Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:Here's a bold idea... (Score 1) 212

Alternatively, because procreation is a societal good, we can incentivize specifically mothers in this fashion. I trust that women wouldn't just have kids to get this benefit, and who pays for it is an open question, but it still seems like a perverse incentive - and in any case it may not be legal to do this.

I see this thread is completely pointless from now on & uptill now.

Comment Re:Here's a bold idea... (Score 1) 212

should be payed. That's the crux. I don't think anyone disagrees that the majority of the gender gap is due men and women doing different jobs, on average. Its just that not everyone thinks the causality is one-way.

No two persons can be evaluated to be of equal value, and have equal pay, especially in expert positions (which CS mostly is). And if gender correlates with pay differences, that means that gender discrimination is happening.
Or that the one sex is better than the other at that particular job. But with the quality of the work being extremely difficult to measure objectively, we can only assume the former.

There is no point in sticking your head in the sand by saying the gender gap is illegal to uphold. It won't change status quo.

Comment Some data missing (Score 2) 183

Sounds like a great idea. Lets hope the details will add up.


The things that aren't addressed by the available information are safety and cost.

Nor is winter & studded tyres mentioned. Studded tyres eat through asphalt & the stones in it quite quickly. How about this plastic?
Perhaps this is only for warm climates. Rotterdam seems to not average sub-zero temperatures even in February, so I guess studded tyres are not used there? Any duch person to confirm?

Comment Re:Deinitely should read the first article (Score 1) 58

This has done absolutely nothing to assist, promote, or further the American taxpayer. [...] How far could NASA have gone with this? CERN? DARPA? Securing our boarders? Gift and install free solar panels? I do not care... At least the money would have, ostensibly, been kept here, where it belongs, where it benefits the taxpayer.

My vote goes for the CERN option!

Do you suffer painful elimination? -- Don Knuth, "Structured Programming with Gotos"