Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

+ - Why women have no time for Wikipedia 2

Submitted by Andreas Kolbe
Andreas Kolbe (2591067) writes "Wikipedia is well known to have a very large gender imbalance, with survey-based estimates of women contributors ranging from 8.5% to around 16%. This is a more extreme gender imbalance than even that of Reddit, the most male-dominated major social media platform, and it has a palpable effect on Wikipedia content. Moreover, Wikipedia editor survey data indicate that only 1 in 50 respondents is a mother – a good proportion of female contributors are in fact minors, with women in their twenties less likely to contribute to Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation efforts to address this "gender gap" have so far remained fruitless. Wikipedia’s demographic pattern stands in marked contrast to female-dominated social media sites like Facebook and Pinterest, where women aged 18 to 34 are particularly strongly represented. It indicates that it isn’t lack of time or family commitments that keep women from contributing to Wikipedia – women simply find other sites more attractive. Wikipedia’s user interface and its culture of anonymity may be among the factors leading women to spend their online time elsewhere."

+ - Could Dark Matter just be Normal Stuff that's Dark?

Submitted by StartsWithABang
StartsWithABang (3485481) writes "When you look out into the Universe at distant galaxies, at clusters of galaxies or at the Universe on the largest scales, what you see is the luminous stuff, which is pretty exclusively stars and stellar-related objects. But based on what we know about gravitation on those scales, we know there’s got to be much more mass than that, most of which doesn’t emit light: dark matter. It seems like a great leap to presume that there’s a new type of matter out there accounting for these observations. Could normal, non-luminous matter possibly account for all the dark matter? No, and here’s why it can't!"

+ - NASA Telescopes Uncover Early Construction of Giant Galaxy->

Submitted by littlesparkvt
littlesparkvt (2707383) writes "Astronomers have uncovered for the first time the earliest stages of a massive galaxy forming in the young Universe. The discovery was made possible through combining observations from the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, NASA‘s Spitzer Space Telescope, ESA’s Herschel Space Observatory, and the W.M. Keck Observatory in Hawaii. The growing galaxy core is blazing with the light of millions of newborn stars that are forming at a ferocious rate. The paper appears in the journal Nature on 27 August."
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re: Anybody should be able to open an e-book shop (Score 1) 88

by s1sfx (#46616461) Attached to: Judge OKs Class Action Suit Against Apple For E-Book Price Fixing

Reasonable point, but I suspect there's a lot of value in simply being listed on Amazon.

No, not really. There is so much listed on Amazon that without marketing to get people to click on a link any book or ebook just goes under without a trace. Single celled organism in an ocean kind of a deal. The ability of people to self publish to Amazon has created this ocean.

Comment: Energy Psychology (Score 1) 517

by s1sfx (#46584783) Attached to: Jimmy Wales To 'Holistic Healers': Prove Your Claims the Old-Fashioned Way
Please note that the petition does not refer to holistic healing, or alternative medicine. It refers to ENERGY PSYCHOLOGY, most especially the case of EFT, which is designed to change negative emotions. The people who have signed the petition are actively working with people who suffer from emotional problems and have plenty of evidence, including plenty of research studies, that what they are doing works. Once again, the Wiki attitude to this is highly illogical and overemotional. It is not rational. It tallies with the "Alchemist Denial" which is prevalent on Wikipedia - leaving out the FACT that many of the "fathers of modern science" were interested in, and highly active in, metaphysics of one kind or the other. Denying simple facts and starting to shout abuse - is that scientific? Really?

Comment: What is "smart"?.. (Score 1) 529

by s1sfx (#46518715) Attached to: The Poor Neglected Gifted Child
Completely concur to start with defining what "smart" means before we start. I do not consider being able to gain a Chemistry degree as a sign of intelligence. Good memory, hard work, ability to focus certainly but even rocket science ain't ... If you want true innovation, creativity and genius, you are not looking for "smart kids." Which is a shame. Because armies of ant scientists are not going to bring in the next big thing, the next revolution, or be the leaders of tomorrow. I find solace in that thought ... ...

Comment: Re:Did Zuckerberg ever have to get past HR? (Score 1) 716

by s1sfx (#42183131) Attached to: Just Say No To College

First of all, most of those "billionaire dropouts" were dropouts from Ivy League schools with plenty of startup money from daddy already at their disposal, not dipshits coming out of no-name-high-school. Secondly, most of them only left college when they already had contacts and solid plans (and financing) in place for starting their own businesses. They didn't need degrees because they were going to be hiring *themselves*, not having to worry about some HR department that will toss any non-degree applicants right into the trash.

For most of the non-rich, non-Ivy League assholes like the rest of us--we still need a college degree if we're going to get beyond the front door to any stable job. We're not Mark Zuckerberg or Bill Gates.

If you're looking for a "stable job" then go to college. If you're not in the slightest bit interested in a stable job but want to do entrepreneurial things instead, and you have that temperament and want to change the world, then to start singing "I did it my way ..." is the way to go. It has nothing to do if you start out rich or poor. Later on, people might "hire" one for special projects but it is nothing like "getting a stable job." It's a completely different path altogether and depends on an individual having their own ideas and the drive to see them through, come hell or high water. So not the lazy man's option then ;->

Comment: Dreading the next upgrades .. (Score 1) 665

by s1sfx (#40888471) Attached to: Why We Love Firefox, and Why We Hate It
I concur. I dread the next update. I never ask myself, "Ooh, what's going to get better ...?" but instead it's "OMG what's not going to work now?" Programs are NOT getting better. They're getting worse. More unstable, more user-unfriendly, forgetting what their original idea was in the first place, cluttered with features I don't need or want, just annoying. And Firefox is a typical example of this trend. Go back ten versions. Try and remember the original idea behind the program. Go back to basics, make 'em work, make me happy. SFX

The clearest way into the Universe is through a forest wilderness. -- John Muir

Working...