I use Opera at work to host a Slack channel, and after being open all day mostly just in Slack, it will often crash with an Out of Memory error, so it's far from a perfect browser.
I'm replying again to correct myself. Basically, the study found that women quite as a result of interview rejection at a much higher rate than men, skewing their numbers. Eliminating early attrition data indicates that women perform equally well at getting jobs from interviews so long as they stay in the game. There are probably socialization issues (which are a result of societal sexism) contributing (some studies are indicated) to women dropping out early. It is hard to know with the data provided, but it is possible that women are just as strong and valid as candidates as men if we can figure out how to address this gender difference in handling rejection.
I went back and re-read. You are correct. The original study was not super well-written, IMO. Too conversational. I think I would have done better with it had it been written in a more traditional research style, including data, etc...
So basically, the answer is to try to deal with whatever socialization factors are contributing to women quitting as a result of interview rejection.
From the Fusion article (and I read the original study to confirm this quote doesn't misrepresent the original work):
'Lerner dug into her data and came up with her own guess for the cause of the surprising results: women were leaving the platform after having one or two bad interviews. In other words, women, feeling discouraged, seemed to be just giving up on interviewing altogether. “Once you factor out interview data from both men and women who quit after one or two bad interviews,” she writes, “the disparity goes away entirely.”'
That result therefore confirms the existence of gender bias, though because there are fewer remaining data points, the results are less significant.
Actually, if you bother reading the article, you'll find the headline is misleading, and if you do a little stripping of outliers, the headline becomes incorrect.
I hate to admit this, but the mobile space, iOS and Android, is really where the attention is being paid where email apps are concerned. The desktop space has become dominated by free webmail monoliths like Gmail and Yahoo. The corporate/business space is dominated by Outlook and... Gmail, yup. Thunderbird was the only strong, independent email app I ever liked since Eudora become stupid years ago. But these days that entire desktop email space has been a vast wasteland. And yet, on mobile devices there is still so much development going on. Look at Outlook mobile (once an independent app called Accompli). The app is great, integrates with Gmail perfectly, and makes reading my work email on my mobile device almost a better experience than on my desktop.
And the tone and tenor of the responses is exactly what I would expect. *I* don't see a problem and someone found a woman to personally refute the claim, therefore there must not be a problem. This topic has been written on often enough and in enough detail from enough different angles that, while some of the intricacies are still elusive, we (as a society) are not clueless about this. Those who claim most loudly that there isn't a problem truly mean that there isn't a problem FOR THEM.
The problem is that for so many women, they have to write BETTER code than their male peers to be considered on the same level. They are put upon to bust stereo-types. And that may be harder for some women to do in work environs which, many times, cater explicitly to male employees.
Yes, this is an indirect response to the video, but the summary and the slant of the question suggest that the interview is as much about grinding a particular axe as interviewing Liz Bennett.
Thanks to the municipal power utility rolling out gigabit speeds to Chattanooga and the surrounding communities, the Tennessee river valley is starting to become a good place for tech. There have also been local efforts to attract and develop startups to take advantage of that broadband speed. Furthermore, though the average salary for employees is below national average, the cost of living is even lower, meaning people can get by on less. The local natural environs are great, too. If you want to work for a big company doing tech it might not be the place for you, but if you want to do your own thing and form, or be part of, a small team doing innovative stuff, it's a great environment to work in. That and you can always take your startup team for a hike in the nearby mountains with only a 15-30 minute drive. Talk about a break to clear the cruft out of a cluttered mind!
They don't have to show up. They can just lose by default by not showing up. However, they can appeal the small claims court verdict and escalate and by moving things to a larger court screw you over in turn by requiring YOU to show up somewhere that may no longer be quite as local. And if you don't show up for that, you can bet your penalty will be much greater than theirs was to have been for losing that initial small claims case.
This is clearly a cost reduction move on Netflix's part, but that doesn't mean they can pass along the reduction. This reduction may better serve to counter increases in cost elsewhere in the chain, preventing them from having to raise the subscription fee. Manufacturers and service providers can't increases costs constantly, so they have to off-set occasional spikes with reductions. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
I learned quite a bit about the Amiga 2000 from this article, but what on earth was going on with the writing? Using apostrophes with plurals, needlessly enclosing terms in double quotes, random capital letters; it was a mess. It was very hard to read because of this craziness.
She seems to be telling us that when technology finally becomes useful enough to be mainstream, it's boring. OK, fine, I can accept that, somewhat. But the point of developing something new and "exciting" is so that someday it will be mundane and boring. And when Google spends all their time on the new, that makes more room for others to innovate with the "old".
I find most self-proclaimed "professional audiophiles" will suck up any cable techno-speak a company will throw at them. Lamp cord will make perfectly fine speaker wire. Also, most "professional audiophiles" are unwilling to perform blind or double-blind listening tests.
This is a problematic piece because it confuses an extended warranty and accident protection/insurance. Most extended warranties do not include accident protection, and that option tends to cost extra and require the base extended warranty, which is the problematic part. If FourSquare wants to offer cheaper, better extended warranties paired with accident protection, more power to them, but that's a very different thing than an extended warranty alone.
Trying to fight globalization on the whole is ineffective, but fighting the demand for more H1B visas with factual data isn't. Recent studies show that companies have been lying about their inability to find domestic talent AND about how much they pay their H1B visa employees. The long and short of it is, the experts exist within the US but the companies want to save money on H1B visas, so they lie to congress, all the while, claiming we need more tech-savvy Americans. When we produce the appropriately educated Americans, the companies won't hire them because they are too expensive compared to their H1B shortcut. All this fight is doing is creating over-educated Americans who will have lots of education debt and no jobs.
I found that getting on to a year my entire XP system would operate a lot more slowly. Everything took longer, and I was a lot more likely to run into error. I did a lot of program installation/uninstallation. That, and XP's constant update cycle actually caused it to bog down. I've a feeling Microsoft's update install process for XP left a lot of cruft lying around.
I found that doing a data backup, clean reinstall, installing the latest service pack and round of updates, and then installing all the latest version of my regular programs resulted in a system that took up a lot less disk space and ran smoothly and quickly again like it was almost new.
Agree. I was very negative on Vista when it came out based on what I read. Then, when I went to build a desktop, it was the only current MS OS available for me to put on it, so I did. And it turns out that after a tweaked it a bit it's been a breeze to deal with (for the most part - there's always some random MS behavior that pisses me off). I have Windows 7 on my laptop and, frankly, I don't find Win7 to be significantly better from the perspective of regular, normal interactions. Vista had some growing pains, but it mostly sorted those out later in its market life.
Though I enjoy Windows 7 on my laptop, I find that Vista is actually decent on my desktop. Certainly better than I expected. I didn't pick up Vista until later in the life cycle, and by then they had sorted out some of the most problematic bits. I haven't had to reinstall Windows for almost 3 years, which is a record for me. As much as I liked XP, there was no getting around doing a system nuke every 12 - 18 months at my usage patterns. Reinstalls were more frequent even than that for OSes earlier than WinXP, including the Classic MacOS. Say what you will about pre-OSX MacOS, it really wasn't any less stable than the competition. I didn't have to reinstall any more frequently than the folks running Win95 and Win98.
At least it slows him down. He has to find and grab an accepted MAC, and you'll know he's trying to connect as soon as you have a collision on the DHCP.
Why even do that? Simply set up a list of accepted MAC addresses and give them assigned IPs. Don't provide any service to a MAC address not matching known. Unfortunately, that only stops your router/AP from handing out IPs. They can still eavesdrop and work on listening in on traffic.
You are right. The executives giving themselves massive raises as the company's finances circled the drain (some amidst the bankruptcy filing) was indeed a case of short-sighted people thinking they deserved something the company couldn't afford.
Hostess blames the unions, but if you look at the company's management history and how many times they've been in bankruptcy there's clearly a set of problems that runs far deeper than the unions. The union blame game is mostly a smoke screen. I can almost guarantee that, if not the Hostess brand, the individual brands like Twinkie and Ding Dong will rise again with new corporate masters and little else will change.
Slashdot Mirror
I use Opera at work to host a Slack channel, and after being open all day mostly just in Slack, it will often crash with an Out of Memory error, so it's far from a perfect browser.
I'm replying again to correct myself. Basically, the study found that women quite as a result of interview rejection at a much higher rate than men, skewing their numbers. Eliminating early attrition data indicates that women perform equally well at getting jobs from interviews so long as they stay in the game. There are probably socialization issues (which are a result of societal sexism) contributing (some studies are indicated) to women dropping out early. It is hard to know with the data provided, but it is possible that women are just as strong and valid as candidates as men if we can figure out how to address this gender difference in handling rejection.
I went back and re-read. You are correct. The original study was not super well-written, IMO. Too conversational. I think I would have done better with it had it been written in a more traditional research style, including data, etc...
So basically, the answer is to try to deal with whatever socialization factors are contributing to women quitting as a result of interview rejection.
From the Fusion article (and I read the original study to confirm this quote doesn't misrepresent the original work):
'Lerner dug into her data and came up with her own guess for the cause of the surprising results: women were leaving the platform after having one or two bad interviews. In other words, women, feeling discouraged, seemed to be just giving up on interviewing altogether. “Once you factor out interview data from both men and women who quit after one or two bad interviews,” she writes, “the disparity goes away entirely.”'
That result therefore confirms the existence of gender bias, though because there are fewer remaining data points, the results are less significant.
Actually, if you bother reading the article, you'll find the headline is misleading, and if you do a little stripping of outliers, the headline becomes incorrect.
I hate to admit this, but the mobile space, iOS and Android, is really where the attention is being paid where email apps are concerned. The desktop space has become dominated by free webmail monoliths like Gmail and Yahoo. The corporate/business space is dominated by Outlook and... Gmail, yup. Thunderbird was the only strong, independent email app I ever liked since Eudora become stupid years ago. But these days that entire desktop email space has been a vast wasteland. And yet, on mobile devices there is still so much development going on. Look at Outlook mobile (once an independent app called Accompli). The app is great, integrates with Gmail perfectly, and makes reading my work email on my mobile device almost a better experience than on my desktop.
And the tone and tenor of the responses is exactly what I would expect. *I* don't see a problem and someone found a woman to personally refute the claim, therefore there must not be a problem. This topic has been written on often enough and in enough detail from enough different angles that, while some of the intricacies are still elusive, we (as a society) are not clueless about this. Those who claim most loudly that there isn't a problem truly mean that there isn't a problem FOR THEM.
The problem is that for so many women, they have to write BETTER code than their male peers to be considered on the same level. They are put upon to bust stereo-types. And that may be harder for some women to do in work environs which, many times, cater explicitly to male employees.
Yes, this is an indirect response to the video, but the summary and the slant of the question suggest that the interview is as much about grinding a particular axe as interviewing Liz Bennett.
Thanks to the municipal power utility rolling out gigabit speeds to Chattanooga and the surrounding communities, the Tennessee river valley is starting to become a good place for tech. There have also been local efforts to attract and develop startups to take advantage of that broadband speed. Furthermore, though the average salary for employees is below national average, the cost of living is even lower, meaning people can get by on less. The local natural environs are great, too. If you want to work for a big company doing tech it might not be the place for you, but if you want to do your own thing and form, or be part of, a small team doing innovative stuff, it's a great environment to work in. That and you can always take your startup team for a hike in the nearby mountains with only a 15-30 minute drive. Talk about a break to clear the cruft out of a cluttered mind!
They don't have to show up. They can just lose by default by not showing up. However, they can appeal the small claims court verdict and escalate and by moving things to a larger court screw you over in turn by requiring YOU to show up somewhere that may no longer be quite as local. And if you don't show up for that, you can bet your penalty will be much greater than theirs was to have been for losing that initial small claims case.
This is clearly a cost reduction move on Netflix's part, but that doesn't mean they can pass along the reduction. This reduction may better serve to counter increases in cost elsewhere in the chain, preventing them from having to raise the subscription fee. Manufacturers and service providers can't increases costs constantly, so they have to off-set occasional spikes with reductions. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
I learned quite a bit about the Amiga 2000 from this article, but what on earth was going on with the writing? Using apostrophes with plurals, needlessly enclosing terms in double quotes, random capital letters; it was a mess. It was very hard to read because of this craziness.
She seems to be telling us that when technology finally becomes useful enough to be mainstream, it's boring. OK, fine, I can accept that, somewhat. But the point of developing something new and "exciting" is so that someday it will be mundane and boring. And when Google spends all their time on the new, that makes more room for others to innovate with the "old".
I find most self-proclaimed "professional audiophiles" will suck up any cable techno-speak a company will throw at them. Lamp cord will make perfectly fine speaker wire. Also, most "professional audiophiles" are unwilling to perform blind or double-blind listening tests.
This is a problematic piece because it confuses an extended warranty and accident protection/insurance. Most extended warranties do not include accident protection, and that option tends to cost extra and require the base extended warranty, which is the problematic part. If FourSquare wants to offer cheaper, better extended warranties paired with accident protection, more power to them, but that's a very different thing than an extended warranty alone.
Trying to fight globalization on the whole is ineffective, but fighting the demand for more H1B visas with factual data isn't. Recent studies show that companies have been lying about their inability to find domestic talent AND about how much they pay their H1B visa employees. The long and short of it is, the experts exist within the US but the companies want to save money on H1B visas, so they lie to congress, all the while, claiming we need more tech-savvy Americans. When we produce the appropriately educated Americans, the companies won't hire them because they are too expensive compared to their H1B shortcut. All this fight is doing is creating over-educated Americans who will have lots of education debt and no jobs.
This may indeed be valid, but I rarely run anything right out of the box : )
I found that getting on to a year my entire XP system would operate a lot more slowly. Everything took longer, and I was a lot more likely to run into error. I did a lot of program installation/uninstallation. That, and XP's constant update cycle actually caused it to bog down. I've a feeling Microsoft's update install process for XP left a lot of cruft lying around.
I found that doing a data backup, clean reinstall, installing the latest service pack and round of updates, and then installing all the latest version of my regular programs resulted in a system that took up a lot less disk space and ran smoothly and quickly again like it was almost new.
Agree. I was very negative on Vista when it came out based on what I read. Then, when I went to build a desktop, it was the only current MS OS available for me to put on it, so I did. And it turns out that after a tweaked it a bit it's been a breeze to deal with (for the most part - there's always some random MS behavior that pisses me off). I have Windows 7 on my laptop and, frankly, I don't find Win7 to be significantly better from the perspective of regular, normal interactions. Vista had some growing pains, but it mostly sorted those out later in its market life.
Though I enjoy Windows 7 on my laptop, I find that Vista is actually decent on my desktop. Certainly better than I expected. I didn't pick up Vista until later in the life cycle, and by then they had sorted out some of the most problematic bits. I haven't had to reinstall Windows for almost 3 years, which is a record for me. As much as I liked XP, there was no getting around doing a system nuke every 12 - 18 months at my usage patterns. Reinstalls were more frequent even than that for OSes earlier than WinXP, including the Classic MacOS. Say what you will about pre-OSX MacOS, it really wasn't any less stable than the competition. I didn't have to reinstall any more frequently than the folks running Win95 and Win98.
At least it slows him down. He has to find and grab an accepted MAC, and you'll know he's trying to connect as soon as you have a collision on the DHCP.
Why even do that? Simply set up a list of accepted MAC addresses and give them assigned IPs. Don't provide any service to a MAC address not matching known. Unfortunately, that only stops your router/AP from handing out IPs. They can still eavesdrop and work on listening in on traffic.
So, the real lesson here is not to accept and technological gifts from a security guru. Gee, thanks!
You are right. The executives giving themselves massive raises as the company's finances circled the drain (some amidst the bankruptcy filing) was indeed a case of short-sighted people thinking they deserved something the company couldn't afford.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/16/gregory-rayburn-raise_n_2147043.html
With corrections to some of the incorrect, inflated numbers floating around Facebook.
Hostess blames the unions, but if you look at the company's management history and how many times they've been in bankruptcy there's clearly a set of problems that runs far deeper than the unions. The union blame game is mostly a smoke screen. I can almost guarantee that, if not the Hostess brand, the individual brands like Twinkie and Ding Dong will rise again with new corporate masters and little else will change.