Fair - how does that account for the predominantly female FA population?

I don't think FA is a great job for a mom but it's not as horrible as pilot. FAs can switch shifts between themselves and dial up or down their hours with relative ease. Pilots have a lot less of this flexibility.

The schedules have negligible difference with respect to your original argument. So if busy schedules are why there are hardly any women pilots, why is the gender balance the exact opposite for flight attendants? There are reasons, and they aren't all because "men bad", but your initial argument is 100% not true based on the simple counterexample of flight attendants. What is being "papered over" is this: why, given the same schedules, are women under-represented in the higher paying, higher prestige job?

> why, given the same schedules, are women under-represented in the higher paying, higher prestige job?

Why do you believe they have the same schedules? There's no rule that says when a pilot follows one flight with another flight, all the flight attendants have to join him.

I don't think there's all that much inherent value in having several flights flown by the same pilot -- if anything, it's the reverse -- so I'd tend to suspect that the rarity of female pilots owes more to the fact that pilots come from the Air Force.

FAs have very interesting schedules. As they work up seniority they have a ton of flexibility in how they space apart their required minimum number of shifts/overnights. Trading shifts and bidding for shifts is common. Additionally at some point in their seniority ladder they can start getting a regular set of shifts that get them back home to base daily, with occasional overnights.

I suspect this institutional flexibility is actually a natural consequence of the gendered nature of the role.

A lot of us didn't

Glad to know that's solved now

That was well covered in another episode.

Anecdotally, I seen many of my coworkers switch from Dell to Mac and we're almost exclusively a dotnet shop. The only thing stopping me from 11 is low disk space but it's really just a matter of time. Pretty sure I'll follow on to mac

Our IT “standardized” the orderable laptop SKUs to the extent that the “developer” PC laptops are now gimped with worse specs than the equivalent base model MacBook Pros that can be ordered.

Any reasonable spec machine requires an “Equipment Council” to approve via an exceptional process (a.k.a not happening if your manager can’t be bothered).

It’s a joke.

They’ll pay developers $250k+ a year but can’t spend the peanuts to get them decent hardware.

So people twiddle their thumbs, rest and vest.

What happens to the IP when this happens? If the product works but wasn't supported by the right company how does it not get picked up by someone more competent?

You wait 20 years, then work on it once the patents have expired. This happens to lots of technologies, which aren't properly license while under patent protection, then take off once the protection expires.

Probably the most well known is animated GIFs, which had some popularity in early web pages, but quickly died off, then had a huge upsurge after the patent expired in the 2000's, when anyone could add animated GIF outputs to any program or web service, without licensing.

I would imagine the IP was sold, especially if there was bankruptcy.

I think the question was why whoever picked it up didn’t do anything with it, which points towards it not just being an issue of incompetence, but maybe an underlying issue of the technology.

It's super common for UP to be sold for $1 to someone who has no intention to use it, just to have a larger defensive IP portfolio.

Or a commercial blood bank bought it. Since this was based on cow hemoglobin and thus a thread to their business model.

Or a patent troll, who are now busy working out how they can sue the Japanese scientists.

Spelling out columns can help the query optimizer too

Consumer reports is a non-profit last I checked

And, of course, you can site a reference for those statistics. That aside, I don't agree with your overall sentiment.

I'm interested because it isn't chromium

Google is evil, and Chromium has too many Google-isms. Also, monocultures are bad.

Let me guess, you wrote this on an Apple device where .. checks notes.. every browser is webkit.

Monoculture is bad. smh

macOS can run any engine. iOS cannot.

Because when there is a monopoly, you are at the whims of the people that control it.

There's a company called Airhart that's trying to bring Fly-By-Wire to GA. But (at least in the US) I think innovation would be better focused on regulations - looking at you aeromedical specifically.