Reactionary_

Extremely poorly? How so?

Social mobility doesn't really matter when everyone more or less has the same quality of life, as in Europe. That's what many don't understand. The Europeans have essentially nullified the value of social mobility in the first place. That is why their economies are more stagnant than that of the US.

The US is one of the best places in the world to be a business owner, that's why its economy is so much more dynamic than European economies. In order to create such an environment worker protections cannot be as robust as in Europe. This biased article of course ignores that fact.

Many workers are much better off in the US than in Europe as well. They get to keep a greater portion of their income, their income goes farther in the US than it would in Europe, and they have more opportunities to change jobs and careers because the flip side of weaker worker protections means businesses can hire with greater agility than in Europe.

If I had to guess, it's because the moon was formed from a molten ball of Earth material while other moons in the solar system were formed from the same accretive processes that formed the planets.

Considering millions of years of evolution shaped female brains to be the primary caregivers, isn't this a common sense approach and explanation for the behavior?

Especially someone busy writing a large collection of the greatest English works of all time.

Alternately, if they couldn't read they'd have to go see his plays performed. That Shakespeare really was a shrewd businessman.

1. I believe black and hispanic students could do just as well as asian students if their cultures were similar to that of the asian students.

Let's not kid ourselves. The asian students doing well on these tests are born into cultures that value academic achievement more than the average black or hispanic family. There's nothing inherently different about the different groups aside from their cultures.

Keep the tests, and encourage a culture of academic excellent to take root in different communities where it may not currently exist.

2. Let's stop being so obsessed with race. Racial quotas make people think more about race when our goal should be to make people think less about race and more about individuals apart from the color of their skin.

Because it has nothing to do with the funding and everything to do with who is a student there.

The purpose of a Master's is to develop expertise in a particular subfield of CS. Your course plan doesn't seem to be focused in any subfield. You'll get more out of your time in the program, and will be able to more easily identify what knowledge gaps to fill, once you decide what you will specialize in.

What outcome? You think enforcing border security and enacting a travel ban on countries identified by the Obama administration as terrorist threats somehow shows racism was a significant part of Trump's election?

Those are common sense policies for most people and have nothing to do with racism. Law, order and regimented immigration processes are not racist, though people who want open borders for the express purpose of "making America brown" most definitely are racist. You should check your biases.

Maybe Clinton was just a terrible candidate and Trump was on the right side of many policy issues? No, that couldn't be the case at all. Must be the racism.

Of course not, but pain is a prime and salient feature of conscious experience.

I'm inclined to disagree with that view.

A complete physical understanding of the structure and dynamics of the brain and all of its parts would never indicate some subjective experience of consciousness. We only assume that because we know from our own experience that consciousness exists (for ourselves).

Saying it's not a problem is hand wavy. Go touch a hot stovetop and tell me that consciousness does not have a quality and value all its own, beyond the electrochemical correlates of the experience of pain.

There is a functional and descriptive science of the apparatus of our consciousness, i.e. the things you describe.

There is also the profound mystery of how individually 'unconscious' physical constituents of our nervous system can give rise to our conscious experience of the world.

The domain of the first is neuroscience and will yield its mysteries to us in time.

As for the Hard Problem of Consciousness as I've described it above, I have resigned myself to the belief that we will never be able to peel back that fundamental mystery. One could (and many have) write volumes on why this is the case, but I believe the simplest explanation of why the Hard Problem is Hard is that we are unable to even state the nature of the problem in a satisfactory way. Our language (our comprehension) fails when we try to probe at the root of consciousness.