The lesson learned was that you can't stop the melt-down and to prevent another you must close down the nuclear plants. Seems like they did learn a lesson and don't intend to let that event happen again.
I guess nobody will be able to bring golf clubs to work with them for a game in the afternoon. And if you have to take two or three trips from the car to your office on the thirteenth floor every morning to bring all the crap you keep in your trunk into the office, then take another two or three trips back down in the afternoon to put the stuff back into the new trunk of the new self-driving vehicle. . . well that just won't work. Some people carry things like a bike around in case they have time to ride it, or the before mentioned golf clubs, or boxes of files so they have something to work on in their down time, or knitting, or etc.
Oh, they got plenty of evidence. The problem is that the evidence was obtained illegally, or they don't (can't) admit how they got the evidence. The official term is "Parallel Construction". This is where they make up a new set of facts about how evidence was obtained so they can keep the secret method a secret. So it isn't always that they don't have the evidence, it is that they are breaking the law already and want to do more of it to keep the first part a secret. Yeah, I totally trust the law-breaking TLA's don't you?!
And the people who kept their money in dollars in a bank account are not doing any better. Remember, there is no power to run the ATM on, so there is no way to get your money so you can buy things.
You also have to understand how they count survival. If you live for 5 years, then is is counted as survival. If you just created a test that detected cancer earlier than 5 years before death, it would have a 100% survival rate. That makes all the numbers they throw out meaningless. The same number of people are dying at the same time as before, but because you told them they were going to die, that makes them from the dead camp to the survival camp. this and this
The old game NetHack can produce an infinite number of dungeons to explore. How can that be possible when the program does not take infinite amounts of memory or time?
Can we add to a Code of Conduct, that SJW are not to be tolerated? And that any SJW that tries to impose their force of will be banned from the group? If I started a project, I would add that to the CoC and fuck all who complains about it! You're not welcome anyway!
need to be careful to make all contributors feel welcome.
Except the people that we hate. We can make them resign or destroy their project all we want because they deserve the hate. Which group is the hate group again? I'm getting confused.
Screens don't change the view image when you move your head left or right, or even up or down, to get a new view through the mirror. You may be able to compensate with a more fish-eye type of lens though. Distance to the object will get harder with a more fish-eye effect, and even without it, you only have one image for both eyes, not two like you get in a mirror. So the depth information is lost.
So if we found that 100% of women have experienced sexism you would say that was a problem. But if 100% of the men also experienced sexism, then where is the problem? And you don't see a need for accurate data. No wonder you would rather go with how it should be rather than how reality actually is.
It's a great interview with a woman from Google. But she puts the same words into Damore's mouth that all the media doing. He never said they were not as good at their job, or that they don't deserve to be there. He is saying that trying to go for 50% won't work because they don't want to be there. When people can actually understand the conversation, then things might be able to be discussed correctly.
The proportion of male registered nurses has more than tripled since 1970, from 2.7 percent to 9.6 percent. https://www.census.gov/people/... This is the exact opposite trend in computer science where the percentage of women comp sci majors has declined.
So the drop in women in computers means they are being pushed out? Every other industry where women were not welcomed has gotten more filled with them. But the one that used to be all women is losing them and somehow that is due to sexism. Perhaps women are finding that there are other jobs that they would rather do. When they were not allowed to be doctors and lawyers, they had to be computers, it was all there was for them since it was an extension of secretary or data entry. Now every industry is open to them and they have stopped being interested in computers. It sounds like we should force women to do what we want them to do rather than give them the choice. Instead of being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, we want them bound and shackled to the terminal writing code. That is very nice of you to treat women that way!
The countries where the sexes are equal in jobs are where you don't have choice to do what you want. The more equal the society, the more diversity you see in the professions of the sexes.
I can see you don't like to read and understand the facts about the world and would rather spew lies to try to manipulate other people. In fact, the only people I ever see who say the women can't do computer science are the people like yourself who want more of them in the field. Your link make a perfect example.
"I think for girls, you cannot be what you cannot see," CEO and founder of Girls Who Code Reshma Saujani says.
And you go on to spew this great lie, which sounds rather sexist to me also. But since your are on the side of RIGHT, you can be as sexist as you want, right? Isn't that how the social justice thing works?!
The ONLY medical sub specialty that has more a biased gender ratio than computer science is Obstetrics/Gynecology, which has a justifiable biological bias.
Anyway, if you would chance the risk of learning something you may have read the article I posted and noticed this nugget.
Meanwhile, men make up only 10% of nurses, only 20% of new veterinarians, only 25% of new psychologists, about 25% of new paediatricians, about 26% of forensic scientists, about 28% of medical managers, and 42% of new biologists. Note that many of these imbalances are even more lopsided than the imbalance favoring men in technology, and that many of these jobs earn much more than the average programmer. For example, the average computer programmer only makes about $80,000; the average veterinarian makes about $88,000, and the average pediatrician makes a whopping $170,000.
\
Veterinarians are as biased in a gender ratio and nurses are even worse. But we can't count them now can we. Facts can't be allowed in a war of righteousness.
But then it must be because of the way we raise the children, you say. Girls are treated differently. No!
Might sexist parents be buying computers for their sons but not their daughters, giving boys a leg up in learning computer skills? In the 80s and 90s, everybody was certain that this was the cause of the gap. Newspapers would tell lurid (and entirely hypothetical) stories of girls sitting down to use a computer when suddenly a boy would show up, push her away, and demand it all to himself. But move forward a few decades and now young girls are more likely to own computers than young boys – with little change in the high school computer interest numbers. So that isn’t it either.
So if it happens before middle school, and it’s not stereotypes, what might it be?
One subgroup of women does not display these gender differences at any age. These are women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia, a condition that gives them a more typically-male hormone balance.
It must be because they are told they can't do math, so they drop out then, right? Isn't that the other story we hear so much about STEM and girls.
Here’s another fun thing you can do with this theory: understand why women are so well represented in college math classes. Women are around 20% of CS majors, physics majors, engineering majors, etc – but almost half of math majors! This should be shocking. Aren’t we constantly told that women are bombarded with stereotypes about math being for men? Isn’t the archetypal example of children learning gender roles that Barbie doll that said “Math is hard, let’s go shopping?” And yet women’s representation in undergraduate math classes is really quite good.
I was totally confused by this for a while until a commenter directed me to the data on what people actually do with math degrees. The answer is mostly: they become math teachers. They work in elementary schools and high schools, with people.
Then all those future math teachers leave for the schools after undergrad, and so math grad school ends up with pretty much the same male-tilted gender balance as CS, physics, and engineering grad school.
This seems to me like the clearest proof
Let's talk about medicine. Women make up roughly 47% of medical school graduates.
Yes, lets talk about medicine. Particularly the different specialties in medicine. And if we collect them based on if that specialty deals with the equipment and high risk, or if that specialty deals more with people. If you haven't read this paper, then you really should. The more egalitarian countries in the world show larger diversity, but places like China and Iran, have 50/50 split in gender for work.
Specialty --- M% --- F% People Based
Obstetrics/Gynecology --- 15% --- 85%
Pediatrics --- 25% --- 75%
Psychiatry --- 43% --- 57%
Family Medicine --- 42% --- 58% Thing Based
Internal Medicine --- 54% --- 46%
Radiology --- 72% --- 28%
Anesthesiology --- 63% --- 37%
Emergency Medicine --- 62% --- 38%
Surgery --- 59% --- 41%
Unless the complaints ore just from complainers. If I complain that the ocean is too salty, does that mean we have to make laws that will force companies to remove the salt so I can go swimming in it? Sometimes complaints are just that. What if I start complaining that there is only 20% men in veterinary fields. Should we stop hiring all the good women that want that job and hire more men so we can get it up to 50/50? And don't forget, veterinarians make more money starting out than programmers do. Am I just a complainer that has no point, or should we correct something that needs to be addressed systematically. Just like the lake of 50/50 representation in prison. We need more women in there also.
You probably need to break the categories down further. I bet that men and women tend to choose different specialties within law and medicine. Also we don't know that in even more time that there won't be majority women in those fields.
This has already been done. It is shown as a chart in the document and I will type in the relevant percentages for the medical fields for people to see them directly.
But he's not making an argument based on individuals, he's making what he believes to be a statistical analysis. No, he doesn't say Martha two cubicles down is unworthy of her position, he is saying that there are a percentage of Google's female employees who shouldn't have been hired for those positions. His concession that individual abilities may vary is simply his way of trying to couch his argument so he isn't calling out Martha specifically. After all, she may be that statistical outlier that is qualified!
He never said those things. Instead, what he said was in order to get and keep women in the field you might want to pay attention to what interests them. If you don't realize that women have a different average on the interest scale, then you assume all people find the same thing interesting. Since it is a higher percentage of men currently, you are not getting a good indication of how to make the job better for women that way. When you see that women might have more interest in people rather than things, then you can incorporate that into the job role to get more women to stay in the field longer.
It's amazing what happens when you actually read something rather than relying on what others say about it.
Then we should observe rotating galaxies that rotate at the correct speed because the dark matter has been pulled away from them. If we don't see that, then there is another reason the galactic curves are not correct.
So we should see spiral galaxies that have the rotational curves that we expect them to have without the dark matter. If the dark matter can be pulled out from the galaxy, then there should be spiral galaxies that are lacking the dark matter and the curve is now correct. Have we found any? If not, would that be suspicious?
Right, just compare it to another image. That sounds so easy. Almost as easy as putting the image into a category of what the image is of. And it could tell you the confidence of what the image is of, and if it isn't confident, then we know it might be a problem.
Oh, yeah! The system is very confident that it has the image recognized correctly. And comparing it to another image is just more image processing. Which will be subject to more failures of a similar nature to what you are trying to fix. Perhaps we need a human to read the signs and touch the screen where the correct sign is displayed. That aught to do it!
Slashdot Mirror
The lesson learned was that you can't stop the melt-down and to prevent another you must close down the nuclear plants. Seems like they did learn a lesson and don't intend to let that event happen again.
I guess nobody will be able to bring golf clubs to work with them for a game in the afternoon. And if you have to take two or three trips from the car to your office on the thirteenth floor every morning to bring all the crap you keep in your trunk into the office, then take another two or three trips back down in the afternoon to put the stuff back into the new trunk of the new self-driving vehicle. . . well that just won't work. Some people carry things like a bike around in case they have time to ride it, or the before mentioned golf clubs, or boxes of files so they have something to work on in their down time, or knitting, or etc.
Brains are made of cholesterol. If you aren't eating meat, you are losing brain matter.
Oh, they got plenty of evidence. The problem is that the evidence was obtained illegally, or they don't (can't) admit how they got the evidence. The official term is "Parallel Construction". This is where they make up a new set of facts about how evidence was obtained so they can keep the secret method a secret. So it isn't always that they don't have the evidence, it is that they are breaking the law already and want to do more of it to keep the first part a secret. Yeah, I totally trust the law-breaking TLA's don't you?!
And the people who kept their money in dollars in a bank account are not doing any better. Remember, there is no power to run the ATM on, so there is no way to get your money so you can buy things.
You also have to understand how they count survival. If you live for 5 years, then is is counted as survival. If you just created a test that detected cancer earlier than 5 years before death, it would have a 100% survival rate. That makes all the numbers they throw out meaningless. The same number of people are dying at the same time as before, but because you told them they were going to die, that makes them from the dead camp to the survival camp. this and this
The old game NetHack can produce an infinite number of dungeons to explore. How can that be possible when the program does not take infinite amounts of memory or time?
Can we add to a Code of Conduct, that SJW are not to be tolerated? And that any SJW that tries to impose their force of will be banned from the group? If I started a project, I would add that to the CoC and fuck all who complains about it! You're not welcome anyway!
need to be careful to make all contributors feel welcome.
Except the people that we hate. We can make them resign or destroy their project all we want because they deserve the hate. Which group is the hate group again? I'm getting confused.
Screens don't change the view image when you move your head left or right, or even up or down, to get a new view through the mirror. You may be able to compensate with a more fish-eye type of lens though. Distance to the object will get harder with a more fish-eye effect, and even without it, you only have one image for both eyes, not two like you get in a mirror. So the depth information is lost.
So if we found that 100% of women have experienced sexism you would say that was a problem. But if 100% of the men also experienced sexism, then where is the problem? And you don't see a need for accurate data. No wonder you would rather go with how it should be rather than how reality actually is.
It's a great interview with a woman from Google. But she puts the same words into Damore's mouth that all the media doing. He never said they were not as good at their job, or that they don't deserve to be there. He is saying that trying to go for 50% won't work because they don't want to be there. When people can actually understand the conversation, then things might be able to be discussed correctly.
But all the male engineers that you want to compare numbers to are also survivors. So it sounds like a valid comparison to me.
The proportion of male registered nurses has more than tripled since 1970, from 2.7 percent to 9.6 percent. https://www.census.gov/people/... This is the exact opposite trend in computer science where the percentage of women comp sci majors has declined.
So the drop in women in computers means they are being pushed out? Every other industry where women were not welcomed has gotten more filled with them. But the one that used to be all women is losing them and somehow that is due to sexism. Perhaps women are finding that there are other jobs that they would rather do. When they were not allowed to be doctors and lawyers, they had to be computers, it was all there was for them since it was an extension of secretary or data entry. Now every industry is open to them and they have stopped being interested in computers. It sounds like we should force women to do what we want them to do rather than give them the choice. Instead of being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, we want them bound and shackled to the terminal writing code. That is very nice of you to treat women that way!
The countries where the sexes are equal in jobs are where you don't have choice to do what you want. The more equal the society, the more diversity you see in the professions of the sexes.
I can see you don't like to read and understand the facts about the world and would rather spew lies to try to manipulate other people. In fact, the only people I ever see who say the women can't do computer science are the people like yourself who want more of them in the field. Your link make a perfect example.
"I think for girls, you cannot be what you cannot see," CEO and founder of Girls Who Code Reshma Saujani says.
And you go on to spew this great lie, which sounds rather sexist to me also. But since your are on the side of RIGHT, you can be as sexist as you want, right? Isn't that how the social justice thing works?!
The ONLY medical sub specialty that has more a biased gender ratio than computer science is Obstetrics/Gynecology, which has a justifiable biological bias.
Anyway, if you would chance the risk of learning something you may have read the article I posted and noticed this nugget.
Meanwhile, men make up only 10% of nurses, only 20% of new veterinarians, only 25% of new psychologists, about 25% of new paediatricians, about 26% of forensic scientists, about 28% of medical managers, and 42% of new biologists. Note that many of these imbalances are even more lopsided than the imbalance favoring men in technology, and that many of these jobs earn much more than the average programmer. For example, the average computer programmer only makes about $80,000; the average veterinarian makes about $88,000, and the average pediatrician makes a whopping $170,000.
\
Veterinarians are as biased in a gender ratio and nurses are even worse. But we can't count them now can we. Facts can't be allowed in a war of righteousness.
But then it must be because of the way we raise the children, you say. Girls are treated differently. No!
Might sexist parents be buying computers for their sons but not their daughters, giving boys a leg up in learning computer skills? In the 80s and 90s, everybody was certain that this was the cause of the gap. Newspapers would tell lurid (and entirely hypothetical) stories of girls sitting down to use a computer when suddenly a boy would show up, push her away, and demand it all to himself. But move forward a few decades and now young girls are more likely to own computers than young boys – with little change in the high school computer interest numbers. So that isn’t it either. So if it happens before middle school, and it’s not stereotypes, what might it be? One subgroup of women does not display these gender differences at any age. These are women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia, a condition that gives them a more typically-male hormone balance.
It must be because they are told they can't do math, so they drop out then, right? Isn't that the other story we hear so much about STEM and girls.
Here’s another fun thing you can do with this theory: understand why women are so well represented in college math classes. Women are around 20% of CS majors, physics majors, engineering majors, etc – but almost half of math majors! This should be shocking. Aren’t we constantly told that women are bombarded with stereotypes about math being for men? Isn’t the archetypal example of children learning gender roles that Barbie doll that said “Math is hard, let’s go shopping?” And yet women’s representation in undergraduate math classes is really quite good. I was totally confused by this for a while until a commenter directed me to the data on what people actually do with math degrees. The answer is mostly: they become math teachers. They work in elementary schools and high schools, with people. Then all those future math teachers leave for the schools after undergrad, and so math grad school ends up with pretty much the same male-tilted gender balance as CS, physics, and engineering grad school. This seems to me like the clearest proof
Let's talk about medicine. Women make up roughly 47% of medical school graduates.
Yes, lets talk about medicine. Particularly the different specialties in medicine. And if we collect them based on if that specialty deals with the equipment and high risk, or if that specialty deals more with people. If you haven't read this paper, then you really should. The more egalitarian countries in the world show larger diversity, but places like China and Iran, have 50/50 split in gender for work.
Specialty --- M% --- F%
People Based
Obstetrics/Gynecology --- 15% --- 85%
Pediatrics --- 25% --- 75%
Psychiatry --- 43% --- 57%
Family Medicine --- 42% --- 58%
Thing Based
Internal Medicine --- 54% --- 46%
Radiology --- 72% --- 28%
Anesthesiology --- 63% --- 37%
Emergency Medicine --- 62% --- 38%
Surgery --- 59% --- 41%
Unless the complaints ore just from complainers. If I complain that the ocean is too salty, does that mean we have to make laws that will force companies to remove the salt so I can go swimming in it? Sometimes complaints are just that. What if I start complaining that there is only 20% men in veterinary fields. Should we stop hiring all the good women that want that job and hire more men so we can get it up to 50/50? And don't forget, veterinarians make more money starting out than programmers do. Am I just a complainer that has no point, or should we correct something that needs to be addressed systematically. Just like the lake of 50/50 representation in prison. We need more women in there also.
You probably need to break the categories down further. I bet that men and women tend to choose different specialties within law and medicine. Also we don't know that in even more time that there won't be majority women in those fields.
This has already been done. It is shown as a chart in the document and I will type in the relevant percentages for the medical fields for people to see them directly.
Specialty --- M% --- F%
Obsetrics/Gynecology --- 15% --- 85%
Pediatrics --- 25% --- 75%
Psychiatry --- 43% --- 57%
Family Medicine --- 42% --- 58%
Internal Medicine --- 54% --- 46%
Radiology --- 72% --- 28%
Anesthesiology --- 63% --- 37%
Emergency Medicine --- 62% --- 38%
Surgery --- 59% --- 41%
But he's not making an argument based on individuals, he's making what he believes to be a statistical analysis. No, he doesn't say Martha two cubicles down is unworthy of her position, he is saying that there are a percentage of Google's female employees who shouldn't have been hired for those positions. His concession that individual abilities may vary is simply his way of trying to couch his argument so he isn't calling out Martha specifically. After all, she may be that statistical outlier that is qualified!
He never said those things. Instead, what he said was in order to get and keep women in the field you might want to pay attention to what interests them. If you don't realize that women have a different average on the interest scale, then you assume all people find the same thing interesting. Since it is a higher percentage of men currently, you are not getting a good indication of how to make the job better for women that way. When you see that women might have more interest in people rather than things, then you can incorporate that into the job role to get more women to stay in the field longer.
It's amazing what happens when you actually read something rather than relying on what others say about it.
It is even true in animals. The sexes end up choosing toys similarly to the way human babies do.
Yeah! The memo mentioned that. Are you trying to say something new or useful?
Then we should observe rotating galaxies that rotate at the correct speed because the dark matter has been pulled away from them. If we don't see that, then there is another reason the galactic curves are not correct.
So we should see spiral galaxies that have the rotational curves that we expect them to have without the dark matter. If the dark matter can be pulled out from the galaxy, then there should be spiral galaxies that are lacking the dark matter and the curve is now correct. Have we found any? If not, would that be suspicious?
Right, just compare it to another image. That sounds so easy. Almost as easy as putting the image into a category of what the image is of. And it could tell you the confidence of what the image is of, and if it isn't confident, then we know it might be a problem.
Oh, yeah! The system is very confident that it has the image recognized correctly. And comparing it to another image is just more image processing. Which will be subject to more failures of a similar nature to what you are trying to fix. Perhaps we need a human to read the signs and touch the screen where the correct sign is displayed. That aught to do it!
Don't forget that agriculture has the wait and do nothing then do a bunch of work pattern involved also.