The horror. Where should people turn to get their approval stamps before they are allowed to write documents? Is it only bad to write about things, or should thinking about things also be frowned upon? Where can I get a list of safe, government approved topics to think about?
Agreed, but she exploited their algorithms which is definitely something 'frauds' do. I'm not even saying it's a bad thing, it's working for her. She shouldn't feel bad but she shouldn't feel like a genius either.
There is also the study where they changed peoples voices in phone interviews, and the women with male voice were suddenly less likely to be hired (although the effect was small, iirc).
Law and medicine are high status jobs, with a lot of people interactions. Yes, programmers have meetings. Not the same level of interaction as medicine, by a long stretch.
There are many TV shows glorifying medicine and law. How many TV shows glorify the job of a programmer? How would you make a TV show glorifying the job of a programmer?
So why do young men study CS in college if programmers aren't glorified? Not to mention that being a "nerd" and "computer whiz" has never been a culturally attractive label, no matter what people might say today.
Men in America, but not in the world in general, are more money conscious than status conscious. They're more likely to salve the idea of not having a respectable job with thinking about how much money they are making.
I doubt it. There are a lot of men who care a great deal about status. I've even heard of men who don't want to date women who make more money than them, because they feel it hurts their status. If they cared more about money, they'd gladly date a richer woman.
The problem is this patriarchal idea that men should be the main breadwinner. Our culture tells them they've failed at being men if they're not the main breadwinner. It also tells them they need to go all-out making money, which makes it easier for employers to convince them to make long hours. At the same time, women have this cultural role of mothers, where they should be concerned with having children, and put their children before their job, and therefore can't be expected to work as hard as men.
Alright, that doesn't explain why women are more prominent in other hard-working jobs like medicine and law. Still, it's a cultural prejudice that's still very much felt in much of society.
Quite the contrary. This is the first time I hear of women who refuse to date a man who earns less than them (excepting gold diggers, of course), and I've heard about men who don't want to date women who earn more than them, from men who think women should not earn more than them.
Women marrying up is historically the biggest driver of equality in Western societies (poor people becoming richer). Economist have identified it as a problem because as women get richer and they don't want to marry down, that mechanism for "equality" is increasingly lost.
So there have been studies about this phenomenon (women not wanting to marry down), but I am too lazy to Google for them.
Also, financial troubles of the husband are the strongest indicator for impeding divorce. And breakups are usually initiated by women.
Every time this comes up I wonder if I should launch a dating site for rich women seeking a "houseman" for a partner. But somehow I am still not convinced yet that there is really such a huge market.
Yeah, but that's part of the old patriarchal system where men make money and women stay at home. In this age of double incomes, it should be irrelevant. Still, some people cling to the old patriarchy.
It's not just that, it is that women have the greater bargaining chip in the relationship. They have the womb for creating babies, so they can make more demands. Also, they make the greater investment into kids (at first, at least, over time it can change), which also warrants "compensation".
I'm not sure what they're supposed to be bargaining about in your view. Have you ever been in a long term relationship? Because what you're describing does not sound like a healthy relationship.
Because it's one of the only fields you're virtually guaranteed an an above average salary straight out of undergrad and it's an easier path relative to medicine and law
I don't agree with this, but the implication seems to be that women/girls are shallower? Is there some other word to characterize "more likely to make major life decisions based on what the TV says"?
Silicon Valley, Halt & Catch Fire, Scorpion, Mr. Robot. Lots of TV shows center around programmers. As with doctor shows however they don't focus on the medicine but the interactions of the people.
It's not only the math involved in the creation of a bitcoin, there's also economics and networking and psychology involved. Granted, most people don't understand how money really works, but grasping a dollar bill in your wallet is easier than the a virtual something on some virtual place.
See? I even feel dumb trying to explain why people feel dumb.
Sure - the economic dynamics and valuation are complicated (I don't understand them either), but I don't think that is what the article was talking about.
The tech is fairly simply, at least the principles. As simple as basic cryptography, anyway. And most people use that on a daily basis.
> That is, managers who have no tech skills as such?
There was an article on the front page earlier about how you simply shouldn't put people with no tech expertise in charge of people who have - so far as tech goes.
There is another problem here: the wage gap across industries. Some of our most important workers (teachers, nurses) are paid a pittance, whereas one industry that invents problems to solve is paid the most. The solution is to treasure the work that everyone does - irrespective of what industry they might be in. This would allow people to pursue a respected career in whatever industry they desire, regardless of what gender is typically motivated to engage in that industry.
Tech has been historically awful to women (and some places continue to do so); yet you can find industries where all genders are discriminated against (some being a social stigma) and nobody seems to give a damn about them.
One thing I can say for certain is that, as an extremely young equal society, we seem to be making a heroic effort to improve. We have a very long way to go and the extremes are probably going to be visited multiple times as the pendulum settles to the center.
Wages are determined by market forces. Most nurses may earn less than techies, but their work might be more rewarding to them. They are helping human beings get better, not optimizing ads.
Nobody is forced to choose Nursing over Tech, so if they are unhappy with the salary, why do people choose Nursing? Presumably more people choose Nursing than Tech, so the salary is lower as per supply and demand (and of course demand is dependent on other factors as well - but if fewer people went into Nursing, prices surely would go up).
Nobody is entitled to any kind of job they want. Jobs exist because people need jobs done, and they are willing to pay for them being done.
Tech has historically not been awful to women. The social networks are full of the reports on how early programmers were all women. Even today tech is not awful to women. They get a red carpet rolled out for them.
Or create another language that compiles to the Ethereum virtual machine. There are several already, and at least two in development designed to be better for formal verification.
Yes that is what I meant - I don't know Ethereum as well, so I assumed Solidity is the already the level of the VM (the "assembly"). Thanks for clarifying!
