This is a really good example of why a lot of men don't respect the intelligence of women. You have to establish whether or not women wish to be involved before you establish why they don't. If you don't establish that then you're begging the question and you're not going to get a meaningful result. After you establish that they want to do it then you can establish why they aren't doing so. Not every endeavor is going to attract a diverse group encompassing everybody, you're going to have people grouped up more in some specialties than others.
I realize that there's a belief of entitlement by most modern feminists, but considering where society is in 21st century America, perhaps being a bit more humility and a lot less sanctimonious about something which is as much their fault as anybody elses is in order.
But more than that, equality is bidirectional, I don't hear a lot of concern by womens' advocates that certain interests are still mostly held by women. Strikes me that if gender equality in terms of representation is all that it's cracked up to be that perhaps there should be more concern paid to that as well.
One of the reasons for that is that there's a lot more players being shipped in from other parts of the world, we've got a lot more players from Asia and various parts of the Caribbean than previously. Baseball is largely about winning games, and while it does help to be white, it doesn't get a team more fans or a player more lucrative endorsements if they're being outplayed by the rest of the league.
Imposed diversity in terms of gender is definitely sexism. You can encourage women to enter a field by cleaning up the misogyny and change rules to be equitable in that dimension which is definitely not sexist. However compelling parity without concern for why there is a difference in the future is a dangerous point to be in.
Also your argument that men make those sorts of sexist remarks more than women really requires some sort of a citation. Sure women tend not to be as vulgar about those sorts of subjects as men, but I regularly encounter women who make equally offensive remarks. Sure that's anecdotal in nature, but I do have to wonder what these same women are saying behind closed doors without any men present.
The point being that it's reasonable to institute rules and a code of conduct which basically requires people to behave in a way which is more or less professional. It's not however OK to go much further than that to increase diversity, except perhaps putting adverts in places that the underrepresented group is more likely to frequent. However you figure that.
The issue is that if it's a narrow interest stub from a more popular article then it might go uncorrected for a prolonged period. So long as nobody clicks the link it's not a problem, but if somebody does then the information might be spam, libel or incorrect and almost certainly out of date.
Right, but that's a different matter. The photographer always has the copyright unless it was done as a work for hire. It doesn't mean that he can publish the photo as the subject does get a say in whether or not the photo is shown or what is done with it.
It's gotten so bad in the film industry that you can't have anything which can be identified anywhere in the movie, even if you're shooting on location without the permission of the party owning the mark. Even if it is out of focus and not noticeable to most viewers. Which makes it damn hard for independent film companies without the large pockets to cover such expenses.
To be honest, that puzzles me as well. The big advantage that pretty much everybody else has over Linux is that they consider the kernel and userland to be tied together with only minor patching to the OS between releases. It makes it a lot easier to do performance tweaking and bug fixing if you have control over the entire base install. It also means that if you send into the mailing list with a problem you can concisely tell them what OS version you're running and they'll have a reasonable understanding of what your software environment is like. If you get a kernel panic you're still likely to have to have to look at the core that you get to figure out what exactly happened, but that's mostly because drivers vary from machine to machine.
I'm guessing that there are more developers interested in maintaining the m68k port than the Alpha port. Or at least that's how that typically goes. Unless you've got a strange OS like NetBSD which is obsessed with running on absolutely every possible architecture from mainframes to wrist watches, some platforms tend to not have enough people with the hardware and interest to keep updating the branch.
I think the issue is that it's corporations that want you to have to pay for everything, but the same corporations don't seem to have any problem ripping somebody off for their work. It's one thing to pirate other people's work if you provide yours for free to all comers, but quite another if you're suing to enforce your rights while ripping off other parties.
Plus, a lot of those people saying that would pirate whether or not there was any moral justification for it.
Because you didn't do anything creative. The photographer is the one that's responsible for pretty much all of the creative work with regards to a photo. You can't copyright a performance of a play, but you can copyright the play itself. Photography is the same way, you can copyright the depiction, but not the seen.
And ultimately, the photographer is the one that decides what is and isn't going to happen in the photo.
There's still a lot about the brain which hasn't been discovered or is weakly supported. One of those things is how humans actually navigate. Some people have a very poor sense of direction and others have a hard time getting lost. Apart from one study which thought that there was a sensor in the ear, which as far as I know wasn't successfully replicated or confirmed, there hasn't been much luck in figuring that out.
Additionally, some people know when there's somebody behind them without having to see or hear the person approach, and others are completely clueless. The human body emits a fairly substantial amount of EMR just from the activity of the nervous system as well as muscle movement. It wouldn't be too much of a shock if over short distances that a person could pick up on it. Or at least not any more shocking than a lot of the things that people are known to be able to do.
If the brain is making use of that sort of information that would provide at least some means of figuring out what else it can sense in that fashion.
Polio is a particularly nasty case. We're close to eradicating it, but probably won't without forcing people to get the shots. I personally was opposed to the chicken pox vaccinations at first, but when I started to do a bit of digging, it became pretty clear that the disease is more dangerous than usually assumed and a shot with a booster later on if needed is really a small price to pay.
Right, and what's worse is that there's a small portion of the population that can't have the vaccination for one reason or another, and the parents that choose not to vaccinate their children make it that much worse for those who would be risking serious illness.
My brother was unable to finish out the MMR series because of a reaction. The year before last I had a reaction to the Flu vaccine they were using. Supposedly if they had insisted on giving out small pox vaccinations a few years ago like they wanted to originally, I would've had to opt out due to the risk of complications.
That's not really a problem. I know that it's popular to claim that consumer spending is important, but that's only in countries like the US where we're pillaging foreign countries for wealth, what little work is left tends to be service sector. An ideal economy would be balanced such that there's as much being produced as there is being consumed and that increases in efficiency would lead to decreases in actual work done.
This is a bit simplistic as it doesn't account for trade and that it's more efficient to raise somethings in say New Zealand and ship them to the US than it is to produce them domestically.
That was my thinking. We in the US are going to have to stop wasting so much money on defense and start paying down our debt. Realistically the Chinese can't afford to pull out of our bonds any more than we can afford to default on them, however there is also nothing that compels the Chinese to buy our debt instruments other than artificially devaluing the yuan.
It's the Chinese government, they don't want freedom of press or speech because it would make it harder for them to control their own population. The Chinese people might very well want freedom of speech, press and assembly, but they aren't the ones working to keep this out. It is also worthwhile considering that Chinese culture is collectivistic and that it can be a lot harder to get collectivists to go along with the sort of things that it takes to have such a significant course correction.
There are, it's just that most of them are posers, or at least that's been the case since at least the 70s or so. They definitely are still around, it's just that they're not particularly active. I know that a contingent from Oregon was the primary party responsible for all the havoc that resulted when the WTO met in Seattle some years back.
Also a fair number of the people that refer to themselves as anarchists are either hipsters or punks.
They likely would tell us. The exchanges have been known to be compromised for years, in fact going back to the 30s, at no point has the system not been compromised. What they're whining about is that it's somebody other than Wall Street insiders that are likely to benefit.
It depends how exactly the exchange is compromised. A group of anarchists getting in and screwing up the ownership records for the current day could do a lot of damage to the system. Basically they'd have to roll back to the close the previous day, as I'd be surprised if there were constant backups being made.
There's a reason for that. The screen isn't really that clear. Any app which has advertising is going to need to access the network. Whether it's sending back information or just downloading it isn't indicated on the screen. A app which includes the ability to place a call from within it is warned the same way whether you have to manually agree or not. Same goes for location data, they tell you that it's going to use it, but there's no way of knowing whether or not it's required for the app or advertising. A GPS app for instance would need to access the GPS, but you've got absolutely no way of knowing what the app is going to do with it.
In the best case you can look at the app and wonder why a game is needing to make phone calls, but much beyond that and you don't actually know anything. Google definitely needs to make it so that you can require confirmation for certain actions like placing calls, it's not realistic to have such a requirement for everything an app could do, but certain things really need to have the user sign off each and every time, or at least default to that.
If by they you mean the state, then you've got a point. I remember my mother pointing out that my grade school teachers were complaining about the lack of time to cover the required material. That was roughly 20 years ago, and at that point the teachers had more or less run out of time to cram everything in, even with scaling back the depth of coverage for a given concept.
But, that's what happens when the tax payers won't pay for support staff, libraries or coordinated training. Stuff like that happens. It's frequently better to take a constructivist approach and slip concepts into other plans so that the students assimilate the material as a whole rather than as a bunch of disconnected facts.
I'm going to have to call bullshit there. Private schools have the advantage of primarily dealing with higher income families and being able to selectively provide scholarships to lower income students that they view as increasing the school's reputation. Relatively minor things like the language spoken at home have a huge impact on the results of education.
Additionally, in precisely what way are the unions responsible for the state of the typical school district's administrative staff? It's really not appropriate to blame the union because the districts can't settle on either decent baseline a pedagogy or consistent training program for the teachers. There's a surprising amount of training out there and without a consistent sense of what's necessary and helpful you're not going to get good results. Even more than that, libraries aren't being funded in terms of books, librarians or librarian's assistants.
Yes, the union does fight for the job security of its members, but perhaps if teachers were better paid, better supported and weren't being forced to work under poor conditions we could attract the sorts of educators that genuinely earn the job security.
And that's the point. The US has for some time been the world leader in creativity and that cannot be measured on a test that you then administer to other cultures. Additonally, the whole notion that you can assess abilities on a global basis is just plain wrong. It's as wrong now as it was back when IQ testing was in vogue. In fact in much of the world they're trying to figure out how to bring an American style education to their countries for the simple reason that you can't innovate if you're only focusing on rote memorization of information and strategies.
I think it's pretty clear why you're being treated like a nutter. It's because you're assuming that a one in a million chance that you're right is sufficient to give yourself a basis for making the assertion. If 1 in a million is the best you can do, that alone isn't sufficient to deal with relatively minor background noise in the study. That's not how that works, Einstein wouldn't have been taken seriously even after his contributions to physics if he put forward a notion that was that unlikely.
Failing to believe that acquired traits can be inherited really undermines ones credibility in terms of evolution, nobody has been able to come up with a means of evolution that I've ever heard where acquired traits aren't handed down. Indeed there's a growing body of evidence which suggests that traits can be acquired after the genetic material is combined and subsequently passed down. It'll be interesting to see where that research is over the next 50 years, whether it be more fully supported or turns out to be bunk.
To be honest, back in the 90s science classes weren't too bad, assuming you had a decent teacher. I still remember my high school chemistry teacher lighting methane filled soap bubbles and the resulting scorch marks on the ceiling. And the 6th grade general science teacher that had us making wet cells. I missed a day because of a big storm, but apparently the students that were in class that day got to use their batteries to power little battery powered cards.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a really good example of why a lot of men don't respect the intelligence of women. You have to establish whether or not women wish to be involved before you establish why they don't. If you don't establish that then you're begging the question and you're not going to get a meaningful result. After you establish that they want to do it then you can establish why they aren't doing so. Not every endeavor is going to attract a diverse group encompassing everybody, you're going to have people grouped up more in some specialties than others.
I realize that there's a belief of entitlement by most modern feminists, but considering where society is in 21st century America, perhaps being a bit more humility and a lot less sanctimonious about something which is as much their fault as anybody elses is in order.
But more than that, equality is bidirectional, I don't hear a lot of concern by womens' advocates that certain interests are still mostly held by women. Strikes me that if gender equality in terms of representation is all that it's cracked up to be that perhaps there should be more concern paid to that as well.
One of the reasons for that is that there's a lot more players being shipped in from other parts of the world, we've got a lot more players from Asia and various parts of the Caribbean than previously. Baseball is largely about winning games, and while it does help to be white, it doesn't get a team more fans or a player more lucrative endorsements if they're being outplayed by the rest of the league.
Imposed diversity in terms of gender is definitely sexism. You can encourage women to enter a field by cleaning up the misogyny and change rules to be equitable in that dimension which is definitely not sexist. However compelling parity without concern for why there is a difference in the future is a dangerous point to be in.
Also your argument that men make those sorts of sexist remarks more than women really requires some sort of a citation. Sure women tend not to be as vulgar about those sorts of subjects as men, but I regularly encounter women who make equally offensive remarks. Sure that's anecdotal in nature, but I do have to wonder what these same women are saying behind closed doors without any men present.
The point being that it's reasonable to institute rules and a code of conduct which basically requires people to behave in a way which is more or less professional. It's not however OK to go much further than that to increase diversity, except perhaps putting adverts in places that the underrepresented group is more likely to frequent. However you figure that.
The issue is that if it's a narrow interest stub from a more popular article then it might go uncorrected for a prolonged period. So long as nobody clicks the link it's not a problem, but if somebody does then the information might be spam, libel or incorrect and almost certainly out of date.
You can't copyright performance art.
Right, but that's a different matter. The photographer always has the copyright unless it was done as a work for hire. It doesn't mean that he can publish the photo as the subject does get a say in whether or not the photo is shown or what is done with it.
It's gotten so bad in the film industry that you can't have anything which can be identified anywhere in the movie, even if you're shooting on location without the permission of the party owning the mark. Even if it is out of focus and not noticeable to most viewers. Which makes it damn hard for independent film companies without the large pockets to cover such expenses.
To be honest, that puzzles me as well. The big advantage that pretty much everybody else has over Linux is that they consider the kernel and userland to be tied together with only minor patching to the OS between releases. It makes it a lot easier to do performance tweaking and bug fixing if you have control over the entire base install. It also means that if you send into the mailing list with a problem you can concisely tell them what OS version you're running and they'll have a reasonable understanding of what your software environment is like. If you get a kernel panic you're still likely to have to have to look at the core that you get to figure out what exactly happened, but that's mostly because drivers vary from machine to machine.
I'm guessing that there are more developers interested in maintaining the m68k port than the Alpha port. Or at least that's how that typically goes. Unless you've got a strange OS like NetBSD which is obsessed with running on absolutely every possible architecture from mainframes to wrist watches, some platforms tend to not have enough people with the hardware and interest to keep updating the branch.
I think the issue is that it's corporations that want you to have to pay for everything, but the same corporations don't seem to have any problem ripping somebody off for their work. It's one thing to pirate other people's work if you provide yours for free to all comers, but quite another if you're suing to enforce your rights while ripping off other parties.
Plus, a lot of those people saying that would pirate whether or not there was any moral justification for it.
Because you didn't do anything creative. The photographer is the one that's responsible for pretty much all of the creative work with regards to a photo. You can't copyright a performance of a play, but you can copyright the play itself. Photography is the same way, you can copyright the depiction, but not the seen.
And ultimately, the photographer is the one that decides what is and isn't going to happen in the photo.
There's still a lot about the brain which hasn't been discovered or is weakly supported. One of those things is how humans actually navigate. Some people have a very poor sense of direction and others have a hard time getting lost. Apart from one study which thought that there was a sensor in the ear, which as far as I know wasn't successfully replicated or confirmed, there hasn't been much luck in figuring that out.
Additionally, some people know when there's somebody behind them without having to see or hear the person approach, and others are completely clueless. The human body emits a fairly substantial amount of EMR just from the activity of the nervous system as well as muscle movement. It wouldn't be too much of a shock if over short distances that a person could pick up on it. Or at least not any more shocking than a lot of the things that people are known to be able to do.
If the brain is making use of that sort of information that would provide at least some means of figuring out what else it can sense in that fashion.
Polio is a particularly nasty case. We're close to eradicating it, but probably won't without forcing people to get the shots. I personally was opposed to the chicken pox vaccinations at first, but when I started to do a bit of digging, it became pretty clear that the disease is more dangerous than usually assumed and a shot with a booster later on if needed is really a small price to pay.
Right, and what's worse is that there's a small portion of the population that can't have the vaccination for one reason or another, and the parents that choose not to vaccinate their children make it that much worse for those who would be risking serious illness.
My brother was unable to finish out the MMR series because of a reaction. The year before last I had a reaction to the Flu vaccine they were using. Supposedly if they had insisted on giving out small pox vaccinations a few years ago like they wanted to originally, I would've had to opt out due to the risk of complications.
That's not really a problem. I know that it's popular to claim that consumer spending is important, but that's only in countries like the US where we're pillaging foreign countries for wealth, what little work is left tends to be service sector. An ideal economy would be balanced such that there's as much being produced as there is being consumed and that increases in efficiency would lead to decreases in actual work done.
This is a bit simplistic as it doesn't account for trade and that it's more efficient to raise somethings in say New Zealand and ship them to the US than it is to produce them domestically.
That was my thinking. We in the US are going to have to stop wasting so much money on defense and start paying down our debt. Realistically the Chinese can't afford to pull out of our bonds any more than we can afford to default on them, however there is also nothing that compels the Chinese to buy our debt instruments other than artificially devaluing the yuan.
It's the Chinese government, they don't want freedom of press or speech because it would make it harder for them to control their own population. The Chinese people might very well want freedom of speech, press and assembly, but they aren't the ones working to keep this out. It is also worthwhile considering that Chinese culture is collectivistic and that it can be a lot harder to get collectivists to go along with the sort of things that it takes to have such a significant course correction.
There are, it's just that most of them are posers, or at least that's been the case since at least the 70s or so. They definitely are still around, it's just that they're not particularly active. I know that a contingent from Oregon was the primary party responsible for all the havoc that resulted when the WTO met in Seattle some years back.
Also a fair number of the people that refer to themselves as anarchists are either hipsters or punks.
They likely would tell us. The exchanges have been known to be compromised for years, in fact going back to the 30s, at no point has the system not been compromised. What they're whining about is that it's somebody other than Wall Street insiders that are likely to benefit.
It depends how exactly the exchange is compromised. A group of anarchists getting in and screwing up the ownership records for the current day could do a lot of damage to the system. Basically they'd have to roll back to the close the previous day, as I'd be surprised if there were constant backups being made.
There's a reason for that. The screen isn't really that clear. Any app which has advertising is going to need to access the network. Whether it's sending back information or just downloading it isn't indicated on the screen. A app which includes the ability to place a call from within it is warned the same way whether you have to manually agree or not. Same goes for location data, they tell you that it's going to use it, but there's no way of knowing whether or not it's required for the app or advertising. A GPS app for instance would need to access the GPS, but you've got absolutely no way of knowing what the app is going to do with it.
In the best case you can look at the app and wonder why a game is needing to make phone calls, but much beyond that and you don't actually know anything. Google definitely needs to make it so that you can require confirmation for certain actions like placing calls, it's not realistic to have such a requirement for everything an app could do, but certain things really need to have the user sign off each and every time, or at least default to that.
If by they you mean the state, then you've got a point. I remember my mother pointing out that my grade school teachers were complaining about the lack of time to cover the required material. That was roughly 20 years ago, and at that point the teachers had more or less run out of time to cram everything in, even with scaling back the depth of coverage for a given concept.
But, that's what happens when the tax payers won't pay for support staff, libraries or coordinated training. Stuff like that happens. It's frequently better to take a constructivist approach and slip concepts into other plans so that the students assimilate the material as a whole rather than as a bunch of disconnected facts.
I'm going to have to call bullshit there. Private schools have the advantage of primarily dealing with higher income families and being able to selectively provide scholarships to lower income students that they view as increasing the school's reputation. Relatively minor things like the language spoken at home have a huge impact on the results of education.
Additionally, in precisely what way are the unions responsible for the state of the typical school district's administrative staff? It's really not appropriate to blame the union because the districts can't settle on either decent baseline a pedagogy or consistent training program for the teachers. There's a surprising amount of training out there and without a consistent sense of what's necessary and helpful you're not going to get good results. Even more than that, libraries aren't being funded in terms of books, librarians or librarian's assistants.
Yes, the union does fight for the job security of its members, but perhaps if teachers were better paid, better supported and weren't being forced to work under poor conditions we could attract the sorts of educators that genuinely earn the job security.
And that's the point. The US has for some time been the world leader in creativity and that cannot be measured on a test that you then administer to other cultures. Additonally, the whole notion that you can assess abilities on a global basis is just plain wrong. It's as wrong now as it was back when IQ testing was in vogue. In fact in much of the world they're trying to figure out how to bring an American style education to their countries for the simple reason that you can't innovate if you're only focusing on rote memorization of information and strategies.
You can't take it with you: Why ability assessments don't cross cultures
I think it's pretty clear why you're being treated like a nutter. It's because you're assuming that a one in a million chance that you're right is sufficient to give yourself a basis for making the assertion. If 1 in a million is the best you can do, that alone isn't sufficient to deal with relatively minor background noise in the study. That's not how that works, Einstein wouldn't have been taken seriously even after his contributions to physics if he put forward a notion that was that unlikely.
Failing to believe that acquired traits can be inherited really undermines ones credibility in terms of evolution, nobody has been able to come up with a means of evolution that I've ever heard where acquired traits aren't handed down. Indeed there's a growing body of evidence which suggests that traits can be acquired after the genetic material is combined and subsequently passed down. It'll be interesting to see where that research is over the next 50 years, whether it be more fully supported or turns out to be bunk.
To be honest, back in the 90s science classes weren't too bad, assuming you had a decent teacher. I still remember my high school chemistry teacher lighting methane filled soap bubbles and the resulting scorch marks on the ceiling. And the 6th grade general science teacher that had us making wet cells. I missed a day because of a big storm, but apparently the students that were in class that day got to use their batteries to power little battery powered cards.