As predicted, the article doesn't contain any genome wide association study to back up its claim in the title that entrepreneurs "don't have a gene for risk".
Instead they present another causal factor for creating startups and just implicitly deny that other factors exist.
I think Quartz is basically the archetype of fake news at this point.
Why do hourly employees care how long your lunch break is? At least in the US it's usually not counted as work time. Assuming people clock out for the lunch break, I don't see why they'd care if it's 30m or 2hr, since people could just make up the hours by working later. Although I suppose it depends on the type of work being done.
>Why do hourly employees care how long your lunch break is
Because you have a ten hour shift of difficult labor and twenty minutes of your thirty minute break is taken up with walking. And if you're in a FC with robots the time it takes for the Kivas to arrive at your station counts against you because you're expected to start working thirty minutes after your break starts, so on top of everything else you have to end your break early to make that time up.
>I don't see why they'd care if it's 30m or 2hr, since people could just make up the hours by working later.
I'm not aware of any business that allows its employees to take arbitrarily long breaks or to work arbitrary extra hours to "make it up." If such a company exists, Amazon is definitely not one of them.
Many employees are evaluated by "scan to scan," which is a literal count of the rate at which they physically scan ASINs and bin codes in sequence, so any activity other than that (including bathroom breaks) counts as a penalty against their rate.
Of course they also have multiple quotas for items per hour, based on item size and expected daily volume, etc.
> Greenland is a poor country. Perhaps Denmark simply wants to help out the many Inuit & Danes & descendants of both. This is ethically reprehensible. Greenland is poor, but compared to many African countries it is fabulously wealthy regardless of whether you take the $20k per capita at face value or discount subsidies etc to get a smaller number like $10k per capita
I strongly disagree with this line of reasoning. One's ability to have impact through altruism is closely linked to one's knowledge of where they're intervening. Denmark could easily have more impact in helping Greenland because they know more about what things need to be done in Greenland and can more easily get feedback on whether they've improved things. If you send money to a country that you have no connection to, how do you know that the money is being used effectively? How do you know that you're solving the right problem? How do you make improvements to your spending unless you're getting continual feedback?
There are limits to this of course and I think it can be okay to donate to international charity, but I think the impact of a well-targeted and knowledgable charity is much more certain.
It's kind of an inverse problem. Once you put the planets in position you can (reasonably easily?) simulate their oribts with some noise. The idea is that the neural network would try to quickly approximate which planet configurations could produce those stable orbits.
Is there any way to use inkscape and have it seamlessly integrate with sharelatex? I'd be kind of concerned about using sharelatex with inkscape PDFs, and then forget about or lose the folder with the inkscape source files.
"Is there any reason, specific to Japanese tradition/convention/bureaucracy to keep the name of the era secret until one month before the actual change?"
What do people mean by this exactly? I've heard some people make the case that the exact boundaries between ethnic groups can be socially constructed, which makes sense to me (like how one draws a hard line between two groups which have some admixture).
But the idea that ethnicities have nothing to do with biology and is a purely social phenomenon sounds like a lay-person's misunderstanding of the above claim. For example, it should be obvious that using a sperm/egg donor can lead to a child of a different ethnicity even if the socialization is kept the same (which you can't necessarily do perfectly in reality, but still).
Historically, “race” was a term invented to group/categorize people by language. From there it evolved into a reference of nationality. Most recently it has become a word to define an attempt to group people by physical characteristics.
So for example you associate race with ethnicity...the question is why? Ethnicity after all is a word to group people through nationality and culture, having nothing to do with physical characteristics...for example Irish is an ethnicity (in addition to just a nationality), but there are both black and white irish.
> Historically, “race” was a term invented to group/categorize people by language. From there it evolved into a reference of nationality. Most recently it has become a word to define an attempt to group people by physical characteristics.
Do you have more information about this? It has been my understanding that throughout history, some languages became the "lingua Franca" so to speak while not introducing race conflict. So I'm curious to hear more about the origins of race as a social construct, specifically its roots in language.
I'm still figuring this out myself, but I think that people are talking about race in at least two different ways:
1) Race from a biological/chemical perspective.
Stuff like 'DNA determines race' goes here.
2) Race from the perspective of all the things that happens to a person because they belong to a particular race (as defined in 1).
Apparently, being black and driving in America means it's more likely that you'll be pulled over by the cops, more likely that they'll assume you're a drug dealer, etc, etc. I wouldn't know because I'm not black, and every time I was pulled over by the cops I was clearly at fault.
Differences like these are discussed under the umbrella of 'race'.
The key is that in the second case there's nothing from biology / chemistry / science that says that black people should get pulled over more. That's just how things are in America now - it's a "social construct".
Again, I'm not an expert, but I think that's what people mean by 'race is a social construct'
Or people trying to be too inclusive and forward thinking without thinking about the implications of what is being said. Race and ethnicity are so closely tied, that from a biological standpoint, it's almost pointless to try to separate them.
I made a comment about this previously in reply:
>This isn't really a good argument. Western people use lactose in a variety of ways such as a drink additive (tea), for cooking (cheese, cream-based sauces), and even consuming by the glass (good ol' fashion milk). However, there's a high prevalence of lactose intolerance in Asian countries. There are just some sensitivities, diseases, and reactions that are more prevalent in some ethnicities than others including lactose intolerance, sickle-cell anemia, and Tay-Sachs disease.[0]
> What do people mean by this exactly? I've heard some people make the case that the exact boundaries between ethnic groups can be socially constructed, which makes sense to me (like how one draws a hard line between two groups which have some admixture).
You’re conflating race with ethnicity. They are not the same. For example, in America the ethnicities of Irish and Italian were not always considered to be part of the race of white.
At least in my experience, I don't see any pressure to not submit if you don't review (I'm in ML though, so could be different in other fields).
I think why people review is:
-You should be reading more papers anyway and we like doing it, so why not take it as an obligation?
-I assume that eventually it helps one to get selected to be an area chair or something along those lines.
Instead they present another causal factor for creating startups and just implicitly deny that other factors exist.
I think Quartz is basically the archetype of fake news at this point.