Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:What's bad about Uber drivers? (Score 1) 21

you probably don't have to deal with Uber SUV's right hooking you on a bike, or Lincoln town cars parked in the middle of the road

Do you have any evidence to suggest, Uber-associated SUVs and town-cars are especially bad in this regard, or are you just venting?

In my personal experience and opinion SUVs are anti-social in general — too big, can not see through them from behind — whoever drives them. But we aren't talking about personal anecdotes here, are we?

Comment: Re:Sexes ARE different, thankfully (Score 1) 584

That's not "a" study, it's from a metastudy.

Yeah. a metastudy by a doctorate candidate. So brilliant, no one has heard of her neither before nor after, and the only reason we have heard of her at all, is that she manipulated the numbers to show, what progressives wanted to see.

Where are you getting that quote from the paper?

Those words are from the article you linked to. The popular text describing the paper.

There absolutely are some very demonstrable differences in certain psychological regards

Oh, wow. Great. Now, if psychology is affected — and we also know, that muscles are — could there not be other differences, subtle and otherwise? Could those hormones, that cause women to dress more provocatively and buy provocative clothes during fertility periods, be also having an effect on work and other pursuits?

We are approaching the question with different axioms — and come to different conclusions. You say: "Genders are equal, therefor any sign of differences proves sexism". I say: "There is little to no sexism, therefor the observed differences prove, genders are different."

Some of our arguments (all of yours, actually) are simply variations of the above...

Oh please, you're not seriously going to pretend that there weren't tremendous pressures in Victorian society for women to not be involved in STEM-style careers

Queen Victoria died in 1901. According to NPR, female participation in programming was on par with men until 1984. I don't buy NPR's explanations, but I believe their facts. Whatever the reason for females losing interest in mid-80ies, blaming "Victorian era" for it is stupid today and was stupid 30 years ago. Find yourself something else to blame...

But if you continue to insist, it is American "parochial" ("bigoted", "backwards", "retarded") attitudes, that are to blame, then you must first explain, why women in the even more parochial countries (like all of the ex-USSR) are doing better, rather than worse.

"I'll see your 50% and raise it to 100%" - how does this even make sense?

Here is how it make sense. You wrote: "one can decide that having 50% of the human population having a solid interest in the sort of careers most valuable to the improvement of the human condition is a good thing". I still think, having the entire 100% of the human population — both sexes, that is — having that "solid interest" is an even better thing.

This ridicule is what you get for speaking in (other people's) slogans, instead of your own sentences.

Nobody is talking about disinteresting men from pursuing STEM careers

Why, TFA is talking about exactly that: "for excluded male students by [...] a companion all-boys school that would emphasize English Language Arts". So, did I just catch you lying, or you didn't even read the write-up before posting?

"Are there laws or even customs, that prevent girls from entering a STEM field and excelling in it" - it's like you didn't even read my post.

I read it, and I still don't know, what you are talking about. "Victorian era"? Must be it...

And if one person wastes their time trying to become a physicist when they'd have made a better fry cook? Well whoop-di-freaking-doo. The world is still a better place.

No, the world is a worse place, if you force a would-be brilliant singer, designer, or a CEO into becoming a mediocre programmer. She'll spend her life programming in some future equivalent of Cobol (Perl?) and hate her life...

I've met people — male and female — working in a field chosen for reasons other than sincere interest, and I pity them. And certainly would not wish such fate upon anyone else.

The pretense, that gender identity is "learned" destroys lives. Why must you insist on it?

Comment: In Other News (Score 5, Insightful) 164

by MightyMartian (#49495993) Attached to: MakerBot Lays Off 20 Percent of Its Employees

And in other news, MakerBot CEO Jonathan Jaglom will receive a bazillion dollar bonus, and another ten bazillion dollars in stock options. It's predicted he will end his term as CEO by urinating and defecating and the smoldering corpse of MakerBot before seeking greener pastures to assrape and pillage.

When asked for comment, Mr. Jaglom replied "I'd just like to say fuck you all very much!"

Comment: Re:Sexes ARE different, thankfully (Score 1) 584

Well, there's this and other things like it

That NPR-article offers two YouTube videos as evidence, that home computers were marketed to boys. We are also led to believe, no such advertising existed targeting girls...

Even if it really did not, however, makes little difference, because the marketing would not have been the reason of girls being less interested, it would have been a consequence of it.

The greedy capitalists paying for those commercials would not have deliberately rejected half of their market...

Also, the effect of such advertising would not have been immediate — the target audience (and the) kids in the videos were 12-15 years old, at least 5 years away from entering the job-market. So they can not explain the drop of female participation in computers, which began — according to the same NPR-article — in 1984.

Case closed.

Comment: Re:Sexes ARE different, thankfully (Score 1) 584

You may be interested to know that the full grand master title is granted automatically for women-only achievements* to make them look better.

I am well aware of this fact, and the link I provided earlier makes the distinction too: see the "How Earned" column in his table.

Comment: Re:Why a single place? (Score 1) 148

That was a pretty interesting study, and does show that the underlying behaviors of canids and humans have some degree of compatibility and overlap, and it does not require a large amount of breeding to produce domesticated canids. The fox experiments (I think they were done in Russia) demonstrate that the domestication of wolf progenitor populations into dogs was probably fairly rapid, which also raises the likelihood (strongly hinted it in the molecular data) that there were multiple wolf domestication events. And even for all of that, dogs still remain simply a number of subgroups of C. lupis, and still enjoy interfertility with other members of genus Canus.

Comment: Re:Sexes ARE different, thankfully (Score 1) 584

But there's only one issue with that...

How was that study conducted? Has it ever been reviewed by peers or successfully reproduced?

Screw Mars and Venus; men and women are from Earth

This would argue againstsegregation... But even that study shows ample differences between genders, and the article describing it (which is what you linked to) acknowledges ample earlier studies "that had shown significant, and often large, sex differences".

If you had a society where eating apples was something almost exclusively done by men

Most of the female chess Grand Masters (not to be confused with the WGMs) come from places, where views on gender-roles remain quite traditional — Georgia, China, Russia, or Ukraine.

This alone handily defeats the argument, that it is the dastardly "Victorian moral system", that keeps women from advancing in anything other than child-bearing and singing.

If a girl from Lviv can become a Grandmaster — her last opponent, incidentally, being a girl from Vladivostok, what is the excuse for a girl from Los Angeles? Sex-stereotypes are only wider-spread in the former USSR...

the very fact that historically there were fewer women in STEM (a legacy from the old Victorian moral system)

Citation needed.

Or, one can decide that having 50% of the human population having a solid interest in the sort of careers most valuable to the improvement of the human condition is a good thing

I'll see your 50% and raise it to 100%. You make even less sense with these slogan here, than you made earlier with attempts to remain scientific.

and maybe we should give a shot at remedying this

Rectifying what? Are there laws or even customs, that prevent girls from entering a STEM field and excelling in it? I am not aware of any such and I await your citations.

even if just on the "offchance" that it's not biological

But what if it is bilogicial — as seems perfectly probable? Would not your efforts to encourage people to do, what they have little aptitude towards, then be wasteful and, indeed, detrimental to that "improvement of the human condition"?

Comment: Re:I thought we were trying to end sexism? (Score 1) 584

By activist you mean corporate lobbyists. They are the ones pushing this computer programming b.s.

Hmm...I wonder if they're pushing for more women in IT, because they can pay women less?

This way they get more cheap workers into the workforce, without having to increase HB-1 foreign workers?

Sounds like an interesting conspiracy theory.

But on the issue of separate (but equal) education. Why stop at boys/girls only schools. I would think ALL groups would do better in similar group schools no? Whites and blacks and latinos and orientals all in separate but equal schools. Separate out of those, the boys and girls...and from those the separate out the straights and gays.

At this point, I'd guess they would show stats that all groups do much better at whatever....right?

Comment: Re: They're called trees. (Score 4, Insightful) 120

by DigiShaman (#49493827) Attached to: Breakthrough In Artificial Photosynthesis Captures CO2 In Acetate

Not cutting down the trees is a useful step, because mature growth fixes more CO2 than new growth.

You're not thinking long-term. Eventually the trees will die, decompose, and go back into the system as CO2. No, what you want to be doing is cutting down trees after their maximum growth rate has been achieved, then sequester the logs someplace. Clearing old growth makes room for newer faster growing trees that will soak up more CO2 than if you left old growth in its place. The only advantage of that (leaving old growth behind) is a more stable ecosystem as it would render that area less disturbed.

Comment: Re:Sexes ARE different, thankfully (Score 1) 584

Untrue. There is plenty of evidence.

If there is not already a special place in Hell for people claiming to there be "plenty of evidence" (of anything) without citing any, Satan better get on with it and build one. In anticipation of the new arrivals from the Internet-forum age.

So, it could easily be a case of chess culture putting girls off from participating

Except there are plenty of WGMs. It is just that very few of them make it to an actual gender-neutral GM for some reason.

Unless you are arguing that girls are just less intelligent than boys

Chess is not purely about intelligence — nor is boxing, for another example, purely about strength either.

But whatever it is, that encourages girls to become chess-players and advance, countries with "traditional" (otherwise known as "backwards" and "bigoted") views on gender-roles — like Georgia, Russia, China, or Ukraine — seem to offer more of it, not less, as evidenced by the last link in my post above.

"There is such a fine line between genius and stupidity." - David St. Hubbins, "Spinal Tap"

Working...