"Singapore is Chinese? This will come as a real shock to all the Malay people who make up the majority of the population there"
The other person said that Singapore is more than 55% ethnic Chinese? Which of you are right? Regardless, the point is taken. I should have left it off the list, or modified it as a "Chinese culturally-dominated country".
"San Francisco a sovereign territory of the PRC."
Last time I knew, the PRC rules with an iron hand over its territories and colonial possessions (like Tibet). The idea of a sovereign colony of theirs is an oxymoron.
"In Tibet, occupied or not, most people speak Tibetan, not Chinese"
This is one of many reasons Tibet is not really Chinese. However, as long as a foreign army from Beijing is occupying it and declaring it is their own, there is a point of view that "Tibet is part of China" that does exist somewhere.
There are right now three Chinese nations: the People's Republic, Taiwan, and Singapore. (No, I will not count "occupied Tibet" because it is ethnically not China). Doing this will not "filter out" those from these countries, as well as other members of the Chinese diasporah worldwide.
About my view of Gore's statement. I do not believe that the use of the word "invent" or "create" in a paraphrase makes any difference. This includes not thinking that using the world "invent" makes Gore somehow look worse. You are right though, that "actually said" should not be used for a paraphrasing.
"Don't forget that it's a shield against not-so-frivolous lawsuits, too"
It is the frivolous lawsuits that are the problem, and these are too common. Just a couple of weeks ago, Ford LOST a lawsuit because some drunk maniac was speeding and flipped an SUV.
"the costs of affirmative action are so trivial..."
As long as one individual is denied opportunity due to their race, the cost is way too high. The benefits are none.
"You say "hire only on excellence" but have not made a single concrete suggestion how society might go about enforcing that"
Easy. Bust those who hire based on race.
"on their normal, often unconscious human biases as they have always done throughout of all of history."
The problem is that you assume that everyone is guilty of being a racist whether or not they really are.
"the change in human nature, that would be necessary for the idealistic precept "hire only on excellence" to become a reality."
It requires no change in human nature. It is an utter fallacy that everyone is a racist.
"Let's see you make a plausible suggestion of how we as a society might somehow enforce the ideal "hire only on excellence"
One strong step is to eliminate affirmative action, as Jim Crow was eliminated.
"Once again, you are completely ignoring the documented fact of UNCONSCIOUS race bias"
I love unconscious, invisible, and undetectable race bias!
"Because of this fact of the human condition, "choose the best candidate regardless or race"
It works in practice.
"that is present in society without some sort of opposing force, something that acts against the unconscious biases that humans develop and perpetuate"
i.e. we must deny people rights based on skin color because of invisible societal forces.
"You don't like affirmative action? "
No, I do not. Nor do I like Jim Crow or anything similar. It all denies individuals equal protection under the law and due process.
"Would you prefer to go back to allowing tension to build up until revolution "
You overlook the obvious, much better solution; remove discrimination. You seem hell-bent on thinking that emplacing discriminating against race B is an OK countermeasure for discrimination against race A. This does not level the playing field: it tips it much worse. You are also creating tension along the way: aff.action divides and conquers and pits groups against each other.
They all do. When any sex or race (or other) quota system is in play, individuals get denied a fair shake because they do not meet the quota's requirements.
"There are no quota systems that say "don't hire Bob Jones""
The quotas tend to discriminate against the wrong sex and race. Not on personal names that happen to be similar to that Catholic university.
"I'm not sure if you just haven't thought this through..."
That's a fair question for you. Perhaps you did not realise it that when quotas discriminate against abstract groups, there are actual living human beings who end up affected by it.
Slashdot Mirror
This law needs a loophole, for those who might be doing something useful, like hunting spammers remotely over the Internet.
If you haven't gotten rid of your floppies by now, better do it before you boot up Magneto. Erase-day is coming.
The magic mushrooms are really popular, too. Except you never know when you'll be reaching for one and Luigi brains you with a big pipe wrench.
Someone better give Hercules and Long John Silver the news.
Looking forward to the Mario Bros themed mosh pit, complete with bricks and burning barrels.
"Help! Help! Janet Jackson has had a wardrobe malfunction! on my TV!!!"
Worse? You mean like having their intellectual property rights violated? Wha? Oh. never mind. You must have been reading some RIAA press releases.
The other person said that Singapore is more than 55% ethnic Chinese? Which of you are right? Regardless, the point is taken. I should have left it off the list, or modified it as a "Chinese culturally-dominated country".
"San Francisco a sovereign territory of the PRC."
Last time I knew, the PRC rules with an iron hand over its territories and colonial possessions (like Tibet). The idea of a sovereign colony of theirs is an oxymoron.
Regardless, I should have left it off the list.
This is one of many reasons Tibet is not really Chinese. However, as long as a foreign army from Beijing is occupying it and declaring it is their own, there is a point of view that "Tibet is part of China" that does exist somewhere.
Wrong, I am. I even read that Wired article when it first came out.
Ever heard "Amarok" ?
There are right now three Chinese nations: the People's Republic, Taiwan, and Singapore. (No, I will not count "occupied Tibet" because it is ethnically not China). Doing this will not "filter out" those from these countries, as well as other members of the Chinese diasporah worldwide.
About my view of Gore's statement. I do not believe that the use of the word "invent" or "create" in a paraphrase makes any difference. This includes not thinking that using the world "invent" makes Gore somehow look worse. You are right though, that "actually said" should not be used for a paraphrasing.
It is the frivolous lawsuits that are the problem, and these are too common. Just a couple of weeks ago, Ford LOST a lawsuit because some drunk maniac was speeding and flipped an SUV.
And I have no idea why I foed'd you. I'm turning it off now. You will probably never read this!
Go to news.google.com, and search on "land of the lost". You will find several stories.
Thanks. I did make an error. Foe and Freak both? Must be a BAD error!
"You say "hire only on excellence" but have not made a single concrete suggestion how society might go about enforcing that"
Easy. Bust those who hire based on race.
"on their normal, often unconscious human biases as they have always done throughout of all of history."
The problem is that you assume that everyone is guilty of being a racist whether or not they really are.
"the change in human nature, that would be necessary for the idealistic precept "hire only on excellence" to become a reality."
It requires no change in human nature. It is an utter fallacy that everyone is a racist.
"Let's see you make a plausible suggestion of how we as a society might somehow enforce the ideal "hire only on excellence"
One strong step is to eliminate affirmative action, as Jim Crow was eliminated.
In keeping with the topic, I suppose I could say that Google is "just like Hitler" because the cache is not working.
I suggest you do as the Republicans do: ban the slashdot fillibuster. I've got no complaint: I had swift rejection of my "nominees".
I love unconscious, invisible, and undetectable race bias!
"Because of this fact of the human condition, "choose the best candidate regardless or race"
It works in practice.
"that is present in society without some sort of opposing force, something that acts against the unconscious biases that humans develop and perpetuate"
i.e. we must deny people rights based on skin color because of invisible societal forces.
"You don't like affirmative action? "
No, I do not. Nor do I like Jim Crow or anything similar. It all denies individuals equal protection under the law and due process.
"Would you prefer to go back to allowing tension to build up until revolution "
You overlook the obvious, much better solution; remove discrimination. You seem hell-bent on thinking that emplacing discriminating against race B is an OK countermeasure for discrimination against race A. This does not level the playing field: it tips it much worse. You are also creating tension along the way: aff.action divides and conquers and pits groups against each other.
Uhhhh. I haven't cleaned my room in a while. Yeah, I know those are half-eaten spaghetti bowls. Just don't light that cigarette in here, ok bud?
They all do. When any sex or race (or other) quota system is in play, individuals get denied a fair shake because they do not meet the quota's requirements.
"There are no quota systems that say "don't hire Bob Jones""
The quotas tend to discriminate against the wrong sex and race. Not on personal names that happen to be similar to that Catholic university.
"I'm not sure if you just haven't thought this through..."
That's a fair question for you. Perhaps you did not realise it that when quotas discriminate against abstract groups, there are actual living human beings who end up affected by it.
Thanks for a question that was entirely unrelated in any way to what was being discussed.
My toilet is plugged. A plungerbot sounds like just the right thing.