pnako

Right now you have the two political parties and virtually all the S&P 500 corporations, all the universities, and most of the media (including social media) actively supporting BLM and being against "systemic racism".

I know that things aren't that simple, but where is that "systematic racism" actually coming from, then? It can't be from the law, since the civil rights era has removed any legal discrimination.

And it can't be just coming from Fox News, 4chan and the odd corporation that doesn't tweet BLM stuff either.

Do we know that there is actually less concern?

I think two "issues" are the relatively better protection against surveillance US citizens have (I wouldn't think it's an issue at all, hence the quotes) and the fact that they tend to be lone wolves more than Islamic terrorism, which often works through networks.

So it's not that easy to spot people like McVeigh, Kaczynski, or outside the US Breivik, before they act.

Note that he did not snub the language but its toolchain.

I think they already have enough trouble with Rust in the ports tree that they don't want the same thing in base.

It does look like separation is back on the menu in America, so I would not be too quick to claim victory.

Look around the world and you will mostly see ethnically homogeneous neighborhoods. It's not by random occurrence.

>The facade was a gift from the Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid II to Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany

Should we return all such gifts? Why?

Should France claim back the statue of liberty?

Yes, the Egyptian collection, including the Rosetta stone, should be returned to France.

(Under no circumstance should it be returned to modern Egypt, which doesn't care about ancient Egypt and used the Rosetta stone as construction material before it was found by an officer of Napoleon)

There is an issue with 'diversity in tech' and, among other things, under-representation of African-Americans in STEM.

So why are the big tech corporations that are constantly virtue signalling about Black Lives Matter and social justice not simply training American engineers (not specifically black, but people coming from poor socioeconomic backgrounds, which would definitely include many African-Americans). Why do they bring Indian or Chinese engineers?

America does not lack people, it has good universities. It could certainly train a local workforce. Providing good jobs to those communities would do wonders to reduce criminality, drug abuse and various issues.

France is an administrative concept, Europe a geographic one.

In practice, what is done is that big corporations have their headquarters in a few well-developed jurisdictions that have very strong laws to protect their shit (London, New York, etc.) but use shell companies in offshore locations that just offer a mailbox.

I don't have an issue with a bank being based in the Bermudas or anywhere, for example; but in that case the HQ should really be based there. There is the same issue with ships registered using flags of convenience. Again, I don't have a problem with that per se. But if there is dispute involving your ship, you go ask Liberia to sort it out. You get your insurance from Liberia too; you get the picture.

Now, being French I'm also well-aware that French politicians are completely unrealistic and want to tax French companies doing business abroad in France, and American companies doing business in France, in France (notice the pattern?) There is a middle ground.

That's not the point. On this particular sub-thread we're discussing his research. You said he has fringe views. I'm just saying that it does not disqualify his research per se.

Otherwise, I have no background or in fact interest about whether or not Steve Hsu was a good VP of research and innovation. The reason given for why he's being fired for this position has nothing to do with his performance, good or bad, and has everything to do with his research. Since he his tenured, they can't fire him for his research, so they found an other way to punish him. That's low.

Your position on this issue is not based on reason or science, but on dogma.

Nothing is ever really settled. And certainly not that topic in particular. How could it be, considering how controversial it is? (This very topic is another proof.)

>the fact that race is a social and cultural construction rather than some genetic reality

That is an absurd claim. I'm well aware of the sensitivity around this topic. I wish we could research it freely, but I can see why people get very agitated about certain findings. I can see why it's unpleasant. Still, just like you can't research dermatology, immunology and other fields of medicine without taking race into account (the idea that racial differences are only skin deep completely breaks down when it comes to finding bone marrow donors), if it turns out that there are also racial difference in cognitive or behavioral traits, it's important to know for research on diseases like Alzheimer, or indeed for research on psychology, sociology, etc.

Most great scientists initially have fringe views that eventually become undergraduate textbook stuff.

That doesn't mean that everyone with fringe views is a great scientist, of course.

But I don't see why that would disqualify him.

Differences at the top (and indeed bottom) end of the curve are important, because they might explain differences in achievement in certain professions. There was a recent case with an Italian physicist from CERN getting in trouble for using that very argument (if the IQ curve for men is broader, this would explain why there are more men than women at the top of that profession).

I note that we don't have issues with men being over-represented on the other side of the curve (mental issues, violence, etc.) We're not calling the police "systematically sexist" despite the fact that most of the police shooting victims are men, for example. There is no call to have gender equality in prisons or mental hospitals.

So you want to reject someone's will to collect more empirical observations and data on a certain issue... based on empirical observations and data you already have?

This makes absolutely no sense. Either we can investigate some issues, or we can't. @markdown is a bit more honest when they say we should not research the issue at all, because the answer is very unpleasant. But note that race is only the ultimate taboo in the west; researchers elsewhere, in particular in China, will continue this research. And I think it's worth having people in the west researching this area, so they understand this research and can, indeed, challenge it when necessary.

It makes sense.

North Face executives are probably wondering why Facebook allows comments around their beautiful ads in the first place.

Paleolithic Europeans, or West-Europeans, would have been fine.

A similar new anti hate speech law has just been invalidated in France by the constitutional council (supreme court).

The wise men indeed recognized that judging whether or not content is illegal and thus censored should be left to judges, not private companies.

I would not be surprised if the German law ends up with the same fate.

That particular evidence leads to a very small number of individuals. From there it's probably trivial to figure out from other records (phone, credit card, etc.) and testimonies if the person they have was the one shown on one of the 1829291 pictures posted on social media.

A person setting a police car on fire might not be the best judge of character and who best contributes to society.

"Keep the immigrants, deport the arsonists"

A professional will eventually wear even the best tools. And since they use those tools every day, they can keep an eye on wear. So it's not that crazy for them to use relatively cheap stuff.

Plus, a tradesman will also sometimes lose tools, drop them in places they can't recover them from and so on.

On the other hand, the day I want to fix some issue at home, the last thing I want is the tool I use perhaps once a year to be an additional source of issue, because it involves a round trip to the store.

In the west we're still primitives, using infrastructure like roads and supply chain logistics to achieve the same thing.

"Xenophobes of all countries, unite!"

They don't openly carry handguns.

Right now the French police is protesting against their own boss (minister of the interior, Castaner) because he went with the BLM narrative and basically called them racist.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53022073

Do you really think we can apply the policing methods of Iceland or Japan to the areas of Mexico where you have cartels chopping up people? Crime and violence are not homogeneous around the world, so I don't think police can be either.

See how far you go with a compassionate police in Brazil.

Maybe this can set an example for the rest of the nation, then.

There have been calls to abolish the police. If Seattle can do it, maybe Atlanta and Minneapolis too.

I think that's the right answer: this should be a local decision and each community should decide the level of policing it wants (including none at all).

Generally their parents are generals or kings, according to my mailbox.

I don't see much discussion of root causes here. But a lot of "police ought to be this or that".

Perhaps the best solution is to have more democracy or community input into policing. It seems like it's happening now in the US (it would be quite different in other countries, where the police is national and considered civil servants; in France you can't elect sheriffs, and police is beyond the responsibility of mayors).

In the end, some communities will vote for a police that's tough, and other communities will vote for a police that's less tough. There will still be issues when criminals used to non-tough cops cross into an area with tough cops, but that's life.

It's trivial to lose money by trading outside of the efficient frontier.

Nowadays when I connect to Google using the Googlebrowser powered by the Googleprotocols to access the Googlecontent I don't care about weird symbols like 'https', arcane concepts like URLs, etc.