281–290 of 328 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably relevant as an example of the thinking, but it's worth noting that this is for evaluating applications to faculty positions, and not applicants trying to enter a PhD program.
FYI, PhD students to most top places nowadays also have to fill their diversity statement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That characterisation is imprecise to the point of being misleading; may I tell the story in detail? I particularly rebut any suggestion that the Tories organised the referendum. That's only true at the most superficial reading. The whole farrago (pun intended) was founded by fringe nutters in the party, offered as a sop by the party leadership, and co-opted and orchestrated by interests inimical to the nation. (Ther…
Your ignorance is clear from near the start of your rant. "Ever since the first referendum to join the EU in 1975" The referendum in 1975 asked "Do you think that the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (the Common Market)?" We'd already been forced into the EC (the predecessor of the EU) without our consent. We were then forced into the EU without our consent as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keynes has been discredited in recent years, it's odd that you think he's established anything. The Austrians were proven right and recent monetary policy reflects their view - you don't see much discussion of Keynes anymore. If you don't understand Keynes maybe that's why you don't realise that? To recap Keynes: his core idea was countercyclical monetary policy, i.e. to issue debt (print money) when times are bad an…
I've been lurking on HN for years, and I just created an account to thank you for this post. I always had this gut feeling that the Keynesianism in the aftermath of 2008 was a really bad idea but economics isn't my space and I don't care to argue with politicos about economics. This explains it really well. So... now what?
I'm sympathetic to diversity statements. I get why some people want them, or some departments want them from applicants. From my experience applying to PhD programs, though, writing and insisting on them is...unacademic and often downright misguided. When you write them you're confronted with essentially justifying your existence as it fits into the often nonsensical groupings of DEI initiatives. Your research is not…
I am familiar with diversity statements by institutions, but what would a diversity statement from an applicant consist of, what would be expected? for example, declared alignment with the institution? or statements about one's own "diversity"? just trying to get a grasp.
Top marks: convince them that you’re a true believer.
Passing marks: convince them that, while you have yet to reach gnosis, you’re eager to learn from them, make a show of it, and encourage others to do the same.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Russians like poetry that actually rhymes That's true of most people, but it seems unlikely to explain why they like particular poetry in a foreign language. It won't rhyme in translation. Kipling was a great writer; that seems sufficient to explain why people like his work.
It does rhyme in translation! And yes, there is a lot of hard work in taking a poem from another language, adapting it to not only not sound weird but also preserve as many of the little connotations of words, and then also making it rhyme. I admire a good translation as much as the original.
It is my impression that Russian is heavily inflected in much the same manner as Latin. So - do Russians feel that certain rhymes are "cheap" or otherwise unworthy? Is it common in poetry to rhyme e.g. one verb form with an identical verb form in the rhyming line, or one noun case ending with the same noun case ending? Any distinction between "high" poetry and vulgar or vernacular poetry?
(For what it's worth, my instincts for English poetic rhyming are:
- Rhyming a word with itself is Poor Form. It's still Poor Form if you rhyme a word with a homonym of itself.
- Rhyming an inflectional suffix with itself doesn't work in the terms I just stated. The suffix is free to participate in a rhyme, but it can't supply the entire rhyme. So rhyming "being" with "seeing" is fine, because "be" and "see" rhyme and it's permissible to continue that rhyme into "being" / "seeing", but rhyming "being" with "doing" can't be done, even though -ing and -ing are the same syllable.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Collaboration would be the most obvious answer to me for that.
Note that collaboration is not mentioned in that rubric at all. It is very much judging an individual commitment to DEIB.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your ignorance is clear from near the start of your rant. "Ever since the first referendum to join the EU in 1975" The referendum in 1975 asked "Do you think that the United Kingdom should stay in the European Community (the Common Market)?" We'd already been forced into the EC (the predecessor of the EU) without our consent. We were then forced into the EU without our consent as well.
I think the people have had enough of experts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We aren’t talking about “racial groups”—you shifted the conversation to “culture.” So defend your premise. What is the “culture” of Mexican Americans (or any other group of your choosing) and how does that make a team of Chinese programmers better? That’s the central premise of “diversity”—that individuals from different groups are materially different—so give me one concrete example.
Edit, sorry i think I misunderstood your post. Are you asking about how a hypothetical non-Chinese person would improve an all Chinese team? If so, I don’t presume to know. That would be up to the team members to find the ideas that best help them. This is the fundamental idea, put together different kinds of people and they’ll work out how to exhange cultural ideas in a way that works
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To understand what "diversity" truly means in a modern context, simply ask yourself this question: have you ever heard anyone claim that the NBA is not diverse enough?
Yeah diversity just means non white I kind of pieced something together recently that makes me feel sick to my stomach. Diversity only matters in white majority areas or white countries. Too many white people anywhere is a bad thing apparently. Nobody in Japan is losing out on a university job for being Asian.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I support your railing against bureaucracy, but question your assertion that a specific quantity of public spending is bad. Firstly, government spending does not imply greater bureaucracy; compare and contrast healthcare in America with pretty much anywhere else. Secondly, fiscal policy should be dynamic and reactive to economic conditions. I don't pretend to understand Keynes, but I believe he established that princ…
Keynes has been discredited in recent years, it's odd that you think he's established anything. The Austrians were proven right and recent monetary policy reflects their view - you don't see much discussion of Keynes anymore. If you don't understand Keynes maybe that's why you don't realise that? To recap Keynes: his core idea was countercyclical monetary policy, i.e. to issue debt (print money) when times are bad an…
I've always linked Keynes with the concept of national debt as a lever to pull, so I'm surprised that you mention printing money. AIUI, the Keynesian approach to the 2008 crisis would have been to issue debt in order to finance public spending, and that spending should be on social security and infrastructure projects. The former stimulates the economy at the roots, the latter generates immediate employment and long-term wealth.
I accept your counters, except that we hope to do better than digging holes and filling them in again. That may be peculiar to America.
I grant that public spending doesn't address the cause of 2008. But sandbags are still useful when the river floods, no? Is gate-shutting the only permissible response to bolted horses, or are we allowed to also engage in horse-fetching?
My weak understanding of the Austrian school is summarised as: small government, laissez-faire, and caveat emptor. I understand them to say of 2008: "you're broke, that's because you took part in an economy where Goldman Sachs pulled a fast one and shat in your pension fund. You should have selected a DESOLBA fund (Doesn't Eat Shit Out of a Lying Bastard's Arse). Now cry."
I observe that our rulers selected a stimulus program that big corp used for stock buyback, and conclude that they used the crisis to advance their own agenda. I understood that they vaunted the Austrian school as the authority for this program. You have disabused me. Please, then, what would von Mises do in 2008?