fche

10 ms·

61.
by fche 9y ago
In this case, google is -both- a for-profit corporation AND some leafy liberal arts campus.
62.
by fche 9y ago
Ask average women - those not in tech.
63.
by fche 9y ago
> dozen other people I talked to That's just like the Pauline Kael apprx-quote about how "no one she knew voted Nixon - how could he possibly win?". IOW, you are already in an echo chamber.
64.
by fche 9y ago
Yes, yes yes, the science is settled (tm), after all 97% of scientists agree. And the case is closed. Yupper.
65.
by fche 9y ago
you underestimate the power of memes
66.
by fche 9y ago
Stop pretending that "comparing" is ipso facto bad.
67.
by fche 9y ago
Some of the later claims of the low-level employee absolutely justify the dumpster-fire: if diversity-related meetings go deliberately unrecorded to stop paper trails, if special second-chance privileges are given to diversity hiring candid
68.
by fche 9y ago
> It's unbelievable that in 2017, in a field that is vastly dominated by males, someone would have the gall to claim "trying to introduce more diversity is repression." From the point of view of a young white male fresh ou
69.
by fche 9y ago
How do you feel when you enter a clearly private space such as a shopping mall, or stadium, and they don't publish a 100%-complete set of rules for you? Is it oppressive? How do you feel when you enter public (government) property, bu
70.
by fche 9y ago
The article is long on words and on Concern, but short on actual compact statement of the problem. Can you help me out here and list some of these problematic private rules?
71.
by fche 9y ago
Yes, it is illuminating when a reductio ad absurdum shows itself in real life.
72.
by fche 9y ago
> and is being sold off by public bodies [...] without any announcement You don't have public bid rules for government sales / purchases?
73.
by fche 9y ago
Why does it matter to them?
74.
by fche 9y ago
Are you of the impression that women are of a very different culture, come in huge numbers that refuse to assimilate? Where is this?
75.
by fche 9y ago
Rereading did not help make the thesis any better founded, or its abuse of the term "open borders" any more acceptable.
76.
by fche 9y ago
If his "open borders"' "free to move" does not include "free to move across borders", then it's a troll piece. If it's "free to move, if immigration law permits", then it's a taut
77.
by fche 9y ago
FTA: > open borders also FTA: > why not charge them more for visas Someone forgot what "open borders" means.
78.
by fche 9y ago
> Foreigners never had a voice or a vote Indeed - and they should not be a beneficiary either. Do you for a moment believe that "New Deal" / "Great Society" laws would ever have passed, if under the understandin
79.
by fche 9y ago
> So less than a billion, net, world wide. So your retort to "if we ignore that a billion people would migrate in a few months in an attempt to escape poverty" is that it will be "less than a billion", then the articl
80.
by fche 9y ago
Considering mass immigration in terms of increasing worker pools presupposes that the mass immigrants are workers.
81.
by fche 9y ago
> you lose nothing Right, and if those unskilled immigrants don't all find jobs as nannies and nurses (since I won't be the only one keeping them from the most vulnerable), then I'll be taxed to pay for them anyway. That&
82.
by fche 9y ago
There's a bit of a chicken & egg problem there - if the immigrants come in a giant burst, they won't have any money to pay for new cities with.
83.
by fche 9y ago
Is this the part you're referring to: "Unskilled migrants care for babies or the elderly, thus freeing the native-born to do more lucrative work." Sorry, no, I don't want migrants deeply afflicted with weird cultures lef
84.
by fche 9y ago
Even distribution is not appropriate when work value is so terribly unequal.
85.
by fche 9y ago
Plus there is a delicious delirium of every migrant population being equally capable of or inclined to productive work.
86.
by fche 9y ago
Benefits are already not disbursed equally across populations. (If they were, they'd be pointless.)
87.
by fche 9y ago
> Some people want these differences to be highlighted Those people are political activists.
88.
by fche 9y ago
> outside the normal rules for fact checking or veracity When those "normal rules" are (or are perceived as being) enforced by political partisans, no wonder people get rebellious against them.
89.
by fche 9y ago
Maybe they thought they were invulnerable.
90.
by fche 9y ago
> we can't fairly determine the information that is being seeded to all parties Why do you think anyone should be in the position of "determining" the information that is being seeded? Fight disagreeable speech with agree

More ›