671–680 of 824 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Charitably, cognitively dissonant and more harshly, a useful idiot some would say. I’d assume an egalitarian person who means well and has started to become suspicious of the more illiberal aspects of progressive motivations.
Wow. So, what, I have to vote Trump now? That won't be happening but always interesting to hear different perspectives.
Why is that the implied option?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah yes, the notion that the white race holds the same vaunted position that Ferrari does among car makes -- held by racists and anti-racists alike.
haha not so much, feeling sorry for someone that can afford a Ferrari and then complains about the car insurance would be ridiculous. Similar to feeling sorry for white guys having to deal with politics, its warranted, not serious, and does not deserve more attention that many other REAL issues. But anyways, have a good day.
A lot of this is driven by narratives—A narrative that college isn’t worth it anymore. A narrative that (white) men are uniformly privileged and life is just easy for them. And a narrative that those men aren’t wanted by society any more. I’m not convinced that all those men need to go to college, but they clearly need something. They need to feel like they’re part of society. Nothing good can come of an entire gener…
> A narrative that (white) men are uniformly privileged and life is just easy for them. This is very perspective dependent. I’m a black college student now and every conversation with friends back home includes some mention of dropping out because it’s not for us as well. When you see people with equivalent resumes already coasting by in the job market because they could get their last names and LinkedIn photos past…
That is cultural transition & stereotype threat first-generation college attendees face, regardless of race.
> When you see people with equivalent resumes already coasting by in the job market because they could get their last names and LinkedIn photos past the screening and into an interview it’s hard to believe that’ll change post-graduation
If anything, they are probably getting introductions/doors opened for them by friends & family. It sounds like you are probably applying for some of the most competitive positions in the world, Google and many other places have less than 1% acceptance rate for interns. Harvard is an order of magnitude less selective. It sucks, but don't let struggling to get an internship get you down.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. So, what, I have to vote Trump now? That won't be happening but always interesting to hear different perspectives.
> So, what, I have to vote Trump now? Why is that the implied option?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> FAANGs primarily recruit from other FAANGs How could that be? I was under the impression that a huge amount of new hires come in each year from fresh university graduates.
There was actually a big twitter thread by a black recruiter at Google (now cut) who out and out said that Google's interviewing engineers looked down on black seniors and ranked them universally lower than white seniors, particularly black seniors from historically black universities. She had to fight tooth and nail to accomplish getting the first black entry-level-from-college hire in all of Google's history.
And it was specifically about hiring from HBU's vs other elite institutions, not about hiring black applicants in general which is how you described it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find this with everything. You have to become an expert at everything if you want it done right. Maybe it's because the truly expert help is generally too expensive. Examples: - Taxes/Pensions - if you just rely on your accountant then they'll do the bare minimum and you'll miss out - Energy company - we're rolling out smart gas/elec meters in the UK. There is an old type (smets1) and a new type (smets2). You don't…
I agree with sentiment, and I discovered early on in my adult life : Iedereen doet maar wat ( Dutch ) Loosely translated : Everybody just fucks around , wether it is car mechanics, doctors or laywers. Would love to hear a more canonical term for the phenomenon. edit: And if it is absolutely critical it is done right? Do it yourself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So, what, I have to vote Trump now? Why is that the implied option?
Americans live in a two party system. The only realistic alternative to the Democrats, who are associated with progressives, are the Republicans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not so sure they understand how it works, though. BTW, if you ever see an EE with a card that has printed on it: V = I*R I = V/R R = V/I it's a sure sign he's a formula-plugger, and has no idea how it works. He doesn't even understand algebra. https://testguy.net/content/266-Ohm-s-Law-Watt-s-Law-Cheat-S... A definite no-hire :-/
Because proper EEs draw it in a triangle instead? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/Ohm%27s_...
https://generalatomic.com/teil1/B.html
Proper EEs don't need a cheat sheet for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
After a few hundred years of race/gender based policies working in favor of whites/males, I don't know what else we would expect from a deliberate effort to reverse it. You can't expect to play a game, give one team an advantage for the first half, give neither team an advantage in the second half, and call it a fair game at the end. Yeah, it sucks for individuals in the meantime, but we were simply never going to ac…
> You can't expect to play a game, give one team an advantage for the first half, give neither team an advantage in the second half, and call it a fair game at the end. The game you are referring to is one in which you presuppose dividing people into ‘teams’. I.e. you are simply assuming that racism is forever and that the only fairness comes dividing people by race and then balancing resources according to racial gr…
No, you're arguing against an artifact the analogy instead of acting in good faith to understand the meaning.
Consider a game where all players are independent, but the "referee" arbitrarily chose half of the players to get an advantage. Let that be team 1, and everyone else be team 2. We got a new referee in the 2nd half, and that ref wants it to be a fair game; would it be unfair for them to acknowledging and try to correct for the 1st ref's team choices?
(Now if you argue that there is no "referee" in real life, I'm going to assume you are being willingly obstinate.)
> A non-racist solution is to support anyone who has been less advantaged in wealth building.
So socialism, totally agree, in general that is the direction we should move back towards.
But take note that you'll then have minorities who were forced to work 10x harder than their white peers say, "wtf?! I put in all that extra work to pull myself up by my bootstraps, and now you're just going to hand out success to everyone? I feel disenfranchised!"
In a "fair" race, that person who worked 10x harder than their peers should be appreciably further along in the "game". The only way to make that correction is to acknowledge the divide already drawn by the first "referee".