In that Reddit thread the topic starter mentions that his CS faculty has a diversity issue. According to the Reddit TS because 30% of undergrads and 15% of the professors are women.
I was triggered by that and wanted to comment on it because I can imagine specific parts of CS are currently so new, evolving and hard to master that I can hardly imagine that diversity is considered an issue.
I can imagine society should already be happy with anyone who is able to complete an university CS study.These studies often require a specific mindset, passion and probably also a specific 'beta' brain.
I might be totally misunderstanding diversity anyway, but in my eyes all society can do is provide equal opportunities to everyone and the outcome can be a result of other factors.
In some specific industries like healthcare (specially nurses) and childcare the far majority is women. That is not because men don't have the opportunity to become one, but there are other factors that create this specific outcome where men are outnumbered.
In e.g. construction the majority is men. Also here women have the opportunity to get such a job, but women probably less likely apply for heavily physical construction jobs because of different physical conditions.
Therefore I think diversity itself should never be a goal, but making sure that _everyone_ gets equal chances/opportunities should be? And then accept the outcome.
In case of the Reddit TS it seems improvements on equal opportunities could perhaps be made on how is dealt with paternal leaves.
To me the limit in freedom of speech is when one calls for violence. As I truly believe in free speech, every exception you make to free speech, is arbitrary. If we have to everyone's exceptions into account, it's over with real free speech.
I personally can't be easily hurt by people I don't know well, but also understand that other people are easier hurt. This can be due to their current situation or things from the past that can more easily hurt their feelings.
I also want to stress that there's obviously something as politeness, empathy and social behavior. These should be encouraged at all times. But we all know some people simply can't behave and sometimes you even yourself can make an insulting remark
But due to free of speech, I do believe that people who are rude, insult others and make insensitive jokes, should be allowed to do so. Without any limit. How terrible it is what they say
They practice their freedom of speech. And we shouldn't punish them, other than telling them how we feel about what they say and making clear it can hurt the feelings of others.
On the other side we should invest in becoming more resilent to insults etc.
Obviously I see a task for parents and maybe even schools.
Thet should invest time in teaching children how to deal with rude, insensitive, insulting people and make them more resilient e.g. by boosting their self confidence.
For me that would be the best solution to keep an open society where people can speak freely. Making exceptions will kill it.
After all what can be insulting to person 1 can mean totally nothing to person 2.
Unfortunately, there are now so many care workers that many people with issues are getting fed up with all the people that come to their house for all kinds of help (think a care worker for finance, one for mental issues,one for physical issues,one to help the person get back to work, one for the kids etc. etc.)
So if there will be a shift from 'police as is', to more like a care worker system, this would be something to consider.
But other than that, it seems to work well. The police is considered your friend. They pretty know each of the people that have issues or who ever committed crime.
They continue to offer help to them,but will make sure they also get off the streets when they become a potential threat.
There continues to be a lot of criticism from certain groups within our country that wants the police act tougher, but I think the majority of people are happy with how the police does it's job here.
Very nice to see someone admitting and making changes after someone makes valid points!
You would think it would be the obvious action, but history has taught us people can go a long way in trying to convince others they are right, when they are not.
I was also surprised by the physical masks. It seems they are intended to 'encrypt your face' which gives me the impression it should make you unidentifiable.
When peacefully protesting, I can't imagine why you would need to hide your face.
If not peacefully protesting and/or looting, such a mask has use for criminals, but I can't imagine that's the intention of Signal.
I think in free, democratic countries, you shouldn't be allowed to hide your face, so you can be held accountable for your deeds.
In non-free countries I can imagine you would need to hide your identity, but would Signal be able to distribute them there?
A local radiostation has a broadcast of four hours. They are required to play an x amount of music tracks by the station (about 6 per hour), but there has been demand to make the broadcast available as podcast without the music.
Could this make it possible to automatically remove the music from the MP3 file they have available? With 6 tracks per hour times 4 hours, manually removing the music is time consuming.
I doubt it, as it seems all vocals are are output to a single file...
I would prefer to buy property any time. People will always need housing. So while the price of the property is pure speculation, rent is a nice steady source of income.
Have you followed the situation in Europe lately? It's a mess. Also during these times, no coordination of the EU at all. When it comes to it, every country is on its own. But worst is that European leaders are afraid to quickly take (tough) measures, something American leaders have shown to do much easier.
As a Dutch citizen I would prefer Americans to have control over this technology than any other country. Merkel has never really cared for German/European citizens but rather for the rest of world. Perhaps it's a trauma of WW2, and she wants to do good.
However in these times it's important that own citizens are prio 1. Trump cares for Americans and America has hardly ever let it's Western European allies down.
From my perspective it's in good hands in the U.S. and I trust anything that comes out of it will also benefit the rest of the world eventually.
I was triggered by that and wanted to comment on it because I can imagine specific parts of CS are currently so new, evolving and hard to master that I can hardly imagine that diversity is considered an issue.
I can imagine society should already be happy with anyone who is able to complete an university CS study.These studies often require a specific mindset, passion and probably also a specific 'beta' brain.
I might be totally misunderstanding diversity anyway, but in my eyes all society can do is provide equal opportunities to everyone and the outcome can be a result of other factors.
In some specific industries like healthcare (specially nurses) and childcare the far majority is women. That is not because men don't have the opportunity to become one, but there are other factors that create this specific outcome where men are outnumbered.
In e.g. construction the majority is men. Also here women have the opportunity to get such a job, but women probably less likely apply for heavily physical construction jobs because of different physical conditions.
Therefore I think diversity itself should never be a goal, but making sure that _everyone_ gets equal chances/opportunities should be? And then accept the outcome.
In case of the Reddit TS it seems improvements on equal opportunities could perhaps be made on how is dealt with paternal leaves.
And once we can