What to Submit
On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
That's fine I guess. I'm sure there's a good hacker out there that is interested in the different parenting styles of French and American mothers. Though I'm not sure about the plural of hackers. That might be a stretch.
There are also hackers out there that are interested in politics, salad recipes, what Bill Murray is doing, and lolcats. I just feel like I'm on Reddit is all.
technology is here to help us live better, so maybe there is an app for this in future? someone works diligently to study child habits from different countries - developed or not and categorizes parenting styles. As a user one can ask the app - which parenting style the action you just took for your child's demand/question fall under, which can help you determine future implications, whether you should have done something else (the app doesnt tell you....but knowledge and data can guide you). I would read these and feed my brain.
This place is turning into Digg little by little. I remember the first page of Digg over half a decade ago. Tech news, phones, and then it went to politics, funny stories, world news. And then it just descended from there.
No, it is not. This article is perfectly on topic. On the other hand: "Please don't submit comments complaining that a submission is inappropriate for the site."
That's what Digg and Reddit said. I'll mark my calendar for 5 years from now, we'll come back and have this conversation again. I'm probably wrong, but I might be right. If anything I'm a hypocrite for contributing to this story in the comments above.
I can't imagine the amount of channel noise generated by certain keywords. And for every one you'd have to do a time consuming search through the user's social graph(s).
There should be a function in the scraper that gives each user a unique ID, and retains an instance count of keyword 'hits'. Over time, the user would build up a 'heat rating' and IDs could be sorted by this. That way, people generating keyword noise over and over again could be separated from the general population for a closer look.
I think she made some very good points. It was a bit ranty, and self contradictory at times:
>On top of that there is evidence that the members of the VC community go out of their way to attract women. Of course, this makes sense. VCs look for underserved markets. Women are likely to address different markets than men, and since there are so few women founders compared to men founders, it’s likely that women are addressing an underserved market.
and then this:
>Whoever started the TED Women’s conference is pathetic.
Uh, ok. Right on TED Women's webpage they say that "Over the past several years, a flood of fascinating data from the worlds of education, microfinance and more has shown an essential link between investing in women and girls and economic growth, public health, political stability."
And it goes on to state that TEDW wants to explore those 'underserved markets' to borrow the author's words, in greater detail, -behavior that she just got finished praising.
But whatever, I'm nitpicking. I think the general thrust of most of her arguments have merit. Women often choose to disengage from the business world to realize life goals that make them happier than what business success can offer them. What guy hasn't had this dream? To be sure, it's probably a different dream. For women, it may involve having children and raising a family for some. For me, it might be throwing caution to the wind and traveling the world. Bottom line is that I think there are some very basic 'non-business' aspirational lifestyles that humans of all walks of life wish they could engage in at different times. Biology and culture have conspired to offer women one of them up on a silver platter if they so choose. Many do, and there's nothing wrong with that.
EDIT: I don't know how scientific this is, but just an ironic post I came across browsing just now. Check out #2 on the list:
Yes. What's a startup business, or even a traditional career, going to get you in the end? Admiration? Adulation? Money money money?
As most people with children will be able to tell you, all of those things are vapid and empty compared to spending time with your children. Perhaps many women choosing to stay home raising families instead of pursuing careers have found something more rewarding to do with their time.
My wife gets the dismissive smile and nod from career women whenever she answers their obligatory "what do you do for a living" question.
This makes her feel bad for raising our children.
This only lasts until I point out that these career women get the awesome privilege that men have enjoyed for hundreds of years: slaving away for some overseer, pushing paper in a cube and staring blankly at fluorescent lights, having distant relationships with your own offspring, and dealing with office politics for 30 years, then dropping dead.
Families also get the added benefit of having their children raised by a rotating crew of $10/hr wage slaves at some cut-rate daycare from infancy, in exchange for about what a 2nd house would cost, because dad isn't likely to want to stay home either.
The neighborhood also "benefits" by being an absolute ghost town during work hours, so people who are doing the work of raising children are left bereft of any sort of neighborhood support (remember when you could just let kids run wild outdoors, or your mom stopping next door for coffee?).
The fulfillment angle of no-parent society is pretty slim I think.
Raising kids is about the only fulfilling thing left in the world that anyone you know is likely to do. Families with no full time parent (mom or dad, mind you) is a bizarre and frightening development.
wow. if that's the world you live in, why have any children? :(
seriously, do you think that maybe different people are made happy by different things? i know men and women who have no interest in having a romantic relationship, let alone raising a family. do they occupy some horrible THX1148-style monochrome existence for fulfilling their lives by doing things?
>all of those things are vapid and empty compared to spending time with your children.
Yes, for some. Come to think of it, spending time with the kids is probably the number one reason men downshift (by choice) as well.
What is complicated and not fully understood by me is how accurately we have accounted for women who voluntarily choose to downshift in all of the 'glass ceiling' statistics. I think that the glass ceiling is very real, but I just wonder how trustworthy the stats are. It's complicated.
You can find studies on this. Treated as a group women are more likely to trade things like extra time off and flexible hours for salary.
It's very rational when you consider that it's consistently been shown that women are more likely (notice I said likely) to place a higher value on non-monetary compensation.
