IHeartBadCode

Well I mean, do you read the links you provide?

While women now account for 57% of bachelor's degrees across fields and 50% of bachelor's degrees in science and engineering broadly (including social and behavioral sciences), they account for only 38% of bachelor's degrees in traditional STEM fields (i.e., engineering, mathematics, computer science, and physical sciences; Table 1).

There's where your 50% comes from. And as you can see, your link also aligns with the 38.6% previously mentioned.

See? Now was that hard? See how once you explained yourself we could clear up the confusion you were having? Nothing wrong with that, easy to be confused by the various terms that are being tossed around.

What are you even going on about? It literally says:

Women represent 57.3% of undergraduates but only 38.6% of STEM undergraduates

That means women are obtaining most of their degrees via non-STEM studies.

Women represent 52% of the college-educated workforce, but only 29% of the science and engineering workforce.

And that is reflected in the study's figures for employment as well.

I’d search for another but people shooting themselves in the foot amuses me to know end

Well let's look over the score here. Someone has provided two different links to back up their argument and you've provided… Oh look, none. You're making claims and pointing out things that clearly do not exist or are anecdotal. Nothing you have done in the last three comments indicates to anyone that any of us should take anything you have to say with any kind of value.

So I guess you are amused to know [sic] end, but a point or logical argument you have not made. But hey if you thinking you took the W here and that keeps you quiet, then good job you totally owned everyone here. Amazing wordsmithing.

OTPs only ensure that you "physically have" the thing that the OTP presents.

UPS used to hand over a signature pad to collect a signature. Amazon's OTP implementation should have an OTP that the customer enters into a pad that the driver hands over. The driver gets the pad back once the package is given to the customer. The package is then marked delivered when the driver enters their OTP into the pad.

The entire point is that the delivery pad is the presentation of the OTP. The customer entering their OTP into the pad indicates they physically have the pad (not the product), the driver entering their OTP into the pad means they have recollected the pad (ideally in exchange for the parcel). The OTP only proves that someone physically holds the device that the OTP was entered on, it proves nothing else.

No good OTP implementation has in it a point where the OTP is told to another person. Amazon's OTP implementation is just flawed from the word start. I think more people would understand it if the whatever digit number was called something like "signature code", in that the set of numbers constitutes the equal to a signature. You wouldn't let someone, especially the driver themselves, sign for your package, so you shouldn't tell the OTP to anyone, except those who you think should be able to sign for your package.

I have a Brother HL-L3230CDW. It has been a horse and has quickly become my most prized possession of all things that I own. It takes anyone's toner and produces quality without question. It works with my various Linux, Macs, Windows, and Android devices without hesitation and minimal fuss to get setup.

So that's what I would recommend. Is a good bit of coin up front but in my opinion, it has paid for itself in cheaper long run TCO and sanity in that it just fucking works.

You're not wrong, but that doesn't mean YouTube's model is correct. The basic understanding we all need to have is pay people for their bread. Don't ever get more from someone that you aren't willing to pay back in some kind. 20% tip for waiting staff might suck for a person, but do not "NOT TIP". We tip till workers get fair wages or we don't go eat out, but don't go eat out and not tip. Same here. Don't head over to your creators on YouTube and deny them their fair share be it premium or ads.

YouTube takes a 45% cut on subscriptions. That's not fair share and they don't provide a means for creators to strike a balance. You can be angry at that. But don't ever be angry at that and not give some fair share to the creators. Additionally, with the whole Channel Membership, makes the whole YouTube Premium questionable. Why am I paying $14/mo for Premium and then $5/mo/channel I'm a member for? Why can YouTube not see that I've spent x% time here at so-and-so's channel and take x% of that Premium and send it to that creator (minus some off the top for infrastructure for themselves)?

This is ultimately what I dislike about YouTube Premium and what I like most about Patreon. In fact, the majority of what I once watched on YouTube has largely shifted there to Patreon. The things is, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask folks to be FAIR about what YouTube is giving, so you're right. But YouTube is a crap distribution platform that routinely robs creators of power over their media, exposure, and revenue and does so with impunity.

People shouldn't rob from YouTube to make a point. People should just leave to make a point. That's the fair thing to do. And if you do enjoy content from your favorite creators, always make sure you tell them so by putting money in their pocket. If we want fair wages for one, we need to remember we need to want fair wages for everyone. And more importantly, the folks running the show need to be more affable to listening to the folks tending to the fields. Be it employers need to listen to their waiters and pay them based on that or YouTube needs to listen to it's creators and address the various issues they bring up.

We're in an era where there's a whole lot of "I know better" in the workplace and really I think we just need more partnership between all involved. I think if we had more of that, we'd have a lot more of the other issues solved by proxy. That's ultimately what I have issues with YouTube, but just because I have issues doesn't mean I go stealing things from them. You are absolutely correct in that folks should play fair if they're heading to YouTube. We're all in this together folks, don't rob from each other even if you don't like the means by which they get the money.

Absolutely this. The reason AI defaults female into "female armor mode" is the same reason Excel has January February Maruary. Our spicy autocorrect overlords cannot extrapolate data in a direction that it's training has no knowledge of.

Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.

There are rules Nixon!

I think this is very telling of the RNC political apparatus. Trump has largely operated outside of the official Republican platform, you know the actual Republican committee chaired by Ronna McDaniel. Largely avoided debates and the other political machinations. And has dominated the party.

Which if Trump can do that outside of the RNC it absolutely begs the question, what the fuck does anyone need the actual governance of the GOP political party's official arm? And the answer seems to be from this, nothing at all. Which to me signals a massive erosion of power from the actual RNC.

If Trump leaves politics for whatever reason, the power vacuum thereafter is going to be absolutely mind numbing. There's zero strength left in the RNC itself.

The good news is, there isn't many of us. Boomers and Millennials are the two biggest groups.

But yeah I already hear BS like, back in my days we roam the streets blah blah blah from folks my age.

I find this insanely interesting. I hope someone does this for us Xers but I have a feeling that everyone will forget about us.

And with this, I’m also interested in the rate of change here. Are boomers dying faster, slower, steady rate?

I think they mean ID as store loyalty card and/or membership card. Not actual government issued ID.

The humanoid three-fingered dolls consisted of earth-bound animal and human bones assembled with modern synthetic glue, Estrada elaborated. It isn't the first time Maussan has had an otherworldly corpse debunked — he made similar claims in 2017.

There's an old saying in Peru — I know it's in Ecuador, probably in Peru — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.