791–800 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But he did become an alt-right / Fox News / conservative machine darling.
You have to consider the possibility that they were the only people who he could actually talk to. Not that he wanted to be in such channels in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has a timeline. His passport was suspended while he was in Hong Kong. He did not travel to Moscow on his US passport, he travelled to Moscow on some other travel document. He’s a defector. I know this site is full of Snowden apologists, but for goodness sake you don’t have to swallow every easily disprovable lie he tells.
Depending on the mechanics of passport cancellation it could have been both, that is the US could have issued a cancelation order while he was still in HK but HK either did not act on it in time or refused to honor it like it did with Snowden's arrest warrant. The fact that Russia did honor the passport cancellation and did not issue him an alternative travel document is more suggestive but would have been the same i…
You’re on the run from the US because you committed espionage, and you fly to Russia?
That’s called defecting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a red herring, and also the 60s - I started my career in the late 70s, 1/3 of my CS class was female, my first job in the US (as a kernel hack) was almost 50% female, still some of the best engineers I've ever worked with, all doing the same job I was. I don't know what happened, by the time my daughter was doing CS the number of woman was < 10% and she and her compatriots were literally hounded out of the cou…
> kids these days Computer science predates gaming, particularly online gaming with a social component, by a lot. You're committing the "all things with 4 legs are elephants" fallacy.
Here's once quote: "Starting when computer technology first emerged during World War II and continuing into the 1960s, women made up most of the computing workforce. By 1970, however, women only accounted for 13.6% of bachelor's in computer science graduates. In 1984 that number rose to 37%, but it has since declined to 18% -- around the same time personal computers started showing up in homes. According to NPR, personal computers were marketed almost exclusively to men and families were more likely to buy computers for boys than girls." ( from https://www.computerscience.org/resources/women-in-computer-... )
Here's a graph of the data: https://images.techhive.com/images/idge/imported/article/ctw.... ( found via https://www.computerworld.com/article/2474991/women-computer... )
Those are only talking about successful degrees, there are plenty of more datapoints to look at when you consider entry vs completion, and similar stats from post-graduation careers. This doesn't prove causality, but their statement stands as viable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are crossing streams. This is not about whether Damore was 'right or wrong' - it's about whether he was within his right to make a reasonable statement and not get publicly murdered for it. Also - your comment has also demonstrated the intellectual dishonestly against him by misrepresenting the thrust of his argument. There are considerable differences between genders, this is not a scientifically controversial p…
> It's obviously a thorny subject, which requires some dispassionate thinking. We don't need people screaming 'Nazi' at the first hint that they might think someone, somewhere committed a 'thought crime' against their personal and very narrow view of the world. Speaking of intellectual dishonesty... "Women are just as equal as men" does not seem to be a very narrow view of the world. > This is the kind of bigotry tha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think his failure was just naivete. He thought Google wanted legitimate feedback or would support intellectual honesty over popularity. That was wrong.
That's not the only issue. Taking away the political content entirely, storing up all your greivances and airing them in a single document intended to attack the entire purpose of other teams was a stupid thing to do. I've seen people do the same thing with technical issues and it's just totally counter-productive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The real frat people are in management (men and women). They are socially adept enough to hide their actual opinions and oppress "lower class" women and men equally. The struggle between men and women benefits their divide et impera strategy, because playing people off against each other while maintaining an irrational authority is their main talent.
A lot of them get into management by starting out as Tech Bros, then rising to their level of incompetence. But in the case of SnapChat and Uber (and many other tech companies), the founders were literally (and archetypically) both Frat Bros and Tech Bros, who set the tone and culture for the entire company, and rampantly hired other Frat Bros from their own Frats, at all levels of incompetency. Incompetent nepotisti…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll point out that this aphorism concedes that certain categories of interesting discussion are not possible, and it's a little neutral about that prospect for my taste. It also concedes that "The New York Times" cannot be trusted to value that kind of discourse more than gotcha narrative chasing.
All sorts of discussion aren't possible unless the participants can be sure that the others are acting in good faith and not likely to engage in needless hostility or reprisals outside the discussion. The term for this environment is "safe space", but they're unpopular for some reason.
I suspect that a healthy society needs both kinds of safe spaces.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By "culture associated with them" you mean you have a stereotype of their culture you associate with them.
No, I was recently a college student who lived near frat houses. (Yes, I know there are academic fraternities: that’s not what this discussion was about.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you a lawyer by chance? In California, infliction of emotional distress in a jury trial requires things that are plausible in this case. See CACI No. 1600, especially the OR section of #2 [1]. I am very skeptical that such a case would actually be dismissed rather than go to trial. I was a juror on a trial with similar grounds a few years ago. Perhaps you've seen something in the handling of such cases that I hav…
Did you read that? In particular, see the Hughes vs Pair quote: "A cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress exists when there is ‘(1) extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant with the intention of causing, or reckless disregard of the probability of causing, emotional distress; (2) the plaintiff’s suffering severe or extreme emotional distress; and (3) actual and proximate causation of t…
Yes, I did read it, thanks for being condescending and violating HN guidelines. As I said already, I sat on the jury for a similar case that did go to trial in California so your rationale for thinking this wouldn't doesn't make sense to me and seems based on no actual experience. This is not an instance of someone simply quoting another person - the individual who posted the memo online did so deliberately to cause harm and bring unwanted media attention and public hatred toward another individual, which pretty much ruined his life. Further, your focus on the "outrageous" portion only shows you're cherry picking what you want this particular tort to say rather than the whole definition. So yes, it is reckless disregard under that standard and any lawyer could probably bring it to trial if they so desired. Whether the jury would find the tweeter guilty or not is another matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depending on the mechanics of passport cancellation it could have been both, that is the US could have issued a cancelation order while he was still in HK but HK either did not act on it in time or refused to honor it like it did with Snowden's arrest warrant. The fact that Russia did honor the passport cancellation and did not issue him an alternative travel document is more suggestive but would have been the same i…
No. Lol. You’re on the run from the US because you committed espionage, and you fly to Russia? That’s called defecting.
