Bits that can be flipped in any number of ways. Software just ain't permanent, no matter how fancy you make it. Gold may be just as fiat on value as cryptocurrencies, but I guarantee you after every single computer chip has returned to the silicon sand from whence it came, gold will still be here.
Exactly right. It is the most bandwidth intensive way possible to do anything. If browsers had supported something more lightweight, say a compiled language instead of a cruddy interpreter, then perhaps we'd have something, but as it is, NO, I don't want to download 6 GB of javacript to my phone to see your cat video.
Nah, that $4000 is virtual too. All money is virtual. The only real money is all gobbled up by collectors, because, well, it's actually REAL, as in made out of precious metals.
You are the one reading that into what he wrote. What he wrote was on preferences, not ability. But I'm not surprised that a sexist pig like you would find sexism everywhere, since you believe in firing men to make room for women yourself.
Yep. You're reading a meaning into those words that simply isn't there. That there is a difference between how men and women ask for compensation, and in fact how, if you want to retain women, you should be providing compensation differently, isn't sexism. And it says NOTHING about the fitness of women to be engineers, just what it takes to recruit and keep women engineers.
No, the meta study said that women were biologically inclined to respond to different compensation tactics than men- and that Google should make an effort, if they want to reach 50% saturation, to provide benefits and compensation that attract women.
I'm not sure I agree with it- but yes, it was a recommendation on hiring practices. It recommended paying men in salaries and job titles, and women hourly with more flex time. And that is ALL it actually recommended.
Anything further is just you reading your personal biases into the text.
Yeah, right. It's all just identity politics, which is based in bigotry and has NO validity whatsoever.
Judging a person because their skin is one color is just as bad as judging a person because their skin is another color. It's all bigotry and it is all entirely irrelevant to the amount of intelligence a person has.
There was no intolerance at all in the original memo, just a meta study of other studies, footnoted to 7 pages of the 10 being nothing but references.
Just because YOU hate white men does not mean your hate is better than his hate.
No, James Damore posted it to an internal forum firewalled away from the world. Nearly a month later, Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance Danielle Brown copy and pasted it to her facebook account, and it went viral.
Nice contradiction to what you previously said. The world does not revolve around individual actions, although sometimes an individual can make a difference by making a big enough fuss about what's going on in the world.
To the contrary, actions by individuals are very important, especially when it comes to developing personal integrity and character.
Which is it?
Until you can provide a non-contradictory argument, I must reject your idea that society must change to suit your illogical and unproven whims.
Sometimes that requires that one group of people must learn to tolerate the diversity of thoughts and actions of others that are different from their own.
That is rich coming from an intollerant AGW believer who does not think that individual voluntary common sense actions can count for anything.
You use your own world view to justify the systematic suppression of the ideas of people who may have life experiences different from your own or who may have a different vision of how the world should be and desire the freedom to work to make changes.
No, that's your side, sorry. It is my view that we can make voluntary market based changes that will reduce fossil fuel usage and raise more food to feed the hungry. Your side says forget all that, what we really need is more taxes and the troops to back them up.
What makes you think "association" with "this kind of bigotry" isn't bigotry on your part?
I hope so, because a mind is a terrible thing to waste- and regardless of what you imagine from not being able to understand his argument, your response to his argument proves that James Damore is a genius- for the original unedited memo predicted your bigotry.
And really, even if he's right, what message is he sending to his female colleagues, that somehow his male brain gives him at least a statistical edge over them?
Clearly you failed to read the memo. The message was that female engineers deserve flex time and higher, hourly rate pay for adequate retention, where men deserve salaries and bigwhig sounding fake titles for adequate retention, based on some weird theory of heterosexual attraction I didn't quite understand.
Slashdot Mirror
Bits that can be flipped in any number of ways. Software just ain't permanent, no matter how fancy you make it. Gold may be just as fiat on value as cryptocurrencies, but I guarantee you after every single computer chip has returned to the silicon sand from whence it came, gold will still be here.
Physical presence of matter beats arrangement of bits in electrons any day of the week for permanence.
Exactly right. It is the most bandwidth intensive way possible to do anything. If browsers had supported something more lightweight, say a compiled language instead of a cruddy interpreter, then perhaps we'd have something, but as it is, NO, I don't want to download 6 GB of javacript to my phone to see your cat video.
Being the premiere cryptocurrency is like being the best atom bomb- if it's ever used, it's gone and so is everything else it ever touched.
Nah, that $4000 is virtual too. All money is virtual. The only real money is all gobbled up by collectors, because, well, it's actually REAL, as in made out of precious metals.
Gay orgies while on watch?
What happened to the human backup?
That's my anti-obama guess for the week, since he let active homos into the military.
Might have more to do with treating them like "Human Resources" rather than "People"
They do if it means more time with their children. They do if it means more family and people time.
You clearly didn't read any of the psychological papers in the footnotes, or you wouldn't be such a clueless idiot.
You are the one reading that into what he wrote. What he wrote was on preferences, not ability. But I'm not surprised that a sexist pig like you would find sexism everywhere, since you believe in firing men to make room for women yourself.
Yep. You're reading a meaning into those words that simply isn't there. That there is a difference between how men and women ask for compensation, and in fact how, if you want to retain women, you should be providing compensation differently, isn't sexism. And it says NOTHING about the fitness of women to be engineers, just what it takes to recruit and keep women engineers.
Your "smoking gun" is more smoke than steel.
Because truly intelligent species don't go broadcasting their location to lesser more violent species, obviously.
No, the meta study said that women were biologically inclined to respond to different compensation tactics than men- and that Google should make an effort, if they want to reach 50% saturation, to provide benefits and compensation that attract women.
I'm not sure I agree with it- but yes, it was a recommendation on hiring practices. It recommended paying men in salaries and job titles, and women hourly with more flex time. And that is ALL it actually recommended.
Anything further is just you reading your personal biases into the text.
Yeah, right. It's all just identity politics, which is based in bigotry and has NO validity whatsoever.
Judging a person because their skin is one color is just as bad as judging a person because their skin is another color. It's all bigotry and it is all entirely irrelevant to the amount of intelligence a person has.
There was no intolerance at all in the original memo, just a meta study of other studies, footnoted to 7 pages of the 10 being nothing but references.
Just because YOU hate white men does not mean your hate is better than his hate.
No, James Damore posted it to an internal forum firewalled away from the world. Nearly a month later, Vice President of Diversity, Integrity & Governance Danielle Brown copy and pasted it to her facebook account, and it went viral.
Nice contradiction to what you previously said.
The world does not revolve around individual actions, although sometimes an individual can make a difference by making a big enough fuss about what's going on in the world.
To the contrary, actions by individuals are very important, especially when it comes to developing personal integrity and character.
Which is it?
Until you can provide a non-contradictory argument, I must reject your idea that society must change to suit your illogical and unproven whims.
Sometimes that requires that one group of people must learn to tolerate the diversity of thoughts and actions of others that are different from their own.
That is rich coming from an intollerant AGW believer who does not think that individual voluntary common sense actions can count for anything.
You use your own world view to justify the systematic suppression of the ideas of people who may have life experiences different from your own or who may have a different vision of how the world should be and desire the freedom to work to make changes.
No, that's your side, sorry. It is my view that we can make voluntary market based changes that will reduce fossil fuel usage and raise more food to feed the hungry. Your side says forget all that, what we really need is more taxes and the troops to back them up.
What makes you think "association" with "this kind of bigotry" isn't bigotry on your part?
I hope so, because a mind is a terrible thing to waste- and regardless of what you imagine from not being able to understand his argument, your response to his argument proves that James Damore is a genius- for the original unedited memo predicted your bigotry.
Yeah, few unmarried 20 year olds realize that money and power isn't attractive. Oh wait.....
Or academia. Or for that matter, Yahoo.
You also haven't been subjected to criminal brainwashing like what happens in left-wing companies.
So why didn't the woman who leaked this get fired? Oh yeah, she's a woman.
He's not the one who leaked it.
So maybe you should not post internal company memos to social media.....hmm, why didn't the woman who did that get fired? Oh yeah, she's a woman.
Bingo. That's what this has really exposed. Google no longer cares about the "best and brightest engineers", as long as they hit their sexist quotas.
Actually, he's had several job offers from competitors who don't judge people by gender theories.
And really, even if he's right, what message is he sending to his female colleagues, that somehow his male brain gives him at least a statistical edge over them?
Clearly you failed to read the memo. The message was that female engineers deserve flex time and higher, hourly rate pay for adequate retention, where men deserve salaries and bigwhig sounding fake titles for adequate retention, based on some weird theory of heterosexual attraction I didn't quite understand.