Your performance will be fucked six ways to Sunday if your workload does a lot of user to kernel mode switches. Unless you fancy waiting for Intel to release fixed chips and then buying a new CPU and a new motherboard to put it in.
Ironically Intel forcing people to buy new motherboards to switch between very similar CPU generations coupled with the fact that any Intel CPU you buy now still has the bug means that its just as easy to buy an AMD CPU and motherboard than an Intel one.
Then again a new Intel chip has Process Context ID support which means the workaround for the bug is relatively low impact.
It will be a binary equivalent kernel. Different drivers and HALs would get loaded. Actually last time I looked at Windows kernel mode they were moving to a single HAL for all x86 systems.
If you look at the Linux code it's shared between AMD and Intel though it does check whether CPU features are present, so different code paths run.
The Commonwealth is the ex British Empire. It used to mean something in that people the UK had preferential trade and immigration deals with Commonwealth countries. Then the UK joined the EU and all the trade deals were unceremoniously axed because inside the EU you have to apply the common external tariff to non EU trade.
But the report is basically a spin piece boosting the NHS and slagging off the US. And its methodology is opaque - to say the least - compared to the ECHI.
Actually it turns out The Commonwealth Fund is run by an MD in NYC, who campaigned for Obamacare. Which he probably expected would end with single payer health care.
Established in 2005, the commission was composed of distinguished experts and leaders representing every sector of health care, as well as the state and federal policy arenas, the business sector, and academia. After publishing a number of influential reports on health reform leading up to and following the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the commission concluded its activities in March 2013.
And if you listen to NR podcasts they still think he's a disaster and run articles by people like the egregious Glenn Beck denouncing him as a threat to conservatism
Also when Buckley was editor he famously used the NR to 'define the limits of conservatism', i.e. by expelling the Birchers, Wallace supporters, anti semites and white nationalists.
Buckley and Meyer promoted the idea of enlarging the boundaries of conservatism through fusionism, whereby different schools of conservatives, including libertarians, would work together to combat what were seen as their common opponents.[3]
Buckley and his editors used his magazine to define the boundaries of conservatism-and to exclude people or ideas or groups they considered unworthy of the conservative title. Therefore, they attacked the John Birch Society, George Wallace, and anti-Semites.[3][18]
Buckley's goal was to increase the respectability of the conservative movement; as Rich Lowry noted: "Mr. Buckley's first great achievement was to purge the American right of its kooks. He marginalized the anti-Semites, the John Birchers, the nativists and their sort."[19]
In 1957, the National Review editorialized in favor of white leadership in the South, arguing that "the central question that emerges... is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas where it does not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes - the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race."[20][21] By the 1970s the National Review advocated colorblind policies and the end of affirmative action.[22]
In the late 1960s, the magazine denounced segregationist George Wallace, who ran in Democratic primaries in 1964 and 1972 and made an independent run for president in 1968. During the 1950s, Buckley had worked to remove anti-Semitism from the conservative movement and barred holders of those views from working for National Review.[23] In 1962 Buckley denounced Robert W. Welch, Jr. and the John Birch Society as "far removed from common sense" and urged the G.O.P. to purge itself of Welch's influence.[24]
So the National Review is essentially dedicated to keeping the far right out the GOP. Also populists like Trump and anyone not acceptable to elite New York opinion.
Intel integrated graphics are aimed at a different market though. People with Intel integrated graphics don't care about gaming performance at all - they just want something that can handle a GUI. On the other hand it comes free with your CPU and it's lower power than a discrete solution.
1.5 BBB; Bismarck Beats Beveridge - now a permanent feature
The Netherlands example seems to be driving home the big, final nail in the coffin of Beveridge healthcare systems, and the lesson is clear: Remove politicians and other amateurs from operative decision-making in what might well be the most complex industry on the face of the Earth: Healthcare! Beveridge systems seem to be operational with good results only in small population countries such as Iceland, Denmark and Norway.
1.5.1 So what are the characteristics of the two system types?
All public healthcare systems share one problem: Which technical solution should be used to funnel typically 8 - 11 % of national income into healthcare services?
Bismarck healthcare systems: Systems based on social insurance, where there is a multitude of insurance organisations, Krankenkassen etc, who are organisationally independent of healthcare providers.
Beveridge systems: Systems where financing and provision are handled within one organisational system, i.e. financing bodies and providers are wholly or partially within one organisation, such as the NHS of the UK, counties of Nordic states etc.
For more than half a century, particularly since the formation of the British NHS, the largest Beveridge-type system in Europe, there has been intense debating over the relative merits of the two types of system.
Already in the EHCI 2005, the first 12-state pilot attempt, it was observed that "In general, countries which have a long tradition of plurality in healthcare financing and provision, i.e. with a consumer choice between different insurance providers, who in turn do not discriminate between providers who are private for-profit, non-profit or public, show common features not only in the waiting list situation..."
Looking at the results of the EHCI 2006 - 2016, it is very hard to avoid noticing that the top consists of dedicated Bismarck countries, with the small-population and therefore more easily managed Beveridge systems of the Nordic countries squeezing in. Large Beveridge systems seem to have difficulties at attaining really excellent levels of customer value. The largest Beveridge countries, the U.K., Spain and Italy, keep clinging together in the middle of the Index. There could be (at least) two different explanations for this:
1. Managing a corporation or organisation with 100 000+ employees calls for considerable management skills, which are usually very handsomely rewarded. Managing an organisation such as the English NHS, with close to 1.5 million staff, who also make management life difficult by having a professional agenda, which does not necessarily coincide with that of management/administration, would require absolutely world class management. It is doubtful whether public organisations offer the compensation and other incentives required to recruit those managers.
2. In Beveridge organisations, responsible both for financing and provision of healthcare, there would seem to be a risk that the loyalty of politicians and other top decision makers could shift from being primarily to the customer/patient. Primary loyalty could shift in favour of the organisation these decision makers, with justifiable pride, have been building over decades, with justifiable pride, have been building over decades (or possibly to aspects such as the job-creation potential of such organisations in politicians' home towns).
The ECHI pointed out that 'Bismarck beats Beveridge". I.e. systems based on compulsory purchase of individual insurance from a market of competing suppliers like the ones in Germany and the Netherlands beats single payer.
The Euro Health Consumer Index (ECHI) 2009 was released this week, and got lots of media coverage in the UK because it ranked the NHS 14th out of 33 countries and said the British health service was let down by waiting lists and "uneven quality performance". Only 4 counties in the EU15 (Western Europe, roughly speaking) got lower scores - Italy, Spain, Greece and Portugal.
The report is full of interesting information, but one point (on p9) particularly interested me. In their words, "Bismarck Beats Beveridge - yet again!" To explain:
Bismarck healthcare systems are "based on social insurance, where there is a multitude of insurance organizations... who are organisationally independent of healthcare providers." They are named after Otto von Bismarck, who founded the German welfare state.
Beveridge systems are "systems where financing and provision are handled within one organisational system, i.e. financing bodies and providers are wholly or partially within one organization." They are named after Wiliam Beveridge, who founded the British welfare state.
Anyway, the point the reports makes is that, "Looking at the results of the EHCI 2006 - 2009, it is very hard to avoid noticing that the top consists of dedicated Bismarck countries, with the small-population and therefore more easily managed Beveridge systems of the Nordic countries squeezing in. Large Beveridge systems seem to have difficulties at attaining really excellent levels of customer value."
The following list shows the rankings of Western European healthcare systems according to their 2009 score. The Bismarck countries are in bold:
Clearly there is something in what the authors of the ECHI say. They suggest two points which could explain the comparative underperformance of Beveridge systems:
(1) Managing organizations of this size (the NHS employees 1.5m staff) requires management skills which just don't exist in the public sector. (I'd say they are extremely rare in the private sector too.)
(2) The primary loyalty in Beveridge organizations tends to be to politicians and other top decision-makers, rather than patients.
Adopting a competitive social insurance system like Holland's would be a huge step forward for the UK, even if - in an ideal world - I would prefer something based on medical savings accounts. You can read more about it here, in our excellent 2002 report
Every hospital in the country has been ordered to cancel all non-urgent surgery until at least February in an unprecedented step by NHS officials.
The instructions on Tuesday night - which will see result in around 50,000 operations being axed - followed claims by senior doctors that patients were being treated in "third world" conditions, as hospital chief executives warned of the worst winter crisis for three decades.
Hospitals are reporting growing chaos, with a spike in winter flu leaving frail patients facing 12-hour waits, and some units running out of corridor space.
Sir Bruce Keogh, NHS medical director, on Tuesday ordered NHS trusts to stop taking all but the most urgent cases, closing outpatients clinics for weeks as well as cancelling around 50,000 planned operations.
Trusts have also been told they can abandon efforts to house male and female patients in separate wards, in an effort to protect basic safety, as services become overwhelmed.
Intel says that its 8th generation Core i7 with Radeon RX Vega M GL graphics is up to 1.4x faster than a Core i7-8550U with an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 GPU in a notebook system.
That's actually a very impressive result. If I was buying a gaming machine, a 1050 is about the minimum. A 1050 TI would be better and it seems like this chip is in 1050 Ti territory.
Well no, he didn't. What he said is that there are differences on average between men and women and those differences can explain why a job is not exactly 50:50 male and female even in the absence of discrimination. He also pointed out that those differences are an average for a group and pointed out there's a lot of overlap. So saying 'women on average are more X than men' doesn't mean that 'each individual woman is more X than any man'. When the fake news media reported on his report they accused him of saying that 'men can code/women can't code', but he very carefully explained this was not what he was saying. And he even drew a nice diagram of two overlapping normal distributions to illustrate this point.
Note, I'm not saying that all men differ from all women in the following ways or that these differences are "just." I'm simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don't see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there's significant overlap between men and women, so you can't say anything about an individual given these population level distributions.
He pointed out that Google's policies now discriminate against men and that there were non discriminatory ways to get more women to work there.
But why not try reading what he actually wrote rather than what other people - who have an agenda - said he wrote. I even linked to a copy of his memo so you can verify he said all the things I said he said, and carefully explained he was not saying what you accused him of saying.
If the parties had in some meaningful way flipped on civil rights, one would expect that to show up in the electoral results in the years following the Democrats' 1964 about-face on the issue. Nothing of the sort happened: Of the 21 Democratic senators who opposed the 1964 act, only one would ever change parties. Nor did the segregationist constituencies that elected these Democrats throw them out in favor of Republicans: The remaining 20 continued to be elected as Democrats or were replaced by Democrats. It was, on average, nearly a quarter of a century before those seats went Republican. If southern rednecks ditched the Democrats because of a civil-rights law passed in 1964, it is strange that they waited until the late 1980s and early 1990s to do so. They say things move slower in the South - but not that slow.
Republicans did begin to win some southern House seats, and in many cases segregationist Democrats were thrown out by southern voters in favor of civil-rights Republicans. One of the loudest Democratic segregationists in the House was Texas's John Dowdy, a bitter and buffoonish opponent of the 1964 reforms, which he declared "would set up a despot in the attorney general's office with a large corps of enforcers under him; and his will and his oppressive action would be brought to bear upon citizens, just as Hitler's minions coerced and subjugated the German people. I would say this - I believe this would be agreed to by most people: that, if we had a Hitler in the United States, the first thing he would want would be a bill of this nature." (Who says political rhetoric has been debased in the past 40 years?) Dowdy was thrown out in 1966 in favor of a Republican with a very respectable record on civil rights, a little-known figure by the name of George H. W. Bush.
It was in fact not until 1995 that Republicans represented a majority of the southern congressional delegation - and they had hardly spent the Reagan years campaigning on the resurrection of Jim Crow.
And that's from the National Review, a magazine which is keen - overly keen in my opinion - to denounce Trump as some sort of moral abomination.
The Republican Party's southern strategy consisted of embracing racism and bigotry in order to gain political power. The Democratic Party's position during this time was to *shed* its Dixiecrat racist wing by supporting civil rights.
Fair enough. But then the people who get cheap CPUs are selling them in enormous volumes. All that's happening is that if you commit to buying 10,000 CPUs you pay a lot less than someone who only wants to buy one.
Also soldered CPUs tend to be cheaper than socketed ones.
In addition, the California State Legislature has adopted statutory protections for employees. Notably, California has a general whistleblower protection statute that protects employees who disclose illegal activity or refuse to participate in illegal activities. Whistleblowers are thus protected under both this statute and the common law public policy exception. Also, several other California statutes contain anti-retaliation provisions. Employees who engage in protected activities (usually filing a complaint or testifying) under laws in the following subject areas are protected from retaliation: discrimination, hazardous substances, occupational safety and health, and workers' compensation. Also, California protects employees who file a complaint relating to employee rights with Labor Commissioner.
Damore's memo was more subtle than his detractors give him credit for
He explains that 'Google has created several discriminatory practice' and suggests 'non discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap'. So he could argue Google were breaking the law, he blew the whistle and they fired him.
Google have pots of money of course, so they'll probably pay him off. And go on discriminating.
This reminds me of the days when Democrats in the Jim Crow south claimed it was only the 'Uppity' negroes who had problems with their legally imposed discrimination.
True. But that means people will buy type 1) machines with a Thunderbolt port (and possibly a non U CPU). I.e. they'll still want something with low power consumption when it's not linked to an external GPU. Which means AMD will still get hit by the "It's not low power enough for group 1)" issue with their solution.
In fact Type 1 machines with a Thunderbolt port are going to be really, really common. And eGPU prices will continue to drop.
I reckon Apple might push eGPUs. They're apparently supported well by High Sierra and Apple don't have any affordable Macbooks with a discrete GPU. Even the high end 15 inch model is very underpowered in GPU terms compared to Windows machines.
Slashdot Mirror
Your performance will be fucked six ways to Sunday if your workload does a lot of user to kernel mode switches. Unless you fancy waiting for Intel to release fixed chips and then buying a new CPU and a new motherboard to put it in.
Ironically Intel forcing people to buy new motherboards to switch between very similar CPU generations coupled with the fact that any Intel CPU you buy now still has the bug means that its just as easy to buy an AMD CPU and motherboard than an Intel one.
Then again a new Intel chip has Process Context ID support which means the workaround for the bug is relatively low impact.
It will be a binary equivalent kernel. Different drivers and HALs would get loaded. Actually last time I looked at Windows kernel mode they were moving to a single HAL for all x86 systems.
If you look at the Linux code it's shared between AMD and Intel though it does check whether CPU features are present, so different code paths run.
https://github.com/torvalds/li...
It doesn't hurt to have multiple redundant levels of security. I.e. HTTPS over VPN over WPA3.
The director paged through the packet logs from the FBI director's machine and smiled to himself.
The Commonwealth is the ex British Empire. It used to mean something in that people the UK had preferential trade and immigration deals with Commonwealth countries. Then the UK joined the EU and all the trade deals were unceremoniously axed because inside the EU you have to apply the common external tariff to non EU trade.
But the report is basically a spin piece boosting the NHS and slagging off the US. And its methodology is opaque - to say the least - compared to the ECHI.
Actually it turns out The Commonwealth Fund is run by an MD in NYC, who campaigned for Obamacare. Which he probably expected would end with single payer health care.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Established in 2005, the commission was composed of distinguished experts and leaders representing every sector of health care, as well as the state and federal policy arenas, the business sector, and academia. After publishing a number of influential reports on health reform leading up to and following the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the commission concluded its activities in March 2013.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Blumenthal is basically an Obama lackey.
Wikipedia says George H W Bush took over from Dowdy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Well except they had a whole issue dedicated to Never Trump
http://uk.businessinsider.com/...
And if you listen to NR podcasts they still think he's a disaster and run articles by people like the egregious Glenn Beck denouncing him as a threat to conservatism
http://www.nationalreview.com/...
Also when Buckley was editor he famously used the NR to 'define the limits of conservatism', i.e. by expelling the Birchers, Wallace supporters, anti semites and white nationalists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Buckley and Meyer promoted the idea of enlarging the boundaries of conservatism through fusionism, whereby different schools of conservatives, including libertarians, would work together to combat what were seen as their common opponents.[3]
Buckley and his editors used his magazine to define the boundaries of conservatism-and to exclude people or ideas or groups they considered unworthy of the conservative title. Therefore, they attacked the John Birch Society, George Wallace, and anti-Semites.[3][18]
Buckley's goal was to increase the respectability of the conservative movement; as Rich Lowry noted: "Mr. Buckley's first great achievement was to purge the American right of its kooks. He marginalized the anti-Semites, the John Birchers, the nativists and their sort."[19]
In 1957, the National Review editorialized in favor of white leadership in the South, arguing that "the central question that emerges... is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas where it does not predominate numerically? The sobering answer is Yes - the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race."[20][21] By the 1970s the National Review advocated colorblind policies and the end of affirmative action.[22]
In the late 1960s, the magazine denounced segregationist George Wallace, who ran in Democratic primaries in 1964 and 1972 and made an independent run for president in 1968. During the 1950s, Buckley had worked to remove anti-Semitism from the conservative movement and barred holders of those views from working for National Review.[23] In 1962 Buckley denounced Robert W. Welch, Jr. and the John Birch Society as "far removed from common sense" and urged the G.O.P. to purge itself of Welch's influence.[24]
So the National Review is essentially dedicated to keeping the far right out the GOP. Also populists like Trump and anyone not acceptable to elite New York opinion.
It reminds me of a joke someone told me about Northern Americans vs Southern Americans.
"Southern Americans dislike blacks in theory but like them in practice. Northern Americans like blacks in theory but dislike them in practice".
Intel integrated graphics are aimed at a different market though. People with Intel integrated graphics don't care about gaming performance at all - they just want something that can handle a GUI. On the other hand it comes free with your CPU and it's lower power than a discrete solution.
Yeah, I'd go for a 1050 or 1050 Ti as a minimum to be honest.
And if you look at the ECHI 2016 report they have this to say on Bismarck vs Beveridge
https://healthpowerhouse.com/f...
1.5 BBB; Bismarck Beats Beveridge - now a permanent feature
The Netherlands example seems to be driving home the big, final nail in the coffin of Beveridge healthcare systems, and the lesson is clear: Remove politicians and other amateurs from operative decision-making in what might well be the most complex industry on the face of the Earth: Healthcare! Beveridge systems seem to be operational with good results only in small population countries such as Iceland, Denmark and Norway.
1.5.1 So what are the characteristics of the two system types?
All public healthcare systems share one problem: Which technical solution should be used to funnel typically 8 - 11 % of national income into healthcare services?
Bismarck healthcare systems: Systems based on social insurance, where there is a multitude of insurance organisations, Krankenkassen etc, who are organisationally independent of healthcare providers.
Beveridge systems: Systems where financing and provision are handled within one organisational system, i.e. financing bodies and providers are wholly or partially within one organisation, such as the NHS of the UK, counties of Nordic states etc.
For more than half a century, particularly since the formation of the British NHS, the largest Beveridge-type system in Europe, there has been intense debating over the relative merits of the two types of system.
Already in the EHCI 2005, the first 12-state pilot attempt, it was observed that "In general, countries which have a long tradition of plurality in healthcare financing and provision, i.e. with a consumer choice between different insurance providers, who in turn do not discriminate between providers who are private for-profit, non-profit or public, show common features not only in the waiting list situation ..."
Looking at the results of the EHCI 2006 - 2016, it is very hard to avoid noticing that the top consists of dedicated Bismarck countries, with the small-population and therefore more easily managed Beveridge systems of the Nordic countries squeezing in. Large Beveridge systems seem to have difficulties at attaining really excellent levels of customer value. The largest Beveridge countries, the U.K., Spain and Italy, keep clinging together in the middle of the Index. There could be (at least) two different explanations for this:
1. Managing a corporation or organisation with 100 000+ employees calls for considerable management skills, which are usually very handsomely rewarded. Managing an organisation such as the English NHS, with close to 1.5 million staff, who also make management life difficult by having a professional agenda, which does not necessarily coincide with that of management/administration, would require absolutely world class management. It is doubtful whether public organisations offer the compensation and other incentives required to recruit those managers.
2. In Beveridge organisations, responsible both for financing and provision of healthcare, there would seem to be a risk that the loyalty of politicians and other top decision makers could shift from being primarily to the customer/patient. Primary loyalty could shift in favour of the organisation these decision makers, with justifiable pride, have been building over decades, with justifiable pride, have been building over decades (or possibly to aspects such as the job-creation potential of such organisations in politicians' home towns).
The ECHI pointed out that 'Bismarck beats Beveridge". I.e. systems based on compulsory purchase of individual insurance from a market of competing suppliers like the ones in Germany and the Netherlands beats single payer.
https://www.adamsmith.org/blog...
The Euro Health Consumer Index (ECHI) 2009 was released this week, and got lots of media coverage in the UK because it ranked the NHS 14th out of 33 countries and said the British health service was let down by waiting lists and "uneven quality performance". Only 4 counties in the EU15 (Western Europe, roughly speaking) got lower scores - Italy, Spain, Greece and Portugal.
The report is full of interesting information, but one point (on p9) particularly interested me. In their words, "Bismarck Beats Beveridge - yet again!" To explain:
Bismarck healthcare systems are "based on social insurance, where there is a multitude of insurance organizations... who are organisationally independent of healthcare providers." They are named after Otto von Bismarck, who founded the German welfare state.
Beveridge systems are "systems where financing and provision are handled within one organisational system, i.e. financing bodies and providers are wholly or partially within one organization." They are named after Wiliam Beveridge, who founded the British welfare state.
Anyway, the point the reports makes is that, "Looking at the results of the EHCI 2006 - 2009, it is very hard to avoid noticing that the top consists of dedicated Bismarck countries, with the small-population and therefore more easily managed Beveridge systems of the Nordic countries squeezing in. Large Beveridge systems seem to have difficulties at attaining really excellent levels of customer value."
The following list shows the rankings of Western European healthcare systems according to their 2009 score. The Bismarck countries are in bold:
(1) Holland, (2) Denmark, (3) Iceland, (4) Austria, (5) Switzerland, (6) Germany, (7) France, (8) Sweden, (9) Luxembourg, (10) Norway, (11) Belgium, (12) Finland, (13) Ireland, (14) UK, (15) Italy, (16) Spain, (17) Greece, (18) Portugal.
Clearly there is something in what the authors of the ECHI say. They suggest two points which could explain the comparative underperformance of Beveridge systems:
(1) Managing organizations of this size (the NHS employees 1.5m staff) requires management skills which just don't exist in the public sector. (I'd say they are extremely rare in the private sector too.)
(2) The primary loyalty in Beveridge organizations tends to be to politicians and other top decision-makers, rather than patients.
Adopting a competitive social insurance system like Holland's would be a huge step forward for the UK, even if - in an ideal world - I would prefer something based on medical savings accounts. You can read more about it here, in our excellent 2002 report
Because single payer works so well in the UK
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
Every hospital in the country has been ordered to cancel all non-urgent surgery until at least February in an unprecedented step by NHS officials.
The instructions on Tuesday night - which will see result in around 50,000 operations being axed - followed claims by senior doctors that patients were being treated in "third world" conditions, as hospital chief executives warned of the worst winter crisis for three decades.
Hospitals are reporting growing chaos, with a spike in winter flu leaving frail patients facing 12-hour waits, and some units running out of corridor space.
Sir Bruce Keogh, NHS medical director, on Tuesday ordered NHS trusts to stop taking all but the most urgent cases, closing outpatients clinics for weeks as well as cancelling around 50,000 planned operations.
Trusts have also been told they can abandon efforts to house male and female patients in separate wards, in an effort to protect basic safety, as services become overwhelmed.
You can get passively cooled 1030s
https://www.phoronix.com/scan....
We need a final solution to the degenerate end-user problem.
Intel says that its 8th generation Core i7 with Radeon RX Vega M GL graphics is up to 1.4x faster than a Core i7-8550U with an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 GPU in a notebook system.
That's actually a very impressive result. If I was buying a gaming machine, a 1050 is about the minimum. A 1050 TI would be better and it seems like this chip is in 1050 Ti territory.
Well no, he didn't. What he said is that there are differences on average between men and women and those differences can explain why a job is not exactly 50:50 male and female even in the absence of discrimination. He also pointed out that those differences are an average for a group and pointed out there's a lot of overlap. So saying 'women on average are more X than men' doesn't mean that 'each individual woman is more X than any man'. When the fake news media reported on his report they accused him of saying that 'men can code/women can't code', but he very carefully explained this was not what he was saying. And he even drew a nice diagram of two overlapping normal distributions to illustrate this point.
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
Note, I'm not saying that all men differ from all women in the following ways or that these differences are "just." I'm simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don't see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there's significant overlap between men and women, so you can't say anything about an individual given these population level distributions.
He pointed out that Google's policies now discriminate against men and that there were non discriminatory ways to get more women to work there.
But why not try reading what he actually wrote rather than what other people - who have an agenda - said he wrote. I even linked to a copy of his memo so you can verify he said all the things I said he said, and carefully explained he was not saying what you accused him of saying.
Doesn't the fact that you are clearly racist, and clearly a republican refute your own claim?
I know you couch it in the terms of falsely aggrieved white folks who were discriminated against for being bigoted assclowns in the workplace.
But you are obviously racist and a republican, and are proving yourself wrong with your mere existence.
Screaming 'racist' at BREXITers helps Leave win a slender majority in the BREXIT referendum, even though Remain started out ahead.
Screaming 'racist' at Trump supporters helped Trump win the US presidency, even though Clinton started out ahead.
Please keep screaming racist at people, it seems like it's helping my side more than it helps yours.
http://www.nationalreview.com/...
If the parties had in some meaningful way flipped on civil rights, one would expect that to show up in the electoral results in the years following the Democrats' 1964 about-face on the issue. Nothing of the sort happened: Of the 21 Democratic senators who opposed the 1964 act, only one would ever change parties. Nor did the segregationist constituencies that elected these Democrats throw them out in favor of Republicans: The remaining 20 continued to be elected as Democrats or were replaced by Democrats. It was, on average, nearly a quarter of a century before those seats went Republican. If southern rednecks ditched the Democrats because of a civil-rights law passed in 1964, it is strange that they waited until the late 1980s and early 1990s to do so. They say things move slower in the South - but not that slow.
Republicans did begin to win some southern House seats, and in many cases segregationist Democrats were thrown out by southern voters in favor of civil-rights Republicans. One of the loudest Democratic segregationists in the House was Texas's John Dowdy, a bitter and buffoonish opponent of the 1964 reforms, which he declared "would set up a despot in the attorney general's office with a large corps of enforcers under him; and his will and his oppressive action would be brought to bear upon citizens, just as Hitler's minions coerced and subjugated the German people. I would say this - I believe this would be agreed to by most people: that, if we had a Hitler in the United States, the first thing he would want would be a bill of this nature." (Who says political rhetoric has been debased in the past 40 years?) Dowdy was thrown out in 1966 in favor of a Republican with a very respectable record on civil rights, a little-known figure by the name of George H. W. Bush.
It was in fact not until 1995 that Republicans represented a majority of the southern congressional delegation - and they had hardly spent the Reagan years campaigning on the resurrection of Jim Crow.
And that's from the National Review, a magazine which is keen - overly keen in my opinion - to denounce Trump as some sort of moral abomination.
The Republican Party's southern strategy consisted of embracing racism and bigotry in order to gain political power. The Democratic Party's position during this time was to *shed* its Dixiecrat racist wing by supporting civil rights.
Except that didn't happen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
You can see that more Republicans than Democrats supported the Civil Rights act
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Fair enough. But then the people who get cheap CPUs are selling them in enormous volumes. All that's happening is that if you commit to buying 10,000 CPUs you pay a lot less than someone who only wants to buy one.
Also soldered CPUs tend to be cheaper than socketed ones.
There may very well be laws against firing whistleblowers who were blowing the whistle on illegal discrimination.
Illegal discrimination would be anything that violates the equal protection clause
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
And if Google were illegally discriminating and Damore pointed this out, which he did, it would be illegal to fire him
https://www.workplacefairness....
In addition, the California State Legislature has adopted statutory protections for employees. Notably, California has a general whistleblower protection statute that protects employees who disclose illegal activity or refuse to participate in illegal activities. Whistleblowers are thus protected under both this statute and the common law public policy exception. Also, several other California statutes contain anti-retaliation provisions. Employees who engage in protected activities (usually filing a complaint or testifying) under laws in the following subject areas are protected from retaliation: discrimination, hazardous substances, occupational safety and health, and workers' compensation. Also, California protects employees who file a complaint relating to employee rights with Labor Commissioner.
Damore's memo was more subtle than his detractors give him credit for
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
He explains that 'Google has created several discriminatory practice' and suggests 'non discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap'. So he could argue Google were breaking the law, he blew the whistle and they fired him.
Google have pots of money of course, so they'll probably pay him off. And go on discriminating.
Q) How to tell if a group is a "protected class"?
A) Does that group tend to vote Democrat? Then it is. Overwise no.
This reminds me of the days when Democrats in the Jim Crow south claimed it was only the 'Uppity' negroes who had problems with their legally imposed discrimination.
Guess who lost that battle.
True. But that means people will buy type 1) machines with a Thunderbolt port (and possibly a non U CPU). I.e. they'll still want something with low power consumption when it's not linked to an external GPU. Which means AMD will still get hit by the "It's not low power enough for group 1)" issue with their solution.
In fact Type 1 machines with a Thunderbolt port are going to be really, really common. And eGPU prices will continue to drop.
I reckon Apple might push eGPUs. They're apparently supported well by High Sierra and Apple don't have any affordable Macbooks with a discrete GPU. Even the high end 15 inch model is very underpowered in GPU terms compared to Windows machines.
https://www.apple.com/shop/buy...
$2,799.00 and you only get a Radeon 560.
That's not a very high end GPU
https://www.videocardbenchmark...