On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:48 AM, Tim Chase wrote:
> On ⅯⅯⅩⅥ-Ⅴ-Ⅷ Ⅹ:ⅩⅩⅤ, Christopher Reimer wrote:
>>> Closing line: "In America today, the only thing more terrifying
>>> than foreigners is...math."
>>> Wonder how close to terrorists pythonists are
>>
>> I wonder how many Americans are aware that the
On 5/8/2016 9:27 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, 8 May 2016 08:22 pm, beliav...@aol.com wrote:
There are
far more female than male teachers. I don't attribute it to anti-male
suppression but to greater female interest in working with children.
Of course there is suppression of male teachers
On ⅯⅯⅩⅥ-Ⅴ-Ⅷ Ⅹ:ⅩⅩⅤ, Christopher Reimer wrote:
>> Closing line: "In America today, the only thing more terrifying
>> than foreigners is...math."
>> Wonder how close to terrorists pythonists are
>
> I wonder how many Americans are aware that they use Hindu-Arabic
> numerals in daily transactions?
T
On 5/8/2016 8:09 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
See:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2016/05/07/ivy-league-economist-interrogated-for-doing-math-on-american-airlines-flight/
Closing line: "In America today, the only thing more terrifying than foreigners
is...math."
Wonder how close to
On 5/7/2016 11:58 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Chris Angelico :
So the question is: Do we care about country equality or individual
equality? You can't have both.
That's why there's been a long-standing initiative to split California
into multiple states:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Cal
On Sun, 8 May 2016 08:22 pm, beliav...@aol.com wrote:
> There are
> far more female than male teachers. I don't attribute it to anti-male
> suppression but to greater female interest in working with children.
Of course there is suppression of male teachers, particularly but not only
for very youn
On Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 5:38:18 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, 8 May 2016 01:57 am, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>
> > A functional, enlightened, prosperous democracy is a very recent
> > historical anomaly. You don't want to jeopardize it naïvely.
>
> Perhaps by implementing per-countr
On Sun, 8 May 2016 01:57 am, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> A functional, enlightened, prosperous democracy is a very recent
> historical anomaly. You don't want to jeopardize it naïvely.
Perhaps by implementing per-country limits on immigration?
*wink*
--
Steven
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman
On Saturday, May 7, 2016 at 4:02:32 AM UTC-4, Stephen Hansen wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2016, at 11:43 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> > Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > > Who is setting and enforcing this quota, and given that only about 1 in 20
> > > Python programmers is a woman, do you think men are seriousl
On Sunday 08 May 2016 13:40, Random832 wrote:
> On Sat, May 7, 2016, at 22:43, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> > If not for the quotas, a citizen of some other country would have an
>> > equal chance to get a green card as a citizen of India or China.
>>
>> If you have a big hat with 5,000,000 tickets
Random832 :
> But that's not what it is. You would have, say, 1,000 tickets labeled
> "green card" and 100,000 tickets labeled "no green card", and (say)
> 12,000 Indian people and 50 Finnish people each get their turn drawing
> from that same bucket. In your version, the Finnish people draw from a
Chris Angelico :
> So the question is: Do we care about country equality or individual
> equality? You can't have both.
That's why there's been a long-standing initiative to split California
into multiple states:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Californias>
Each state gets two senate seats,
On Sat, May 7, 2016, at 22:43, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > If not for the quotas, a citizen of some other country would have an
> > equal chance to get a green card as a citizen of India or China.
>
> If you have a big hat with 5,000,000 tickets marked "Indian", and 500
> tickets marked "Finish",
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, 8 May 2016 04:40 am, Random832 wrote:
>
>> On Sat, May 7, 2016, at 11:16, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> > Indian and Chinese H1B holders are getting screwed, which is of course
>>> > the whole objective of the country limits.
>>>
>>> T
On Sun, 8 May 2016 04:40 am, Random832 wrote:
> On Sat, May 7, 2016, at 11:16, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> > Indian and Chinese H1B holders are getting screwed, which is of course
>> > the whole objective of the country limits.
>>
>> The *whole* objective? You don't think that *part* of the objecti
On Sat, May 7, 2016, at 11:16, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Indian and Chinese H1B holders are getting screwed, which is of course
> > the whole objective of the country limits.
>
> The *whole* objective? You don't think that *part* of the objective may
> be
> to ensure that citizens of countries ot
Chris Angelico :
> But immigration laws are a pretty terrible mess the world over, from
> what I've seen, and I wish countries could drop the whole "but we have
> to protect ourselves from foreigners" thing. At some point, those
> "foreigners" become "citizens", and just as worthy of your protecti
Steven D'Aprano :
> On Sat, 7 May 2016 06:50 pm, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> Indian and Chinese H1B holders are getting screwed, which is of course
>> the whole objective of the country limits.
>
> The *whole* objective? You don't think that *part* of the objective
> may be to ensure that citizens of
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 1:16 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> Obviously this system is a conspiracy to benefit citizens of Andorra
> (population 85 thousand), Marshall Islands (pop. 70 thousand),
> Liechtenstein (pop. 37 thousand), Nauru (pop. 9 thousand) and the Vatican
> City (pop. 842).
The Vatic
On Sat, 7 May 2016 06:50 pm, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> The United States has an "egalitarian" quota system that seeks to
> promote diversity. By law, at most 7% of green cards can be awarded to
> citizens of any individual country. So, by this fair principle, in any
> given year, at most 7% of the g
Stephen Hansen wrote:
On Fri, May 6, 2016, at 11:43 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote:
Whether you think this is a good strategy or not,
beliavsky is right that it's not "equal".
This is a pedantically and nonsensical definition of "equal", that
ignores the many, many reasons why there are 1 in 20 wome
Gregory Ewing :
> Suppose there are 100 people wanting to ask questions, and there is
> only time to answer 10 questions. If the 1 in 20 ratio holds, then 5
> of those people are women and the other 95 are men.
>
> Alternating between men and women means that all of the women get
> their questions
On Fri, May 6, 2016, at 11:43 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Who is setting and enforcing this quota, and given that only about 1 in 20
> > Python programmers is a woman, do you think men are seriously missing out
> > on any opportunities?
>
> Suppose there are 100 people wa
On Saturday, May 7, 2016 at 12:13:59 PM UTC+5:30, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Who is setting and enforcing this quota, and given that only about 1 in 20
> > Python programmers is a woman, do you think men are seriously missing out
> > on any opportunities?
>
> Suppose there a
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Who is setting and enforcing this quota, and given that only about 1 in 20
Python programmers is a woman, do you think men are seriously missing out
on any opportunities?
Suppose there are 100 people wanting to ask questions, and
there is only time to answer 10 questions.
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 12:04 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>
> In the case of PyCon questions, I fully agree with it; there were
> enough women present that it wasn't a ridiculous suggestion, and it
> encourages people to speak up who might otherwise have kept quiet. But
> just because that worked w
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sat, 7 May 2016 06:35 am, beliav...@aol.com wrote:
>
>> This not "equal opportunity". It is a quota system.
>
> I must ask, what do you think the phrase "quota system" means?
>
> Who is setting and enforcing this quota, and given that onl
On Sat, 7 May 2016 06:35 am, beliav...@aol.com wrote:
> This not "equal opportunity". It is a quota system.
I must ask, what do you think the phrase "quota system" means?
Who is setting and enforcing this quota, and given that only about 1 in 20
Python programmers is a woman, do you think men ar
It seems like it would be equal opportunity between sexes. 1:1 opportunity
to ask based on apparent sex. It is not equal representation necessarily.
On May 6, 2016 5:53 PM, "beliavsky--- via Python-list" <
python-list@python.org> wrote:
> On Friday, May 6, 2016 at 5:07:28 PM UTC-4, Ethan Furman
On Friday, May 6, 2016 at 5:07:28 PM UTC-4, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 05/06/2016 01:35 PM, beliavsky--- via Python-list wrote:
>
> > Most of [Guido's] keynote at that conference was answering questions from
> > the people who had attended. And he actually said, "Let's alternate
> between
> > men
On 05/06/2016 01:35 PM, beliavsky--- via Python-list wrote:
Most of [Guido's] keynote at that conference was answering questions from
> the people who had attended. And he actually said, "Let's alternate
between
> men and women asking questions."On the second day of the conference,
he was
> we
On Thursday, May 5, 2016 at 3:00:01 PM UTC-4, Terry Reedy wrote:
> https://motherboard.vice.com/blog/python-is-an-equal-opportunity-programming-language
>
> from an 'Intel(R) Software Evangelist'
> --
> Terry Jan Reedy
>From the link:
MB: What is it about Python tha
https://motherboard.vice.com/blog/python-is-an-equal-opportunity-programming-language
from an 'Intel® Software Evangelist'
--
Terry Jan Reedy
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
33 matches
Mail list logo
