Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Subject (Score 2) 212

Do you understand the difference between a press release and a peer reviewed article?

Yep, I do. Since you're obviously unable to navigate the internet, here's a link to the peer reviewed study.

OK, sure. When you take a study about "differences in connectivity" in the brain, and claim it has established implications for behavior, that is vague handwaving.

Reading comprehension isn't you strong suit, is it?

The only claim I made was that there are differences in the biology of human brains based on gender, and these differences are correlated with observed behavior. You do know what correlated means, don't you? Have you ever heard the phrase "correlation does not imply causation"? Jumping to the conclusion that I claimed gender differences in brain biology explains gender differences of cognition/behavior only speaks to your obvious bias.

Refusing to entertain the possibility that biology might play a role in the cognitive differences between men and women is the stuff of dogma. It is textbook black and white thinking, and all it shows is your devotion to some kind of social viewpoint that has nothing to do with's a lot closer to religion.

Indeed, and in this case you used it to sarcastically express your unhappiness that your preferred alternative wasn't being argued. You should own it instead of backpedaling.

Backpedaling? Hardly.

I do own my statement, I just don't own your interpretation of it. My statement simply bemoans the assertion that the answer to the question has an either/or answer - contrary to the position of the person I replied to. Your continued insistence that it means something it doesn't is just plain hardheaded.

My preference is to allow for the possibility that biology may be a factor (in addition to culture) that explains observed gender differences in behavior/cognition/skills. You shut out this possibility based solely on an assumption that men and women are able to all perform tasks equally, and any observed difference to the contrary MUST be due to some kind of cultural injustice forced on women by a patriarchal society. You've closed your mind to any other possible factor that may have an influence on gender differences.

But by all means, continue to put words into the mouths of any one challenging your beliefs, continue to misrepresent their positions, continue to claim they've made arguments they haven't, and continue to clasp your hands to your ears and shout "NA! NA! NA!" when presented with inconvenient truths.

Comment Re:Subject (Score 1) 212

Vaague handwaving over common-sense notions isn't systematic evidence.


Talk about willful blindness. Why don't you take a look at this and tell me about vague handwaving. That's not the only "systematic evidence" either. And I'm not inclined to spoon feed you any other scientific studies on this're unlikely to open your eyes to anything that conflicts with your preconceived notions.

"God forbid" that figures of speech imply meaning.

And what meaning is that? How does "God forbid" - a common idiom - indicate that I prefer biology over culture? Perhaps English isn't your first language.

Whether this statement is an expression of your anecdotal experience or just willful blindness is impossible to say.

Fine. I'm prepared to change my mind if you can show me some "systematic evidence" to the contrary. And please don't waste my time by citing something more than a couple of years old. My statement was unambiguously qualified.

But since you prefer to divine "implied meaning" over the actual meaning of plain spoken words (and you don't know what constitutes an anecdote) I'm not hoping for much out of you.

Comment Re:Subject (Score 1) 212

There is no evidence that biology has anything to do with the proclivities of the genders for computer science. There is lots of evidence that many gender differences which are popularly ascribed to biology are in fact cultural, for example competitiveness.

Last time I checked, competitiveness is a behavior, not a skill. In any event, there is plenty of evidence of biological differences in the brains of men and women, and there are strong correlations between these differences and observed strengths/weaknesses of the sexes relative to one another. Do you need a citation for that, or do you know how to use a search engine?

Your anecdotes and personal preferences for what might be true just aren't as convincing as systematically gathered evidence.

What anecdotes? I don't believe I told any stories. Care to point out these supposed anecdotes to me?

And what personal preference did I relate? If you're referring to my comment on biology, I was merely stating that dismissing biological factors in these matters is foolish.

If you read my statement and concluded that I somehow prefer a biological explanation to a cultural one, you are stuck in a black and white world. There are shades of grey here, and there is no evidence that women are somehow culturally discouraged from participating in math or science these days. This is 2015, not 1955.

Comment Re:Fortunately (Score 1) 212

There are countless accounts of women facing gender related problems studying CS. What is your argument against those accounts? Are they lying? Perhaps you dismiss their problems, or claim that men face equal problems. I'm interested to know your position.

There are also countless accounts of men facing gender related problems in securing jobs at breastaurants. Like your accounts, they are also anecdotal. Are you going to let your position on those instances of blatant discrimination be known as well? Would it prove anything?

Comment Re:Subject (Score 1) 212

This whole idea of looking at gender statistics and then deducing there is a problem is stupid.

That part isn't stupid.

While you make a fair point, that part has a fair share of stupidity as well. Assuming statistics tell us something about reality, someone is looking at the numbers and declaring that reality is a problem. But why is the reality that men outnumber women in tech related positions a problem? Conversely, why is the reality that women outnumber men in Accounting/Auditing not a problem?

It's a far deeper cultural phenomenon*.

So it's all nurture and no nature for you, eh? God forbid biology has anything to do with it.

Comment Re:kindergartners? (Score 1) 74

Critical thinking is a pseudo-science and pseudo-didactics invented by anti-scientistic intellectuals and shabby pedagogues who tend to vigorously oppose to any solid training in math and logic.

What the fuck does that mean? If you don't want to be written off as a crank, you'd better explain yourself.

Comment Re:Country run by oil barons does nothing!!! (Score 1) 195

There was zippy chance that money would had ever be used for any social good.

Oh c'mon...many artificial persons have and will benefit from the F35 - FXX. It's one of the ways that we reward our job makers. All those profits are re-injected into the greater economy, and everybody benefits. We aren't like the banks where they borrow at 0% and invest at 4%. A monkey could run that con. We actually produce useless hardware that will thwart the tourorists.

We are on the right track...what could possibly go wrong?

Comment Re:The Struggle (Score 1) 410

For fuck's sake how was that not obviously sarcasm? Only on fucking Slashdot do people think I seriously believe that queers are queer bashing.

Do you have a problem with reading comprehension? I'm not talking about gay bashing, I'm talking about whether the LGBT population in Seattle is INCREASING or DECREASING. Your posts on the subject of trends in the community seem to be in conflict with one another...maybe I'm wrong on that.

Here is the question one more time: is the LGBT community in Seattle growing or shrinking? If you don't know, just say so. No need to get your knickers in a knot.

Comment Re:Greeks surrender: no restructuring (Score 2) 485

The most notable point is the that there is no firm agreement to restructure (cut) the debt. I wonder how Tsirpas will sell this to his constituents who just voted a firm "NO" to a deal without restructuring.

Why would he have to sell it to his constituents? Doesn't he know that when you owe a bank 1,000,000,000 the bank owns you - but if you owe the bank 380,534,382,133.32 you own the bank?

Maybe the leadership of Greece just doesn't know how to negotiate. Should we send in Donald Trump to work it out?

Comment Re:The Struggle (Score 1) 410

As the queer population in Seattle is decreasing, violence against queers is increasing.

That's odd, because in your post here, you say:

Seems pretty likely that a growing queer population has led to violence against queers.

So, honest question - is the LGBT community in Seattle growing or shrinking? Either way, a source backing up your position would be great.

Comment Re:lettice under LED grow lights? (Score 1) 279

I'm not upset so much as disappointed.

I asked for a US source to back up your position. I got a vague puff piece about someone doing it in the UK instead which wouldn't even be meaningful anyway... there was no information in it to audit the economics.

What are you talking about? When did you ask for a source? To back up what position?

Your response appears to be directed at someone else - but I'll go ahead and make a few comments anyway.

What I suspect with these things is that they get a lot of subsidy money or they charge a lot more at the market for the produce. That means they're not competitive.

Your suspicions of subsidies are pure speculation. Furthermore, if a farmer can charge more for his produce at the market, how is that not being competitive? Hasn't the market determined his product is superior to the competition, or at least price-competitive?

Besides, all sorts of farm products and producers already get subsidies, including your agrobusiness Death Stars...does that mean they aren't competitive? Does that mean they're on welfare?

If that is the case, isn't subsidizing vertical farms leveling the competitive playing field?

... we can see if your concept is competitive.

It won't be. But I'll keep an open mind and look at the data if you ever get around to posting it.

It won't be? Sounds to me like you've already got your mind made up. Hardly the posture you would expect of an open mind.

Alternatively... I can look it up for you and then post the information in black and white here.

Actually, I think it would be an excellent idea for you to do some research on your own. You probably won't have to speculate as much, and you can provide some outside data to back up your positions.

Comment Re:lettice under LED grow lights? (Score 1) 279

You put in the vertical qualifier like it is difficult to stack shit on top of each other.

I didn't put in the vertical qualifier, the referenced articles did.

There are plenty of pot growers that use "wavelength tuned" LEDs to grow pot.

None of them appear to be on youtube.

Give me a fucking break. In fact... just fuck me. That comment was so painfully annoying in its obtuseness that I deserve a blowjob just to take my mind off f'ing dumb that vertical qualifier was...

You really shouldn't let yourself get so easily upset.

As to costs declining... Sun light is free... good luck with your cost structure competiting with that. Here you're going to say "but in this urban factory blight area"... I'm sure... but you're not competiting against farms in other fucking factories. You're competiting against a sunny field some where with an unobstructed view of the sky, long clear days, good irrigation, and of course a global transit system that can move that produce anywhere in the world pretty damn cheaply pretty damn quick.

Vertical farms have been up and running profitably in countries across the world for some time now.

I am literally fucking sitting here chopping up a pineapple that was grown in Hawaii. I believe it cost me 4 dollars.

You're a clever guy. Perhaps you could figure a way to use that pineapple to relieve some of that pent up sexual frustration you frequently experience.

Have fun with your revolution sport. I rather suspect the Empire will surprise you with a fully operational agro business battle station. :D

How'd the Empire in your Star Wars reference turn out? Weren't those high and mighty dark side douchebags taken out by a small force of teddy bears?

Comment Re:lettice under LED grow lights? (Score 1) 279

... This is what passes for innovation? Go to youtube and you'll see an endless procession of pot growers that have been doing that since always.

I can't find any pot growers on youtube using wavelength tuned LEDs to grow weed in a vertical farm.

Part of the issue is that buildings are not built to grow things. And to really do proper urban farming, they have to either be modified or built from the ground up with that in mind.

The facilities used for vertical farming are frequently abandoned factories or unused warehouses. Building modification costs are negligible.

Often an urban farm is going to have less than perfect sunlight or be outright shaded.

Using wavelength tuned LED systems in vertical farms eliminates those factors.

Then you've got hydroponics...

Growing plants without soil is a lot more expensive that growing plants with soil.

Etc. This product they're thinking about selling... I can't see anyone outside of some government goofball on expense account buying this thing.

They're not just thinking about selling their product, vertical farms with LED lighting are already in operation around the world. With Phillips recently demonstrating a 68% efficient LED, vertical farms will become commonplace as costs decline and technology improves.

Comment Re:Cost of making the USA piss their pants: Pricel (Score 1) 409

Insult, insult, insult. Is your argument really that weak?

Yes, it is. You'll find that there's a direct relationship between the weakness of a given Karmashock argument, and the frequency of childish insults in his replies.

It's unfortunate that he's sucked another reasonable, rational, polite slashdotter into his black hole of denial. His hope is that because people like you have actual lives and can't afford to spend ALL DAY POSTING ON /. like he does, he can simply outlast someone by continually repeating the same invalid arguments loaded with his childish insults.

All you have to do is review a few days of his posting history, and you will see a very sorry and pathetic picture of an individual that has absolutely no life outside of this site - and has some very serious psychological issues to boot.

Please, take my word for it on this. DO NOT actually review this guy's posting history unless you are prepared to expose yourself to the utter darkness of the mind of a soulless, narcissistic, sociopath. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.


Slashdot Top Deals

Too many people are thinking of security instead of opportunity. They seem more afraid of life than death. -- James F. Byrnes