But clearly she doesn't want to have this debate separately with hundreds of different people.
Geez! Go to a public forum and discuss it there. You'll find people who are willing to talk about it, I'm sure.
So don't try and have a rational debate with her then. She's clearly not interested and if you make it into a game then you're just being a childish troll.
France? Not looked into this so maybe their attitude has changed but they've traditionally been pretty pro-nuclear.
Actually, they "peeped" pretty loudly
It's not an ideal. It's not even optimal. There are arguments for imbalance. Net neutrality is a solution to a problem in the US- that of a small cartel having undue control over the internet.
There are reasons you might want to have a two tier internet, and even if there aren't it's not impossible that we might want them in the future. Most countries there's enough competition for this to self regulate to a degree.
Pink slip? It's a Japanese company. Failure has more serious consequences.
It would have been a pretty cowardly political decision for the Grand Jury to do so for that reason.
Not that I think you're wrong. But such thinking would make me wonder why the Grand Jury was even there.
Their web design looks absolutely gorgeous, but it's inefficient and not remotely fit for purpose.
I like this thought. Not quite sure what counts as imagination though. Does the ability of a chess algorithm to model hypothetical future board positions count?
My experience - writing a very simple rubik cube solver as an undergraduate project - I rejected the two simple solutions for a trivial case (requires 1 turn to solve). So it turned the opposite face, then turned the first face, then turned the opposite face back. This had the appearance of a creative solution even though the algorithm was dumb.
Do any of them even handle formal logic? "All cows have 4 legs. Daisy is a cow. How many legs does Daisy have?" sort of thing.
It was Turing's first attempt to answer the question "what makes a machine intelligent?". As a mathematician he wanted an empirical answer so he felt that the Turing Test would be a good test. A decent idea, but remember, computers had only been around for a few years. I don't know if he'd ever written a program.
But what he had was a user requirements list. He didn't have a working implementation. He had "computer must be able to respond like a human to questions asked", so we have software that fits those requirements. But it's not obvious that it's intelligent. Personally I think computer chess shows more signs of intelligence. It requires imagination, prediction and abstraction. These seem much more important than ability to communicate with a human.
Seriously, I quite enjoy it, but please give me a UI designer, or at least an artist with UI experience to work with! I've worked on some cool interactive display stuff.
Can confirm. I'm an engineer who once designed a UI. Turns out it's a lot harder than it looks.
It's a devious ploy to step people from mobbing the review site with bogus 1-star reviews.
Although I checked yesterday and ther were 150 negative reviews, and the three newest ones looked fairly legit. I think Trip Advisor is deleting any review added since this story hit the interwebs.