From the image: "There will be teams organized around business goals....and teams organized around what they do (like teaching, video, developer etc.)"
Sounds an awful lot like an executive group....(read: managers)
The paper is charting how sex and gender have been used throughout academic literature in the past few decades. In the last few decades we have learned swathes more about the complexity of gender identity and diversity, not just in western culture but it many others. Biological sex on the other hand it pretty well understood, and is certainly correlated with gender identity, but is distinct. It makes a lot of sense that papers about gender have increased while paper talking about sex have decreased, it aligns with new knowledge.
And the paper makes the point that new writers to the field often use gender in place of sex because they don't understand the full complexity of the word.
Or you know....delete your comment:
"I would love for you to explain what it is that I failed to understand about the paper, since I do enjoy learning new things. I'm not holding my breath though."
Wow...I don't know how much more stereotypical sexist male you could get in one email..."girls", "pink lanyard", gender binaries...
The way to attract more women, stike, people to your conference is not through tokenizing them...it's by making the conference interesting (having some diversity in the organization group would be a start!)
I have had an internet connection since I was 11, and a computer a few year prior to that. Int he beginning the only way my parents let me use the internet/computer was in a public room (in our case it was the study)...as I got older my parents bought me my own laptop and allowed me more privacy to browse...as long as I did my homework, and didn't spend all day on the computer all was well.
No automated parental controls at all...being realistic I was always better at using the computer than my parents, I would have got around them anyway.
These days I would go one step further and say make sure the browser they are using has a good ad blocker etc. Begin with a public setting so you can keep an eye on them, then as they get older, just leave them be.
That is a very long article based on flawed argument.
Given no other information, assuming someone gave you 2 envelopes and told you one has $40 vs $20, common sense dictates choose 1 randomly and walk away - with no other information it is illogical to reason any other way.
The chance you choose the lower value is 1/2.
Now, if you are allowed to look inside the envelope (which gets introduced further down) then it becomes a different game.
Get $20...well by swapping you may get $10 or $40...you should probably swap.
Get $2000...well by swapping you may get $1000 or $4000...you should probably swap.
I think this works all the way up...someone with a bit more background on game theory may be able to formalise it, but the realisation that swapping forever leads to $0 nullifies this "paradox"
The first link concerns a small group protesting against increased automation...this has happened in practically every place that has had manufacturing...
The second concerns road safety acts, although they sound ludicrous by todays standards, served as an important step in the transition from horses to automobiles - in a country which had been relying on horses for transport for atleast 1000 years prior.
Actually you started off by saying you can't teach "talent", now you are saying you can teach it but it may be hard...
Do you honestly think your genetics is playing against you in your study of mathematics? Which bits are you struggling with? What have you tried to fix it? What courses have you taken? Have you tried private tutoring? khan academy? Have you tried anything for longer than a couple of a days? weeks? How many hours of deliberate practice do you think you have put into studying mathematics?
Swimming is not innate...some people do pick it up easily, others take a couple of times, but I have never heard of anybody who is "unable to learn how to swim" and once they learn they can practice and get very good at it....there is sometimes a genetic advantage (Micheal Phelps springs to mind) - but he wasn't always nearly 7 foot swimming giant, he had to learn different techniques and practice for hour and hours a day to get as good as he is.
The first couple of drawings are terrible, primary school level drawings - the perspective, shading etc. are all completely off.
If you honestly believe you couldn't pull something like that off given 30 minutes of dedicated drawing...well I don't believe you.
Some more examples of skills that are learned:
* Programming
* Public Speaking
* Estimation
* Throwing
* Juggling
Or are you going to start telling me that some babies are born with an innate ability to juggle? or programming?
I am not saying these skills are easy or trivial, they require thousands of hours of dedicated practice. It sounds to me you think most people are simply good at something and do that...when in fact people spend thousands of hours honing and perfecting skills.
You can't jump into the water and start swimming until you lean how to control your body through crawling, standing and lifting...with maths...you may be unable to grasp theorems because you lack basic training in propositional logic (something that is rarely taught before undergraduate unfortunately - it is so simple and provides a grounding that would make any additional mathematics teaching a whole lot easier) - what is your mathematical background? what books have you studied? what lectures/courses have you taken? Lets see if we can't fix this!
I started playing guitar when I was 11...did I suck then...yes...I could barley hold a full sized guitar...and over the years I have learned new techniques and practiced endlessly...and now people would say I am pretty good.
Writing and math are no different - to peg them as just "talent you are born with" deprives the subject of all the work they have done throughout their lives.
Concrete Mathematics should not be too hard to understand for someone who understands basic algebra. Most of the topics it covers use nothing more than arithmetic and simple logic.
That said it is not a good general mathematics book (it is designed as a Computer Science book).
English is a tricky language, good on you for attempting to master it - you can write better in English than I can in any other language!
I hope you don't mind me providing some feedback on your writing!
"I am trying to fix my spellings and grammar." - We generally say "spelling and grammar", even though "spellings" is technically correct - when people say they want to improve their spelling, they generally talk about a skill rather than individual spellings.
"It been going on for a month now." - It (has) been going on for a month now - although this could have easily been a typo.
That is interesting, from a reread, I would say the "youngness" is a product of the length and over-descriptiveness.
""Magic" is my term for "I don't know how it works because I haven't taken the time to figure it out yet" - it's an attribute of my understanding of a thing, not of the thing itself; that is, it's the Clarkian definition." - No one speaks like that - it makes it sound like you are trying to come across smarter than you really are - Every developer under the sun understands what you mean when you say "Magic"
At it's most essential it sounds like you gobbled up a "software best practices book" and then spouted chapter titles without any context - Examples definitely help!
e.g. <Module Z> is a great example of why we need to keep our code clean, since I joined the team no fewer than X lines have been added resulting in this module having Y different responsibilities - because <Module Z> is so bloated we have Q different tickets in our backlog which will result in code changes to it.
<Module T> and <Module R> are a perfect example of where we can utilize code reuse. Both contain a function Y, which we make heavy use of - we should consider extracting this into a common library function etc. etc.
If you make an actual proposal instead of a complaint, people are more likely to listen - it is a lot harder to argue against raw data than it is a personal opinion.
Honestly this does not read well. You have some decent points (not unique points to any professional software engineer but good points) - there are several grammatical errors "to(sic) much magic" and you have not provided any examples.
You state that you are new to the project - from the writing style it sounds like you are fairly young, so I would guess this is your first programming gig? Either way take a professional writing course.
Provide examples - where are there problems with code clarity? Where are the repeated sections? Simply stating there are problems help nobody - you need data - how many repeated lines? What is the overhead of this code? How many special cases etc.
I would have thought this would be common sense by now - don't submit to a polygraph ever - it cannot help you, only hurt you. And don't submit to any kind of interrogation without a talking to a lawyer first. Relevant video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
Sounds an awful lot like an executive group....(read: managers)