the only place you can get one near me is an upscale joint where a beef burger is $20. That said, even a bloody Chilli's is $12 bucks if you don't get the lunch specials, and a cheap black bean burger at my local overpriced sports bar is $15 (went for a team get together, wouldn't go there on my own).
Koch Bros funded (e.g. right wing) studies show about $2 trillion every 10 years in savings for single payer healthcare. University studies (e.g. peer reviewed) show about $5 trillion in savings every 10 years.
We actually _save_ money by giving everyone healthcare because of how wildly inefficient our system is now. I'd like to see us do it and use the money saved to pay off the national debt.
they're primarily used to boost the price so that the CEOs get a big paycheck since their bonuses are tied to (and often paid in) stock. This is _exactly_ why stock buy backs were illegal (until Reagan made them legal).
Folks like Liz Warren and Bernie Sanders would be happy to do this if we'd give them more left wing colleges in congress. But these are "Job killing regulations" right? Except that what's really killing jobs is that we let the ruling class gamble with all the money in the country and when they go bust they come out smelling like roses.
I don't think we can let them go bust, either. We're in a hostage situation and always will be without government oversight. We need new rules to protect jobs. To wit:
1. Ban Stock Buy backs.
2. Require public companies to have 50% employee representation on their board of directors or they don't get a charter (and the protections therein).
3. Bring back Glass-Stegal.
4. Undo Bush Jr's commodities market deregulation. Make folks who buy commodities take possession of them so they can't skim 10% off our food supply.
There's lots more. Liz Warren has a fairly comprehensive anti-corruption law she wants to enact.
the reason replaceable desktop grade graphics never caught on in gaming laptops wasn't just the proprietary form factors it was that if you did even moderate gaming then after a few years the heat made the PCB warp and the memory chips came loose. Then you could bake it for 10 minutes and then throw it up on ebay since it would work for the 2-4 weeks their guarantee lasted.
There was some standardization around replaceable cards but they were still expensive as heck because of fewer sales and the added cost of miniaturization.
I know nVidia & ATI have improved desktop PCI-E card's reliability (I've got a 760 that's going on 4 years old while the last 2 cards barely got 18 months), but I'm skeptical they can do the same in that tight a space and match full on desktop support. Something's gotta give. Either the chip throttles (like they do in those Gigabyte "Brick" small form factor PCs) or PCB warping.
I think that's the only way to really drop air pollution and carbon emissions. Even if solar and wind were cheaper long term the amount of infrastructure spending needed means no private firm is going to want to jump in.
It's like how even Microsoft can't compete with Quicken/Quickbooks because they've spend a fortune on small business accounting. You end up having to invest too much getting in the door and then you can't compete with established players because they've long since made back their investment and they're coasting on profits. That means as soon as a competitor shows up they'll just drop their pants and undercut you until you can't make your loan payments and you collapse. Nobody's gonna put up billions to take that risk when they can just buy stock in oil or gas and wait for shortages (short or long term) to make them rich...
write a peer review paper of the research papers that you take exception with, debunking their data points.
If you want to discredit junk science the correct way to do it is with real science, not more junk science. "Fight fire with fire" sounds nice but you just wind up burning your house down.
1. The claim soy turns you into a girl is based on a 1940s era study into sheep eating clover.
2. Estrogens are a _class_ of chemicals and plant estrogens behave very differently than the female sex hormone.
3. Alex Jones' supplements are chock full of soy (it's a cheap filler).
Feel free to watch the rest of the video above.
I'm not necessarily interested in defending soy, but I'm since and tired of junk science.
much less TFA. There _was_ academic rigor. The papers were published for peer reviewed and then peer review determined they were fake. They do a cursory check to make sure the paper isn't total nonsense. Then they publish the article so that it can be peer reviewed.
This is _exactly_ how it's supposed to work. Journals don't peer review. This is BAU/Functioning as Designed. The system worked.
The new process involves "sandwiching" an iGPU core into the CPU core. In the past iGPUs were severely constrained because you wanted to keep them relatively simple to keep yields up (since if the iGPU is bad you just bricked the CPU in most cases). It should mean much, much faster integrated graphics. e.g. entry level gaming laptops in the $400-$500 range.
to affect change. Mitt Rhomney has power. Donald Trump & Mike Pence have power. The blue haired girl at your local community college saying dumb things about sexism does not have any actual power. No one listens to her when it comes to matters of public policy. Her department the the college has relatively little funding.
The right has managed to make it so they don't have to provide reproductive health services to millions. They've modified text books in Texas to remove references to slavery. They've put their 2 new SCOTUS judges up and innumerable district court judges. In the same time the SJWs managed to get some butt-poses removed from video games and comics.
SJW has become a slur. It no longer has meaning. People find the worst examples of the left (mostly bitter, angry frightened women) and poke and prod them until they say stupid things. Then they hold up these fringes as though they're somehow representative of the left. If we did the same for the right you'd be shitting bricks. Some of the stuff Pat Robertson has said is terrifying. I've got guys on the right that want to stone gays, start a white ethno-state. Bring back child labor and slavery.
But this is all just pointless whataboutism. At the end of the day the anti-SJW crap is just the new Southern strategy. It's a distraction from economic issues. A villain for you to blame your woes on so you won't notice you're being robbed blind.
They picked a relatively small sub-section (3600 words out of 187k). That's about 160 lines (based on a quick lorem ipsom generation). They also didn't do a ctrl-f-replace. They carefully re-wrote the section.
I've pointed this out elsewhere, but these folks spent significant amounts of effort to get their stuff past the journals. The read other, successful submissions and carefully crafted theirs to match. Even then they got caught in peer review (which is kind of the entire point of the journals). The system worked exactly as designed.
All these people did is prove that peer review will eventually catch bullshit, which is the opposite of what they were trying to prove.
they're researchers. The rules are quite a bit different. In Academia submitting false papers with fake research is _always_ an ethics violation. If you need to research something then find another way. Do a survey if you have to (with a control group). They abused a peer reviewed research paper. As has been pointed out by me and other posters they carefully crafted their papers to slip them them through, going so far as to research other, successful submissions and pattern their papers after them. They also included a ton of fake data, too much for the staff of a journal to fact check. In the face of all that data an honest journal would err on the side of caution and publish the paper to let peer review do it's job, which they did. The result was finding the studies were fakes.
These guys wasted a bunch of researchers time for a cheap stunt. They deserve the punishment they get. If they do it again they should be drummed out of the community as academic trolls. There are real problems in gender relationships. Maybe you don't think the academic community is properly addressing them. If you don't do a proper study with proper data and control groups and prove your point. That can and would add productively to the discourse. Personally, as I've said elsewhere, I'd love to find a way to move on from this SJW bullshit so we can focus the country's attention on economic issues.
The authors of the papers wrote 20 paper and 7 got through. They researched other papers that were accepted and deliberately patterned their papers to match. They also included hundreds of fake research data points to make the studies appear legitimate. Before that they'd done several much crazier papers that got caught. They worked on this for years. It was a well orchestrated hit piece from start to finish.
I don't expect an academic journal to vet everything. That's not the point. They look at a study, check if there's enough research data for it to appear worthy of peer review and then publish it so that it can be peer reviewed. This is is exactly what happened here. The system also worked as designed. Peer review revealed the papers to be bullshit and the people in question are now in trouble for faking research (rightfully so I might add).
There were _plenty_ of legitimate ways for them to go about their research. This is not one of them. They used the academic community for a cheap political stunt. If they're allowed to keep doing that then real research will suffer. Yes, studying gender topics is worth while. I for one would like to find a middle ground between obnoxious SJWs and actual sexual harassment and abuse.
in the academic world? You do a research paper debunking other, badly written papers. That's what peer review is. That would have been the appropriate response from an academic response.
This? This is just a cheap stunt. It adds nothing of substance to the discourse. It's frustrating because overzealous SJWs are a real problem for the left and one I haven't been able to figure out. Yes, sexual harassment is a real thing. So is rape. But then we waste time on the Gender Pay Gap which may or may not be real while the average American worker has lost 20% of their pay since the 70s. We're quibbling over 1-3% instead of the 20% we lost and we're divided to boot...
then maybe I will (metaphorically speaking). Fake studies add nothing of substance to the public discourse. All they've done is waste a bunch of researchers time debunking them. I'd love to seem some actual research into the problem of SJWism but this kind of academic trolling (for lack of a better term) doesn't help anyone. It comes off as precisely the kind of cheap political stunt that it claims to oppose.
then don't complain when you get in trouble for breaking the law.
But I'm not even buying that. Like I said, there were plenty of ways to effective research the Social Justice Warrior movement and discuss the backlash to it. There was no need or reason to write phony papers with made up research. If you have a point to make, make it legitimately.
Not that it really matters. To be blunt You'd have better luck defending pedophiles than SJWs. The amount of hatred directed at that group is astonishing, especially given what little actual power they have. Seriously, we elected a Christian Dominionist (Mike Pence) to the second highest office in the land and the atheist and skeptic community can't shut up about SJWs. I don't get it. There are so many bigger fish to fry.
All that said I'd like to see some genuine analysis of the anti-SJW backlash. The left need to address it and get past it so that real economic policies can be pushed forward. Right now we're stuck with the same trickle down economics we always had while freaking out about some powerless girls saying silly things in college.
and they got caught by peer review. They're currently being punished because they faked studies. Do all the dumb gender studies you want, but you have to do them. Otherwise your wasting everyone's time with what amounts to a troll post.
If you want to make a case that SJWs have gone too far (which is what the Vox article says they were doing) that's fine, but do real research on the topic in a controlled setting and then, based on that research present solutions to improve the situation. That would add usefully to the discussion.
As a lefty I welcome that. Nut job blue haired college girls are giving actual, effective left wing policies like medicare for all a bad name and radicalizing a host of angry men who feel threatened by out of control feminists (never mind the fact that these guys are part of the atheist-skeptic community who's been getting buddy/buddy with the Evangelicals lately out of fear of SJWs, see the Creationist Cat and Cult of Dusty Youtube channels for more on this ).
Bottom line, these guys should take their lumps for trolling us. I'm fed up with these anti-SJW types trolling us for cheap publicity, usually in the hopes of getting some Youtube views & Patreon donations out of angry men. They're as bad as the SJWs they attack, and for the same reason: They're outrage merchants, selling outrage to angry folks. The right wing equivalent to Jesse Jackson.
folks who are actually trolling get equal time in a discussion. You get this with left wing candidates being "concern trolled" by the media a lot. Right now there's a ton of stories about how "concerned" CNN and MSNBC are with various aspects of Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocassio-Cortez's politics, daily life, staffing, etc. It's the political equivalent to "Netcraft confirms it!".
another is that most people don't like computers. Computers are tools to them. They hold the same feelings towards a computer that most techies hold to a spanner wrench. Less so, really, since your spanner wrench doesn't break all the time due to complex maintenance requirements.
Microsoft isn't likely to hide data mining. Again, most people don't care about privacy. They've got bigger problems in their lives, like paying rent, getting healthcare or figuring out how to save enough for college. And you know what, they're right. Privacy violations aren't the principle tool used to control and oppress people, as others have long since noticed
despite causing a government shut down and even admitting to causing it on live TV. It's scary. He really could shoot somebody in Time Square and his followers wouldn't care. They're not thinking, they're feeling. When a large percentage of people think the head of state is above all criticism it never ends well.
I keep saying this, but on matters economic the media has a strong right wing bias. Folks ignore it because the media's a bit left of center on social issues, but watch the media coverage around the shut down.
CNN did 2 stories on government employees impacted by the shut down. There's no nice way to say this: They were fat black chicks. The kind that were going to put off anyone who'd be likely to side with Trump.
Meanwhile left wing outlets like The Hill found a pretty white single mom as their example.
There's 800,000 federal employees. Black people account for 12.5% of the population. You're not going to convince me that CNN picked somebody who would be unsympathetic to the side that most needs to be convinced that Trump's at fault by accident. This, ladies and gentlemen, is what we call "Narrative".
Slashdot Mirror
the only place you can get one near me is an upscale joint where a beef burger is $20. That said, even a bloody Chilli's is $12 bucks if you don't get the lunch specials, and a cheap black bean burger at my local overpriced sports bar is $15 (went for a team get together, wouldn't go there on my own).
Koch Bros funded (e.g. right wing) studies show about $2 trillion every 10 years in savings for single payer healthcare. University studies (e.g. peer reviewed) show about $5 trillion in savings every 10 years.
We actually _save_ money by giving everyone healthcare because of how wildly inefficient our system is now. I'd like to see us do it and use the money saved to pay off the national debt.
Air pollution causes a lot more cancer than we like to talk about.
they're primarily used to boost the price so that the CEOs get a big paycheck since their bonuses are tied to (and often paid in) stock. This is _exactly_ why stock buy backs were illegal (until Reagan made them legal).
Folks like Liz Warren and Bernie Sanders would be happy to do this if we'd give them more left wing colleges in congress. But these are "Job killing regulations" right? Except that what's really killing jobs is that we let the ruling class gamble with all the money in the country and when they go bust they come out smelling like roses.
I don't think we can let them go bust, either. We're in a hostage situation and always will be without government oversight. We need new rules to protect jobs. To wit:
1. Ban Stock Buy backs.
2. Require public companies to have 50% employee representation on their board of directors or they don't get a charter (and the protections therein).
3. Bring back Glass-Stegal.
4. Undo Bush Jr's commodities market deregulation. Make folks who buy commodities take possession of them so they can't skim 10% off our food supply.
There's lots more. Liz Warren has a fairly comprehensive anti-corruption law she wants to enact.
the reason replaceable desktop grade graphics never caught on in gaming laptops wasn't just the proprietary form factors it was that if you did even moderate gaming then after a few years the heat made the PCB warp and the memory chips came loose. Then you could bake it for 10 minutes and then throw it up on ebay since it would work for the 2-4 weeks their guarantee lasted.
There was some standardization around replaceable cards but they were still expensive as heck because of fewer sales and the added cost of miniaturization.
I know nVidia & ATI have improved desktop PCI-E card's reliability (I've got a 760 that's going on 4 years old while the last 2 cards barely got 18 months), but I'm skeptical they can do the same in that tight a space and match full on desktop support. Something's gotta give. Either the chip throttles (like they do in those Gigabyte "Brick" small form factor PCs) or PCB warping.
I think that's the only way to really drop air pollution and carbon emissions. Even if solar and wind were cheaper long term the amount of infrastructure spending needed means no private firm is going to want to jump in.
It's like how even Microsoft can't compete with Quicken/Quickbooks because they've spend a fortune on small business accounting. You end up having to invest too much getting in the door and then you can't compete with established players because they've long since made back their investment and they're coasting on profits. That means as soon as a competitor shows up they'll just drop their pants and undercut you until you can't make your loan payments and you collapse. Nobody's gonna put up billions to take that risk when they can just buy stock in oil or gas and wait for shortages (short or long term) to make them rich...
write a peer review paper of the research papers that you take exception with, debunking their data points.
If you want to discredit junk science the correct way to do it is with real science, not more junk science. "Fight fire with fire" sounds nice but you just wind up burning your house down.
I _do_ like hamburgers. Seriously, by the time your done processing hamburger meat it's not really meat anymore. Go figure.
See here
A few points for the TL;DR; crowd:
1. The claim soy turns you into a girl is based on a 1940s era study into sheep eating clover.
2. Estrogens are a _class_ of chemicals and plant estrogens behave very differently than the female sex hormone.
3. Alex Jones' supplements are chock full of soy (it's a cheap filler).
Feel free to watch the rest of the video above.
I'm not necessarily interested in defending soy, but I'm since and tired of junk science.
much less TFA. There _was_ academic rigor. The papers were published for peer reviewed and then peer review determined they were fake. They do a cursory check to make sure the paper isn't total nonsense. Then they publish the article so that it can be peer reviewed.
This is _exactly_ how it's supposed to work. Journals don't peer review. This is BAU/Functioning as Designed. The system worked.
The new process involves "sandwiching" an iGPU core into the CPU core. In the past iGPUs were severely constrained because you wanted to keep them relatively simple to keep yields up (since if the iGPU is bad you just bricked the CPU in most cases). It should mean much, much faster integrated graphics. e.g. entry level gaming laptops in the $400-$500 range.
to affect change. Mitt Rhomney has power. Donald Trump & Mike Pence have power. The blue haired girl at your local community college saying dumb things about sexism does not have any actual power. No one listens to her when it comes to matters of public policy. Her department the the college has relatively little funding.
The right has managed to make it so they don't have to provide reproductive health services to millions. They've modified text books in Texas to remove references to slavery. They've put their 2 new SCOTUS judges up and innumerable district court judges. In the same time the SJWs managed to get some butt-poses removed from video games and comics.
SJW has become a slur. It no longer has meaning. People find the worst examples of the left (mostly bitter, angry frightened women) and poke and prod them until they say stupid things. Then they hold up these fringes as though they're somehow representative of the left. If we did the same for the right you'd be shitting bricks. Some of the stuff Pat Robertson has said is terrifying. I've got guys on the right that want to stone gays, start a white ethno-state. Bring back child labor and slavery.
But this is all just pointless whataboutism. At the end of the day the anti-SJW crap is just the new Southern strategy. It's a distraction from economic issues. A villain for you to blame your woes on so you won't notice you're being robbed blind.
because that one seemed pretty messed up.
They picked a relatively small sub-section (3600 words out of 187k). That's about 160 lines (based on a quick lorem ipsom generation). They also didn't do a ctrl-f-replace. They carefully re-wrote the section.
I've pointed this out elsewhere, but these folks spent significant amounts of effort to get their stuff past the journals. The read other, successful submissions and carefully crafted theirs to match. Even then they got caught in peer review (which is kind of the entire point of the journals). The system worked exactly as designed.
All these people did is prove that peer review will eventually catch bullshit, which is the opposite of what they were trying to prove.
they're researchers. The rules are quite a bit different. In Academia submitting false papers with fake research is _always_ an ethics violation. If you need to research something then find another way. Do a survey if you have to (with a control group). They abused a peer reviewed research paper. As has been pointed out by me and other posters they carefully crafted their papers to slip them them through, going so far as to research other, successful submissions and pattern their papers after them. They also included a ton of fake data, too much for the staff of a journal to fact check. In the face of all that data an honest journal would err on the side of caution and publish the paper to let peer review do it's job, which they did. The result was finding the studies were fakes.
These guys wasted a bunch of researchers time for a cheap stunt. They deserve the punishment they get. If they do it again they should be drummed out of the community as academic trolls. There are real problems in gender relationships. Maybe you don't think the academic community is properly addressing them. If you don't do a proper study with proper data and control groups and prove your point. That can and would add productively to the discourse. Personally, as I've said elsewhere, I'd love to find a way to move on from this SJW bullshit so we can focus the country's attention on economic issues.
The authors of the papers wrote 20 paper and 7 got through. They researched other papers that were accepted and deliberately patterned their papers to match. They also included hundreds of fake research data points to make the studies appear legitimate. Before that they'd done several much crazier papers that got caught. They worked on this for years. It was a well orchestrated hit piece from start to finish.
I don't expect an academic journal to vet everything. That's not the point. They look at a study, check if there's enough research data for it to appear worthy of peer review and then publish it so that it can be peer reviewed. This is is exactly what happened here. The system also worked as designed. Peer review revealed the papers to be bullshit and the people in question are now in trouble for faking research (rightfully so I might add).
There were _plenty_ of legitimate ways for them to go about their research. This is not one of them. They used the academic community for a cheap political stunt. If they're allowed to keep doing that then real research will suffer. Yes, studying gender topics is worth while. I for one would like to find a middle ground between obnoxious SJWs and actual sexual harassment and abuse.
in the academic world? You do a research paper debunking other, badly written papers. That's what peer review is. That would have been the appropriate response from an academic response.
This? This is just a cheap stunt. It adds nothing of substance to the discourse. It's frustrating because overzealous SJWs are a real problem for the left and one I haven't been able to figure out. Yes, sexual harassment is a real thing. So is rape. But then we waste time on the Gender Pay Gap which may or may not be real while the average American worker has lost 20% of their pay since the 70s. We're quibbling over 1-3% instead of the 20% we lost and we're divided to boot...
then maybe I will (metaphorically speaking). Fake studies add nothing of substance to the public discourse. All they've done is waste a bunch of researchers time debunking them. I'd love to seem some actual research into the problem of SJWism but this kind of academic trolling (for lack of a better term) doesn't help anyone. It comes off as precisely the kind of cheap political stunt that it claims to oppose.
then don't complain when you get in trouble for breaking the law.
But I'm not even buying that. Like I said, there were plenty of ways to effective research the Social Justice Warrior movement and discuss the backlash to it. There was no need or reason to write phony papers with made up research. If you have a point to make, make it legitimately.
Not that it really matters. To be blunt You'd have better luck defending pedophiles than SJWs. The amount of hatred directed at that group is astonishing, especially given what little actual power they have. Seriously, we elected a Christian Dominionist (Mike Pence) to the second highest office in the land and the atheist and skeptic community can't shut up about SJWs. I don't get it. There are so many bigger fish to fry.
All that said I'd like to see some genuine analysis of the anti-SJW backlash. The left need to address it and get past it so that real economic policies can be pushed forward. Right now we're stuck with the same trickle down economics we always had while freaking out about some powerless girls saying silly things in college.
and they got caught by peer review. They're currently being punished because they faked studies. Do all the dumb gender studies you want, but you have to do them. Otherwise your wasting everyone's time with what amounts to a troll post.
If you want to make a case that SJWs have gone too far (which is what the Vox article says they were doing) that's fine, but do real research on the topic in a controlled setting and then, based on that research present solutions to improve the situation. That would add usefully to the discussion.
As a lefty I welcome that. Nut job blue haired college girls are giving actual, effective left wing policies like medicare for all a bad name and radicalizing a host of angry men who feel threatened by out of control feminists (never mind the fact that these guys are part of the atheist-skeptic community who's been getting buddy/buddy with the Evangelicals lately out of fear of SJWs, see the Creationist Cat and Cult of Dusty Youtube channels for more on this ).
Bottom line, these guys should take their lumps for trolling us. I'm fed up with these anti-SJW types trolling us for cheap publicity, usually in the hopes of getting some Youtube views & Patreon donations out of angry men. They're as bad as the SJWs they attack, and for the same reason: They're outrage merchants, selling outrage to angry folks. The right wing equivalent to Jesse Jackson.
folks who are actually trolling get equal time in a discussion. You get this with left wing candidates being "concern trolled" by the media a lot. Right now there's a ton of stories about how "concerned" CNN and MSNBC are with various aspects of Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocassio-Cortez's politics, daily life, staffing, etc. It's the political equivalent to "Netcraft confirms it!".
another is that most people don't like computers. Computers are tools to them. They hold the same feelings towards a computer that most techies hold to a spanner wrench. Less so, really, since your spanner wrench doesn't break all the time due to complex maintenance requirements.
Microsoft isn't likely to hide data mining. Again, most people don't care about privacy. They've got bigger problems in their lives, like paying rent, getting healthcare or figuring out how to save enough for college. And you know what, they're right. Privacy violations aren't the principle tool used to control and oppress people, as others have long since noticed
due to the sheer number of viruses and spyware on it that will stop those updates....
Seriously, I don't think it's possible to run a modern OS connected to the Internet without regular security updates.
despite causing a government shut down and even admitting to causing it on live TV. It's scary. He really could shoot somebody in Time Square and his followers wouldn't care. They're not thinking, they're feeling. When a large percentage of people think the head of state is above all criticism it never ends well.
with NBC for his reality show after he found out he wasn't the top paid reality TV star.
I keep saying this, but on matters economic the media has a strong right wing bias. Folks ignore it because the media's a bit left of center on social issues, but watch the media coverage around the shut down.
CNN did 2 stories on government employees impacted by the shut down. There's no nice way to say this: They were fat black chicks. The kind that were going to put off anyone who'd be likely to side with Trump.
Meanwhile left wing outlets like The Hill found a pretty white single mom as their example.
There's 800,000 federal employees. Black people account for 12.5% of the population. You're not going to convince me that CNN picked somebody who would be unsympathetic to the side that most needs to be convinced that Trump's at fault by accident. This, ladies and gentlemen, is what we call "Narrative".