is he wrong in saying that only having researching gender issues and only having researchers of only one gender may skew the research? what if this were two male researchers and a female rejected it for "ideologically biased assumptions"?
just sayin.
I don't know. We should go back to and recheck the majority of all research published, since it fits that description.
I'm sure if a paper with the opposite conclusion authored only by men was submitted for review, women (both reviewers and others) would be decrying that fact,
Please cite the article about this happening? Or is this just your prosecution fantasy as a middle classed white male?
They started as a bookseller, then moved slowly into other merchandise
They started as a method to sell and distribute goods on the internet. Books were only their choice for a physical manifestation of the method. I guess you are too young to remember what people were speculating on back in the "boom."
Period
Hacking is relatively benign compared to the damage a prosecutor with an agenda can do. The latest round of these travesties is now going on in Wisconsin http://www.wsj.com/articles/ri... , It seems we get these popping up about once a year lately and it's been accelerating.
Nice way to use a real issue to push you political agenda. Wall Street Journal, the new Fox News for the criminally insane.
IPv6 would help both enormously. Lower latency on routing means faster responses.
Responses? Most of the internet traffic is streaming video, which gains speed by being cached, not having a direct connection to the server. Fess up. Most people here screaming that they need IPv6 are only interested in game ping times. Or else they really don't understand the difference between latency and "ping time."
And 99.9% of people don't care.
There are a lot of things 99.9% of people don't care about. If that's your justification...
Me personally, I'd love my end-to-end connectivity back.
People who think they need end-to-end connectivity for everything don't understand networking. It's not only not required, it is undesirable in most cases.
Part of the problem is, these two things are working at cross purposes. Contrary to your instinct, making a language easy to learn will also probably harm the cause of fostering interest.
The problem is, from a sort of detached, scientific, logical point of view, it sounds like a great idea to have a language that is simple, easy to learn, containing definite rules, with no irregularity, and leaving little room for ambiguity. The problem is, people don't want language to work that way. It's not specifically that they want it to be hard to learn, but they want a language with nuance and ambiguity. We like puns and plays on words. People often enjoy and appreciate slang, or unusual word choice.
I am an American English speaker who has taken the first step to learning Japanese. One of the first things that confuses westerners about Japanese is the four alphabets, two phonetic (hiragana and katakana), one symbols borrowed from Chinese (kanji), as well as the English alphabet. Why not standardize the whole thing on English, and get rid of the rest? Well, then I discovered Kanji puns. There are different pronunciations and meanings for each Kanji, and they can be used in various ways to create double and triple meanings. The Japanese love to use Kanji puns. So, yeah, no one is looking for the optimally simple language. People want a language that the average people can communicate in, and the clever people can be funny and interesting in.
Get over yourself.
Removing access immediately is important for 2 reasons. The first is obviously security. Then 2nd is figuring out what he does & making sure somebody else has that access & knowledge.
Beat me to it. When I saw "finishing up projects," that immediately raised a red flag. All projects should immediately be turned over to other staff, and the short termer can watch over their shoulders and answer any questions. It may make sense to let them keep email and IM during the time, and maybe even read-only to code to help look up issues. But that's about it.
For me it's not about security of the company. It's security of the person leaving, so that they can't get blamed for breaking something during that time. But the most important thing is knowledge transfer. Two weeks is a very short time to document all the little things that were picked up during their tenure.
My biggest complaint recently has been people leaving without proper knowledge transfer. Even after I emailed managers on that point, and was told to try to stop scheduling meetings with him. "He's too busy." Sigh. Now I'm left picking up the mess he left behind.
Yeah, MS spent a copious amount of dollars developing a clean, efficient, and practical framework. They're being generous by not only continuing to develop it with all sorts of modules and internal testing, but expand it to other platforms.
Generous? I don't think you are using that word correctly. If anything, MS is using this as a means of increasing market share. If that happens, they will come out with the next proprietary version to trap people into. Don't go thinking that MS ever does anything for the "common good."
Yeah it makes no sense. They have separate categories for Software Engineer, Programmer, and Software Developer. They are the same job, although often they have slightly different connotations in that in some organizations the word engineer has more prestige than programmer but it varies.
Pretty much useless... a distinction that makes no different at best. Even if some pedant comes along and says "a software engineer has XX degree and a programmer has YY degree" it is still meaningless because these types of distinctions are not generally agreed upon.
But that's why all three are listed. Companies that post may have different names for pretty much the same job, but the posters have to find a matching title. I don't see what the problem is.
I'm still holding out for pneumatic tubes to everyone's house or apartment.
It was a joke. Which is all this idiotic topic deserves. The Bechdel test makes some (although not much) sense for a movie, where the characters and dialog are the whole point. But for a software project? Why should I care about the gender of who wrote the software I am using?
That is the crux of the problem, that you do not care. To you this is unimportant, and should not matter. You are incapable of believing that it COULD matter. You dismiss it, instead of trying to understand how it could be important. And while the majority of the "geek community" is so positive that their worldview is so perfect and right and just that it is silly to think otherwise, nothing will change.
Start with the concept that it IS important. Try to imagine that. Then you may be able to get out of your tiny little shell of superiority, and lean about the rest of the world.
Narcissism and sociopathy are probably the most harmful diseases currently known to man, leading directly to wholesale slaughter, destruction of the environment, rampant poverty, etc. The sooner that we can put people like the referenced into a controlled medicated environment where they can no longer have such a negative affect on the world the better.
I could see the big bad CEOs being scared when Jobs was in charge, but Cook?
God, bankers are even bigger pussies than I thought.
Are you saying that gay guys can't be scheming sociopaths? Remember, Jobs chose him as his replacement.
Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money bags. -- Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"
