I don't know whether this is a legit breakthrouhg. But technological progress is often a sigmoid (S-shaped) growth curve, it may take a while to get past certain steps but once you are through, money flows and more people devote time to that technology which accelerates the process. It is not hard to imagine, say, 20 years from now, we have power plants running on fusion given the interest we have in solving the climate crisis.
Sometimes I wonder if in some instances a low approval rating is endogenous to the company's employee makeup. I work in the HE sector and I can tell you that the lowest levels of student satisfaction comes from departments or disciplines comprising of mostly people complaining about society, yadayadyada
> Vox's newsroom unionized, even though I would suppose that they are likely treated better than most journalists -- at least to the extent the business' economics allow.
Better treatment also involves better pay. Being nice to your employee is not enough. Vox may treat employees nicely, but you'd be surprised how low they pay to their occasional writers who are scattered in a bunch of niche vehicles.
Do you have personal familiarity with their payment practices? Are the occasional (presumably non-employee) writers also part of the union? Do they get votes like full employees?
I mean the other thing is does vox really have much money to be folding into higher comp? I have always assumed that it's a break-even venture like most news media these days but I'd be interested to learn otherwise.
First of all, Greenwald did not steal anything, and he is being charged because he actively engaged in covering the hackers' tracks. That is criminal in Canada, Brazil or US... I am pretty sure that had Mr Greenwald been in Canada he'd be charged by now. It is precisely why he is in Brazil. Because Brazil is a Banana Republic where the powerful and well connected can get away with most of the things unless the evidence is very clear. Greenwald has a wide net of supporters in Brazil who are very powerful, starting with the Worker's Party, the Communist Party of Brazil and so one. Not to mention his husband who is a congressman himself.
Just because Mr Greenwald is facing death threats as a result of his work doesn't mean he is 100% on his interpretation of the story. Also you forgot to mention that Greenwald's husband is a congressman which means they enjoy some enhanced security. Also you need to mention that the Brazilian's Worker's Party (the largest party in Congress) has Mr Greenwald's back. He is far from being alone in Brazi, there is a broad support from the establishment. It doesn't mean that his worries about his security are overblown, my point is that he enjoys a great deal of support especially from journalists, politicians and the Brazilian last instance's judges.
> However, as we now know thanks to Greenwald, this anti-corruption fight was corrupt in itself, and the person overseeing the investigation was cooperating with the prosecutors to strengthen their case.
That is according to Greenwald. Judges and prosecutors talk all the time in private. This is your opinion. Many in Brazil and abroad don't think such practice configures collusion. Especially if you read the transcripts, it is far from being damming to Mr Moro and the prosecutors.
There is certainly something to be said about the way stay-at-home mothers are perceived by many in our society. They provide one of the most valuable contributions to society and should be praised. The issue is: many females take this issue at a personal level. Being a stay-at-home mom is a choice and most people don't look down on women who choose a different path. Also, some women can't simply cope with the fact that they have a biological clock and their careers may be on the way to their motherhood (or vice-versa). I wish there were more honest conversations about this.
Males also should equally share the burden here I must say, as more and more of us run away from life responsibilities. The 30 year old basement dweller meme is real.
With such a large percent of this generation destined to be childless you don't think that conversation is coming? I'd bet on it once more start to realize the reality of their decision. Men or women, really.
Absolutely. And there is a gap here to be bridged. In the current political discourse, I see a narrative of men and women being put as adversaries, as if they were competing for something whereas in most cases they are complements and their whole is greater than the sum of its parts. And I repeat, males are just as guilty here. Divorce has gone through the roof, single mothers are an ever increasing share of the parental composition. Men are running away from their responsibility which is to raise their children in conjunction with their partner. I hope we turn a corner sometime soon.
I appreciate the author's piece but motherhood is not an alternative argument for why women leave STEM, it is THE argument. It is, in all likelihood, the strongest factor to influence women's decisions to leave the field. The evidence is getting overwhelming, just check the most recent publications by Harvard Professor Claudia Goldin (most recent: https://test.openicpsr.org/openicpsr/project/113672/version/...)
Sexism is real but its importance is far from being large. It is really tiresome to see the news regurgitating the talking point on wage gap without properly giving context.
What is clear to me is that the wage gap as measured by the average earnings by gender (even drilled down by field) is very hard to be fixed given the obvious biological differences between males and females (in which motherhood reigns supreme).
Women also need to be honest about their prospects, it is very hard to juggle a career and motherhood. You can't have your cake and eat it too. So there needs to be an honest confrontation on the trade offs of motherhood and having a career and the cope that comes with it.
Yes, this is what I was thinking. Feminism is ruining women by mistakenly telling them they want something that might make them unhappy. What do women gain by having 50% professional nuclear physicists or 50% coal miners?