Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Submission + - Google Testing Software to Judge Hollywood and TV's Portrayal of Women 1

theodp writes: Aside from it being hosted in a town without a movie theater, the 2016 Bentonville Film Festival was also unusual in that it required all entrants to submit "film scripts and downloadable versions of the film" for judgment by "the team at Google and USC", apparently part of a larger Google-funded research project with USC Engineering "to develop a computer science tool that could quickly and efficiently assess how women are represented in films" (an award for "Highest Diversity Score" was awarded at the film fest, fittingly to the film 'Tested'). Fest reports noted that representatives of Google and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy appeared in a "Reel vs. Real Diversity" panel presentation at the fest, where the importance of diversity and science to President Obama was discussed, and the lack of qualified people to fill 500,000 U.S. tech jobs was blamed in part on how STEM careers have been presented in film and television. White House Visitor Records show that in the weeks leading up to the festival, representatives of the Bentonville Film Fest and Google met at the White House with scores of female educators, advocates, and activists from universities and nonprofits, as well as execs from the toy, game, film, television, print, and retail industry. In a 2015 report on a Google-sponsored USC Viterbi School of Engineering MacGuyver-themed event to promote women in engineering, USC reported that President Obama was kept briefed on efforts to challenge media's stereotypical portrayals of women. As for its own track record, Google recently updated its Diversity page, boasting that "21% of new hires in 2015 were women in tech, compared to 19% of our current population," although its most recently posted EEO-1 report showing actual headcount is still from a pay period in 2014.

Comment Re:Many reform proposals (Score 1) 154

Perhaps, but again, it just demonstrates that the media companies simply don't get it and having cut of their own nose have now proceeded to remove other facial features. People don't use search engines to find out what's going on in the world (e.g. the snippets of news articles of TFS), they'll go directly to their MSM site(s) of choice for that with no linking or royalties required, or go through a new aggregator. People use a search engine for news stories because they either already know what they are looking for but don't know where to look for it or are looking for an alternative take on it, and in that case having some indication of how relevant the results are (in the case of the snippets) or any results (in the case of linking in the first place) are going to dictate where their clicks go.

What the MSM sites don't seem to grasp is that this is free traffic generation for them; when a user searches for some given event/gossip/whatever and ends up on some random news site purely because it happened to pop up in the search results with a relevant looking snippet of the article, they've got an opportunity to serve up some ads, sell other services they offer, and maybe even acquire a new regular reader. Remove the snippets, let alone the links, and all of that traffic is not just going to go away - it's going to go to one of your competitors that had more of a clue about how things work. Both the search engines and MSM companies need each other for this arrangement to work, but the relative numbers of major search engines to MSM sites puts the advantage firmly in the hands of the search engines; they need *some* MSM sites, but they don't need all of them, and they certainly don't need the ones the like to haul them into the courts at the drop of a hat.

Comment Re:Many reform proposals (Score 2) 154

Even if it does pass, I really don't see this one being a problem for the search engines - just the opposite, in fact given the way Google responded to a similar legislative attempt in Spain. It's a "request for payment", at least in this version, so I would imagine it'll go down like this: Some media outlets "request" payment. The search engines cough up some cash for past transgressions and strip the snippets from future search results for those companies. Search engine users click on alternative links that still provide snippets. Media outlets that made the requests for payments have to go back to the search engines and beg for a new deal, which will obviously be loaded in favour of the search engines.

As a bonus, as search engine users and media consumers, we'll also get to sort out the dinosaurs in the media business (Hi, Rupert!) from those that are actually willing to try and embrace the new Internet order and make it work for them; I know which group I'd rather support...

Comment Nope, and missing the point (Score 5, Insightful) 69

I know you are going for funny point mods, but the real advantage here to Dominos is that NO gratuity is expected at all. If the price is the same then they will sell far more pizzas as people won't have to worry about tipping enough, or being dressed well enough to greet a stranger at the door, or have the front living room clean enough as said pizza person casually stares past you as you fumble for your wallet. Just talking to a stranger is a task for some socially awkward people. It will be perceived as safer also. No one casing your home as they deliver pizza. When you factor in the energy and gas savings and once it is perfected I bet the per mile cost is 1/10th the amount with a delivery person.

Yes jobs will be lost. Drudge jobs we as a society shouldn't be expecting people to live by. As for students, their time is better spent studying than trying to pick a few extra bucks, because like it or not, the no skill jobs are going away. Even many skilled jobs are in peril. This will be an awkward 10-50 years as we learn to adapt society to a not-everyone-has-to-work society. Corny as Star Trek's 'we work to better ourselves' slogan is, the only non-dystopian future will have to be this way -- where you are not compensated for the work you provide, but by how well you prove you are constantly learning and helping society as a whole, and yes for same that will be a regular job kind of work, but for most it will be community service and continuing education.

Comment Re:Government Grants??? (Score 2) 114

A government grant if he's going to come here to do something useful. What we definitely do not need more of is entrepreneurs, we need people who are going to work for a living, stay here and invest. We produce useless business types by the metric ton, we need to find a way to make them our chief export.

Comment Re:Making 26 YOs work 80 hour weeks is easier too. (Score 2) 231

I agree they're not much good on a smooth floor, but I use a broom for that. They work very well in that environment. We've had a Dyson for a long time and aside from eating its skinny little belts trivially if you clog it with hair, it's a very good machine for us. And it pulls stuff out of the carpet that other vacs don't, which is its mission...

Comment Re:Good on him (Score 1) 231

When arguing ICE vs EV, I get the impression that noise and vibration is considered a good thing with ICE.

Some people seem to think so, and in a sports car that's as may be, but in other kinds of cars it's not so much. The thing is, that's not really a big problem. There's only a small amount of pleasant noise from my Audi (all real, none generated) and there's really no discernible vibration because of the fancy-pants engine mount setup, which is not even active. It's just good. The real benefits of EVs are not so much in sound (although there are some there) as in efficiency. When the batteries become cheaper, and when typical range gets a bit better, they will become ubiquitous for this reason.

Comment Re:Good on him (Score 1) 231

One day you should actually drive an EV instead of just spurting unjustified nonsense.

You can get a lovely used luxury car with better interior quality than a Tesla for around ten grand in very good condition. (The best examples of older luxobarges seem to run about that.) Per dollar, it walks all over the Tesla. Yes, the Tesla is a better car. It's not a hundred thousand dollars better. Used Teslas won't be that cheap for decades.

Comment Re:Good on him (Score 1) 231

I've watched the Jay Leno's Garage on his Doble. It was an amazing thing. But the system takes up too much space. Compare the Doble to a Fiesta with a 1 liter Ecoboost engine and there's no contest in any category. Physics limits how small a steam system can be; it could perhaps be more compact than in the Doble, but how much more? If you're going to go that far in your quest for a new-old engine, NASA's proven Stirling engine tech is probably a better example.

Comment Re:Good on him (Score 1) 231

Whatever you do, don't take a Tesla test drive. It will make you hate your slow, noisy, polluting ICE car forever.

What makes me hate my ICE car is unreliability. But when it's working, my A8 Quattro is not exactly an unpleasant driving experience. You can get a spectacular (old) one for ten grand and the price difference will pay for fuel just about for life. I should have spent more on mine :p

Comment Re:We need this (Score 3, Insightful) 231

we need people actively looking into making those new type of batteries instead of just researching them and never do anything with the research

You haven't been paying attention.

Like photovoltaic solar panels (which can now be had for under a dollar a watt WITHOUT subsidies, more than an order of magnitude improvement over the last decade or so), DEPLOYED battery technology has been improving, drastically.

Of course most of the breakthroughs don't get deployed. That's usually because better breakthroughs come along before they get that far.

Slashdot Top Deals

The steady state of disks is full. -- Ken Thompson

Working...