blind3rdeye @ blind3rdeye @aussie.zone

Posts

0

Comments

8

Joined

3 wk. ago

It's not so much an aversion to algorithms as it is a version to corporate controlled algorithms (which are often targeting highly questionable metrics).

It really is shocking. For decades, copyright laws have been enforced; and various new laws and powers have been added to prevent people from sharing content with each other. And yet now, it seems governments are willing to accept that big companies are allowed to just take whatever content they want and put it into their own products to on-sell however they like. Like, governments have gone out of their way to block people's access to sites like zlib; but their the entire zlib archive is just downloaded as a matter of routine business by mega-corps - not to be read, but to be exploited for profit, with nothing at all given to the actual source of the value; not even acknowledgement or a 'thank you'. And certainly not with consent. Is this somehow ok?

The phrase "reduce, reuse, recycle" was meant to be a hierarchy, where 'reduce' was by far the best option, and 'recycle' was the backup plan in cases where the others were not viable.

But somehow the message about recycling was twisted to the point where many people believe that mountains of waste are totally fine as long as it is 'recyclable'. And so instead of reducing waste per person, we've increased it. Advertising and convenience seems to overpower any kind of good intention. Perhaps regulation is the only way.

The researchers also found:

• around one in ten (9.4%) Australian men has sexually offended against children

Does that figure accurately reflect the Australian population? Like, 1 in eleven men (roughly) have acted on some sexual impulse with a child. That sounds pretty high. I know a lot of adult males; so with that kind of statistic (and the follow-up about their typical backgrounds), it would be highly likely that I know a few sexual offenders without realising it.

So what you're saying is that if we just keep switching to different data sources, we could get above 50% in less than two months!

You have said in multiple posts that "women" should be doing more to address the issue of misogyny.

What are you saying now? That you don't think teachers aren't doing their jobs? Holy smokes man. It's not what you were saying before, but it is similarly hateful.

Well, 'majority' just means more than 50% - so your claim is true. But that doesn't mean what I said is "wrong". The site you linked to says 61%. (Which I still think is relatively balanced compared to many fields of work.) And obviously that proportion will not be uniform in every school.

Why are you trying to push responsibility of the problem to women anyway? That's pretty weird. I'm surprising you're still pushing on this even now. It's as if you actually feel strongly that women teachers in particular are the only people who can address this issue. I don't know why you'd take that view.

In primary school most teachers are women, but in high school - which is what we're talking about, it's pretty balanced.

More to the point though, something is failing in classrooms. That's what the article is about, hence the title "misogyny is thriving in our schools". Obviously it is not being caused by the teachers. The teachers do not want this to happen. It makes for a horrible work environment - especially for the female teachers. Programs and strategies are being implemented to try to address the problem, but the root of the problem is not from the school itself.

I hope that answers your genuine good-faith questions on the topic.