heterogenic
You could've just said "yes".
(The operative part of that reply was "hours after it was amended". Your rant, and 90% of the other replies on this thread, added nothing at all to the conversation besides typical red pill douche-baggery.)
In the (extremely) unlikely event that I post here again, I'll be sure to stealth edit any changes instead.
If you really want to pursue this line of thinking, what if a female nurse had posted a hobby page wherein she documented all the ways nurses most often contaminate hospitals or traumatize children, and all the "example" nurses in the pictures were male.
But really, that's not a perfect analogy. Female bodies != male bodies in our culture, particularly in STEM careers. It is at best impolite (and at worst creating a hostile work/study environment) to use these images in a page on a university website.
But maybe you're not seeing the same images as everyone else. Most of us see these on his page: http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/bchafy/test_rgb/testrgb.jpg http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/bchafy/test_rgb/3girl_test3.JPG http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/bchafy/test_rgb/3girl_test.JPG
In fact, all of his non-technical images are of scantily clad or posing women. That's fine in some contexts, but definitely not professional or welcoming to female students.
I just hope he's only a student, and not in a position of responsibility. (Not that that necessarily makes it OK, but at least it would reflect less on the institution).
edit: ok, not porn, "objectified female bodies". Because that makes it more appropriate?
You can see the admissions essay requirements on the linked page.
The irony of course is that the scions of empires and children of privilege who are being groomed for leadership essentially get a free pass at admissions. (Which has a sort of logic when you consider that they form the backbone of the class power network almost immediately upon graduation).
(As an HBS graduate I have mixed feelings about the overall privilege distribution, but admit to having no plausible suggestions of how to address it.)
My conclusion is that for a multitude of reasons (most of which are well known) having involved investors reduces my chances of success considerably. And all they offer is money.
Money is cheap.
Meddling, conniving & power-drunk busybodies, all of them.
Totally off-topic, but I have such a fangirl crush on Salvatore Sanfilippo... Every time he posts I get butterflies.
> Citation required.
You may want to Google the meaning of "hypothesis"...
You're assuming that the factors which drive women out of engineering do so independent of ability.
I would hypothesize that this is false, that the most interested and passionate women are least likely to be nudged out. Google should be comparing its ratio to that of their potential pool, which is presumably skewed high. If that's true, they should be expecting to get closer to 50%. (Not exactly 50, but better than the holistic ratio at least.).
Also, they can look at their specific source pools to get a less hypothetical target. Berkeley is ~50/50, for example. (http://www.wired.com/2014/02/berkeley-women/). But retroactively
Clearly, this is not a bug, but a feature.
Scala has been "the next big thing" for a while now, but I'm just not convinced that the Java ecosystem is looking for a next thing at all.
To be clear: I absolutely agree that we can do better than Java, and though I prefer Clojure, Scala is certainly a step up. I'm just not convinced that the practical realities of its user base are enough to drive that change, which limits my willingness to move my organization in that direction.
Having a way to filter in those cases would save having to write & maintain a whole new CRUD layer. In the long run, it could even lead to more efficient queries when objects are composed of many records.
Something like:
(request)
{username:"",address:"",credits:""}
(response)
{username:"Manilow, Barry", address:"Hollywood Bowl", credits: 99}
Lines like:
> He's found results by giving girls genuine compliments,
> has finally internalized the notion that women like sex too.
> helping women by training men to be better communicators.
> empowers men like Seth by helping them understand what they have to offer women.
I wish more of the awkward guys in the bay area (or even NYC) would follow this advice.
Even if you disregard the engineering shortage, doubling the pool and taking the to half dramatically shifts the curve of ability and passion of our workmates. We're all missing out.
"How much money" exists in the world is not a terribly difficult number to ballpark. When someone stashes money offshore it doesn't disappear, it just becomes unidentifiable. It still goes into TBills, bonds, equity, etc; and that we can measure.
And at a more granular level, the offshore banks in question need to state and verify their assets in order to issue loans, and without loans they can't generate interest. We may not know who it belongs to, but we know it's there.
There's a lot of tax evasion out there. A _lot_. But it's easy enough to do through legal loopholes that few jump through these kinds of hoops.
I have a same-sex partner, Brendan is willing to work and make a real effort to take away our recognition. To unmarry our children's parents. To eliminate our shared benefits, and impair the other 1148 rights conferred by marriage.
I am not happy that my money and time might go towards his salary and to further empower his views, so it's a logical decision for me to boycott his company. Many others feel similarly.
To be fair, at any point he could have said "My views have evolved, and I no longer think it is my right to deny others marriage.". He chose not to.
Try to imagine reading this as a female developer/founder. It's not that it's all crazy/insulting/aaargh, but enough is. And it's happening without our input.
So. Frustrating.
One thread that only women are allowed to post to. No men to challenge them, play devil's advocate or otherwise defend their privilege. Just one place for us to say our piece without being downvoted into oblivion, where our voice can be heard (in all its glorious heterogeneity).
Because that's what's missing in this conversation about women in tech. Women.
Carry on mansplaining your way through it boys... I'll be over here building things.