Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Back for a limited time - Get 15% off sitewide on Slashdot Deals with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re:Remember: Cultural, not racial (Score 1) 459

I think the sources for "some populations on average are smarter than others" are needed. Same with the "superior social ability". I've seen nothing that suggests that either are true and that they can be attributed to a genetic difference and not to social or environment confounders. The consensus is that it's not worth studying. The genomic data shows that any influence or different in complex behaviors would be just noise and impossible to measure in the face of strong confounders. The point is that these perceived "differences" between races (a term that many argue has no scientific basis) are in fact incredibly small genetic despite their outward appearance.

----- Yeah, I totally feel like digging up sources. It looks totally like you would not dismiss the sources out of hand.

Comment mostly black immigrants (Score 1) 459

It's funny how most of the well known and esteemed black technies that I know of are of recent immigrant background and how most of them are very, very much black. One would think that the "racist" White, Asian and Indian cabal that's doing all it can to keep the black man out of IT would hate african blacks even more than they hate african-american blacks, right ? I think I get it though. What we have here is the evil, racist Whites, Asians and Indians using divide and conquer, for sure. Also, the Whites, Asians and Indians work with Nigerians/etc but keep the African-Americans out because they're *know* that AAs so much more qualified than they are and that the Nigerians are not a threat, you see. Surely that must be why Nigerians and other immigrants are the only black face in IT. It has nothing to do with their own talents and abilities. It's all about the Whites, Asians and Indians scheming to keep the brother down!

Comment Re: here we go (Score 1) 834

There's something about a black person refusing to be their pet that enrages some of the lefties. I'm reminded of a comment thread on a french site called Rue89. It's the kind of site where it's taken for granted that nonwhites or immigrants hate the native french and have very good reasons to do so. In a discussion, a commenter claiming to be a recent african immigrant chimes in and says that contrary to most people of his background, he has no problem with the native, white french people and that he's very happy for the opportunity etc. Some (presumabely white) gets so incensed that he temporarily loses his mind and actually writes that he usually never criticizes a black person, because that's racist, but that thanks to that african immigrant he now has an opportunity to insult and metaphorically scream at a black person, because that african student is a right wing reactionary or something. So he calls the african student a slave, an uncle tom and stops just short of calling him the n-word! I'm talking about the french equivalents of those terms of course.

Comment Re:Special treatment (Score 1) 834

sorry for AC post above. The reason is because they don't want the religious beliefs of some so-called "brown" people criticized. You can be sure that they're not thinking of mormons when they say that people shouldn't be criticized for their religion

Comment Re:I couldn't go to a war zone... (Score 2) 419

I remember asking mom about wars and things like that at around age 5 or 6. While she probably didn't go into every detail, she tried to explain those topics to me and didn't tell me that kids shouldn't think about such things. If you have smart, resilient kids I see no good reason for all the coddling and shielding.

Comment unusual parenting but ok (Score 1) 419

Intent matters. Did he intend to harm his kids ? He didn't. He was putting them in harm's way to some degree, but he did that in order to teach them valuable lessons and to make them more experienced, wiser kids. I can't say that I think parents can expose their kids to *any* level of risk for any reason, but I'm also not at all a fan of the idea that kids need to grow up in some kind of silky coccoon, always protected from any and every slight or danger. There's merit in overcoming fear and danger, imho. It's a view of course not shared by those with a more utilitarian view of what life is about.

Comment good, approved trolls and bad trolls (Score 2) 457

Somehow I knew that this was going to be the NYT complaning about 4chan and uncivil speech coming from certain types of people and not all uncivil speech, of course. If you're at all familiar with the "social justice" crowd, you probably know that they don't believe that the rules of civility apply to them. Asking them to watch their language or to be considerate is usually denounced as attempts to "control" them and to "silence" them. Those who are the targets of their policing, the ones whom they "call out", though, are just supposed to sit there, shup up and listen while the "approved trolls" from the social justice world dress them down. This is of course understood already by many on slashdot. I saw a commenter abvove approve of trolling by followers of the flying spag monster. That's fine actually but I wonder if the commenter is also ok with trolling by the those who wish to defend christianity in vigorous manner. I rethorically wonder, that is.

Thus spake the master programmer: "Time for you to leave." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"