No_one
Underemployed Slav. Likes playing Factorio.
User ID: 1042
No_one
4hr ago
Disparate impact is only an Anglo thing. It's almost completely ignored in Europe, where we only have to contend with environmental laws and bureaucratic bullshit.
Also you made my heart rate spike to cca 150 for a sec. In other thread I posted a photo of a girl calling herself 'Pasha'. I log back in, what do I see. Uff.
No_one
12hr ago
Lot of people are lying now, especially in the US, but if you look at the original link "slim" isn't what you'd describe the typical sexy ancient sculpture, nor the most popular images in large databases.
No_one
1d ago
It would appear, therefore, that using this new law to reimplement affirmative action would not be legal.
Is there no way for Democrats to make the court more favorable ? E.g. by say, packing it with wise latinas?
No_one
1d ago
Not sure if we can judge by her - she's been selling erotic, non nude photos for pocket money for years.
No_one
1d ago
So we agree women are just clueless about male preferences, and likely to believe stuff such as that men find women like Kate Moss on average as sexually attractive as women of the type of say, Bellucci or Hayek ?
No_one
1d ago
https://reason.com/volokh/2024/05/15/congress-is-preparing-to-restore-quotas-in-college-admissions/
Apparently, there's a new privacy bill in congress, with a maximally bad attachment to it, and quite likely to pass. (what kind of monster would be against privacy? )
Almost all kinds of decision making (anything that involves computers seems like) are classed as an algorithm.
If your 'algorithm' causes disparate impact, it's bad and you must change it or you're open to lawsuits. Yearly review of the 'algorithm' is mandatory, first review in 2 years after bill is passed..
Covers: every bigger business (iirc 750 employees+), all social networks and...??all nonprofits using computers to process 'personal data' to submit yearly evaluations if they're not causing 'disparate impact'. Excepted: the entire finance industry, government contractors.
It also explicitly allows discrimination on the basis of a protected characteristics (race, sex etc) for the purpose of
27 (ii) diversifying an applicant, participant, or customer pool;
Here's a bigger excerpt:
Here's how it works. APRA's quota provision, section 13 of APRA, says that any entity that "knowingly develops" an algorithm for its business must evaluate that algorithm "to reduce the risk of" harm. And it defines algorithmic "harm" to include causing a "disparate impact" on the basis of "race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or disability" (plus, weirdly, "political party registration status"). APRA Sec. 13(c)(1)(B)(vi)(IV)&(V).
At bottom, it's as simple as that. If you use an algorithm for any important decision about people—to hire, promote, advertise, or otherwise allocate goods and services—you must ensure that you've reduced the risk of disparate impact.
The closer one looks, however, the worse it gets. At every turn, APRA expands the sweep of quotas. For example, APRA does not confine itself to hiring and promotion. It provides that, within two years of the bill's enactment, institutions must reduce any disparate impact the algorithm causes in access to housing, education, employment, healthcare, insurance, or credit.
No one escapes. The quota mandate covers practically every business and nonprofit in the country, other than financial institutions. APRA sec. 2(10). And its regulatory sweep is not limited, as you might think, to sophisticated and mysterious artificial intelligence algorithms. A "covered algorithm" is broadly defined as any computational process that helps humans make a decision about providing goods or services or information. APRA, Section 2 (8). It covers everything from a ground-breaking AI model to an aging Chromebook running a spreadsheet. In order to call this a privacy provision, APRA says that a covered algorithm must process personal data, but that means pretty much every form of personal data that isn't deidentified, with the exception of employee data. APRA, Section 2 (9).
No_one
1d ago
Is there any paper where women opine on male preferences ? I'm sure there is.
No_one
1d ago
She started out with a narrow face, though make up is doing some work. Although, it's possible she had fat remove from under the jaw. Women do that these days.
They're also apparently getting fat transfers into boobs, though that's very expensive compared to implants, and a bit riskier.
There's some men who find fat people attractive - I mean, genuinely fat, not the fat but 'built like a brick shithouse' body type that is attractive to maybe half men even if the BMI is firmly in the 'overweight' range. (the girl in picture is actually obese, BMI wise, weighing 90 kg at 1.68m).
But it's a small amount of men, very small. Impossible to gauge how small really, as none of the porn databases are well marked. I believe it's even smaller than the % of homosexual men. Nevertheless, they exist.
I remember being stunned a decade ago seeing a guy bring his huge girlfriend or maybe wife to a cyclist restaurant right at the city limit. They drove there ofc. She was at least twice as heavy as he was and wearing tight fitting clothing.
No_one
1d ago
One of the observations about anorexia is that before modernity it also existed but those women claimed they were fasting for religious reasons. There might even be a saint who starved herself to death rather than suffer some indignity like forced marriage. (not sure)-
It looks more like something broken and the sufferers confabulating reasons for wanting to be that way.
No_one
1d ago
I think you're typical minding. You're not a median woman, very far from it, furthermore you're old enough to have used your vastly superior mental tools to get a whole lot of experience.
What does a median 18-22 woman know about these things? Women are conformist, they 'read the room'. If media and society keep putting out a message "being chubby is bad etc" a young woman might have spent years as deluded about male preferences as some guys are deluded about female ones (the so called 'nice guy' ). Sure that's not very applicable now with the obesity epidemic, nevertheless..
Also, there's a whole bunch of research that found women don't really know what men want, body shape wise.
No_one
1d ago
He replies "she could lose some weight" or "you could lose some weight" to any picture of a woman he comes across, with the exception of actually anorexic or very thin ones where he'll say "you should gain some weight".
I'd say the only constant is that it makes women mad.
No_one
1d ago
I don’t think any straight women are unaware of this fact
It's not aimed at men.
No_one
2d ago
Africa is the exception, really. Sub-Saharan Africa has several attested cultures where being fat was seen as attractive, such also existed in Arab countries at times.
Even today, bigger body size is seen as desirable in US black culture, at least if we go by this NYT opinion piece where a woman is complaining how black men don't want them to lose weight..
No_one
2d ago
but when we look at potential mates we want the thin one
Not the thin one. The curvy one..
Link goes to one of the most stunning examples of 'autism' out there, and it's making everyone from arch-hater 0hp Lovecraft to bog standard SJWs and boomers mad.
Thinking about the past, it makes me smile how much it was common to hear, until twenty years ago, that women are very uninterested in politics, unlike men. For my generation, this idea looks absurd. Men do not care about politics at all.
Yeah, well, look how it's working out for 'The West'.
Absolute shambles. In the 'Great Game' of global hegemony, the 'West' is the drunk guy who thinks he's playing checkers, but he's so drunk he doesn't understand he's actually playing chess, against a guy who's perfectly sober.
Meanwhile, in China, you're only supposed to care about politics if it's literally your job. Any random civilian caring about politics is viewed (rightly) with suspicion, perhaps partly genetic due to the millenia of rebels getting executed.
So, you had an absolutely typically female hysterical reaction to Ukraine war, with sanctions that resulted in exports to Russia crashing, and exports to Russian neighbors booming. Russia is still chugging along with the war, meanwhile European economy doesn't look too hot.
But a less well known example: 1 million 244: The 40 year long rare earth mineral boondoggle.
TL;DW:
-
rare earths are crucial for renewables (wind turbine magnets etc) and nice for electric cars.
-
processing them is very hard, harder than uranium enrichment actually to be cost-effective at it. It's a whole bunch of chemically very similar elements that occur together.
-
China having little energy has a strategic interest in energy production and e-cars that actually makes sense. They went into this in early 1980s
-
'The West' gimped rare earth processing companies in 1980s with a nonsensical rule change that put 'thorium', byproduct of RE processing on par with uranium. I'd love to know whether this preceded the Chinese strategic decision to aim for e-cars and so on.
-
all the processing was outsourced to China. China stole and improved upon all the IP. They also subsidize RE processing and control the market. RE processing, thanks to their subsidies, is unprofitable everywhere. IF you try to set up your own industry, they'll tank prices just to make every startup go bankrupt.
This is all very funny because:
-
rest of the world doesn't really need most RE. Renewables are a scam. Chinese mandate electric cars ( you won't even get a car plate) unless the car is electric, in preparation for WW3 and the naval blockades.
-
e-cars don't really need them, but it's apparently mildly easier to make them good if you have ample RE.
No_one
2d ago
You'e talking as if developing replicator technology and getting as far and as fast off from the rest of you humanity wasn't the default position of every person with an ounce of self preservation.
People are insane these days due to being disconnected from actual material reality. It's going to get far, far worse with more wealth. Either we get thought control and become some weird hive mind, or people will be getting ever more insane because they can and because our minds were not designed or evolved to cope with modernity.
No_one
2d ago
But I can’t say I ever expected Ukraine to come out on top.
Given the pushback I've been getting here over the last years, there's a good few people who expected it. One would think so, except it's apparent the entire military procurement sector in the West is vastly more corrupt than in Russia.
No_one
2d ago
Funny, short video from the province of Airstrip one. Savage in that breathtaking way only those people are capable of.
No_one
3d ago
Same thing essentially, there might be some biochemical downside but a tablespoon a day is far below typical intake in a western diet so..
No_one
3d ago
This is an unwarranted response, I think.
I'm generally suspicious of CS_CA but he's right here.
No_one
3d ago
Yes, it's a morass of propaganda. Some things, such as social media casualty counts done by the other side using an open methodology allow us to glimpses of how things are. E.g.
https://meduza.io/en/feature/2023/07/10/bring-out-your-dead
Other things - like pre-war information etc also.
And then you've got the amputee numbers:
upwards of 20k. There's another article saying 'around 50k' by some amputee charity person.
That's 200k dead if we assume Ukraine is slightly worse at casualty care than US in GWOT. (~6 KIA per amputee).
No_one
4d ago
Endgame ?
This or next year, Ukraine folds and accepts territorial loss and permanent neutrality (Finlandisation- no NATO, no EU membership). NATO is ran by idiots simply wasn't able to provide the armaments necessary for victory. Might be some fun (meaning FPVs into NATO political leaders) out of this when Ukrainians with their half million dead are going to be given no rebuilding assistance [1].
EU (specifically the centrist fraction of EU parties) is mulling a union-wide draft law, supposedly voluntary at the start, so recruiting at most 10% of age groups. So there might be remilitarization. It's required in the mid run anyway because America is likely going to go down.
Russia reforms their military procurement in preparation for WW3 (new defense minister looks up to the task) and will probably take over the Baltics out of pure vengeance when US hegemony collapses following the China war. It's nice real estate, but I guess most the young people there will flee and Russian hydrocarbon funds will go to pay for those pensions too.
[1]
"On the question of NATO's role in the reconstruction of Ukraine after the war. The first thing I will say is that first of all, you need to ensure that Ukraine prevails. Because unless Ukraine prevails, there's nothing to reconstruct in a free and independent Ukraine.
We must be able to help Ukraine prevail because it's important for Ukrainians. But also because every day this war drags on, of course, the more destruction and the more expensive, the more resource demanding it will be to do reconstruction afterwards."
The funniest thing would be, if they truly wanted to address 'disparate impact' meaning proportional representation in everything desirable, that'd de facto be a return of the Jewish quota too. Despite falling off a bit due to intermarriage Jews are still over-achieving quite a bit over basic whites, so any legislation that'd truly remove disparate impact would be in essence also a quote on Jews, if they chose to identify as such, no ?
More options
Context Copy link