>That link about vocal characteristics is only relevant when talking about huge populations. On an individual basis it's meaningless, there's just too much variation.
If we are talking about white/black voice difference, then it is meaningful.
>Now if "Japanese" isn't a race then nothing is. The vast majority of Japanese are identifiable on a genetic level due to the relative isolation of the country.
Race is just a more broad concept than an ethnic group, that's what I mean.
>If you're talking some stereotypically Polish person compared to some stereotypically Arabic person from Egypt, obviously, but there's cases where ordinary Turkish people look more "European" than some groups of Europeans do.
That's what I meant when I said that it would be easier if you take groups 100 hundred people, it averages out. And yeah, Europeans and Arabs are white, so there is little difference between them.
>The bell curve on these things is just too wide, there's nothing but overlap in all but the most extreme fringes.
Yes, "cline" is a better description than "race" but it is not as useful in daily life as "race" is.
>The dark-skinned people of southern India, Australia and New Guinea, for example, did not independently evolve their color simply because evolution favored it.
>They inherited the ancestral dark variants Dr. Tishkoff’s team found in Africans. “They had to be introduced from an African population,” said Dr. Tishkoff.
>It's not the obvious cases that matter, but the borderline ones. Is that person Japanese or maybe Inuit?
First of all, I don't think it is appropriate to classify "Japanese" or "Inuit" as races. Race is a more general concept.
Anyway, Japanese and Inuit are easy to distinguish. Middle Eastern and European are better examples. If you take one European person and one Middle Eastern person it would be hard to differentiate them, if you take two groups of one hundred people it would be easy.
I don't really understand the point of the article.
How does this research “dispels a biological concept of race”?
>“If you ask somebody on the street, ‘What are the main differences between races?,’ they’re going to say skin color,” said Sarah A. Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania.
Yep, that's true. Skin color is the most prominent and easily identifiable feature. But every human can easily identify black/white/Asian based on facial features or voice. Forensic anthropologists can identify a race based on skull, they can even make a pretty good prediction based solely on a jaw.
The idea that race is just a skin color is not a dated notion of race, it is a modern interpretation that is pushed by leftists. If racists believed that race is just a skin color, why would they be racists?
Now, if we could dispel the idea that race is just a skin color and the idea that some races are inferior, if we could stop treating it as a dichotomy, that would be good.
I don't really understand significance of this insight easier. Floating point number is just stored in scientific notation base 2. That's it. And kids learn scientific notation in 7th grade? 8th tops. I mean, swap base 2 to base 10 in this image, and the effect changes from "woah" to "duh, obviously".
The EU is my last hope. Out of all governments and international entities, the EU is the only one I have a stretch of confidence in. The fact that Google and Amazon are located in the US means that the EU has nothing to lose if they want to regulate them. An additional fact that the EU consists of multiple countries that can bully each other to comply with their own laws makes it effective. I believe that if there is someone who can fix this shitty situation, it is the EU.
If you've been a victim of a crime, you should report it. If you've witnessed a crime, you should report it too. Otherwise you enable criminals. If you were told that there were a crime by a random person, you don't have to report it. I think it is as simple as that. I don't think or imply that Uber is a force of nature, I don't know where you got this idea from.
If Uber is complicit, where are the charges? Where are the fines? Where are managers getting jailed for concealment of a crime? Is there even a prosecution?
It is the job of the justice system to understand whether he is guilty or not. I think that if a company fires a person for a claim of sexual assault that wasn't proved, this person is justified to sue the fuck out of the company for false pretense.
If I understood the letter correctly, what Uber did was not illegal. And if I understand how police works in most countries, if you report a crime to police they are obliged to investigate it
So my point stands. If you think that people shouldn't report crimes, you enable crimes. "‘strongly under the impression’ that they would." is a laughable excuse. What did Uber do that would provide a strong impression, yet wasn't enough to be accused of being misleading in court?
If what Uber did is illegal in UK, they should face punishment. But as far as I can tell, they did nothing illegal in this situation.
People should report crimes to police, they shouldn't report them to school or company. Everyone who tells the opposite enables sexual assault. Uber is not at fault in this situation and it doesn't enable anything.
Is "furthermore" scientific jargon? I thought it is just a professional version of "moreover". Like, I would say "moreover" to a friend, but write "furthermore" in a letter.
Systematic investment to education provides new enrollees for MIT and Stanford and, subsequently, workforce for Apple and Google. Brain drain is a real problem for developing countries.
Or a right-wing solution if you like direct democracy and societal cohesion.