tomlock

60 ms·

1. 571.▲
   by tomlock 12y ago

   The punctuation mistakes you make in this post match those in the crappy sections of the contract.
2. 572.▲
   by tomlock 12y ago

   I disagree. Could you help me understand why you think he backed down rather than just clarifying his comments?
3. 573.▲
   by tomlock 12y ago

   I'd actively encourage everyone to listen to "the other side" regardless of what side they are on. I see the popehat article as guilty of not doing that, but similarly I think dismissing popehat entirely as a result of this
4. 574.▲
   by tomlock 12y ago

   I am easily amused and I also know what intersectionality is. I'm interested in why you have the perspective that Satya was being honest and then recanted, since he pretty clearly stated that he misspoke, and it is easy to see how he
5. 575.▲
   by tomlock 12y ago

   I chuckled a little because you mention "generic white males" and then Satya in the next sentence. Satya's comments were poorly stated and he said as much. People spoke freely about it, and he clarified. Free speech in acti
6. 576.▲
   by tomlock 12y ago

   I'm finding Judith's article much better written. Looking at the response the students had to the "dangerous space" flier, seems to typify free speech. Why shouldn't they ask the university to condemn the flier? Bu
7. 577.▲
   by tomlock 12y ago

   Sincerely: Thank you for engaging with me on this. Given what you've said, I really have two options with this article: 1) I can read it as fundamentally misreading the politics of people who use safe spaces on campus 2) I can read it
8. 578.▲
   by tomlock 12y ago

   Unfortunately for the people that use the term I'm pretty sure that the ambiguity does not exist. It is exceptionally easy for me to read this article as a direct criticism of all safe spaces, while the author draws a link that seems
9. 579.▲
   by tomlock 12y ago

   I'm not really sure how the author is making the link between post 9/11 safety versus liberty issues and safe spaces. It is really quite confusing because the people that exist in these spaces are generally quite vehemently oppose
10. 580.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    As a nation born from the labour of convicts and the slaughter of aboriginals, we're pretty consistently a result of Britain's blunders! Criminals and colonialism!
11. 581.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    Well this fell from number 5 article pretty quick. I've noticed this happening heaps with articles about sexism. Why is that?
12. 582.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    If this selection is trying to paint Ellen Pao as a hypocrite, shame on the poster! I don't think its particularly surprising that an asian woman would want to work in a company with employees that support building diversity. I think
13. 583.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    What a cool article, tracking the lineage of silencing women! Its eye-openingly interesting to observe how often the men in meetings speak compared to the women. Sometimes its quite surprising, particularly in meetings that have a majority
14. 584.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    To put it another way, the following article was posted, upvoted, and generated almost no discussion regarding its "methods" and the "evidence" it presented: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8909954
15. 585.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    Sure! But I'd think that based on history there's a fair chance that studies that show (a) are being selected for because they are factual. For example, zero women have been american presidents (although maybe that'll chang
16. 586.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    Sure! However, I feel like the grand irony of these kind of studies is that the same kind of unconscious selection against orchestra members is probably also occurring in evidence acceptance. It feels like people are overwhelmingly critic
17. 587.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    Also interestingly, this study perhaps shows that there isn't a bias towards hiring women in this case for "political correctness". The screen prevents this.
18. 588.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    This seems to suggest that when we know someone is a woman, we judge them more harshly.
19. 589.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    One of the authors colleagues has posted in this thread stating that the selection of 12 years was because that was the amount of data available in the system they used.
20. 590.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    I think that's a fair theory!
21. 591.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    Thanks for sharing. What kind of reactions have you gotten to this research?
22. 592.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    Here's some more: http://www.asx.com.au/documents/asx-compliance/the_bottom_li... https://finsia.com/news/news-article/2015/03/13/boardroom-ge... http://ww
23. 593.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    It really should be no surprise that these progressive companies have performed better than average. Society places higher expectations on women, so of course they must overperform!
24. 594.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    I work in a big, dumb enterprise with too many spreadsheets and Access databases. What made me move away from Excel spreadsheets: 1) As in the infamous case, its too easy to miss extending a range when you add new data[1] 2) There's no
25. 595.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    I've summarized your argument so far in this helpful graphic: http://imgur.com/KzUmovh
26. 596.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    Done. Now where's the dangerous trend?
27. 597.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    I'm finding it hard to see this as evidence of a dangerous trend. Could you help me understand how these five links constitute that?
28. 598.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    The amount of downvotes I've got on the above comment really speaks volumes about the problem. It is shameful to me that I can get downvotes on a comment that suggests people actively listen to women.
29. 599.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    :( Thanks for sharing.
30. 600.▲
    by tomlock 12y ago

    Source?