richmarr

32 ms·

241.
by richmarr 9y ago
Uh huh, there are potential other explanations, yes. Are they evidenced? Not to my knowledge. > I personally think it's naïve to dismiss inherent biological preferences entirely... "naïve", huh... So, Adam Grant is one o
242.
by richmarr 9y ago
Sure. I can't speak to what influenced you or friends, or the girls you knew... just that it's not a worldwide phenomenon, and is restricted to CS rather than other STEM fields... so seems to fit. There may be no way to ever know
243.
by richmarr 9y ago
There's a pretty convincing argument that the drop in apparent interest in computing from girls was caused by computers and computer games being marketed squarely at boys: https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gend
244.
by richmarr 9y ago
Goleman, Petrides (2001), and Salovey/Mayer (2004) all "make statements about EQ" so would all fall into ralfn's defined group "people making statements about EQ" that he accuses of being "less scientific
245.
by richmarr 9y ago
> "If 50/50 is a goal..." Stop right there. There is no "goal" other than fairness. What there is is evidence of bias in hiring processes, which is (a) unfair on individuals, and (b) reduces the productivity
246.
by richmarr 9y ago
> For politeness sake, i'll assume its a misunderstanding, although that is a bit hard to imagine at this point, since i'm being extremely explicit. By all means do things for politeness sake; I'm fine with that. It seem
247.
by richmarr 9y ago
> Honest question: is the goal really to have a 50/50 split To answer honestly; anything other than a 50/50 split prompts questions as to the cause of that discrepancy, and whether that cause involves unfairness (that would h
248.
by richmarr 9y ago
> A gossip magazine will make statements that are often false but falsifiable. Hence strictly more scientific than statements about EQ So, are you arguing that people not following scientific method AT ALL are more "scientific&quo
249.
by richmarr 9y ago
What units are you using to measure "less scientific than a gossip magazine"?
250.
by richmarr 9y ago
Yes, incentives in scientific publishing, tenure, etc are messed up and have caused reproducability problems. That problem is systemic and will take a long time to fix. There are serious people working on areas such as this; and they don&#x
251.
by richmarr 9y ago
> it in my opinion confuses (at least) two things There are several models of EQ, or EI, (e.g. Petrides 2001, Salovey/Mayer 2004, or Goleman's 1995 book) but none of them treat it as a single thing. Instead they treat it as a
252.
by richmarr 9y ago
My guess is that she's arse-covering. She wants to be seen 'doing something' and so that if there's an incident she can then point and say "I told them but they didn't listen"
253.
by richmarr 9y ago
IX would be a slightly ominous name to choose :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ix_(Dune)
254.
by richmarr 9y ago
> The author is the one who moved the goalposts ...biztos was correct to call it out. Yes, there's an extra word in there. I think you're both missing the point. It wouldn't be interesting or valuable for Horowitz to chang
255.
by richmarr 9y ago
> Um, no. Does he really live in such a morally uncentered world... He does explicitly say completely honest, and you admit that nobody is 100% honest all the time. Feel like you're moving the goalposts somewhat here.
256.
by richmarr 9y ago
Why will UBI and automation lead to properly managed capitalism? And what do you mean by "properly managed capitalism"?
257.
by richmarr 9y ago
(In the UK at least) "bag" is a derogatory term used for older women. Just sayin.
258.
by richmarr 9y ago
Monzo, not mozno. It's a startup aiming to provide a replacement for the traditional current account.
259.
by richmarr 9y ago
> ...but do know that statistics won't tell you... I don't dispute that some or all of your childhood sucked. I understand and sympathise. You've landed that point. > Do you agree that "growing up in the wrong nei
260.
by richmarr 9y ago
Serverless refers to your workflow & division of responsibility, not the literal stack. Personally I think there are enough things to be peeved about in the world without adding this.
261.
by richmarr 9y ago
So you're drawing a distinction between expertise and experience and saying Dunning-Kruger applies to one not the other. Huh. Perhaps we could dig into that at some point, but you can't ignore the parts of my comment that you don&
262.
by richmarr 9y ago
Uh huh, sure. So to try and make your next discussion productive, maybe try using evidence, try not creating straw-man arguments, try not deflecting or changing the subject in response to points made by other people.
263.
by richmarr 9y ago
[Update - by all means reply and address these questions, but in the absence of that I'm going to interpret your silence as an admission that actually you're not as informed on the subject of discrimination as you initially argued
264.
by richmarr 9y ago
> Although I don't think Dunning-Kruger applies... Based on your extensive qualifications in behavioural science I assume? ;) Sorry, that was a cheap laugh... but you don't get to brush it off without reasoning though, and Dunn
265.
by richmarr 9y ago
Thanks for explaining; very helpful. The point that failed to land was first thing I said, i.e. that we are poor judges of our own informed-ness. Assuming discrimination were uniformly distributed it might be a reasonable position to sugges
266.
by richmarr 9y ago
I'm sorry to hear that you had a hard time. > This idea that white people only suffer "small amounts of discrimination, under a broad definition" is a joke ...and is not something that I said. The rest of your comment fo
267.
by richmarr 9y ago
> I think we're just talking around each other here. No, we aren't talking around each other at all, but I can understand why you might feel uncomfortable discussing your motivations so by all means let's stop.
268.
by richmarr 9y ago
> They don't bother me, it is just that I think they might hurt women more than they help. Perhaps you can see why being told by you (presumably a man) that they shouldn't do the thing that they want to do because you know what
269.
by richmarr 9y ago
You're defending white men against a point that I did not make. I was careful to make my original comment in a precise and defensible way. You admit that women and minorities experience more frequent and severe discrimination. From tha
270.
by richmarr 9y ago
Men-only clubs were broadly a problem because (at the time they were prevalent) men and their clubs held a significant portion of the money and power in society. Exclusion was an extreme sanction. Why do women-only tech events bother you? D

More ›