And the excuse for not hiring women in the Criminal Division was they have to deal with all these tough types, and women aren't up to that. And I was amazed. I said, have you seen the lawyers at legal aid who are representing these tough types? They're all women.

People ask me sometimes, when — when do you think it will it be enough? When will there be enough women on the court? And my answer is when there are nine. RBG

Bob

On Dec 16, 2023, at 9:30 AM, rjmcmahon via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:

The president who ran Harvey Mudd College had to fix their computer 
science problem of a 90% to 10% male to female ratio. She was asked, 
"What's the goal?" She responded, "It should reflect to population so 
50/50." The others said, "Be realistic."

She was and she got it to 50/50 where it should be in every technology 
group.Though we have more improvements to be done.

https://hechingerreport.org/an-unnoticed-result-of-the-decline-of-men-in-college-its-harder-for-women-to-get-in/

There is now way to fix a problem without getting passed the denial 
phase. This list population, and the LEO worshiping of Musk displayed 
here by its constituents, are very much white male things. Not noticing 
this & staying silent on this shows a lack of integrity by the group. My 
judgment.

Bob
 to be very clear, I am in no way saying that anyone's (let alone
 saying women's) views are not desired. I think a diversity of views if
 extremely valuable.
 
 I just get my back up when people say things like 'there need to more
 X in charge' (for any value of X that refers to a characteristic that
 someone is born with)
 
 David Lang
 
 On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, Dave Taht wrote:
 
 This is principally a male dominated list, and I in general assume
 that the public debate over fiber, bandwidth, etc, etc skews heavily
 male also.
 
 It is a very good set of questions to ask about how the internet
 should be structured to best meet the needs of both sexes, and how
 that has changed over time, and may change in the future! I hesitate
 to even make one overbroad conclusion! Permanent connectivity and
 messaging seems more important to women than men, and a phone more
 important than fiber. Security (tracking and/or protecting kids),
 also. It is something I would rather research than draw premature
 conclusions from.
 
 https://www.google.com/search?q=how+do+men+and+women+use+the+internet+differently
 
 On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 1:42 PM David Lang via Starlink
 <starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
 
 why do you think telehealth won't work over LEO services?
 
 I've used it personally.
 
 Even if women use telehealth more than men, that doesn't say that 
 women have any
 particular advantage in moving the bits around that make telehealth 
 possible.
 
 David Lang
 
 On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, rjmcmahon wrote:
 
 Women are the primary users and providers of telehealth services. 
 They are
 using broadband to care for our population. They also run most of 
 the
 addiction services across our country, whatever the addiction may 
 be. So
 gender actually matters. Ask them as providers. Telehealth doesn't 
 work over
 LEO (nor does it matter much for men on boats.) Same for distance 
 learning.
 
 https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/women-more-likely-telehealth-patients-providers-covid-19-pandemic/608153/
 
 As Washington considers which virtual care flexibilities should 
 remain in
 place post-COVID-19, experts are flagging that paring back 
 telehealth access
 and affordability will disproportionately affect women, even as a 
 growing
 share of startups emerge to address women’s unique health needs.
 
 While women are more likely than men to visit doctors and consume 
 healthcare
 services in general, telehealth seems to be uniquely attractive to 
 women.
 
 Bob
 who exactly do you think is calling for there to be no Internet
 access? and what in the world does the sex of individuals have to 
 do
 with shipping bits around?
 
 Starlink (and hopefully it's future competitors) provides a way to 
 get
 Internet service to everyone without having to run fiber to every
 house.
 
 As for the parallels with rural electrification, if that problem 
 were
 to be faced today, would the right answer be massive public 
 agencies
 to build and run miles of wire from massive central power plants? 
 or
 would the right answer be solar + batteries in individual houses 
 for
 the most rural folks, with small modular reactors to power the 
 larger
 population areas?
 
 Just because there was only one way to achieve a goal in the past
 doesn't mean that approach is the best thing to do today.
 
 David Lang
 
 On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, rjmcmahon wrote:
 
 Hi All,
 
 We're trying to modernize America. LBJ helped do it for 
 electricity
 decades ago. It's our turn to step up to the plate. Tele-health 
 and
 distance learning requires us to do so. There is so much to 
 follow.
 
 A reminder what many women went through before LBJ showed up. I'm
 skeptical a patriarchy under Musk is even close to capable. We 
 probably
 need a woman to lead us, or at least motivate us to do our best 
 work for
 our country and to be an example to the world.
 
 A Hill Country farm wife had to do her chores even if she was ill 
 – no
 matter how ill. Because Hill Country women were too poor to afford 
 proper
 medical care they often suffered perineal tears in childbirth. 
 During the
 1930s, the federal government sent physicians to examine a 
 sampling of
 Hill Country women. The doctors found that, out of 275 women, 158 
 had
 perineal tears. Many of them, the team of gynecologists reported, 
 were
 third-degree tears, “tears so bad that it is difficult to see how 
 they
 stand on their feet.” But they were standing on their feet, and 
 doing all
 the chores that Hill Country wives had always done – hauling the 
 water,
 hauling the wood, canning, washing, ironing, helping with the 
 shearing,
 the plowing and the picking.
 
 Because there was no electricity.
 
 Bob
 On Fri, 15 Dec 2023, Sebastian Moeller via Starlink wrote:
 
 Hi Frantisek,
 
 
 On Dec 15, 2023, at 13:46, Frantisek Borsik via Nnagain
 <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
 
 Thus, technically speaking, one would like the advantages of 
 satcom
 such as starlink, to be at least 5gbit/s in 10 years time, to 
 overcome
 the 'tangled fiber' problem.
 
 No, not really. Starlink was about to address the issue of 
 digital
 divide -
 
   I beg to differ. Starlink is a commercial enterprise with the 
 goal to
 make a profit by offering (usable) internet access essentially
 everywhere; it is not as far as I can tell an attempt at 
 specifically
 reducing the digital divide (were often an important factor is 
 not
 necessarily location but financial means).
 
 Every Inernet company " commercial enterprise with the goal to 
 make a
 profit by offering (usable) internet" don't dismiss a company 
 because
 of that. Starlink (and the other Satellite ISPs) all exist to 
 service
 people who can't use traditional wired infrastructure
 
 
 delivering internet to those 640k locations, where there is 
 literally
 none today. Fiber will NEVER get there. And it will get there, 
 it will
 be like 10 years down the road.
 
   This is IHO the wrong approach to take. The goal needs to be a
 universal FTTH access network (with the exception of extreme 
 locations,
 no need to pull fiber up to the highest Bivouac shelter on Mt. 
 Whitney).
 And f that takes a decade or two, so be it, this is 
 infrastructure that
 will keep on helping for many decades once rolled-out. However 
 given
 that time frame one should consider work-arounds for the interim 
 period.
 I would have naively thought starlink would qualify for that 
 from a
 technical perspective, but then the FCC documents actually 
 discussion
 requirements and how they were or were not met/promised by 
 starlink was
 mostly redacted.
 
 what do you consider 'extreme locations'? how long a run between
 houses is 'too far'?
 
 we've seen the failure of commercial fiber monopolies in cities 
 with
 housing density of several houses per acre (and even where there 
 are
 apartment complexes there as well) because it's not profitable 
 enough.
 When you get into areas where it's 'how many acres per house' the 
 cost
 of running FTTH gets very high. I don't think this is the 
 majority of
 the population of the US any longer (but I don't know for sure), 
 but
 it's very clearly the majority of the area of the US. And once 
 you get
 out of the major metro areas, even getting fiber to every town or
 village becomes a major undertaking.
 
 Is running fiber 30 miles to support a village of 700 people an
 'extreme location'? let me introduce you to Vermontville MI
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermontville,_Michigan which is 
 less
 than an hours drive from the state capitol.
 
 David Lang

 Nnagain mailing list
 Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
 https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
 

 Starlink mailing list
 Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net
 https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink
 
 
 
 

Nnagain mailing list
Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain

_______________________________________________
Nnagain mailing list
Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain