the drivers for men in the field are the same as the drivers for women
No way.
Men, especially from about age 15 to 25, are genetically programmed to do things that may impress women. It is this drive that produces Nobel prizes, dictators, fire eaters, and football players.
Look, we can even measure brain structure differences. Think that affects nothing?
To imply that the STEM inequality is a bad thing is to judge women by male standards. Life isn't all about getting published, famous, or powerful. Other things are valuable in life, especially if you are not male. There is nothing wrong with having different priorities in life. To judge women by male standards is to devalue female standards, and thus women.
Women have babies because it is a maternal instinct. It is a part of their nature, but not for all women. Some women use birth control and abortion to avoid having babies so they can have a career. Most women want children, so they can look after her after she grows old and have a legacy (or legashe based on the Simpsons) to pass on her genetics to the next generation.
Having babies will be part of their nature for all women, because the others fail to pass their genetics to the next generation.
Birth control and abortion are MASSIVE sources of evolution-causing selection pressure. The change to our environment has been tremendous. If you don't want kids, your DNA is going out of style really fast.
In prior centuries, sexual desire was a good proxy for a desire to reproduce. We've broken that link, so now we evolve mental differences that will get us back on track regarding the population explosion.
Since liberals are generally being selected against, you can make a reasonable bet that abortion will be illegal within a few generations. Maybe even birth control will eventually be illegal, perhaps after a dozen generations. Of course, a tendency to understand evolution is NOT being selected for, so God will get the credit.
That would be the woman who things her own free time and material wealth is more important than that of children and the world's future.
Note that the economy will REALLY collapse without intelligent sane humans.
Right now, the women with the ability to produce intelligent sane children rarely do so. That's selfish. A few generations from now, the children produced by idiots will fully overwealm the children produced by bright people. We're doomed.
Suppose your students do a horrible job on standard tests. Suppose that students with other teachers do even worse, comparing similar demographics.
I'd say that makes you a good teacher. Your students are less bad that would be expected, so clearly you deserve to be rewarded.
BTW, the students need to sleep. Keeping their eyes open during class won't really make them able to learn. The problem is after-school jobs, excess homework (remember that they have other teachers), the social need for a morning grooming routine, and an idiotic policy of having school start long before most people would naturally wake up.
You can't pay teachers out of the capital expenses budget, the facilities budget, etc.
As with any budget that is part of a larger budget managed by somebody else, "use it or lose it" applies. You might even get in trouble for not spending enough, because "use it or lose it" applies to the budgets above you as well.
The horrible failing is that states are allowed to set low standards. They are allowed to choose crappy tests.
Prior to NCLB, there was nothing to stop a teacher from spending most of his time rambling about his favorite hobby. Nobody could prove that learning didn't happen in his class. At best, every teacher taught their own private unapproved version of the curriculum. Next year's teacher would not be able to rely on anything having been learned this year.
To fix NCLB, we need to mandate specific test content and scoring standards. It was foolish to assume that states would not subvert NCLB when given power to decide the test content and standards.
Raising pay doesn't make teachers suddenly perform well. We'd just pay more for the same shitty results.
Somebody worth $75k won't tolerate the hostile workplace that is school. School is the only place outside of law enforcement where you have to face daily abuse. Law enforcement at least has the legal right to do something about the abuse; schools do not.
It's kind of unreasonable to expect regular people, who are lucky to make $35k, to want to pay more than that for babysitters.
The number of questions you answer correctly determines the weight of your vote. Question difficulty varies widely. (math from 1+1 to differential equations, reading from "see spot run" to corporate law, etc.)
It's time we got past the idea that a test is unfair to any particular group. To suggest unfairness is to suggest that a particular group is stupid. Not that it matters of course; all people should want our leaders chosen by the smartest voters.
You need to count the sunlight that gets spread out by the atmosphere, making that lovely blue sky. Add up the blue sky and the yellow-looking Sun, and you get a bluish-white light.
The result is that natural shadows have a bluish cast. People look more natural outdoors because the shadows of their face get this.
To reproduce, method 1:
Cover your ceiling with an array of colored LEDs that point down. Focus the red and green ones to a 1-degree angle. Spread out the blue ones. Of course, this requires about a million LEDs for a typical room.
To reproduce, method 2:
Get a very high ceiling with bluish-white lights way up high. (mercury, halogen, LED, etc.) Focus the lights into 1-degree downward beams. At a normal ceiling height, add a false ceiling made from aerogel. (possibly with glass to support it) The aerogel acts like atmosphere, spreading the blue more than the red and green.
To reproduce, method 3:
Split the light with a prism, then put it back together without the blue. A couple custom plastic parts over a white LED should do the job. The blue is allowed to leak out the side, unfocused.
The programmer wants to access *foo, unless it is NULL. We will thus do so. Additionally, we know that *NULL will not fault (on the AIX operating system) and that it will give us a zero. Thus, we can access *foo in any case.
The code becomes:
tmp=*foo; if(foo && tmp==CONSTANT)
The C standard only places requirements on an abstract machine. Underneath it all, the code could be getting executed by a bunch of monks who chisel computations into blocks of granite. It doesn't matter if one of the monks takes a bathroom break or whatever. The C standard doesn't care.
The compiler depends on the OS to set up certain things, including the memory at address 0.
If I remember right, *(int)0==0 on this system.
It's totally legit. The C standard says nothing about how the assembly code behaves, or even that there is any assembly code. (C can be an interpreted language)
The compiler can do anything it damn well pleases, as long as the end result acts like it should.
The compiler certainly can dereference the pointer. It can also throw in a call to sin(42), a write to some memory containing the current line of code, and a system call to check for pending debugger stuff.
None of this would make the high-level view of things be anything other than the required short-circuit evaluation of the given code.
Tubal ligations and vasectomys are the standard techniques of surgical sterilization. Some people are congenitally sterile others whilst not technically "sterile" are incapable of producing children without medical assistance. No homosexual sex has ever produced chidren. There are even plenty of things a fully fertile man and woman can do sexually which have very little likelyhood of the woman getting pregnant even without the use of any contraception.
"very little likelyhood" is unacceptable when you may create a child without a proper family.
Except purely homosexual acts (but see the so-called "pregnant man"), all of your "safe sex" ideas have been known to fail. Yes, even surgery and anal sex.
Also note that one or the other person may have some other relationship. (after all, you're not respecting the idea of marriage) Now you're spreading diseases, possibly to totally unaware innocent people including the unborn.
Intent to have children isn't terribly important, though it does suggest that a real commitment may exist. The important thing is an acceptance of the possibility that you might need to raise a child.
Not everyone is heterosexual, not everyone is monogamous, not everyone wants children, not everyone wants "long term" relationships and so on. Human sexuality simply isn't a "one size fits all" deal.
Not everyone can resist pedophilia either. Your point?
We don't need any more broken families. We don't need any more sex addicts running around spreading diseases like herpes and genital warts.
Don't want to stay married? Enjoy yourself. Seriously. Find some porn. Don't mess up anybody else's life.
Starting a family that young is stupid. Most teenagers are not ready for the huge amount of work and responsability involved in raising children.
"teenager" has nothing to do with it.
I know a woman who got married just about the moment she turned 18. Last I heard she was very happily married, with about 9 children after about a dozen years of marriage. I know a different woman who did nearly the same thing, marrying her boyfriend since 6th grade, who is now about 24 to 28 years old with her 4th kid on the way. Either one of them could have handled a marriage a few years earlier. In case it matters, both women are severely traditional about family life.
On the other hand, I know an older woman who has 8 kids with 5 different dads. She gets child support for some kids, burns all the money on fun, lives by manipulating her grown children into housing her, and spends her days cruising the internet to pick up foolish guys. Thankfully, this worthless parasite is hitting menopause right about now.
For some people, getting married EVER is just plain stupid. (and thus, they should keep their pants on) Others handle it just fine from an early age, being limited mainly by physical maturity.
If you aren't mature enough to stay married and raise your children, then you aren't mature enough to fuck. Age has nothing to do with this; plenty of older people are hopelessly immature.
I said nothing about loving, though that would be desirable and expected. The key thing is that you may produce children if you fuck. (even the best birth control, short of a hysterectomy, can fail) Children are best raised in an intact family with both mother and father. Such children get more education, suffer less poverty, are less likely to become drug addicted or otherwise criminal, and are less likely to create non-intact families of their own.
There's also that problem of herpes and genital warts. Neither is fully stopped by a normal condom. (skin-to-skin contact will spread them) Herpes is incurable. Genital warts are somewhat incurable. Both lead to disability and even death, often via cancer, causing much misery and economic loss.
It might help if we had an objective way to measure someone's ability to have informed consent.
That could be a dream come true.
Let's determine this via a reading comprehension test. The test material can be a wide selection of common real-world consumer contracts. Anything a regular person has to sign is fair game: car rental agreement, apartment lease, contract to buy a house, DSL terms of service, employment agreement, HIPPA waiver, credit card agreement, Windows Vista EULA, AT+T agreement for the iPhone, etc.
You can get married before you turn 18. The lower limit depends on the state. Often a judge will override a parent that refuses to allow marriage. In some states you can be as young as 14.
Waiting is stupid. There is nothing wrong with teenage fucking and even pregnancy, AS LONG AS YOU ARE MARRIED AND WILLING TO RAISE ANY CHILDREN THAT MAY RESULT. Go for it. Start a family. Kids may be a pain at times, but most every parent loves them anyway. Put your fear aside and start your life.
He and Remy Card wrote ext2. He and Stephen Tweedie wrote ext3. He and Ming Ming Cao wrote ext4.
He maintains the filesystem repair tool (e2fsck) and resizing tool for those filesystems.
He also created the world's first/dev/random device, maintained the tsx-11.mit.edu Linux archive site for many years, and wrote a chunk of Kerberos. He's been the technical chairman for many Linux-related conferences. He pretty much runs the kernel summit.
He's certainly not a kid. I think he's about to turn 40.
Really, Intel ought to give tytso piles of free SSD hardware before it goes on sale. This would help Intel by encouraging tytso to optimize Linux for Intel's SSD hardware.
Slashdot Mirror
While at work, the breasts get full. This discourages milk production. For many women, the end result is that they have to switch to fake milk.
Depending on the breast of course, a pump doesn't even work very well. It hurts too.
Then there is the hassle, the loss of close natural mother-baby interaction, the cost, the spoilage risk, etc.
the drivers for men in the field are the same as the drivers for women
No way.
Men, especially from about age 15 to 25, are genetically programmed to do things that may impress women. It is this drive that produces Nobel prizes, dictators, fire eaters, and football players.
Look, we can even measure brain structure differences. Think that affects nothing?
To imply that the STEM inequality is a bad thing is to judge women by male standards. Life isn't all about getting published, famous, or powerful. Other things are valuable in life, especially if you are not male. There is nothing wrong with having different priorities in life. To judge women by male standards is to devalue female standards, and thus women.
Women have babies because it is a maternal instinct. It is a part of their nature, but not for all women. Some women use birth control and abortion to avoid having babies so they can have a career. Most women want children, so they can look after her after she grows old and have a legacy (or legashe based on the Simpsons) to pass on her genetics to the next generation.
Having babies will be part of their nature for all women, because the others fail to pass their genetics to the next generation.
Birth control and abortion are MASSIVE sources of evolution-causing selection pressure. The change to our environment has been tremendous. If you don't want kids, your DNA is going out of style really fast.
In prior centuries, sexual desire was a good proxy for a desire to reproduce. We've broken that link, so now we evolve mental differences that will get us back on track regarding the population explosion.
Since liberals are generally being selected against, you can make a reasonable bet that abortion will be illegal within a few generations. Maybe even birth control will eventually be illegal, perhaps after a dozen generations. Of course, a tendency to understand evolution is NOT being selected for, so God will get the credit.
That would be the woman who things her own free time and material wealth is more important than that of children and the world's future.
Note that the economy will REALLY collapse without intelligent sane humans.
Right now, the women with the ability to produce intelligent sane children rarely do so. That's selfish. A few generations from now, the children produced by idiots will fully overwealm the children produced by bright people. We're doomed.
Suppose your students do a horrible job on standard tests. Suppose that students with other teachers do even worse, comparing similar demographics.
I'd say that makes you a good teacher. Your students are less bad that would be expected, so clearly you deserve to be rewarded.
BTW, the students need to sleep. Keeping their eyes open during class won't really make them able to learn. The problem is after-school jobs, excess homework (remember that they have other teachers), the social need for a morning grooming routine, and an idiotic policy of having school start long before most people would naturally wake up.
Go directly to math class. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200.
The chance of severe interference affecting the average (mean, median, or mode) approaches zero, not 100%.
The more students you have, the less the outliers matter.
That'd be a huge culture change.
Throw in the drinking age as well, with the driver's license a year later.
I guess bound it a tad, perhaps using age 14 and age 24. :-)
Obviously, any moron can count ribs. Despite this, I knew a fundie who refused to believe that men and women have the same number of ribs. WTF!!!!!
You can't pay teachers out of the capital expenses budget, the facilities budget, etc.
As with any budget that is part of a larger budget managed by somebody else, "use it or lose it" applies. You might even get in trouble for not spending enough, because "use it or lose it" applies to the budgets above you as well.
The horrible failing is that states are allowed to set low standards. They are allowed to choose crappy tests.
Prior to NCLB, there was nothing to stop a teacher from spending most of his time rambling about his favorite hobby. Nobody could prove that learning didn't happen in his class. At best, every teacher taught their own private unapproved version of the curriculum. Next year's teacher would not be able to rely on anything having been learned this year.
To fix NCLB, we need to mandate specific test content and scoring standards. It was foolish to assume that states would not subvert NCLB when given power to decide the test content and standards.
Raising pay doesn't make teachers suddenly perform well. We'd just pay more for the same shitty results.
Somebody worth $75k won't tolerate the hostile workplace that is school. School is the only place outside of law enforcement where you have to face daily abuse. Law enforcement at least has the legal right to do something about the abuse; schools do not.
It's kind of unreasonable to expect regular people, who are lucky to make $35k, to want to pay more than that for babysitters.
The number of questions you answer correctly determines the weight of your vote. Question difficulty varies widely. (math from 1+1 to differential equations, reading from "see spot run" to corporate law, etc.)
It's time we got past the idea that a test is unfair to any particular group. To suggest unfairness is to suggest that a particular group is stupid. Not that it matters of course; all people should want our leaders chosen by the smartest voters.
You need to count the sunlight that gets spread out by the atmosphere, making that lovely blue sky. Add up the blue sky and the yellow-looking Sun, and you get a bluish-white light.
The result is that natural shadows have a bluish cast. People look more natural outdoors because the shadows of their face get this.
To reproduce, method 1:
Cover your ceiling with an array of colored LEDs that point down. Focus the red and green ones to a 1-degree angle. Spread out the blue ones. Of course, this requires about a million LEDs for a typical room.
To reproduce, method 2:
Get a very high ceiling with bluish-white lights way up high. (mercury, halogen, LED, etc.) Focus the lights into 1-degree downward beams. At a normal ceiling height, add a false ceiling made from aerogel. (possibly with glass to support it) The aerogel acts like atmosphere, spreading the blue more than the red and green.
To reproduce, method 3:
Split the light with a prism, then put it back together without the blue. A couple custom plastic parts over a white LED should do the job. The blue is allowed to leak out the side, unfocused.
We do "if (foo && *foo == CONSTANT)" like so...
The programmer wants to access *foo, unless it is NULL. We will thus do so. Additionally, we know that *NULL will not fault (on the AIX operating system) and that it will give us a zero. Thus, we can access *foo in any case.
The code becomes:
tmp=*foo; if(foo && tmp==CONSTANT)
The C standard only places requirements on an abstract machine. Underneath it all, the code could be getting executed by a bunch of monks who chisel computations into blocks of granite. It doesn't matter if one of the monks takes a bathroom break or whatever. The C standard doesn't care.
The compiler depends on the OS to set up certain things, including the memory at address 0.
If I remember right, *(int)0==0 on this system.
It's totally legit. The C standard says nothing about how the assembly code behaves, or even that there is any assembly code. (C can be an interpreted language)
The compiler can do anything it damn well pleases, as long as the end result acts like it should.
The compiler certainly can dereference the pointer. It can also throw in a call to sin(42), a write to some memory containing the current line of code, and a system call to check for pending debugger stuff.
None of this would make the high-level view of things be anything other than the required short-circuit evaluation of the given code.
Tubal ligations and vasectomys are the standard techniques of surgical sterilization. Some people are congenitally sterile others whilst not technically "sterile" are incapable of producing children without medical assistance. No homosexual sex has ever produced chidren. There are even plenty of things a fully fertile man and woman can do sexually which have very little likelyhood of the woman getting pregnant even without the use of any contraception.
"very little likelyhood" is unacceptable when you may create a child without a proper family.
Except purely homosexual acts (but see the so-called "pregnant man"), all of your "safe sex" ideas have been known to fail. Yes, even surgery and anal sex.
Also note that one or the other person may have some other relationship. (after all, you're not respecting the idea of marriage) Now you're spreading diseases, possibly to totally unaware innocent people including the unborn.
Plus with the intention of having children...
Intent to have children isn't terribly important, though it does suggest that a real commitment may exist. The important thing is an acceptance of the possibility that you might need to raise a child.
Not everyone is heterosexual, not everyone is monogamous, not everyone wants children, not everyone wants "long term" relationships and so on. Human sexuality simply isn't a "one size fits all" deal.
Not everyone can resist pedophilia either. Your point?
We don't need any more broken families. We don't need any more sex addicts running around spreading diseases like herpes and genital warts.
Don't want to stay married? Enjoy yourself. Seriously. Find some porn. Don't mess up anybody else's life.
Starting a family that young is stupid. Most teenagers are not ready for the huge amount of work and responsability involved in raising children.
"teenager" has nothing to do with it.
I know a woman who got married just about the moment she turned 18. Last I heard she was very happily married, with about 9 children after about a dozen years of marriage. I know a different woman who did nearly the same thing, marrying her boyfriend since 6th grade, who is now about 24 to 28 years old with her 4th kid on the way. Either one of them could have handled a marriage a few years earlier. In case it matters, both women are severely traditional about family life.
On the other hand, I know an older woman who has 8 kids with 5 different dads. She gets child support for some kids, burns all the money on fun, lives by manipulating her grown children into housing her, and spends her days cruising the internet to pick up foolish guys. Thankfully, this worthless parasite is hitting menopause right about now.
For some people, getting married EVER is just plain stupid. (and thus, they should keep their pants on) Others handle it just fine from an early age, being limited mainly by physical maturity.
If you aren't mature enough to stay married and raise your children, then you aren't mature enough to fuck. Age has nothing to do with this; plenty of older people are hopelessly immature.
I said nothing about loving, though that would be desirable and expected. The key thing is that you may produce children if you fuck. (even the best birth control, short of a hysterectomy, can fail) Children are best raised in an intact family with both mother and father. Such children get more education, suffer less poverty, are less likely to become drug addicted or otherwise criminal, and are less likely to create non-intact families of their own.
There's also that problem of herpes and genital warts. Neither is fully stopped by a normal condom. (skin-to-skin contact will spread them) Herpes is incurable. Genital warts are somewhat incurable. Both lead to disability and even death, often via cancer, causing much misery and economic loss.
It might help if we had an objective way to measure someone's ability to have informed consent.
That could be a dream come true.
Let's determine this via a reading comprehension test. The test material can be a wide selection of common real-world consumer contracts. Anything a regular person has to sign is fair game: car rental agreement, apartment lease, contract to buy a house, DSL terms of service, employment agreement, HIPPA waiver, credit card agreement, Windows Vista EULA, AT+T agreement for the iPhone, etc.
Get married.
You can get married before you turn 18. The lower limit depends on the state. Often a judge will override a parent that refuses to allow marriage. In some states you can be as young as 14.
Waiting is stupid. There is nothing wrong with teenage fucking and even pregnancy, AS LONG AS YOU ARE MARRIED AND WILLING TO RAISE ANY CHILDREN THAT MAY RESULT. Go for it. Start a family. Kids may be a pain at times, but most every parent loves them anyway. Put your fear aside and start your life.
So many choices!
belt sander
nitric acid
cutting torch
charcoal and a blower
chip wired into an AC wall socket
thermite
repeated use as a model rocket blast deflector
drill press
"tytso" is Theodore T'so.
He and Remy Card wrote ext2. He and Stephen Tweedie wrote ext3. He and Ming Ming Cao wrote ext4.
He maintains the filesystem repair tool (e2fsck) and resizing tool for those filesystems.
He also created the world's first /dev/random device, maintained the tsx-11.mit.edu Linux archive site for many years, and wrote a chunk of Kerberos. He's been the technical chairman for many Linux-related conferences. He pretty much runs the kernel summit.
He's certainly not a kid. I think he's about to turn 40.
Really, Intel ought to give tytso piles of free SSD hardware before it goes on sale. This would help Intel by encouraging tytso to optimize Linux for Intel's SSD hardware.
You have to turn the debris to gas.
A laser really is the best idea.