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


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:How do they define GM? (Score 1) 59

It's only a thin line if you want to be a facetious ass and make it one...They're crops that have had their DNA altered with DNA from other species. Cross pollinating a grapefruit with a tangerine to make a tangelo is not GM...

Tangerines and grapefruit are the same species? Got it.

I guess we should update wikipedia: C. paradisi vs C. tangerina

Tell me how is tangelo not a GMNO when it is the combination of DNA from 2 species and by your own definition makes it a GMO?

Perhaps, you should use the correct terminology before you express your outrage on something before contradicting yourself and appearing as an uninformed ass.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

the point is, there is no additional barriers women face in IT. subtle social misgivings is not a barrier.

and the above post was before my morning coffee so I have no guarantee of readability of it. besides this thread has gone on for days on a tangent that may or may not be pertinent to the thread at hand.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

There is equal opportunity. If I have that "validation" then women have it as well.

Subtle social pressure is not a loss of opportunity. Being in the same class room as a female does not create active barriers for that female to be successful at CS.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

You missed that there is a trend elsewhere.

And you missed the part that even in countries that are more pro-women with more progressive policies to push women into stem than that of the US they still choose not to go into stem.

It's not about you, it's about numbers going from close to 50% to close to zero.

It's not about forcing women to do anything. It is about letting women decide what they want. They choose not IT.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

You assume a lot like women will not choose fields they enjoy because if it is not 50/50 it is a systemic "push". I disagree.

I could care less what others think of the type of work I do or what others think of me. I enjoy my work and I do not need the validation of others to be successful at it.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

instead of "more oppressive" substitute "just about everywhere else outside of the middle east"

I said: "oppressive regimes like China and Iran "... What part of China is in the middle east? Did I miss something?

I'm sure if you try hard you can come to some answers that you will believe instead of a kneejerk denial just because someone over 25 suggested it.

Kneejerk denial? No. I don't care how old you are TBH, I am over 25 and it has no bearing on the conversation. Or should I get off your lawn?

Your point is predicated on us fucking something up and women not choosing for themselves. I disagree. I have worked with plenty of women in IT that had no issue. I have seen other industry cultures that were 10x worse than IT by any measure and women do just fine. Why is IT so different? Why do they need special treatment? What did we do while staring at computer screens that was so terrible that women now need special treatment?

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

The sad part. You are the one who thinks that merely having a boy in a class room is a barrier to a girl.

At what point are you going to argue we segregate the work force because men can be a potential rapist to those poor women that need coddling and special treatment? The worst enemy of feminism is feminists.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

Which is, as you already know, perfectly ridiculous. The instructors actions are irrelevant.

Not it is not ridiculous. The instructors actions are very relevant because they are the adult and moderators of the fucking classroom. If the other students had behaved inappropriately and the instructor did nothing, you would be outraged.

Did she suffer harassment?

Obviously. RTFA

The daughter said: " Everyone in the class was a boy and nobody was like me and now I hate computers even more.". That is not harassment by any measure stop making it out to be anything more than what it is.

You also missed the other daughter FTFA: "Alba’s daughter had a more straightforward experience making an app. "

Out of 2 girls. 1 had a straightforward experience 1 had a negative experience because she was different. Doesn't sound like extra barriers.

No where does it say she was harassed or "made" to feel unwelcome. She felt unwelcome because she was different, yet Alba's daughter did not. It doesn't matter if there is equal opportunity if ONE girl has a bad feeling therefore we must do anything to help her and coddle her... But if it is a boy, tough shit grow a pair. You don't even care if the other students felt the unwelcome. If they were able to get over why can't this girl do the same? You assume so much by making the argument "she felt uncomfortable therefore extra barriers".

. Let's say the other kids didn't ostracize or otherwise harass the girl, but she felt uncomfortable anyway because she was the only girl

Then case closed there is no extra barriers just like Alba's daughter. Get over it.

Well, that's a barrier, far worse than the one imposed by that girls classmates.

No where in the TFA did it say that the other classmates imposed anything on her. Stop saying that.

You want equal outcome and not equal opportunity. You have not demonstrated any extra barrier this girl faced. She had a bad feeling because she was different... So what? That is called life. Why should we change the rules because a minority of girls feel uncomfortable and need special treatment? That isn't a problem with CS, the camp, the other students, the teacher, her mother, or society. It is on her.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

Would you expect a kid, any kid, to do well in an environment where they're made to feel unwelcome and unwanted? It's supposed to be a fun activity, and this kid was excluded, bullied, and made to feel subhuman.

I guess I should have been clear and included what I said in other comments. If the behavior is deemed unacceptable by the instructor; the instructor should take disciplinary action. If that did not occur it seems to me that the "offending" behavior is blown out of proportion. Was she "made" to feel that way by the other kids or did she just feel that way because only girl? No instructor or teacher is going to let a student get harassed by others. It is the teachers job to ensure the learning environment for all pupils. If the teacher saw she was not enjoying herself why didn't the teacher do something to engage her further?

This happens all the time (not exclusive to gender, girls, and CS) but in this instance we want segregation!?!? Over reaction much? Why is it in this instance we say that girls need special treatment and coddling?

If the girl felt unwelcome because she was the only girl in the classroom and the other kids did nothing wrong? Then no, that is not a barrier.

When she's the only girl, and suffers from that harassment,

Again that second part is the important part. Did she suffer harassment? Was the instructor aware of this? Why didn't the instructor take action to stop the offending behavior?

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

The total number has been relatively the same. So that number is a small overall percentage.

Some time between 1985 and now we've fucked things up and a bit of repair makes sense.

You assume this. But this is happening in all western countries where women have freedom and choice and other progressive measures to promote women. But in more oppressive regimes like China and Iran women make up a larger percentage in CS. Why is that? Why do you assume we fucked things up when women have the freedom to choose and decide for themselves? There is nothing legally stopping them. They can choose any career path they want yet they don't choose CS. You say we fucked something up. I say women are using their independence and freedom.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

there are extra barriers to entry because there are extra barriers to entry

Wow, bullet proof logic there

Yes, yes it is. Care to take a shot at it?

The homeless are homeless because they are homeless.

If you would like to list those barriers I am all ears. Claiming they exist because they exists and others say the exist does nothing. So far the only example I have is "feeling unwelcome" FTA. That isn't a barrier.

I stated, quit explicitly, that it is a likely explanation for your absurd behavior.

My absurd behavior of having an opinion online? Oh the humanity, it's so absurd! You have no idea how I behave. You know nothing about me except for an opinion I have.

Sorry, but the worst enemy of feminism today is feminists. Your absolutist explanations of my "absurd behavior" fail to account for anything beyond the rose colored glasses of ideology.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

how many students graduate high school outside of the specified state-mandated kindergarten start date of their age cohort? Maybe a few percent at most? There may be some mixture of ages in higher grades, but mostly students are stuck in a group of students who are within one year of their age... regardless of intellectual level. Yes -- it's possible in most schools to move out of that system for particular students, but it is considered abnormal (and thus introduces excessive social problems often because it is considered so abnormal).

the ages is the simplest net to catch the largest group for education. Kids will have similar education , maturity, and age related factors that make it easier for educators and the students to learn. It is not perfect and if there is a better way then by all means lets hear it. The small percentage is by definition abnormal so it is reasonable to assume that they are going to have other social problems by being abnormal in this regard (I am not advocating for it but if you have a better idea to account for the 1%). Kids are not nice and are not nice to their youngers. The age groups, while not perfect, does protect the youngest. Not every kid is a special little snow flake that should advance to 12th grade by 12. It is rare and the stats (I don't have them but I would agree with you that is very substantial) reflect it.

Note that these are precisely the same claims that were made when white and black schools were deliberately segregated. Segregation is almost always justified as being helpful to the those who are forced to be segregated -- blacks were considered inferior, and thus obviously it would be easier on them and on their teachers to separate them out.

But your missing the point that in special cases those age limits can be ignored. What special cases would racial segregation be ignored? Calling those age groups segregation is disingenuous. The ages are not as cut and dry as racial segregation and did not have the same consequences when ignored.

Our rather rigid age segregation in most public schools results in a lot of harm, in my opinion. Look at studies, for example, on students who are born in spring vs. fall. Just because students start kindergarten at roughly 5.5 years instead of roughly 5 years often makes a large developmental difference in outcomes, even as late as high school. Then look at the outliers and see how they are affected. Age segregation may be the "best" system of segregation for educational purposes, but I think the evidence is far from as conclusive as you act.

Nothing is perfect. But name a different system that can account for the majority of kids that protect the youth, account for maturity, education, intelligence (for the most part), interests, etc... If we can identify areas of improvement then by all means lets do so and try something. What can we do to account for fall DOBs?


Yes, you are right. You didn't say that. I was not implying you directly said those exact words. My statements were more of my opinion on general of sex segregation. Read 'you' as a general in that statement'

When you say: "the argument that the studies I mentioned make is basically that girls often mature a little faster and could benefit from being separated from a bunch of disruptive male idiots who are still too immature to allow a place for the wisdom of their female counterparts in their (segregated) age cohort."

It sounds like the scientific racism before Brown v Board of Education. I am not going to deny the validity of those studies or whether they are right or not. But In the real world, men and women have to work together. They need to learn that somewhere and at early ages. I do not think women and girls need to be coddled and have special treatment to be successful. If that were the case why are so many successful today? Women make up the majority of college enrollment and college graduates but they still need special treatment?

If you do give them special treatment based on their feelings how far into adulthood are you willing to coddle them? We coddle students in college from scary ideas, might as well segregate the work place too from all those potential rapists and murderers.

Comment Re:Segregation not the answer (Score 1) 449

there are extra barriers to entry because there are extra barriers to entry

Wow, bullet proof logic there. Care to list those barriers or is that just fuzzy feel good listen and believe bullshit?

Reality doesn't care about your fantasies.

Reality also doesn't care about your feelings.

girls in the class were targeted and made to feel unwelcome

Then the instructor should have intervened if the behavior was deemed unacceptable. If the instructor felt it was unnecessary to intervene I can infer the behavior was not as bad as many make it out to be.

You mention lots of evidence... Feeling unwelcome is not evidence. It is impossible to make everyone feel accepted, welcome, good, w/e.

You can list your evidence for actual barriers but minor social inconveniences are not evidence. Feeling bad is not enough because anyone can feel anything with any circumstance. If it is actual harassment then yes let the instructor deal with it. If it is legal then yes let us amend the law.

That you insist on conflating the two indicates that you are perfectly aware of the reality here, but have some other interest tangential to the issue here. A vested interest in maintaining the status quo or a general resentment toward women seem likely possibilities.

No. I think meritocracy is a good thing. I also do not think that we need to coddle people any more than we are. I find it hilarious that you infer I have a resentment toward women because I think women do not need coddling or special treatment. My wife agrees with me.

I have a suggestion for you. It works trust me. Cry me a river, build a bridge and get over it. It does wonders for achieving your goals.

"We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company."