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:A counter-example already exists: Chernobyl (Score 1) 163

True, but then again I live about 60mi from one of the largest nuclear generating stations in the world. The amount of worry I have over it? Pretty much zero. Most people around here also have zero worry, hell the biggest problem most people are concerned about has to do with the mega dump they want to put at the old caramuse lime pits.

If for some reason bruce nuclear goes tits up, there are going to be a lot of other things to worry about. Especially in terms of food production, especially since we export most of our harvest crops in SW-Ontario to either Europe or the US.

Comment Re:Well that's great... (Score 1) 173

Mashiki, this is getting old now. Like clockwork, you make your second standard mistake: assuming that women are not interested in tech.

Care to explain why in the past more women went into technology than do now? Or why these courses are generally quite successful at attracting girls to study them?

Well, except I didn't make a mistake. I'm going off the actual employment records that happily list exactly what fields that women are drawn to, it's not tech. It's the humanities and psychology areas.

Oh, and someone else already gave you the reason why. Of course, in my own case at Waterloo, we had about 70 women in the applied mathematics course, by the end of the year there was one. The rest had left and went into...did you guess humanities, history, or psychology related areas. So, sure they're successful at attracting, terrible at retaining because they discover it's not something they'll enjoy.

Shocking. Women don't seem to like particular jobs and find something they do like. Then again, I'm sure you'll be leading the charge to get women working as oil field drill monkeys right? The shitty, well paying job that it is.

Comment Re:Well that's great... (Score 1) 173

It's about giving everyone an opportunity.

Well that's great, since the opportunity already exists right? Never mind that those barriers in said oil field workers don't actually exist, much like they don't in tech. They're jobs that don't draw existing groups because said groups have no desire to go into that field. You seem to be repeatedly making the same mistake in believing that if you throw money at something, while claiming 'we want diversity' at the cost of quality isn't a recipe for failure.

Comment Well that's great... (Score 1) 173

We'll just shoehorn people into fields they may not want to follow. Up next: We'll see IBM and the government fixing the dangerous jobs industries like mining and commercial fishing, while ensuring men don't have problems being called pedophiles for becoming k-12 teachers. And while we're at it, we'll ensure that there are more males entering psychology related fields. Should work out well, since women now make up the majority of the student body in universities.

I can't wait to see women enjoying a long day in the oil patch while men go off to become teachers with no issues.

Comment Re:Not like here... (Score 1) 39

The US is one of the worst societies in human history for its political class to say "let's see how far we can push the public."

Holy fucking hyperbole. Apparently someone skipped medieval European history in school, also skipped history of China and SE-Asia while they were at it.

Comment Re: Lovely summary. (Score 4, Insightful) 1033

This is not an attempt to reform or destroy stuff, it's just a massive attempt at shameless self promotion and getting their stuff awarded. Any claims to the contrary are simlpy them making stuff up to rewrite history in otder to make themselves look better, something Vox Dei does a lot.

If that was true, then the SF clique wouldn't have voted no award in only specific categories. That rather disproves your point, Hoyt figured it out. Steven King figured it out, GRR Martin figured it out.

Anyway as a result, the Hugos are part way to adopting a new voting system which penalises identical voters in order to make it harder to utterly stack the votes.

And thus both sad and rabid puppies proved their point that a clique was there, and forming voting blocks for the stuff they wanted to win awards. Which detracts from the actual point of having awards for good writing.

Comment Re:Lovely summary. (Score 1) 1033

That perfectly describes a bunch older white males who pine for the Golden Age when they thought they ruled the world, when women stayed at home and had babies rather than winning Hugos - bunch of white male elitists had a bad case of homophobia.

As for the numbers, well they really do have something to say about how a bunch of whiny old 5th tier male writers tried to influence an popularity contest by insulting and trying to bully the very people they needed to vote for them. And, not so amazingly, they created an EPIC FAIL.

Strange. I guess all those female nominees who were no longer the 'right kind of person' that said CHORFs decided to vote against with no award were white male elitists. Then again, when did it become bad to be male, white or elitist?

The numbers sure do, that the SF clique couldn't stand anyone else other than those they wanted to win the awards. And voted 'no award.' If authors like Steven King and GRR.M could figure it out, I'm sure you shouldn't have a problem.

Maybe Computer Science should be in the College of Theology. -- R. S. Barton