Now it's just getting sili

I don't think they do. And judging by the two kinds of of people that complain about the under-representation of women in tech...
The first person is doing absolutely nothing about it except throwing a patreon account around and begging for more money...
The second uses it as a PR campaign (without realizing that the outragists that care about the whole thing have no interest in tech)...

Not a single complainer decided to go into tech to improve the ratio. But you hear about it. From "journalists". From bloggers, vloggers, and podders. And high ups that don't do any of that stuff themselves, but have a chief of public relations.

How come the programmers aren't complaining? If this is such a problem, why is it only ever raised from the outside in the form of clickbait, PR, or justification for getting more money?

Great idea. Let's take all the enthusiastic, optimistic, and insightful CS students and throw them out the window, then try to coax and cajole the uninterested into replacing them. I don't see how this plan could possibly fail.

Seriously, guys?

What happened to merit? What happened to "the heart wants what the heart wants"? What happened to free choice?
Why must there be more girls in CS to the point of excluding those *actually* interested in the subject itself? And why is this situation not repeated in welding, or mining? Why don't you want women to make up their own minds on what they want to do?

I see lots of women every day that somehow managed to pick a career and/or interest without anyone having to invest lots of money into convincing or cajoling them, so I'm pretty sure it can be done.

If I'm not mistaken, you are thinking about branch prediction, not out-of-order-executions in an otherwise serial pipe.

To elaborate, OOE deals with computing as much as possible without having to wait for a result first.
Branch prediction is a cache separate from the execution tray that attempts to predict the outcome of an if/switch or other branching evaluation and then load the pipelines to the execution tray with the computations following that branching, since the time it takes to evaluate an if/switch can be long, and without a prediction the cpu would have to stall until the evaluation is complete.

This is not rocket surgery.

DO:
Put your shoes on before going outside.
DO NOT:
Greet your neighbors with a tennis racket to the genitals.

DO:
Post the summary of the article in the summary.
DO NOT:
Post worthless clickbait in the summary.

Please grasp the concept.

Are you looking to replace Austin Powers?

I'm curious why this type of "diversity" drive only pops up in tech-related office jobs? Where is the drive in getting more men into child care jobs or social services? Why not more women in construction work? Why not more women in the army? Why not more women in sanitation, mining, welding, or fishing?

As it stands, it doesn't seem like diversity is the goal at all.

Because a lot of people have worked damn hard to get somewhere and to build something. And all of that effort is being diminished to no small extent by this preferred treatment program.

If you work your ass of for 10 years, making sure to be the best, only to get passed by for a rookie on a "diversity" quota, wouldn't you get a little grumpy? That is why so many here are asking for the 'best candidate' treatment rather than the 'look how minority I am' treatment. That is why yet another of these "diversity" programs is viewed with no small amount of suspicion and apprehension.

Intel being Intel *might* be able to do something smart, but given the organizations that they have partnered with for the drive, it is very very unlikely that anything other than feminazi rabies will come out of it. And that sucks for everyone on the planet.

The former is the standard, and the money is going to organizations that deal only in the former.

Because then you'll be approached by a frothing at the mouth "journalist", asking questions like "Why isn't your workforce 50% white, 50% asian, 50% black, , 50% hispanic, 50% homosexual, and 50% female?".

Hiring the best suited candidate is so 1990. Now it's all about the progressive stack and checking your privilege.

Meh, the summary doesn't bring up any of the new stuff.

We *know* that exercise has an effect on the body. We *know* that exercising increases concentrations of growth hormones, anti-inflammatory responses, and metabolic rate adjusting factors. We *know* these adjustments are made through methylation patterns over enhancers/promoters.

Furthermore, there is no *change* in the DNA. Any alterations that occur do so on the back-chain of the DNA, which is normal behavior as the backchain is modified by ALOT of different factors. No nucleotides are being mutated or swapped by exercising (unless you imbibe strange and unhealthy body building substances).

Last, the adjustments made to the exercised cells are in *response* to the exercise rather than proactive as the summary suggests. It would after all be really freaky if your body started building up muscles *before* you started working out. That would actually freak me the hell out.