Oh absolutely. But see my followup post. Most people I encounter online discussing politics are absolutely dumb enough to make & believe such a statement.
I generally trust/. still on moderating such posts enough for meed to weed them out, but I browse lower... probably lower than I should with my emotional baggage.
I am the OP, and I certainly had sardonic irony in mind. I am surprised by the amount of "whoosing" that my comment engendered.
Remember that over 80% of people support mandatory labeling of foods containing DNA.
Most (I am not exaggerating, I believe the number actually is > 50%) people are stupid and/or uneducated enough to be quite serious with comments such as yours. It is pretty safe to assume people are in the majority.
I shouldn't have commented in the first place. Broke my own rule: don't comment on politics on Slashdot (or pretty much any place else, for that matter). I am primarily committed to sharing information, not opinion. Commenting on politics is rarely informative, always opinionated. One is reduced to sardonic irony, or worse.
On reflection, the part that speaks to me is: "Conservatives are for equal treatment. For instance, a law against sleeping on the sidewalk should be enforced equally on both millionaires and homeless vagrants."
Thing is, that statement is just as much bullshit as the anti-liberal statement.
1. Sleeping on the sidewalk is a law that affects only 1 group. They make such laws knowing that the law will only or primarily affect the demographic they hate. Do millionaires sleep on the sidewalk? No. Passing a law that you know will only or primarily affect a certain demographic is discriminatory. The KKK could fuck over 2 of their hated groups by getting a law passed that says "curly hair is illegal." Such a law doesn't violate the constitution or civil rights laws at its face, so the conservative KKK says ". You have to look at who it hits primarily.
2. Entitlement programs. To me, giving a business a tax break is no different than giving an individual a tax break. Conservatives are all for tax breaks for their businesses & charitable donations. But give a poor person a meal and they throw you in jail.
As an expat, there are a very small number of reasons (I forget, maybe 4 or 5) that I will even be allowed into the embassy. Basically, my US passport will get me a ticket out of the country if WWIII starts, but other than that, the fact that the embassy exists is of absolutely no day-to-day use to me.
That page shows a picture of a helicopter saving a US Citizen hurt in the earthquake in Haiti. US Citizens got helicopters, everybody else got Cholera. Sounds like a decent benny.
If you work for Comcast, you either a) expect to get shit from people hating Comcast; or b) are a complete idiot.
You're a cunt.
Yes a huge, blubbering fanny flap.
Oh, I'm sorry, you don't like getting abused. But you chose to come to/. you accepted that you're a complete cunt.
I don't recall seeing "If you come to/. you're a cunt." in the EULA. I accept that bigots and idiots might call me a cunt, but no, I don't accept I'm a cunt.
The point I'm making here is that regardless of your job, being abused by customers is never acceptable and blaming the victim for it is pants on head retarded.
Blame the victim?! Dude, you're defending the customer service reps! Between the reps & the customers, who are the victims in this story, the only evidence of anybody being a dick, was the reps changing the customer's names! They're the assholes in the story, not some nebulous concept of a generic company hating customer yelling to random innocent reps making them too angry to do their job!
A lot of people take these jobs because they cant find any other work. This does not mean they have chose to take abuse.
But they get to call customers, who never did anything to them, "whore".
What Apple Europe (which is in Ireland) does is holds all the profits that Apple makes in countries other than the US, because they can't bring that money back into the US. The US wants to charge a second round of taxes, even though European taxes have already applied.
European taxes have not been collected because of the tricks Apple uses. The EU is pursing Apple for dodged taxes as well. One of Apple's subsidiaries paid absolutely no taxes at all for 5 years despite $30 billion in profits. $0 taxes, $30 billion profit.
This is the same thing that the US does to dual nationals - a US/UK dual citizen working in the UK will pay income tax both to the UK and to the US, because the US thinks they're entitled to taxes on money made abroad.
Does said US citizen get to hold his US passport? Does he get to use US Embassies? Will he be rescued by the US military if kidnapped in Iraq? All that costs money. And the guy gets to deduct from his US tax bill anything paid in the UK anyways.
The reality here is that what should change is the US's policy of taxing all money everywhere, whether or not it ever had anything to do with the US.
As long as it has nothing to do with the US.. I agree the US shouldn't tax it. Last time I drove through Cupertino though, I'm pretty sure I saw a giant Apple logo behind a bunch of people carrying Apple Ids. At least one of Apple's Irish subsidiaries has zero employees though.
1920-1922, Banting and Best create synthetic insulin changing life forever for millions of diabetics. Thanks for playing iTard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
Banting & Best, in 1921, were the first to extract natural insulin from dogs & later, fetal cows. They got a nobel prize in 1923 for doing that.
30 years later, Frederick Sanger picked up the 3rd nobel prize awarded on the subject by mapping the amino acid structure of insulin. The first mapped protein.
And 10 years after that, 2 universities created the first synthetic insulin, based on the 50 years of work done prior to that.
Hey, I just invented a new game. I call it "uTard". Thanks for playing anonymously.
especially if said job involves being yelled at and blamed by angry people all day about things they have no control over.
"Woe is me, I have no control over which shit call center job I have.", right?
Go back a few posts
You take a job at a customer call center for a reviled company;
If you work for Comcast, you either a) expect to get shit from people hating Comcast; or b) are a complete idiot.
If you choose to associate yourself with any business or entity, you are choosing to be a part of that organization's reputation too. If you join the CIA, there are some Snowden lovers that are going to hate you. If you join the CIA as a public relations officer, you're going to have to meet & talk to Snowden lovers that are going to hate you. This is known. It doesn't matter if that organization is Comcast, the CIA, the US Army, the KKK, the "Slashdot Beta Lovers Club", Obama's campaign, Romney's campaign, or "The H Club". If you choose the association, and you choose to speak to people who, from the organization's reputation, probably have a good reason to be upset before you ever pick up the phone, then you absolutely have & had control over your predicament. If you can't handle what goes with that, then quit and consider things more carefully before joining another organization with a known bad reputation.
Sure they have to be fired when the insults become public as a matter of public relations, but I sympathize with them even if I'm one of the people they've labeled insultingly.
I can sympathize with having to put up with a shitty job; but not with doing a shitty job. The people who made the name changes are assholes. Entertaining, but assholes.
Uh, no. The bigger the country and its GDP the greater the economies of scale.
So you think money is why our internet access sucks? We don't have enough money?
The bigger the country, the greater number of opposing viewpoints you have to get past. If the bigger GDP mattered more, Obamacare would have been the model for the Massachusetts health care plan, not the other way around. New & improving initiatives nearly always take place at the local or state (US state / any other entire nation) level before they hit the federal (US) level because of this. Sure, you & 10 friends pooled together have enough money to buy a new house. But who is going to live in it? Who is going to maintain it? Who will replace it when it burns down?
The density issue is stupid as well since we don't have FTTH in all the cities.
Does it cost the same to lay 1000 miles of fiber as it does to lay 1 mile? Once you get the fiber in, do you make the same amount of money off 1 customer as 1000? Does it cost the same to service a line 1000 miles away as it does to service a line right outside your office? Do you think it is just random coincidence that cities get new/faster access before rural towns? Population density is a big part of every business decision in this realm because it is so closely tied to how much money you can make.
Source: Living with dial-up in San Jose, California, the heart of Silicon Valley, in this century, because every high-speed internet providing company on the planet agreed that it was more profitable to build up different, smaller, higher-density locations first.
I think what the "study" is missing is the fact that they're studying OSS on GitHub. The diversity there is implicit in the model. GitHub does not have a downtown office where all the contributors meet daily from 9-5 to work on their respective projects. So the talent pool is not artificially limited or hindered by the location. Anybody, anywhere, at any time, can start, end, join, or leave a project at a whim. Contributors are world-wide.
Amazon's Seattle office (not picking on Amazon, it is just a nice example) will never be that diverse because it requires anybody that wants to work there to move to Seattle. The people that do end up working there will be inundated with Seattle's culture & mindset, becoming less diverse the longer the office stays open. People aren't going to magically change sex or skin tone, but their brains will start to think alike because they're all forced to be a part of the same culture.
Sure, Amazon can attract diversity to Seattle. There are countless big name projects from big name companies that were created by truly diverse teams. But that is not the standard the "office in city X" naturally promotes. They have to specifically look for diversity by offering relocation benefits, extra stock options, visas, etc.
Of course what I'm truly saying is you're more likely to get the benefits of diversity if you look for geographic differences in your workforce as that marker is a more likely indication of different mindsets brought about by varied cultures.
It's been broken and invalid for at least 13 years. No one gives a shit, at least those that can fix it.
Well someone fucked it up good and proper in the last 2 days. The layout is now totally borked on Safari 6.1, whereas at the start of the week it was perfectly fine.
Which part of the comment are you guys referring to?
This?
It took me all of 5 seconds to run a slashdot story through an HTML5 validator and see where you fucked up
or this?
Oh, and BTW.. News, Nerds, Technology with this story? Obviously the glory days are over.
With a stable currency you're unlikely to lose money that way... as opposed to an untimely investment in a speculative market where you may lose 0-100% of your value which you may or may not have the time to wait out for that value to return, but don't take it from me, take it from the millions of baby boomers who wanted to retire in 2008 but then had to work another 10 years because their investments lost a big chunk of value. I'll bet the money in their mattresses didn't get affected much.
With any currency you are guaranteed to lose money that way because the money loses value every day to inflation. The longer you hold cash in your hand, the poorer you get.
As to the baby boomers, no, they were not affected significantly by the drop in 2008. Why? Because even at the bottom of the worst of the market in 2008, the Dow was still up 1000% from its low in 1970. The fools that had to work an additional 10 years were just that, fools. They didn't invest properly.
Hording cash is not an investment strategy. Trading currency, including bitcoins, is.
Look man, Last year I could take a bitcoin and buy $1000 worth of drugs with it. Now I can only get $200 worth of drugs. It's lost like $800 worth of utility!!!
But the penalty is so low, and takes so much money to even get a judgement, that nobody can do it.
Although... I have heard of great success from people suing telemarketers for robocalls in small claims court. Some places, like California, make it stupid easy to do it because you can file your case online. Obviously $10k isn't going to get you very far if a false DMCA ruins your business. But if you just want to send a message, or if you need a down payment for a car, that may be the way to go.
James Clapper mentioned recently meeting the Kim Yong Chol, the North Korean general in charge of cyberwarfare. Clapper emphasized Kim's belligerence and lack of a sense of humor, implying that an advance screening of "The Interview" would likely have enraged and provoked the North Korean brass."
If you work your ass of for 10 years, making sure to be the best, only to get passed by for a rookie on a "diversity" quota,
Is that any different from working your ass off for 10 years, making sure to be the best only to get passed by because you're not a man? Is it possible for science to identify bias using a randomized, controlled trial?
So the thing is you're assuming everything is equal and therefore quotas are hurting men. The thing is that they're not equal and women are demonstrably being passed over in favour of men simply by vitrue of not being male.
So what do you think should be done. Unless you have a good rebuttal for that study, something is clearly messed up.
Bad article. The author condescendingly dismisses an argument, providing merely a link to her sister's article which claims the argument arises from media bias. The argument being:
From reading the comments on Sean Carroll’s post, most people who read this will have one of four reactions: [snip] 4) Equally qualified women should be discriminated against, because they could go off and get pregnant. I’m afraid the 4’s do exist, and from my experience they are not very willing to have their minds changed. (For a concise article that touches on why their argument is flawed, I’d recommend this piece by my sister, Shara Yurkiewicz.)
Her sister Shara is "disturbed" by people that claim actual differences between sexes is a legitimate reason to discriminate, going so far as to misstate #4s position. The argument I see is NOT that "equally qualified women should be discriminated against", it is that two people with equal education & experience, 1 being male & 1 being female are not equal. She goes on to define when she considers a preference to be discrimination (and fails to mention actual differences; thus validating the actual argument behind #4) and concludes with
The commenters claim that their views are grounded in the economic model we work within. That is fair, but – wrongly, I believe – there is nothing said of the normative, or "what ought to be."
"What ought to be" has and is said, but she disagrees due to being on the short end of the stick, and so her own bias as to how the world should be causes her to miss it. "What ought to be", in many people's eyes, is "The best of the best". Sometimes you have to compromise, but you always search for the best. Obviously for those that are not the best that is a horrible system to live in. So the author ignores it, effectively claims that is not a valid goal, and moves on to simplify the solution to everything being just
a shift in mindset about traditional gender roles.
But there is actual, real, research that shows women miss more work due to being a woman. Some of that no doubt is just a view of traditional gender roles, and so can be changed to some extent. But there are also real physical differences as well that will affect worth no matter how far you stick your head in the sand. So if you're looking for the "best of the best", you have to consider how much missed work will affect your hire's worth just like you consider their education, experience, attitude, cleanliness, credit history, & interpersonal skills.
The question the author should be asking & trying to answer is: What is HER "ought to be"; what is YOUR "ought to be"; and how do we reconcile them? Reading between the lines makes her "ought to be" just sound like any other argument presented by anybody else that has ever been on the short end of the stick: I deserve to have anything you have. So I'm inclined ignore it with "Tough shit."
Slashdot Mirror
I generally trust /. still on moderating such posts enough for meed to weed them out, but I browse lower... probably lower than I should with my emotional baggage.
I am the OP, and I certainly had sardonic irony in mind. I am surprised by the amount of "whoosing" that my comment engendered.
Remember that over 80% of people support mandatory labeling of foods containing DNA.
Most (I am not exaggerating, I believe the number actually is > 50%) people are stupid and/or uneducated enough to be quite serious with comments such as yours. It is pretty safe to assume people are in the majority.
I shouldn't have commented in the first place. Broke my own rule: don't comment on politics on Slashdot (or pretty much any place else, for that matter). I am primarily committed to sharing information, not opinion. Commenting on politics is rarely informative, always opinionated. One is reduced to sardonic irony, or worse.
I *should* do that.
So should most everybody else actually...
Granted; I see your point.
On reflection, the part that speaks to me is: "Conservatives are for equal treatment. For instance, a law against sleeping on the sidewalk should be enforced equally on both millionaires and homeless vagrants."
Thing is, that statement is just as much bullshit as the anti-liberal statement.
1. Sleeping on the sidewalk is a law that affects only 1 group. They make such laws knowing that the law will only or primarily affect the demographic they hate. Do millionaires sleep on the sidewalk? No. Passing a law that you know will only or primarily affect a certain demographic is discriminatory. The KKK could fuck over 2 of their hated groups by getting a law passed that says "curly hair is illegal." Such a law doesn't violate the constitution or civil rights laws at its face, so the conservative KKK says ". You have to look at who it hits primarily.
2. Entitlement programs. To me, giving a business a tax break is no different than giving an individual a tax break. Conservatives are all for tax breaks for their businesses & charitable donations. But give a poor person a meal and they throw you in jail.
Does he get to use US Embassies?
How does one use an embassy?
As an expat, there are a very small number of reasons (I forget, maybe 4 or 5) that I will even be allowed into the embassy. Basically, my US passport will get me a ticket out of the country if WWIII starts, but other than that, the fact that the embassy exists is of absolutely no day-to-day use to me.
Embassy Services
That page shows a picture of a helicopter saving a US Citizen hurt in the earthquake in Haiti. US Citizens got helicopters, everybody else got Cholera. Sounds like a decent benny.
You're a cunt. Yes a huge, blubbering fanny flap. Oh, I'm sorry, you don't like getting abused. But you chose to come to /. you accepted that you're a complete cunt.
I don't recall seeing "If you come to /. you're a cunt." in the EULA. I accept that bigots and idiots might call me a cunt, but no, I don't accept I'm a cunt.
The point I'm making here is that regardless of your job, being abused by customers is never acceptable and blaming the victim for it is pants on head retarded.
Blame the victim?! Dude, you're defending the customer service reps! Between the reps & the customers, who are the victims in this story, the only evidence of anybody being a dick, was the reps changing the customer's names! They're the assholes in the story, not some nebulous concept of a generic company hating customer yelling to random innocent reps making them too angry to do their job!
A lot of people take these jobs because they cant find any other work. This does not mean they have chose to take abuse.
But they get to call customers, who never did anything to them, "whore".
Except that's not what Apple is doing. See the fact that Apple US paid 6 billion dollars in US taxes on 18 billion profit.
That is what they told you. The US Senate grabbed Apple's IRS paperwork and found a check for $2.5 billion.
What Apple Europe (which is in Ireland) does is holds all the profits that Apple makes in countries other than the US, because they can't bring that money back into the US. The US wants to charge a second round of taxes, even though European taxes have already applied.
European taxes have not been collected because of the tricks Apple uses. The EU is pursing Apple for dodged taxes as well. One of Apple's subsidiaries paid absolutely no taxes at all for 5 years despite $30 billion in profits. $0 taxes, $30 billion profit.
This is the same thing that the US does to dual nationals - a US/UK dual citizen working in the UK will pay income tax both to the UK and to the US, because the US thinks they're entitled to taxes on money made abroad.
Does said US citizen get to hold his US passport? Does he get to use US Embassies? Will he be rescued by the US military if kidnapped in Iraq? All that costs money. And the guy gets to deduct from his US tax bill anything paid in the UK anyways.
The reality here is that what should change is the US's policy of taxing all money everywhere, whether or not it ever had anything to do with the US.
As long as it has nothing to do with the US.. I agree the US shouldn't tax it. Last time I drove through Cupertino though, I'm pretty sure I saw a giant Apple logo behind a bunch of people carrying Apple Ids. At least one of Apple's Irish subsidiaries has zero employees though.
1920-1922, Banting and Best create synthetic insulin changing life forever for millions of diabetics. Thanks for playing iTard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
Banting & Best, in 1921, were the first to extract natural insulin from dogs & later, fetal cows. They got a nobel prize in 1923 for doing that.
30 years later, Frederick Sanger picked up the 3rd nobel prize awarded on the subject by mapping the amino acid structure of insulin. The first mapped protein.
And 10 years after that, 2 universities created the first synthetic insulin, based on the 50 years of work done prior to that.
Hey, I just invented a new game. I call it "uTard". Thanks for playing anonymously.
....but Steve Jobs has passed on. Those that follow, are exactly that, followers.
WTF?! NOW JOBS DYING FIRST MAKES ME A COPYCAT FOLLOWER FANBOY?!
Well fuck you I'm living forever!
That's not creating a new business out of nothing, nor is it being particularly visionary. It's a natural improvement on an existing market segment.
Can you name an invention on par with the iPhone in the last 100 years that lives up to your definition?
especially if said job involves being yelled at and blamed by angry people all day about things they have no control over.
"Woe is me, I have no control over which shit call center job I have.", right?
Go back a few posts
You take a job at a customer call center for a reviled company;
If you work for Comcast, you either a) expect to get shit from people hating Comcast; or b) are a complete idiot.
If you choose to associate yourself with any business or entity, you are choosing to be a part of that organization's reputation too. If you join the CIA, there are some Snowden lovers that are going to hate you. If you join the CIA as a public relations officer, you're going to have to meet & talk to Snowden lovers that are going to hate you. This is known. It doesn't matter if that organization is Comcast, the CIA, the US Army, the KKK, the "Slashdot Beta Lovers Club", Obama's campaign, Romney's campaign, or "The H Club". If you choose the association, and you choose to speak to people who, from the organization's reputation, probably have a good reason to be upset before you ever pick up the phone, then you absolutely have & had control over your predicament. If you can't handle what goes with that, then quit and consider things more carefully before joining another organization with a known bad reputation.
Sure they have to be fired when the insults become public as a matter of public relations, but I sympathize with them even if I'm one of the people they've labeled insultingly.
I can sympathize with having to put up with a shitty job; but not with doing a shitty job. The people who made the name changes are assholes. Entertaining, but assholes.
They claim the same for other drugs that have been used, very successfully, by the medical community.
So, why should I believe these mosquitoes are harmless?
Uh, no. The bigger the country and its GDP the greater the economies of scale.
So you think money is why our internet access sucks? We don't have enough money?
The bigger the country, the greater number of opposing viewpoints you have to get past. If the bigger GDP mattered more, Obamacare would have been the model for the Massachusetts health care plan, not the other way around. New & improving initiatives nearly always take place at the local or state (US state / any other entire nation) level before they hit the federal (US) level because of this. Sure, you & 10 friends pooled together have enough money to buy a new house. But who is going to live in it? Who is going to maintain it? Who will replace it when it burns down?
The density issue is stupid as well since we don't have FTTH in all the cities.
Does it cost the same to lay 1000 miles of fiber as it does to lay 1 mile? Once you get the fiber in, do you make the same amount of money off 1 customer as 1000? Does it cost the same to service a line 1000 miles away as it does to service a line right outside your office? Do you think it is just random coincidence that cities get new/faster access before rural towns? Population density is a big part of every business decision in this realm because it is so closely tied to how much money you can make.
Source: Living with dial-up in San Jose, California, the heart of Silicon Valley, in this century, because every high-speed internet providing company on the planet agreed that it was more profitable to build up different, smaller, higher-density locations first.
Then it should be named Vincent, and our own system should be renamed Julius. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...
Digital Drachmas, 75% off!
I think what the "study" is missing is the fact that they're studying OSS on GitHub. The diversity there is implicit in the model. GitHub does not have a downtown office where all the contributors meet daily from 9-5 to work on their respective projects. So the talent pool is not artificially limited or hindered by the location. Anybody, anywhere, at any time, can start, end, join, or leave a project at a whim. Contributors are world-wide.
Amazon's Seattle office (not picking on Amazon, it is just a nice example) will never be that diverse because it requires anybody that wants to work there to move to Seattle. The people that do end up working there will be inundated with Seattle's culture & mindset, becoming less diverse the longer the office stays open. People aren't going to magically change sex or skin tone, but their brains will start to think alike because they're all forced to be a part of the same culture.
Sure, Amazon can attract diversity to Seattle. There are countless big name projects from big name companies that were created by truly diverse teams. But that is not the standard the "office in city X" naturally promotes. They have to specifically look for diversity by offering relocation benefits, extra stock options, visas, etc.
Of course what I'm truly saying is you're more likely to get the benefits of diversity if you look for geographic differences in your workforce as that marker is a more likely indication of different mindsets brought about by varied cultures.
Hire another local programmer at 110% of the fired employee's salary to fix the cheap H1B programmer's code = 60% loss.
Hire 2 new FTE programmer/H1B programmers for 50% of the 2nd local programmer's salary = another 50% savings = 100% savings!
Where is my honorary MBA?!
It's been broken and invalid for at least 13 years. No one gives a shit, at least those that can fix it.
Well someone fucked it up good and proper in the last 2 days. The layout is now totally borked on Safari 6.1, whereas at the start of the week it was perfectly fine.
Which part of the comment are you guys referring to?
This?
It took me all of 5 seconds to run a slashdot story through an HTML5 validator and see where you fucked up
or this?
Oh, and BTW .. News, Nerds, Technology with this story? Obviously the glory days are over.
With a stable currency you're unlikely to lose money that way ... as opposed to an untimely investment in a speculative market where you may lose 0-100% of your value which you may or may not have the time to wait out for that value to return, but don't take it from me, take it from the millions of baby boomers who wanted to retire in 2008 but then had to work another 10 years because their investments lost a big chunk of value. I'll bet the money in their mattresses didn't get affected much.
With any currency you are guaranteed to lose money that way because the money loses value every day to inflation. The longer you hold cash in your hand, the poorer you get.
As to the baby boomers, no, they were not affected significantly by the drop in 2008. Why? Because even at the bottom of the worst of the market in 2008, the Dow was still up 1000% from its low in 1970. The fools that had to work an additional 10 years were just that, fools. They didn't invest properly.
Hording cash is not an investment strategy. Trading currency, including bitcoins, is.
I too find it amazing that people find this surprising
meta-surprise.
Look man, Last year I could take a bitcoin and buy $1000 worth of drugs with it. Now I can only get $200 worth of drugs. It's lost like $800 worth of utility!!!
Silk Road getting trashed is not bitcoin's fault.
The volatility of bitcoins is just proof that you shouldn't horde them, there's no reason to do that.
So BitCoins are not suitable as an investment? Interesting....
Has putting wads of cash in your mattress EVER been a suitable investment strategy?
Yet I have never heard of anyone being prosecuted or sued for it.
Several have. Including Diebold.
http://targetlaw.com/consequen...
But the penalty is so low, and takes so much money to even get a judgement, that nobody can do it.
Although... I have heard of great success from people suing telemarketers for robocalls in small claims court. Some places, like California, make it stupid easy to do it because you can file your case online. Obviously $10k isn't going to get you very far if a false DMCA ruins your business. But if you just want to send a message, or if you need a down payment for a car, that may be the way to go.
James Clapper mentioned recently meeting the Kim Yong Chol, the North Korean general in charge of cyberwarfare. Clapper emphasized Kim's belligerence and lack of a sense of humor, implying that an advance screening of "The Interview" would likely have enraged and provoked the North Korean brass."
Maybe Kim just doesn't like being lied to?
If you work your ass of for 10 years, making sure to be the best, only to get passed by for a rookie on a "diversity" quota,
Is that any different from working your ass off for 10 years, making sure to be the best only to get passed by because you're not a man? Is it possible for science to identify bias using a randomized, controlled trial?
Why yes!
http://blogs.scientificamerica...
So the thing is you're assuming everything is equal and therefore quotas are hurting men. The thing is that they're not equal and women are demonstrably being passed over in favour of men simply by vitrue of not being male.
So what do you think should be done. Unless you have a good rebuttal for that study, something is clearly messed up.
Bad article. The author condescendingly dismisses an argument, providing merely a link to her sister's article which claims the argument arises from media bias. The argument being:
From reading the comments on Sean Carroll’s post, most people who read this will have one of four reactions:
[snip]
4) Equally qualified women should be discriminated against, because they could go off and get pregnant.
I’m afraid the 4’s do exist, and from my experience they are not very willing to have their minds changed. (For a concise article that touches on why their argument is flawed, I’d recommend this piece by my sister, Shara Yurkiewicz.)
Her sister Shara is "disturbed" by people that claim actual differences between sexes is a legitimate reason to discriminate, going so far as to misstate #4s position. The argument I see is NOT that "equally qualified women should be discriminated against", it is that two people with equal education & experience, 1 being male & 1 being female are not equal. She goes on to define when she considers a preference to be discrimination (and fails to mention actual differences; thus validating the actual argument behind #4) and concludes with
The commenters claim that their views are grounded in the economic model we work within. That is fair, but – wrongly, I believe – there is nothing said of the normative, or "what ought to be."
"What ought to be" has and is said, but she disagrees due to being on the short end of the stick, and so her own bias as to how the world should be causes her to miss it. "What ought to be", in many people's eyes, is "The best of the best". Sometimes you have to compromise, but you always search for the best. Obviously for those that are not the best that is a horrible system to live in. So the author ignores it, effectively claims that is not a valid goal, and moves on to simplify the solution to everything being just
a shift in mindset about traditional gender roles.
But there is actual, real, research that shows women miss more work due to being a woman. Some of that no doubt is just a view of traditional gender roles, and so can be changed to some extent. But there are also real physical differences as well that will affect worth no matter how far you stick your head in the sand. So if you're looking for the "best of the best", you have to consider how much missed work will affect your hire's worth just like you consider their education, experience, attitude, cleanliness, credit history, & interpersonal skills.
The question the author should be asking & trying to answer is: What is HER "ought to be"; what is YOUR "ought to be"; and how do we reconcile them? Reading between the lines makes her "ought to be" just sound like any other argument presented by anybody else that has ever been on the short end of the stick: I deserve to have anything you have. So I'm inclined ignore it with "Tough shit."