rada

Case in point: I am that "russian person". When I search in Russian, I am doing it because I want to get russian apps - that is, fully localized apps whose UI is natively Russian. I positively hate it that the app store is full of apps that were "search optimized" like you suggest.

I repeat:

The subtitle states "I'll WRITE, design, and code a custom page..."

keeping his head in the sand like you suggest

Where did I suggest that? So many dramaz. Jeez.

Don't let the ADHD crowd get you down. Beautifully done.

Average U.S. construction prices per square foot for apartment buildings start at $130 per square foot, depending on location and material/fixture quality. New York is the most expensive at $230 per square foot.

So at 36 square feet, this dumpster home would end up at what... $270 per square foot? That's way more expensive than an actual apartment building, and that's before appliances and shared spaces such as bathrooms/laundry rooms/kitchens, not to mention the shipment costs which have got to be significant.

(My father has PD, my father-in-law had PD, I am a webmaster for a PD news/events/support groups website, and we are on the board for Struther's Parkinson's Center in Minneapolis. Which is to say, I live and breathe PD daily, in a very personal way, through relatives and close friends, as well as doctors who have dedicated their entire lives to PD. I see first-hand what PD medications and DBS surgeries do to people, over a period of many years.)

Your post is mind-boggingly misinformed and heartless. The "relatively safe and effective" medications you mention are not safe or very effective at all. They carry serious side effects for most patients and get less and less effective as time goes on. Even in the honeymoon years when the meds are still relatively effective, people still suffer in-between dosages, which is to say several times a day. The fact that people prefer being on them than being without them is a testament to how bad PD is, not how "safe" these meds are.

Likewise, the DBS surgery is quite risky - so much so that you have to be relatively young and healthy to get it, e.g. very few people over 75 are even eligible. Moreover, the improvements are typically in the 40%-80% range, far from the 100% you so happily imagine, so MOST patients who undergo DBS still have to take medication. The risk of stroke from the surgery is 2% and the risk of infection requiring another surgery is super high at 4%, to name just two. If that's not enough for you, the risk of DEATH from DBS surgery is around 0.5%. Moreover, it is NOT a one-time procedure. The batteries implanted in the chest run out, and then you get to have another surgery.

DBS, while brain surgery, is the more elegant solution. Your tremor goes away, rather than requiring a superficial "hack" like this spoon.

What a bad, cruel joke.

The word "sexist" does not appear in the article. Not even once.

I am guessing it were examples such as, "My former adviser has never graduated a female PhD student", that made you think "sexist"?

Notice that the conclusion and the label are yours, not hers.

there is no symmetry in these biases (e.g. the false equivalence of misogyny and misandry)

It does not mean that there is never a case of sexism against men or racism against whites. What it means is that you cannot simply flip mysogyny and misandry, or racism against minorities and racism against majority. One major reason is the power imbalance - you can read more about it online but the simplest example I can offer is that of sexual harassment where the power imbalance is essential to the problem, i.e. a lowly employee asking for a date with their boss is a fundamentally different problem than a powerful boss asking for a date with their employee. Another reason is systemic vs. individual discrimination - again, other people explain it better than I ever could but a very simple example would be that everyone across the board, meaning men and women both, discriminate against equally-qualified resumes with female names on them, evidencing that our whole culture is systemically sexist in one direction.

And if you read carefully what that parent was responding to, it will make even more sense.

I go to tech events and I never ever see anyone dressed in t-shirts with programming jokes on them (1). It's mostly the same ole sloppy t-shirt with jeans or chinos. So no, I am not going to wear the dorky scarlet letter all by my lonesome, thank you very much.

An outfit tells you what someone's into, not how good they are at it.

You mean, like, someone in a sloppy t-shirt and jeans is into complete and utter conformity?

At a typical tech event, most of the black people you meet are programmers. Most of the women you meet aren't.

Oh please. Most black people you see at a typical tech event are security and catering. As for the 2nd part of your statement, holy guacamole confirmation bias!

(1) For science, I just googled images for pycon, disrupt nyc, def con and finally just "hackathon" and nope, not a single programming joke t-shirt in sight. So your "easy answer" is anything but - you are asking women, and women only, to jump through extra hoops in order to get a seat at the proverbial table. Talk about a privileged, entitled stance.

But let's play by your set of rules. What would be something nobody but a coder would wear?

Bonus question. If "clothing is signalling", what does a typical coder's outfit say about their ability to come up with non copy-paste solutions?

Double bonus question. What do you think of black coders, who are even less common than female coders? Do you presume they are at a tech event to play basketball? Would you advise them to come in white face so they could provide the right "signalling"?

Also, let's get the numbers straight. Women comprise about 30% of computing workforce, a far cry from 5% that you made up to justify sexist stereotyping: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_computing#Statistics_i...).

You mean a dress? I am a coder and that's what I wear.

Yeah, you should definitely wear that next time.

Except, here is what lkrubner said, emphasis mine:

The same is true about this conversation, and _your reaction_.

See how we were, in fact, having a thread where we all address each other personally? How you made up an arbitrary rule to discount my comment just because it made you uncomfortable?

Next time, check your own emotional state before jumping with with a lecture on someone else's. And try to argue on substance, not tone, please.

You missed the parent's point so entirely, it's as if you are an MRA bot posting the same old scripted comments no matter what actual discussion is taking place. He said that we could "have a conversation about diversity in hiring without ever introducing the subject of guilt" and that we don't need to "frame the whole thing in terms of accusations" and your immediate knee-jerk response is to list all these imaginary accusations that are being "implied". Can you just keep an open mind and consider the possibility that, as the parent says, none of these accusations are actually being made? (If you don't find the parent comment convincing enough, perhaps look at your own "not usually stated" qualifier).

I am in Minneapolis and my resume has "founder" on it. I've had no problems finding employment. In my current job, it actually helped me get hired: my boss specifically wanted to assemble a team of entrepreneurially minded people. In my previous job, it didn't help but it didn't hurt either. So my personal anecdata says it's not a problem at all.

Just one example:

Sex is coveted by men. Accordingly, women limit access as a way of maintaining advantage in the negotiation of this resource. Women who make sex too readily available compromise the power-holding position of the group, which is why many women are particularly intolerant of women who are, or seem to be, promiscuous.

What a ridiculous thing to say. Women limit access as a way of maintaining some power advantage? Really? There isn't a simpler, less sinister explanation for why a woman might decline sex with anyone and everyone who asks?

The main example of the article doesn't hold any water either. I mean, the test subject's outfit is downright grotesque, especially in a classroom setting. She is wearing a skirt so short that she could not possibly sit down without showing her underwear, not to mention the rest of her outfit - her top is cut so low that I can see her bra sticking out. No wonder another student commented, "What the eff is that". That's not "hostility" and "cold war", that's a completely normal reaction. If a male student showed up in class wearing lycra short-shorts exposing his package and a neon shirt cut down to his mid-section, you don't think male students would react the same way?

http://whois.net/whois/whitehatsec.com

http://abc.go.com/shows/shark-tank/episode-guide?category=Se...

http://abc.go.com/shows/shark-tank/episode-guide?category=Se...

http://abc.go.com/shows/shark-tank/episode-guide?category=Se...

http://abc.go.com/shows/shark-tank/episode-guide?category=Se...

Looks the usual to me - mostly white guys, that is.

Another sticking point for me is the battery life. The transmitters are touted as low energy, which they are, being able to transmit for 2 years on a watch coin battery is amazing. However, a transmitter is useless without a receiver (did the tree really fall...) and the receiver is going to be anything but low energy if has to continually scan and compare surrounding signals. Granted, my demo receiver app was as unoptimized as you can get (one day of coding plus I am not even an iOS developer) but at the same time, it didn't do much but look for signal, and it was chomping through battery at an alarming rate. It was ok for a 5 minute demo but I can't imagine real users would put up with this for long.

Given these two limitations, I have a hard time imagining wide adoption.

If RSSI cannot be relied upon, it severely limits the utility of iBeacons. A "binary" result (beacon found, beacon not found) can be useful but not near as useful as a reliable distance indicator. For example, my goal for the hackathon was to see if equipment in a lab could be activated by walking around with your phone. If the phone cannot tell that I am closer to equipment A than equipment B, then there is no point and moreover, we should not be referring to this new technology as "micro locations".

Having said that, I know of a company here in Minneapolis piloting iBeacons as indoor navigation (to find your way in a mall for example). I don't know if their technology works because they've found a way to ensure more correct RSSI readings, or if they are simply relying on the assumption that stores are far enough apart.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Freedom_Index#Rankings_an...

I would also like to address your "some chilling effects" comment. Investigative reporters are only as good as their sources and the sources have been silenced. That's a nuclear winter, not "some chilling effects".

Meta: is it really necessary to imply that whomever you are responding to is lacking in intellectual capacity? What's with all the "would it stretch your intellect to...", "one can think x without drawing a parallel to y..." and so on. If your arguments are strong, let them stand on their own.

AP president Gary Pruitt: "Longtime sources have stopped talking to the Associated Press in response to the Obama administration’s secret seizure of the wire service’s phone records. This chilling effect is not just at AP, it’s happening at other news organizations as well. Journalists from other news organizations have personally told me it has intimidated sources from speaking to them."

Chief White House Correspondent for NBC News Chuck Todd: "You end up essentially criminalizing journalism when it comes to reporting on the federal government, particularly on national security. You know, I’ve had different conversations with people over the last week who are sitting there not quite comfortable having certain conversations on the phone."

Would it stretch your moral intellect to google any of the above? The US has successfully criminalized real journalism so there is no need to kill. Not a whole lot better.

Errr... what? My husband was a stay-at-home dad for a couple years, and he wasn't the only stay-at-home dad in his "mommy" group. Approximately 3.5% of stay-at-home parents in the U.S. are fathers, and that number is growing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_Conception#Virginal...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/19/arrest-w...

My point is, please drop your anti-American superiority complex. You Brits do plenty of ridiculous things too.