Okay, I'm seeing a lot of respondents say this is a non-US thing.
Fair enough.
I'm in the US, where there's this attitude of "you're safer in an SUV" prevalent. So, perhaps this has the effect of "I wouldn't be safe on a bike AT ALL", which is ultimately why people in this country hate bikers.
In my experience (and where I'm at), "Share the Road" signs often mean "If you're on a bike, stay on the shoulder and cars will swerve around you into the left lane. That's not safer, but at least drivers aren't inconvenienced by bikers."
In other words, biking sober is highly discouraged. Drunk biking is right out.
There aren't a lot of 2B contracts out there, but there are plenty of small ones worth a paltry few million that would easily fly under the radar because those aren't the big, shiny ones. Barely worth investigation if there are some shenanigans at play.
If there is any doubt, even 1% doubt, that something is 100% safe, don't handle it. Get gloves, or a net or a trap, or something, but for fuck's sake, don't pick it up, at least, not without gloves.
Yes, I can read. I know frogs are not known to be venomous, thus the news story, but that doesn't mean that it isn't carrying a weird bacteria, or has a secretion that can cause an allergic reaction, or any number of things that can go wrong.
What's more efficient? A productive employee taking time off to have kids, while having a policy that will allow them back with open arms after they're well rested and get some solid family time, or giving them the heave-ho because they're technically not contributing for a year or more?
If the latter is the case, no productive employee should ever leave to satisfy OP's idea that he/she shouldn't have to be paying for that person to take time off.
I'd like to add on to this. The logical conclusion of GP's post is that everyone should retire once they have kids. Or, only incompetent people should breed, so that "good" employees never have to take any time off for children's sake.
Did I enter a Dilbert strip somewhere along the line here, or am I misunderstanding GP's point?
It's one thing to blend colors because you've switched out your filament. It's quite another to blend prescription medications with (and to) nasty side effects.
Maybe I've got a head in the clouds as I've neither been a food or drug engineer in my life, but I kind of wonder how this would be applied.
Like, if you have a 3D printer that prints several different types of tablets, would pharmacists need to add yet another label to prescriptions that says "this drug manufactured in a plant that also processes x, y and z". (I really don't know the difference between compounding and 3D printing, but I imagine printing would need more rigorous cleaning standards in order to make something like this work.)
Would it eventually be moved into pharmacist labs or hospitals so that customization is closer to the patient, or is it considerably safer to have only the drug manufacturer do this?
Would this really catch on? There's cost and quality assurance standards to meet, and why change a system that works relatively well now (I don't really hear a lot about problems with the pharma industry; of course this just means I don't know where to look if those problems actually exist).
Anyway, these are my passing thoughts on this. I try not to be cynical and dismiss this sort of thing as an industry trying on a passing fad, because, you never know.
"How to appreciate learning" "How to think logically" "How to negotiate a better salary" "How to be self-reliant" "How to deal with your emotions as a teenager when your hormones are running wild (aka: You're not the first one to ever have that problem)"
Seems like when there's a hot subject, we push for kids to learn that, when really, it should be more like things that kids can practically use and apply everywhere.
"So I don't think people should harass others at work, but I also think that some people sometimes need to grow a little thicker skin. I've had interactions with people in professional settings in which I've felt personally insulted by something they said or did. But when that happens, I don't fly off the handle and try to get the other person fired. Not every slight needs to be elevated to the level of existential crisis. Sometimes, you just have to grit your teeth and get the job done, even when the person you're working with is distasteful."
And this is what I mean when I say "women need to grow a thicker skin".
Not everything is indicative of misogyny. Sometimes the guys want to include you in their game, and that game is busting your (metaphorical) balls.
The best leaders I've ever met (male AND female) understood the philosophy that not everyone is going to like you, that good leaders piss people off all the time, and you learn how to work peaceably with people who don't agree with you.
Yes, there are going to be haters. That's the point. They make you stronger and sharper. You can't just Slip n' Slide your way to a leadership position. Sometimes there are obstacles. Sometimes there are really terrible ones. But if you're going to whine and complain at every little slight, you're simply proving that you're not worthy of the thing you say you want.
Yes, and how many of the people in this discussion are actually female?
Raise hands, people.
Not that I necessarily need for the majority of you to be women, mind you. Though I do think it's profoundly unfair that you have to start from the position of "I'm not one of those guys", as if the default assumption is that you have to prove you're not.
No, what I'm saying is that if the base assumption of this discussion is treatment of women, then why aren't more women speaking up? And I'm saying this for both sides.
Is it because there are fewer women? Is it because fewer women make the choice to stay in tech, or indeed make the choice to BE in tech? And who cares if they don't?
The problem at the end of the day for me is that I'm tired of people reminding me that I'm a woman, tired of them dictating what my experience is when they don't fucking know me and tired of the assumption that the contents of my pants are somehow important when it comes to me doing my job.
Everything you said? Yeah, can be turned around on you as well.
And I stand by my assessment that the world is good AND bad. AND, I'm willing to say it as a non-AC.
When you talk about how "the real world works", you're basically saying that MY experiences (and the experiences of the women I know are not valid.
Now, I'm sorry if I have other things to do in a day than take polls and do research to counteract any bullshit "gender studies" stories that come out in the media. All I can do is provide witness that this idea of "men keeping women out of tech happens everywhere, at all times to all women" is bullshit.
Hopefully the scales will turn, but until then, how about you stop telling me how to feel about things? Or do I need to take lashings like all the other women YOU know until I've "seen the light"?
FTFA: "Check back for our Diversity in Open Source series, which starts August 10."
Yes, of fucking course, because the product takes second place to having enough women and minorities that are safe from microaggressions working on it.
I admit that I respond to a lot of this stuff, and I probably should back off, but the number one reason why I do is because I feel I have to offer a counter-message to stuff like this. As much as I don't want to talk about it anymore, I feel like the more of the stuff like this that gets posted, the more it gets accepted as "truth" that women are somehow under attack by "the boys club".
For every woman that claims there's some inherent "truth" that conferences need "anti-harassment policies" and "safe spaces", I'd like to be a woman that says there are plenty of women with experiences that indicate the problem isn't as bad as they say it is.
(And, no, your feminist blog is not proof that it is. Any and all feminist blogs offering such "proof" will be roundly ignored.)
Yes, you have assholes. You have them everywhere. You can't keep them out of your arena.
But I go to Code Camps and other technical events fairly regularly. And I've never once got the sense that I (or any of the other women in the room) have been hounded, or hounded out or treated with derision.
Maybe the problem is because that one asshole draws so much attention to him- (and indeed, her-) self, we create archetypes based on those personalities which we then elevate into "the norm", and then we forget all the nice, normal people around us that aren't being assholes to us. And believe me, there are far fewer assholes than there are decent people out there.
If you can't find any decent people around you, and you're calling everyone an asshole, you might want to grab some toilet paper and give yourself a good once-over. Or as we used to say when we were kids: "She who smelt it, dealt it."
Maybe, then, the solution is to stop treating sexism as if it's a constant problem for everyone at all times. Maybe it's time to start understanding that what's creating a hostile work environment in many places is the assumption that it's going to be hostile from the jump. Maybe it's time to start acknowledging that when you have an organization that's a hammer, perhaps you've developed a myopia that tells you everything around you looks like a nail.
Men don't need to be taught not to rape (or for the purposes of this discussion, harass). Women need to toughen up and realize that no space is ever completely "safe", and sometimes you just have to deal with it.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, I'm seeing a lot of respondents say this is a non-US thing.
Fair enough.
I'm in the US, where there's this attitude of "you're safer in an SUV" prevalent. So, perhaps this has the effect of "I wouldn't be safe on a bike AT ALL", which is ultimately why people in this country hate bikers.
In my experience (and where I'm at), "Share the Road" signs often mean "If you're on a bike, stay on the shoulder and cars will swerve around you into the left lane. That's not safer, but at least drivers aren't inconvenienced by bikers."
In other words, biking sober is highly discouraged. Drunk biking is right out.
Seriously, where does this happen so frequently that an invention had to be made because of it?
Sure, there's bike-share in big cities these days, but is drunken cycling a really big problem in these places?
To maintain healthy weight: Calories In ~= Calories Out
I can already hear the soundbite.
Coca-Cola President: "It's not OUR fault your fat ass can't get up and exercise."
Heh. That was my first thought as well.
It's a large piece of gum, much as a "chiclet" is a small piece of gum.
How all that relates to terrorism is beyond me, though.
Or, realistically, many smaller contracts.
There aren't a lot of 2B contracts out there, but there are plenty of small ones worth a paltry few million that would easily fly under the radar because those aren't the big, shiny ones. Barely worth investigation if there are some shenanigans at play.
Nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
Indeed. There are certainly ways of determining the "what would happen if..." without becoming a test subject yourself.
And he would have gotten away with it too, if not for...oh, wait.
...involving aliens?
If there is any doubt, even 1% doubt, that something is 100% safe, don't handle it. Get gloves, or a net or a trap, or something, but for fuck's sake, don't pick it up, at least, not without gloves.
Yes, I can read. I know frogs are not known to be venomous, thus the news story, but that doesn't mean that it isn't carrying a weird bacteria, or has a secretion that can cause an allergic reaction, or any number of things that can go wrong.
Why?
What's more efficient? A productive employee taking time off to have kids, while having a policy that will allow them back with open arms after they're well rested and get some solid family time, or giving them the heave-ho because they're technically not contributing for a year or more?
If the latter is the case, no productive employee should ever leave to satisfy OP's idea that he/she shouldn't have to be paying for that person to take time off.
I'd like to add on to this. The logical conclusion of GP's post is that everyone should retire once they have kids. Or, only incompetent people should breed, so that "good" employees never have to take any time off for children's sake.
Did I enter a Dilbert strip somewhere along the line here, or am I misunderstanding GP's point?
And if I could have done modded ya, son, I'd a done modded ya +1 Funny.
This is the sort of thing I'd hope for.
It's one thing to blend colors because you've switched out your filament. It's quite another to blend prescription medications with (and to) nasty side effects.
Not sure where you were going with your FOTR allegory there.
Technically speaking, the FOTR wasn't particularly successful. In fact, ultimately, the only reason it was, was because of Gollum.
So, do we need a Gollum in the mix for the greater good? :-P
It's also been established that sound can put out fires.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/ar...
Maybe I've got a head in the clouds as I've neither been a food or drug engineer in my life, but I kind of wonder how this would be applied.
Like, if you have a 3D printer that prints several different types of tablets, would pharmacists need to add yet another label to prescriptions that says "this drug manufactured in a plant that also processes x, y and z". (I really don't know the difference between compounding and 3D printing, but I imagine printing would need more rigorous cleaning standards in order to make something like this work.)
Would it eventually be moved into pharmacist labs or hospitals so that customization is closer to the patient, or is it considerably safer to have only the drug manufacturer do this?
Would this really catch on? There's cost and quality assurance standards to meet, and why change a system that works relatively well now (I don't really hear a lot about problems with the pharma industry; of course this just means I don't know where to look if those problems actually exist).
Anyway, these are my passing thoughts on this. I try not to be cynical and dismiss this sort of thing as an industry trying on a passing fad, because, you never know.
Yep. And how about things like:
"How to appreciate learning"
"How to think logically"
"How to negotiate a better salary"
"How to be self-reliant"
"How to deal with your emotions as a teenager when your hormones are running wild (aka: You're not the first one to ever have that problem)"
Seems like when there's a hot subject, we push for kids to learn that, when really, it should be more like things that kids can practically use and apply everywhere.
You said:
"So I don't think people should harass others at work, but I also think that some people sometimes need to grow a little thicker skin. I've had interactions with people in professional settings in which I've felt personally insulted by something they said or did. But when that happens, I don't fly off the handle and try to get the other person fired. Not every slight needs to be elevated to the level of existential crisis. Sometimes, you just have to grit your teeth and get the job done, even when the person you're working with is distasteful."
And this is what I mean when I say "women need to grow a thicker skin".
Not everything is indicative of misogyny. Sometimes the guys want to include you in their game, and that game is busting your (metaphorical) balls.
The best leaders I've ever met (male AND female) understood the philosophy that not everyone is going to like you, that good leaders piss people off all the time, and you learn how to work peaceably with people who don't agree with you.
Yes, there are going to be haters. That's the point. They make you stronger and sharper. You can't just Slip n' Slide your way to a leadership position. Sometimes there are obstacles. Sometimes there are really terrible ones. But if you're going to whine and complain at every little slight, you're simply proving that you're not worthy of the thing you say you want.
Yes, and how many of the people in this discussion are actually female?
Raise hands, people.
Not that I necessarily need for the majority of you to be women, mind you. Though I do think it's profoundly unfair that you have to start from the position of "I'm not one of those guys", as if the default assumption is that you have to prove you're not.
No, what I'm saying is that if the base assumption of this discussion is treatment of women, then why aren't more women speaking up? And I'm saying this for both sides.
Is it because there are fewer women? Is it because fewer women make the choice to stay in tech, or indeed make the choice to BE in tech? And who cares if they don't?
The problem at the end of the day for me is that I'm tired of people reminding me that I'm a woman, tired of them dictating what my experience is when they don't fucking know me and tired of the assumption that the contents of my pants are somehow important when it comes to me doing my job.
Everything you said? Yeah, can be turned around on you as well.
And I stand by my assessment that the world is good AND bad. AND, I'm willing to say it as a non-AC.
When you talk about how "the real world works", you're basically saying that MY experiences (and the experiences of the women I know are not valid.
Now, I'm sorry if I have other things to do in a day than take polls and do research to counteract any bullshit "gender studies" stories that come out in the media. All I can do is provide witness that this idea of "men keeping women out of tech happens everywhere, at all times to all women" is bullshit.
Hopefully the scales will turn, but until then, how about you stop telling me how to feel about things? Or do I need to take lashings like all the other women YOU know until I've "seen the light"?
Well, then he should only get 75%.
Oh, wait...
And by the way, anecdotes =/= data.
I'm not about to take it on faith from someone who won't even post as anything other than AC that things just "happen" because people say they do.
And you know what? I HAVE TOO.
People around here seem to misunderstand me when I say that "the problem's not that bad".
I'm not saying it hasn't happened. I'm saying that the problem is not an epidemic the way Slashdot and many "feminist" organizations say it is.
So, go fuck yourself, AC, at least until you're willing to not be an AC and tell me that directly.
FTFA: "Check back for our Diversity in Open Source series, which starts August 10."
Yes, of fucking course, because the product takes second place to having enough women and minorities that are safe from microaggressions working on it.
I admit that I respond to a lot of this stuff, and I probably should back off, but the number one reason why I do is because I feel I have to offer a counter-message to stuff like this. As much as I don't want to talk about it anymore, I feel like the more of the stuff like this that gets posted, the more it gets accepted as "truth" that women are somehow under attack by "the boys club".
For every woman that claims there's some inherent "truth" that conferences need "anti-harassment policies" and "safe spaces", I'd like to be a woman that says there are plenty of women with experiences that indicate the problem isn't as bad as they say it is.
(And, no, your feminist blog is not proof that it is. Any and all feminist blogs offering such "proof" will be roundly ignored.)
Yes, you have assholes. You have them everywhere. You can't keep them out of your arena.
But I go to Code Camps and other technical events fairly regularly. And I've never once got the sense that I (or any of the other women in the room) have been hounded, or hounded out or treated with derision.
Maybe the problem is because that one asshole draws so much attention to him- (and indeed, her-) self, we create archetypes based on those personalities which we then elevate into "the norm", and then we forget all the nice, normal people around us that aren't being assholes to us. And believe me, there are far fewer assholes than there are decent people out there.
If you can't find any decent people around you, and you're calling everyone an asshole, you might want to grab some toilet paper and give yourself a good once-over. Or as we used to say when we were kids: "She who smelt it, dealt it."
Maybe, then, the solution is to stop treating sexism as if it's a constant problem for everyone at all times. Maybe it's time to start understanding that what's creating a hostile work environment in many places is the assumption that it's going to be hostile from the jump. Maybe it's time to start acknowledging that when you have an organization that's a hammer, perhaps you've developed a myopia that tells you everything around you looks like a nail.
Men don't need to be taught not to rape (or for the purposes of this discussion, harass).
Women need to toughen up and realize that no space is ever completely "safe", and sometimes you just have to deal with it.