Allegro.cc - Online Community
Post Reply

Allegro.cc Forums » Allegro.cc Comments » Thread locks too soon

rss feed Print
Thread locks too soon
NiteHackr
Member #2,229
April 2002
avatar

I find it odd that you prefer vulgar humor to God's Word... :/

What's vulgar about a tea bag?! ???

Anyhow, I have strong beliefs, but that doesn't mean I lost my sense of humour.

It figures that I can't even post anything funny in here without someone using it to spawn an argument. <sigh> Time to stay away from here for a while I guess. Not in the mood to debate my beliefs. I think everyone knows them quite well by now. Nobody in here is changing me, and I certainly won't change anyone's mind in here, so it is pointless.

Gideon Weems
Member #3,925
October 2003

For breaching participation limits on political/religious discussion, the following members of A.cc are hereby sentenced to 30 seconds of staring at Golden Boy:

  • NiteHackr

  • raynebc

  • bamccaig

  • Chris Katko

  • Edgar Reynaldo

  • Aaron Bolyard

{"name":"611742","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/f\/0\/f0db8d5a54c4a5e7a7e647ef19fa46bb.jpg","w":900,"h":1200,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/f\/0\/f0db8d5a54c4a5e7a7e647ef19fa46bb"}611742

Use that time to introspect on the meaning of life.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

God hates Democrats.

But so does everyone else.

;)

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Arvidsson
Member #4,603
May 2004
avatar

I know for a FACT that God doesn't exist.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

video

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

NiteHackr said:

What's vulgar about a tea bag?! ???

We both know that poem was not about a tea bag. :/ It bordered on pornographic if you ask me. :/

arviddson said:

I know for a FACT that God doesn't exist.

Well Amen and HalleluJah! Finally, someone with proof God doesn't exist! Now I can safely put my delusions to rest safe in the arms that knowing my entire life is a lie. ;) Oh wait, you don't have any proof, just a belief. So it's still a religion to disbelieve the existence of God, so you're just as silly as I am.

Listen, I'm not your therapist, so I can't help you work through all of your issues with God. But most are really just misconceptions about God fueled by so called evidence in the way that the world is so evil.

Remember, god divided light from dark. He separated good from evil. It was Satan, the Serpent, who tempted Eve and seduced her into eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Satan tricked Eve into bringing evil into the world. And God said, if you eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, in that day you will die. A day with the Lord is a 1000 years. Guess how long the early descendants of Adam and Eve lived? Nearly a 1000 years. Setting aside other things that reduced man's lifespan to 120, what he said was true. And that is how evil came into the world, through Eve's weakness and Satan's cunning.

For breaching participation limits on political/religious discussion, the following members of A.cc are hereby sentenced to 30 seconds of staring at Golden Boy:

Who's Golden Boy? And I can't stare at bare male nipples for more than 15 second without getting hot and bothered. Please, 30 seconds is too much.

raynebc
Member #11,908
May 2010

I think there's a nipple joke involving the Golden Girls that could be conjured up, but I never really watched that show and have no particular affinity for them.

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

I don't need to watch an hour long video on a single point about how culture drives conflict. No shit sherlock.

Besides, I'm still waiting for Arviddson to prove God doesn't exist. :/

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

I don't need to watch an hour long video on a single point about how culture drives conflict.

It's more about how "social justice" when aiming for equal outcome is actually corrupt and counter-productive, and how. And why a university must choose between social justice or truth. And a basic dialogue of how universities should operate, versus how they have been, and the consequences of it. It's very interesting. It should be especially interesting to you being that you're in a university now, are you not?

It even touches on why papers tend to be less useful than they used to be because instead of people doing the honest thing, seeking to do unbiased work, and their peers holding them to it, social justice has been creating an environment in which you cannot do that properly, which has been undermining the entire process.

Besides, I'm still waiting for Arviddson to prove God doesn't exist. :/

I'm sure he will as soon as NiteHackr proves that God does exist... :-X

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

bamccaig said:

It's more about how "social justice" when aiming for equal outcome is actually corrupt and counter-productive, and how. And why a university must choose between social justice or truth. And a basic dialogue of how universities should operate, versus how they have been, and the consequences of it. It's very interesting. It should be especially interesting to you being that you're in a university now, are you not?

;D, I'm curious to see what you find is the 'truth' and how equality is bad, mmmkay? You're welcome to sum it up for me.

Madison's proposed the following constitutional amendments:

First. That there be prefixed to the Constitution a declaration, that all power is originally vested in, and consequently derived from, the people.
That Government is instituted and ought to be exercised for the benefit of the people; which consists in the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right of acquiring and using property, and generally of pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
That the people have an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform or change their Government, whenever it be found adverse or inadequate to the purposes of its institution.

Sadly, these changes never made it into the bill of rights.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Equality of opportunity is good. That means there's no discrimination. Candidates are chosen based on merit, and ideally the best person for the job gets it.

But equality of outcome requires discrimination to account for individual choices. If most women are not interested in a career in STEM, but we insist on their being a 50/50 ratio of men and women in STEM, then you will necessarily have to have fewer men in STEM to even out. Say, for example, 98 men wanted to be in STEM, but only 2 women wanted to. The only way to get 50/50 without forcing women into STEM is to restrict men to only 2. That's not good. That's bad. It hurts men, and it hurts STEM. And it doesn't help any women.

Most people assume that there remains discrimination against women, but when experiments are conducted the opposite is seen: due to affirmative action companies are going out of their way to give women every opportunity, at the expense of men. There is discrimination, but it's in favor of women, not in favor of men. What this means is that the discrepancies aren't due to systemic discrimination, but due to personal choices and differences.

The problem is that proper research isn't being done to come to the conclusion that there's discrimination. People are looking at the numbers, seeing a discrepancy, and concluding that the reason for it is systemic discrimination. It's dishonest, and it's not helpful. It's harmful. It's discrimination! And it doesn't even benefit the groups that you're trying to help. It might help the odd woman that goes against the grain and chooses a different path than others, but most of them have no interest in doing it so you're not doing them any favors making it easier for them to get in. They won't take advantage of it because they don't want it. And in the process, you're hurting men that do want the opportunity, and would have done a good job. Which also means you're hurting STEM by keeping the men that would have done good jobs out. Which hurts society overall.

And perhaps, even worse, all of the pressure to get more women into STEM might convince girls that they should pursue STEM only to find after investing years of their life and perhaps thousands of dollars in tuition that it's not actually what they wanted...

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

bamccaig said:

Equality of opportunity is good. That means there's no discrimination. Candidates are chosen based on merit, and ideally the best person for the job gets it.

I agree with this fully.

bamccaig said:

But equality of outcome requires discrimination to account for individual choices

However, I agree with this up until the point where you say individual choices are the reason 'discrimination' is needed. An individual's life is made up of far more than their 'individual choices'. It includes the situation they were born into, as well as the choices of those around them.

I don't know how I really feel about affirmative action like policies. They mean well, but they're more like crutches than teaching people how to walk. It entirely depends on the implementation of the policy.

For instance, there's nothing wrong with encouraging women to go into STEM disciplines. Personally, I want nothing more than to have more women in STEM. It's a fucking sausage party as it is, and that's lame.

But to just let nature 'take its course' and not try to do anything to help disadvantaged people is irresponsible.

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Strengthen the weak links, and you strengthen the entire chain.

NiteHackr
Member #2,229
April 2002
avatar

bamccaig said:

I'm sure he will as soon as NiteHackr proves that God does exist... :-X

I have proven God exists to my own personal satisfaction. It is impossible for me to prove that He exists to you or anyone else who does not believe in Him and refuses to accept that He exists. I won't waste both of our time trying.

We've been down this road too many times in these forums to count and it only leads to frustration and anger.

It often reminds me of Star Wars, each side is firing off shots at the other like crazy and nobody is hitting anything. ;)

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

I thought you guys were joking about how much you care about all this god and politics stuff. ::) Surely you know nobody is going to be persuaded by the current discussion.

So here's a floating-point visualizer:

http://bartaz.github.io/ieee754-visualization/

Also, the reason Javascript's floats are literally the devil? They start as DECIMAL floats, which get converted to BINARY floats (float floats) using an algorithm that leads "non-divisible by two" numbers with repeating fraction that marks the .00....004 value.

So .1 + .2 = .3000...004 NOT .3

GENIUS!

https://medium.com/@sarafecadu/64-bit-floating-point-a-javascript-story-fa6aad266665

For those who don't realize, this does not affect C or any other God-fearing language.

Note again, that this does NOT affect numbers that are divisible by 2. So unless you know this insane implementation detail, there's no intuitive reason why things would break with only CERTAIN numbers failing to match their C (or any IEEE math) counterparts.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

raynebc
Member #11,908
May 2010

Affirmative action is like providing crutches to somebody who was born with a hobble. Hiring quotas are like putting shackles on people who would out perform the people with crutches, in order to equalize their performance.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

video

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

An individual's life is made up of far more than their 'individual choices'. It includes the situation they were born into, as well as the choices of those around them.

Please elaborate on what kind of things you have in mind that would unfairly prevent a woman from entering STEM, and how these things don't also affect straight white men the same way. I don't see how it is relevant.

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Strengthen the weak links, and you strengthen the entire chain.

But we're not strengthening women by giving them special treatment. We're keeping them weak. And by holding men back we're making them weaker too. The net result is that the chain is weaker.

And the worst part is that women are not weak. They don't need this special treatment in the first place. They're different, but where they have weaknesses as compared to men, they also have strengths over men in other areas. We should be embracing our differences instead of trying to erase them.

The only way to make men and women equal is to get rid of all of our strengths and level the playing field at the lowest bar. That's bad for everyone.

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

bamccaig said:

Please elaborate on what kind of things you have in mind that would unfairly prevent a woman from entering STEM, and how these things don't also affect straight white men the same way. I don't see how it is relevant.

Gender roles. Social norms. Cultural bias. For the longest time, a woman's role in the workforce has always been secretarial work, as if that is all they were qualified for. Similarly, a woman's role in the house is to raise children, cook, clean, etc. These are merely conventions. Men are just as capable of fulfilling the same roles, but they are always delegated to women.

The key is not to drag men down, but to lift women up. That is all I am advocating. Women are equally as capable of programming a machine as men are, but without encouraging and supporting women in STEM, the typical gender roles win out, and women are relegated back to the kitchen and secretarial work.

bamccaig said:

We should be embracing our differences instead of trying to erase them.

You see differences that don't exist. :/

Polybios
Member #12,293
October 2010

It has been shown that the more rights and equal opportunity women have the less likely they are to work in STEM.

Typically, people do (and like to do) what they are best at. So while women do not need to be less capable of programming than men, they might typically be better at something else individually.

Also, the logical choice for a gender-neutral pronoun appears to be "it" from my perspective (as a non native speaker). Demanding to be addressed in the plural strikes me as rather arrogant (pluralis maiestatis)? Shouldn't the plural be reserved to denote that ... more than one individual is involved?

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

Polybios said:

Also, the logical choice for a gender-neutral pronoun appears to be "it" from my perspective (as a non native speaker). Demanding to be addressed in the plural strikes me as rather arrogant (pluralis maiestatis)? Shouldn't the plural be reserved to denote that ... more than one individual is involved?

I find both degrading.

If someone refers to your dog as "it" you're like "it's a girl." When they refuse to use male/female, they most often do it because they hate dogs or they're complete a-holes trying to use dehumanizing language, as in "this is just an object and property."

They seems rather insane and blows up grammar when you need they to actually refer to multiple physical bodies.

But I'm so tired of the discussion on pronouns it's like, you know what, if that'll shut you up, fine, I'll simply say whatever crazy language you want, if it'll shut you up. But shutting someone up doesn't magically make me respect them. In fact, the opposite. If I HAVE to do something and more-often-than-not I don't even get an explanation of why, "just do it because I say so", it means you're a child throwing a tantrum. And people don't respect children.

If someone came in tomorrow and demanded I "high five" them every time we met them, I'd find it annoying. And if they then demanded (with no room for compromise) that I do so or I'm some sort of "Nazi" or bigot, I would instantly lose respect for that person.

But somehow, using different pronouns magically heals bigendered people so there's a medical reason and if we don't don't validate them, they will physically die within a few hours.

[edit] A.CC lost half my post till now.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Gender roles. Social norms. Cultural bias. For the longest time, a woman's role in the workforce has always been secretarial work, as if that is all they were qualified for. Similarly, a woman's role in the house is to raise children, cook, clean, etc. These are merely conventions. Men are just as capable of fulfilling the same roles, but they are always delegated to women.

The key is not to drag men down, but to lift women up. That is all I am advocating. Women are equally as capable of programming a machine as men are, but without encouraging and supporting women in STEM, the typical gender roles win out, and women are relegated back to the kitchen and secretarial work.

https://www.thejournal.ie/gender-equality-countries-stem-girls-3848156-Feb2018/

Feminists have been preaching the idea that there are no differences between men and women, but the differences are obvious to anybody with an open mind. It's not science that suggested that men and women are the same. It was political activists. It's laughable to suggest that men and women are the same. Sure, women are capable of doing most of the same work that men are. Obviously though they cannot do certain jobs as well on average.

For example, if the job requires a lot of heavy lifting then men would generally be better qualified for it. That's not to say that women cannot do heavy lifting, or that no men would struggle with it, but fewer women can do heavy lifting, and fewer of them would want to. They're not as physically strong as men. They'd be more likely to hurt themselves.

Also, men tend to be more heavily represented at the top (and bottom) of the IQ spectrum. On average, men and women's IQ isn't that much different, but at the extremes men are over-represented whereas women's IQ is more average. Which means the people at the top end of the IQ spectrum are more likely to be men, and they're probably more likely to be attracted to the most mentally demanding work, which probably means STEM fields. The people at the bottom end are also likely to be men which probably attracts those men to menial jobs that don't require a lot of thinking.

There are other ways that women are different from men too. And when you factor these things in then the roles that women traditionally held start to make a bit more sense. And the jobs that women are doing today also make better sense.

If women were equal to men then you have to explain how things ever came to be "uneven" in the first place. You would instead expect women to be equal with men throughout history. What's that, "men forced them into their role?" No, no, no, they're just as capable as men, remember? Men couldn't force them into a role they didn't want to do. They would just fight back. "All the men ganged up on individual women," you say? No, no, women would just gang back up on the men. In a universe where men and women are truly equal there would be no differences. The differences we see in outcome are actually related to the differences between men and women.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_scientists_before_the_20th_century

Edgar Reynaldo
Member #8,592
May 2007
avatar

From your own article :

“It’s important to take into account that girls are choosing not to study STEM for what they feel are valid reasons, so campaigns that target all girls may be a waste of energy and resources,” Professor Stoet said.

“If governments want to increase women’s participation in STEM, a more effective strategy might be to target the girls who are clearly being lost from the STEM pathway – those for whom science and maths are their best subjects and who enjoy it but still don’t choose it,” he said.

bamccaig said:

If women were equal to men then you have to explain how things ever came to be "uneven" in the first place.

Ever cooked a live frog in boiling water? The temperature delta is low enough that the frog doesn't know its being cooked alive. Change happens over time.

Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
avatar

I feel bad for my transgressions. So now I exclusively eat RESIST brand ice cream from Ben and Jerry's.

video

Finally, the patriarchy will be defeated, with the power of pecans.

Goddamn it, liberals. ::) You make it physically exhausting to support POLICIES I ALREADY SUPPORT because of your non-stop stupidity and commercialism.

{"name":"ap_ravens_steelers_football_76404960.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/c\/6\/c67f9c98bcecb2aeb5b225e393a54a7a.jpg","w":1000,"h":667,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/c\/6\/c67f9c98bcecb2aeb5b225e393a54a7a"}ap_ravens_steelers_football_76404960.jpg

I cannot cite a single person whose life was saved by forcing NFL players to run around in pink dresses to end breast cancer. I'm pretty sure the doctors are the people ending breast cancer. But when was the last time you saw one of them thanked on TV? Nah, better sell people some pink hats and headphones because that'll... end... cancer or something (while we make some sweet -ss pity money!)

I actually care about the environment. I actually care about cancer. I actually care about immigrants.

But literally everything the liberal establishment (media + politicians) do, is an affront to actually solving problems.

They want solar and wind power, but they don't care how many birds die as they're literally burnt out of the air by solar panels, and smashed into pieces by wind farms:

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-solar-bird-deaths-20160831-snap-story.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/wind-energy-takes-toll-birds-now-there-s-help-ncna866336

"Up to 300,000 birds a year killed by turbines" and of course, that will only increase as they build more.

And nobody cares how much extremely toxic rare earth minerals are used in the construction of solar and wind power plants.

It's like nobody on the planet actually cares about saving the damn planet.

-----sig:
“Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.” - Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
"Political Correctness is fascism disguised as manners" --George Carlin

Post Reply


Go to: