Yeah, it just seems to me that girls are under a lot of peer pressure to pursue social, status-raising activities. Sitting in front of a PC hammering-away Java for 5 hours a day isn't very glamorous, exciting, or social, and there's the "nerd" stigma associated with it.

Even women who are naturally inclined to pursue Comp Sci or engineering do so to pursue careers in finance or business, and make more money, not necessarily because they love computers. And moreover women who are employed by tech-companies usually work in the non-technical areas, like PR, marketing, sales, etc.

If Google wants more women in tech, they should make coding (a solitary and unglamorous pursuit) look cool, exciting, and socially positive. Maybe they need a Java Camel.

I'm out, and I'm gone!

Android was updated... Nevermind I can't afford a new phone.

Except it's 2015, there's hardly a structural barrier keeping women out of STEM.
In fact girls are overly encouraged to study math and science. Celebrities and the media
tell girls it's cool to study science.

The thing is that college and graduate level science courses are hard, require practically a single-minded dedication to succeed in, and have very little social prestige. And even then there are plenty of women who graduate with hard science degrees (chemistry, physics, math) from 4-year colleges.

But then they go off to work on Wall Street, where the money is, instead of going to graduate schools (for science) or going into a lab.

So enough of the 'it's 1955 all over-again' bullshit!

yo! triggered!

I think a lot of the SJW (prevalent on reddit and of course tumblr) has more to do with youth and inexperience. These are basically Millennial's who've been coddled their whole lives, or social-science academics, (and of course the internet) and seldom encounter a viewpoint that challenges their world-view. When they're in college and meet like-minded people, they become militant ideologues shouting down people with differing opinions that make them 'uncomfortable'.

You can see this every time college kids protest a speaker who ever said anything offensive or politically non-comforming.

But this is hardly ever encountered in the real-world unless there's a street demonstration that includes young white kids.

In fact, it's called "Silicon Valley" because of the high silica content of the soil, which helped nitrogen propagation in crops. True story!

Maybe in 50 years, but not sooner. I mean, think about the kinds of mass-produced items people buy today, then think about why 3D printing doesn't yet solve the problem of making those things cheaper: Smartphones, consumer electronics, cars, furniture, etc.

A smartphone has hundreds of components of varying complexity.

Can you 3D print a cpu? a PCB?, the hi-res screen? We're decades away from making 3D printing of those components cheaply available.

Could you 3D print a car's engine? Not from plastic. And you know what they call a 3D printer that uses metal? A forge, which most people wouldn't have in their house any way.

Let's face it, there's a a lot "yeah but's" when talking about driverless cars and automation in general. You shoot down someone's pie-in-the-sky idea with purely practical concerns that would occur to someone not vested in "teh futurzes" and you're met with, yeah, but... (insert overly-optimistic impracticable solution here).

I mean, remotely controlled weapons platforms to defend cargo, even if it were legal it'd be an insurance nightmare. "Yeah, but..."

Police aren't security guards. What incentive do they have to protect an out of state shipping container? It's like if I called 911 because I parked my BMW in a bad neighborhood. The laughter at the other end of the line wouldn't be very reassuring. As with all technological utopianism, you haven't thought this out too well have you?

TRIGGERED

How do "intelligence organizations" control he BBC?

Wait, you mean technological progress and anything resembling AI robots is incredibly difficult to implement in the real-world. I thought the singularity was 10 years away?!

Seriously, it's like someone on trial for murder, who has a lawyer that says "now, I'm not saying my client didn't murder the victim but someone else could have done it too, amiright?"

...never mind

"Ulbricht's own lawyer admitted during opening statements that his client created the site. "There's no dispute it was used to sell drugs," said Turner. 'There's no dispute when the defendant was arrested, he was logged in as Dread Pirate Roberts.'"