What else could they want?

Vox Day has a post today about Forbes revising its net worth estimate for Elizabeth Holmes from $4.5 billion to zero.  Yet from this article it is clear that Holmes has all of the attributes to be a kickass tech visionary:

  • Lab coat?  Check
  • Ponytail?  Check*
  • Fanboys?  Check

The only deficiency I can find is related to eye-wear.  I can’t find a single image of her wearing either glasses or safety goggles.  This is however a purely superficial issue, and given her other accomplishments (see bullets above) it is something I think the business press and venture capitalists should continue to overlook.

*I have given her credit for a ponytail even though no ponytail is verifiable in the photo.  It is however possible that like the test results from her company’s signature invention, the ponytail assumption will have to be thrown out.

This entry was posted in Elizabeth Holmes, Fantasy vs Reality, Satire, Vox Day, You can't make this stuff up. Bookmark the permalink.

141 Responses to What else could they want?

  1. Cane Caldo says:

    One of my go-to comments: People push for there to be more women in the workplace, college, and government and at the same time complain that these institutions are getting worse and worse.

  2. Pingback: What else could they want? | Neoreactive

  3. Pingback: What else could they want? – Manosphere.org

  4. Another female with inadequate credentials is puffed up by society as “101st richest woman in the world!” Why look at this girl! She has a lab coat. She is OBVIOUSLY A DOCTOR.

    No? Really?

    Then she must have a decade of experience in medical products manufacturing?

    Nope.

    Then she must have several year managing a top technology company?

    Nope.

    This 31 year old chick is a college dropout and the sum total of her experience is living in China and starting a business, allegedly selling to Chines universities. No other credentials besides being a HB6 Blonde with that most precious and exulted commodity in all the universe- that most holy and moist vagina may peace be upon it. Apparently that is enough. She is a STROOONG INDEPENDENT WOMAN, after all. Perhaps next this Mary Sue can use her magical powers of the vagina force and battle off a dozen Sith Lords at the same time?

    Absolutely incredible how they engage in a frenzy of media build up of substandard women while gleefully tearing down any man who puts up his head.

    Reminds me of an old Chinese proverb- It is the man who sticks up for himself who will be hammered down. Contemporaneously while the women are built up, even if it is just with a house of cards and even if it comes at the cost of destroying men… the important thing is yougoooogirrrrrrlllllzzzz…because it is how we FEEEEEEEEEL we are contributing, not what we actually produce.

  5. Avraham rosenblum says:

    There were and are great women. Emmy Noether, Maryna Viazovska. Generalizing about women is not that different than generalizing about men. There is a are positive masculine traits and negative ones. Same with feminine traits.

  6. greyghost says:

    This chick Elizabeth Holmes took the you go girl with FI approval to a record high in STEM of all places. STEM has no place for FI it is pure reality there. That blood test “technology” was a complete fraud sprinkled with “I want to believe” FI pixie dust. She may not go to jail but some dudes going along to get along engineer types signing off on that shit are in big trouble.

  7. SirHamster says:

    There were and are great women. Emmy Noether, Maryna Viazovska. Generalizing about women is not that different than generalizing about men. There is a are positive masculine traits and negative ones. Same with feminine traits.

    … who?

  8. Dalrock says:

    @Avraham rosenblum

    Generalizing about women is not that different than generalizing about men.

    You have failed entirely to grasp the point of the post. This isn’t about women’s traits, but about how incredibly eager we are to assume stellar competence for women based on the most superficial attributes.

  9. Avraham rosenblum says:

    Thank you for correcting me. I see now what you meant.

  10. SnapperTrx says:

    Wow, those are some dead eyes in that lab coat pic.

    Or maybe its more of, “I have no idea what any of this stuff does….”

  11. Avraham: “There were and are great women.”

    I am reading “The Making of the Atomic Bomb” that traces the particle physics in exquisite historical detail. Fully 15% of the great researchers and physicists profiled in this grand project (to split the atom) were women. More often accomplished and highly educated women were married to other great scholars and scientists. Fully 1/2 of the (male) scientists were married to brilliant scholars who greatly assisted their research. The wives proofread, revised, and most important provided a sounding board for the men’s work and a tranquil home environment for these men to continue their work without distractions.

    I bring it up because the book describes how women used to behave. Several of the great female scientists would routinely throw a party for her husband and a group of scholars and then demurely serve tea for the men while they met. She would listen intently and quietly but after the meeting she would discuss the finer points of whatever quantum physics or particle physics theory was on the table. The men were often surprised and delighted to discover this woman held a PhD in physics and had authored papers on the topic.

    Which of course is exactly the the point of the post. Men WANT women to be equal. We elevate women naturally, hoping to find the special one. We elevate them to the point you were compelled to whine NAWALT. We want a woman who can hold a discussion on the details without resorting to the emotional feelgood Okey Dokey language that women (and feminine Presidents) use. We are destined to disappointment.

  12. Avraham rosenblum says:

    Blue Pill Professor. Very well put and apt comment. You said better what I was trying to point out

  13. White Guy says:

    My father and I work together in a Engineering firm and we can usually tell if a project has a woman involved (either at the bureaucratic or design level). It’s usually behind schedule, over-budget, and/or over designed. But the powerpoint presentations look really, really good.

    He put it best, we need to have a new field called ’emotional engineering’ that way they can have good feelz and ‘contribute’ on these hard projects without actually screwing them up.

    I will go ahead and lay down this axiom. In STEM – WOMEN RUIN EVERYTHING.

    Don’t even get me started on the US space program.

  14. Looking Glass says:

    Now that the Theranos scam is on full display for everyone (the rumors started getting problematic when their lead researcher committed suicide in 2013), now all of the messy details will start coming out.

    Though BPP doesn’t quite go far enough on the ” most holy and moist vagina may peace be upon it” joke. She was between 21 & 23 when Theranos was getting most of its early financing in the Venture Capital world. Medical companies are big money sinks. Ever wonder how a college drop-out with no skills in a field managed to land a lot of VC funds early?

    She styled herself a lot like Steve Jobs (which means she’s a petty tyrant inside the company, more than likely), but she’s good with the networking aspects of raising funding. There was a lot of that praise early with Theranos & Holmes. Though I’ve always wondered if those statements weren’t coming from Men she’d slept with to secure funding.

    Oh, and the Black Turtleneck thing really, REALLY didn’t work. Sure, it was an imagine, but she always looked bad in them.

    Lastly, and credit to ZeroHedge for this one, but the Theranos board of directors really only made sense if you were running a Biological Warfare company. Which, who knows, maybe they are?

  15. Spawny Get says:

    “The only deficiency I can find is related to eye-wear. I can’t find a single image of her wearing either glasses or safety goggles.”

    Unbeliever!

    If she just sorts out the eyewear problem…she’s set for glory once more. And how silly will we feel ever having doubted her and golden uterus?

  16. Spawny Get says:

    “Biological Warfare company”

    Seems to be a great destroyer of investor money. Does that count?

  17. Pingback: What else could they want? | Reaction Times

  18. Caspar Reyes says:

    I hear whites all around the eyes is a sign of bat-s#!7 crazy.

  19. Opus says:

    As I understand it, Holmes dropped out of Stanford as a Sophomore (I have no idea what that is). Filled with you go grrrl dreams (just look at her eulogies for you go grrl women on Twitter – sexist or what! – and which, incidentally, she has not updated since December last year) she dreams of a shorter needle for extracting blood. Sounds pointless to me but I am one who thought Broadband Internet pointless so what would I know. The company is privately funded and so far as one can see entirely by men. Nothing has ever been peer reviewed and the blood tests are outsourced to standard equipment . In 2013 an employee a Dr Gibbons a British Bio-chemist committed suicide and according to his widow he had said that nothing worked. Theranos are claiming libel. As a strong empowered woman, I read, she wears the same costume as the late Steve Jobs.

    Some say she is genius whose time has not yet come, some say she is scam artist and others more charitably say she has believed her own self-serving hype and not tolerating dissent has only listened to those who praise her – her clutch of Beta-orbiters. I say she has that wild-eyed stare of a pudding-faced thirty-two year old woman looking Spinster-dom and childlessness in the face.

  20. Women really are much better at “playing the part.” Women professionals seem to really get down the parts about how to look, sound, dress, and move like a professional. Perhaps because they tend to focus on those sorts of externals a little too much. Men are probably a little more preoccupied with whether or not they are PERFORMING as a professional, not whether or not they are PERCEIVED BY OTHERS to be a professional.

  21. (continued from my comment above)

    This is something I have noticed a lot with women in their mid-twenties. I’ll meet girls who seem like superstars because of how well they seem to have it together. I get fooled by this persona that they so perfectly adopt and then later when if I actually get to know them I’ll kick myself for being so foolish as to be intimidated by them because of appearances because that’s all it was- appearances.

  22. Don Quixote says:

    One of funny things about this ‘Theranos’ company is the board of directors. These guys* got taken in by the blond chick in a lab coat.

    These guys: Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, Bill Perry and so on.

  23. Currently on a project with 2 chicks and one man doing a one man job. Meanwhile, I don’t have time to turn around. Today top Chick’s testing equipment broke down so she had time to watch something she would have normally been testing. When I asked her to spot me she put on a sad face and begged off because she was “too busy”. It’s a farce.

  24. Wow, she looks like the typical space cadet. Physiology strikes again?

  25. Wow, she looks like the typical space cadet. Physiology strikes again?

    Henry K’s latest Monarch Project? She looks like she has gravy on the brain.

  26. Looking Glass says:

    @Don Quixote:

    Eh, board members get paid. Depending on the meetings, they get flown out twice a year to make sure the books work. Only Bill Frist had any medical understanding, and there’s been no complaints about the books or auditing being fraudulent. Theranos has done everything properly that’s required to make the business work. This is actually sign of a competent Board.

    However, this board was well-chosen for making deals but no one on there able to check the advanced science. So, no one got taken, but someone very specifically decided to avoid a proper Science Advisory group. Either it was Holmes or one of the main VC groups.

  27. Feminist Hater says:

    Lol, she was the self-made billionaire feminist prophet. Kind of all built on hype. Not a single share of her company was sold to the public. All the money was injected from some big names who hold preferential shares and pumped up the company via normal and social media. It’s all a scam, they used other companies to conduct their tests and the test they did do are faulty.

    Ms Turtle Neck Sweater is worth nothing because she created nothing. Nothing that wasn’t already offered by men for far cheaper and that provide a far better service. Fraud is what this was.

    A typical venture capital ideal where hype sells the company, public eventually buys the hype and the shares, company fails but the venture capitalists more on.

  28. Feminist Hater says:

    Lucky the public didn’t get the opportunity to buy in….

  29. Dalrock says:

    @Opus

    Nothing has ever been peer reviewed and the blood tests are outsourced to standard equipment. In 2013 an employee a Dr Gibbons a British Bio-chemist committed suicide and according to his widow he had said that nothing worked. Theranos are claiming libel.

    As I understand it their own equipment was initially approved by the FDA for Herpes, but then claims were made that Theranos had submitted improper data. For a few years Theranos did use their own equipment, but then last year revoked all of the results for 2014 and 2015. Even worse, according to the WSJ their problems extend to their ability to use other companies machines as well:

    A person familiar with the matter said the Arizona lab performed the blood-coagulation tests with a traditional machine from Siemens AG that was programmed to the wrong settings by Theranos.
    The Arizona lab also failed several tests to gauge the purity of the water it uses in its Siemens machines, which could affect the accuracy of some blood tests run on the devices, the person said.
    The person added that Siemens has grown wary about its relationship with Theranos.

  30. JDG says:

    One of my go-to comments: People push for there to be more women in the workplace, college, and government and at the same time complain that these institutions are getting worse and worse.

    Yep!

  31. Dave says:

    My father and I work together in a Engineering firm and we can usually tell if a project has a woman involved (either at the bureaucratic or design level).

    I work in healthcare, and the story is the same. Particularly when women are in healthcare administration. It is absolutely insane. They seem to bury you in useless paper works, and chase after you to complete useless documents rather than allow you to take care of sick patients.
    I once attended a training session for a new job at a hospital. Typically, as a new (temp) hire, they teach you how to complete your charts on their system, dictate your notes and write orders for the labs and the pharmacist. Our trainers were all women, and they spent the whole time in the morning hours talking about absolutely useless stuff, only to start rushing their talks on how to use the computer system at about 3pm, when everyone was tired and bored.
    Women are great for two main things: to attract a mate, and nurture the young. Everything else is really not within their domain. Let them abide in their calling and everything will be just fine.

    Brethren, let every (wo)man, wherein (s)he is called, therein abide with God

    —-Apostle Paul, paraphrased.

  32. Ooh Ooh men do it too!
    https://therationalmale.com/2013/10/23/not-all-women-arent-like-that/

    The hallmark of a Blue Pill mindset is the automatic defense of the feminine with accusations of “sweeping generalizations” about women instantly followed with male comparatives and NAWALT.

    Replace Elizabeth Holmes with a man and no one would think to defend him with gender comparatives.

  33. Spike says:

    Elizabeth Holmes has gone the way of Marissa Meyer: promoted on the basis of image rather than record, surrounded by acolytes and inflated by an obsequious press,they will work like a sugar-hit – that is, until the shit gets real.
    My guess is that Holmes will probably try telling us she is the victim of a sexist patriarchal witch hunt.

  34. Farm Boy says:

    I wonder if Ms. Holmes can make a sammich…

  35. feeriker says:

    One of funny things about this ‘Theranos’ company is the board of directors. These guys* got taken in by the blond chick in a lab coat.

    These guys: Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, Bill Perry and so on.

    Couldn’t have happened to a more deserving bunch. Too bad they didn’t lose ALL of their (ill-gotten) money …

  36. Yoda says:

    My guess is that Holmes will probably try telling us she is the victim of a sexist patriarchal witch hunt.

    Jedi powers you might have.
    See the future you can

  37. feeriker says:

    There were and are great women. Emmy Noether, Maryna Viazovska.

    Echoing SirHamster. WHO……???!!!

  38. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    I saw this SyFy Channel monster movie. A Woman Scientist was leading a team of explorers over some lake. She barely look 30, yet she was described as “the most brilliant scientist in the world” in her specialty. Quite an achievement for a woman so young.

    She had the ponytail, despite her bimbo appearance, walking about the boat in a bikini.

    Her team included a burly Macho Man Diver.

    At one point, the Villain came with some Underlings, carrying guns, to intimidate the Woman Scientist into calling off her expedition. The Woman Scientist boldly ordered the Villain off her boat. Her Macho Man Diver did nothing to help her, silently standing by and letting her take charge, since she was not only Brilliant, but Tough. Tougher than the Villain with all his guns and Underlings.

  39. Isa says:

    The idea itself is a good one, especially for neonates. The issue was the amount of miniaturization and subsequant inevitable quality problems. We already test blood glucose with a prick, so it is conceivable that other conditions could also be tested for. However, claiming to be able to perform a full cbc and hept panel as well as viral testing on a couple drops of blood? I’m not sure how the technology would be accurate enough to get good results, especially once a centrifuge got involved… Nanotech needs to advance quite a bit before this is feasible.

  40. White Guy says:

    Well she saw it on Star Trek once or was that Star Wars, I get all those boy shows mixed up. So it must be almost real, like you know. Those engineers and bio-chemists just need to work harder.

  41. SirHamster says:

    There were and are great women. Emmy Noether, Maryna Viazovska.
    ————-
    Echoing SirHamster. WHO……???!!!

    To be fair, they have at least one fanboy, are probably wearing glasses, and if they have a ponytail and are dressed in Serious Science attire …

  42. They Call Me Tom says:

    I must admit, that the mastering perception thing does happen, for a bit. But given that the current economy puts everyone in a spot eventually that shows whether they can or can’t. At the last office, they put some of the faking-it ladies in leadership positions. Because the company’s leaders prefer a passive, take the money from the machine, never mind the machine approach. The company was already in the habit of cutting corners, so everyone was already spread thin. When the fakes very quickly showed they were making the job harder still with their incompetence, I wasn’t the first, nor the last to head for the doors.

    I had the next job before I could even start looking for it, and from lunches and dinners with former coworkers… they haven’t replaced the people they’ve lost, and those that I’ve talked don’t intend to be there a year from now.

    You. go. girl. Ha ha ha.

  43. Boxer says:

    There were and are great women. Emmy Noether, Maryna Viazovska.
    ————-
    Echoing SirHamster. WHO……???!!!

    To be fair, they have at least one fanboy, are probably wearing glasses, and if they have a ponytail and are dressed in Serious Science attire …

    I know who Emmy Noether was, and anyone who has spent any time in advanced linear algebra or ring theory classes as an undergrad math student will have heard of her work (whether he remembers or not).

    When you guys imply that no woman can do technical stuff, you sound as kooky as the feminists who squawk about all men being rapists. Not only is this nonsense tired, but it’s simply not true.

    Problem with great female minds (legit ones, like Noether) is that they’re outliers, and more importantly their promotion gives everyday girls (who largely aren’t outliers) the idea that modeling their lives on these outliers is a phony expectation which will lead to great happiness and fulfillment. Dr. Noether really wasn’t happy as a woman, and a casual perusal of her papers suggests she’d have been happier as a wife and mother than as a teacher — though she was a great teacher and did important work. She was sterile (had to have a hysterectomy in her 20s, IIRC) so marriage wasn’t really in the cards anyway.

    To make her a role model, symbolically and literally sterilizing thousands of young girls who might just like mathy stuff today, is not only unfair to today’s women, but it’s also the last thing Noether, herself, would have wanted.

    Boxer

  44. feeriker says:

    Because the company’s leaders prefer a passive, take the money from the machine, never mind the machine approach. The company was already in the habit of cutting corners, so everyone was already spread thin.

    In other words, a typically over-leveraged tech firm where competence and quality control are considered unacceptable bites into the bottom line.

    Par for the course.

  45. mrteebs says:

    Elevation of female mediocrity coupled with good looks into “rising young rock stars” has become an art form in most big companies, lest they miss their diversity quotients. Academia is excepted, as mediocrity, ugliness, and stridency form the female Trifecta there.

  46. feeriker says:

    Academia is excepted, as mediocrity, ugliness, and stridency form the female Trifecta there.

    Attainment of academic mediocrity –of both sexes, but particularly of women– would be the equivalent of excellence in any other profession or setting. In academia today the prevailing standard is usually somewhere between bad and unacceptable.

  47. MarcusD says:

    “When you guys imply that no woman can do technical stuff”

    I think it’s a consequence of so many female role models, particularly in STEM (and especially those promoted by the media), turning out to be frauds (or dramatically less qualified) that has led to this view. That’s not to say all (or nearly all), but enough to start making people question the whole thing. It’s a bit like female soldiers in the military: once it comes out that a few were basically carried through, the capabilities and qualifications of all female soldiers are questioned. I think such questioning should only go back two or three decades, though (e.g. WWII female Soviet combatants did just fine in certain roles (e.g. snipers, pilots)).

  48. Looking Glass says:

    @Boxer:

    The Eastern & Northeastern Europeans have turned out some really good female Mathematicians over the last 2 centuries, but it seems to be mostly isolated to those parts of the world. There’s also a pretty much an assurance that their mathematical abilities come at the complete cost of the rest of their lives, but they’re only ever “good” not and “great” mathematicians. (That most of them would score on the Autism Spectrum test having a lot to do with that.)

    But there’s also this little issue where Mathematics has been pretty much a “geek” field for the better part of 2 centuries. You’ve got to be pretty smart, but the “really smart” go into other fields. It’s hard to really grasp the reasons this happen unless you’ve been pretty far down the training, but the short version is that there’s pretty much nothing worthwhile for a research-level mathematician to do these days. (Graduate students can be doing research that maybe 100 other people on the planet can actually understand. Ain’t much Glory to be found there.) So most of the really bright head for the spots they’ll make more money and get more Women.

    Let me tell you, the fastest way to kill every conversation is to start it with “I have a degree in Mathematics.” You’ll get a lot further with both Men & Women if you started with, “I have the word “Hilter” tattooed on my butt”.

  49. Avraham rosenblum says:

    I saw some notes asked about whom I meant. Emmy Noether was in Abstract Algebra. And Viazovska proved the lattice in 8 dimensions is the most condensed.But I was just trying to point out what I thought was clear. There are talented women. Though people that have commented here about their experience in engineering and medicine I can see also have a point. Maybe it is simply hard to tell who is really talented and who is faking it.

  50. Looking Glass says:

    On “Women in professions” issue, the problem is the central feminist views stuck within our cultures, rendering much of the assumptions functionally stereotypical. We used to understand there were outliers and we mostly let them be. It didn’t effect much. But, now that every quirk, oddity or perversion must be “accepted” (while subtlety claiming normality is evil), you have to bring in people that are simply not qualified to meet quotas.

    Like all affirmative action, it puts most people in positions to fail badly, and greatly diminishes the accomplishments of those that actually accomplish something.

  51. JH says:

    The girl field goal kicker (who tried out for the NFL) of STEM.

  52. Opus says:

    Holmes reminds me of Zoolander in the Pennsylvania mine. What else can one assume when amongst her Twitter updates is her cheer-leading that Women are now to be front-line Infantry troops. I write this just short of a month before the centenary of The Battle of the Somme on which day (the 1st July 1916) there were 57,470 British casualties. The Somme cannot be too far away from The Teutoberg Forest where in the year 9 AD the Germans wiped-out not just one but three Roman Legions – the XVIIth, XVIIIth and XIXth (never underestimate the Germans). The Romans also at some unknown date in Britain lost their IXth legion – never further mentioned in the chronicles (I’m guessing Scots here) – and then in 216BC at Cannae, Hannibal Barca slaughtered 75,000 Romans. Holmes appears to see War more as a beauty-pageant where one poses in attractive clothing rather than a life-or-death fight where even if you are not killed or injured slavery would have been your fate – provided you are male. Women, of course, could expect a fate worse than death.

  53. Desiderius says:

    “To make her a role model, symbolically and literally sterilizing thousands of young girls who might just like mathy stuff today, is not only unfair to today’s women, but it’s also the last thing Noether, herself, would have wanted.”

    Exactly.

    One can play tennis with a Stradivarius, and indeed Rafael Nadal could probably beat you with one, but that’s not what it’s for. To imagine that saying so is a knock on Stradivarius violins is so absurd that one wonders what’s really behind the push to get women into all these fields.

  54. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    I didn’t know what to expect from Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. I assumed it would retain the Regency Period setting and atmosphere of the original Jane Austin novel, but with zombies. But the DVD is expensive (I didn’t read the book), so I checked out the trailer.

    Looks like an awful film.

    Young, kick-ass English ladies of the Regency period, fighting hordes of zombies, martial arts style. Why can’t they be proper English ladies dealing with zombies? Zombies are enough of a twist on the novel, no? Did they have to make these English ladies so hyper-masculine?

    And there’s even a clip of the girls’ proud father saying, “My daughters are trained for battle fare, not the kitchen.”

  55. Desiderius says:

    Avraham,

    “There are talented women.”

    But there are very few relative to the men in fields such as mathematics, and they get rarer the further out you get on the greatness distribution. Why did you feel compelled to defend women from some imagined attack which would be absurd on it’s face? Is it denigrating to great mathematicians to point out that many were profoundly absent-minded?

  56. Avraham rosenblum says:

    I am new to the blog. Some comments seemed to imply less talent than what I had seen. That is the reason I felt compelled to mention the great women. But from what I see now looking over the general nature of the blog, it could be that most people on this blog already understood that point.

  57. Looking Glass says:

    @Avraham:

    We’re quite aware that Women can develop strong but not great talents. We’re also well aware that focus should be on the home life and not enforced in most of the work field, as there are few Women that have the mental fortitude to actually perform most Visual-Spatial Economic Tasks with consistency.

    We also take most of the “see, there are great women!” points as explicit White Knighting, which will get destroyed here for being extremely pathetic. Dealing with the Truth requires having a proper valuation of what people bring to life. Something wholly lacking in our societies now.

  58. Blak says:

    This woman is most likely just the face of this company. Kissinger’s name on the board is a red flag that this was a initiative of the NWO.

  59. Modsquad says:

    This situation is way beyond male/female dynamics. It isn’t about gender, it’s about fraud. This was about rigging a stock to loot investors, the only unknown yet was where did the money go and what are they using it for.

    It’s the same skim as per Enron/Global Crossing over a dozen years ago. Enron built the Dabhol Power Station in India for free (the Indian government paid nothing for it). Global Crossing laid the fibre optic network across the Pacific for free. Then both companies went belly up… the U.S. corporations that were moving their production overseas guaranteed themselves a reliable electricity supply in India and a high speed communications network going back to the U.S., and made the investors of Enron and Global Crossing pay for the whole thing. This was all intentional, Enron and Global were not supposed to survive after their function was complete.

    Looking at the Theranos board members, it’s a who’s-who of power brokers. They propped up Holmes (the Lee Harvey Oswald in this case) as the front person, pumped up the share prices to a $9 billion valuation, then sold out their own holdings and funnelled the profits elsewhere. This is Bre-X on a much larger scale, all done with the safety of “we were wrong, the technology doesn’t work” in order to keep it from looking like fraud.

  60. Opus says:

    I am doubtful that there are any great women. It is all too easy to name a woman like Noether and in pretending that men and women are interchangable to ignore that she is a failure as a woman whilst ignoring that for every woman of her ability there are probably ten or thirty men. There have always been some women who did not reproduce and that was never in small numbers a problem; the problem comes when women are led to believe that they are just like men and that motherhood is something that can be delayed or otherwise is outsourced.

    I cannot name a great female composer though I can name some very good ones. The equality theorist is then caught on the horns of a dilemma: if the theorist says that men deliberately held women back then he impliedly acknowledges greater male skill, cunning or force – something that he is otherwise keen to deny for that contradicts his theory of equality of the sexes. If however he avoids that own-goal and claims that there have always been great female composers, then he has to explain why no one has heard of them or heard their music. He must also explain why and even though since the founding in the 1820s of the first Conservatoires where women have always been accepted as students and where they frequently won prizes for composition these women are unknown. Most men who win prizes are of course also unknown but no one then argues on behalf of the forgotten men as the equality theorist must for the women that concert-promoters or the like have deliberately held the women back. It might then be argued that motherhood got in the way of a glittering career – as if the needs of family have never hindered men. It may well be the case for some women that Motherhood held them back but not for all and it ignores the many obstacles that male composers have often faced.

    There are two ways to achieve equality: by deliberately lowering someone below their natural level and by deliberately raising someone above their natural level. The Equality Theorist will attempt both. If thus you consider Charles Babbage; his status as the constructor of the first non-human computer has to be lowered and Miss Byron’s contribution (so far as I can see as little more than a data-input operative) has to be raised to the first Programmer. One cannot ignore however that Babbage – a lowly commoner – was the inventor and that the Lady Ada, – a member of the aristocracy, wealthy and in the right place at the right time – was a mere assistant who probably also made the sandwiches or would have had she not had a houseful of servants. I fully expect to see the image of Miss Byron on a Bank of England note long before I see the image of Charles Babbage.

  61. Dalrock says:

    @Modsquad

    This situation is way beyond male/female dynamics. It isn’t about gender, it’s about fraud. This was about rigging a stock to loot investors, the only unknown yet was where did the money go and what are they using it for.

    There may very well be fraud involved, but if the claim is that this was a conspiracy to defraud the average investor the leaders failed as badly there as they did at creating the tech the company was ostensibly founded to create. Theranos never went public. Had they wanted to bilk the clueless investor they should have gone public back when Walgreens partnered up with Theranos.

  62. Chris says:

    Off-topic post: Dalrock, any idea why Society of Phineas made his blog private? How do I get in touch to request the password?

  63. DeNihilist says:

    Opus, the only place were I can find women on an almost equal footing as men is in country music.

    Nuff said!

  64. Avraham rosenblum says:

    To Opus: My respect for Noether could hardly be higher. To me it does not seem that there could have been many people or anyone at all for that matter to fill her shoes. I think the first time I saw Abstract Algebra was about circa the year 2001-2003 in the lectures of Nathan Jacobson. And seeing the state of Algebra before her and to what depths she brought the subject, I am astounded. To me it looks like all of Modern Mathematics is Algebra and Topology and that she should be credited with the creation of Abstract Algebra.

  65. Anon says:

    It is one thing for a tech company to have normal ups and downs, and for high-flying startups to fail.

    It is quite another for someone’s paper net worth to go from $4.5B to zero. On paper, she had wealth comparable to Donald Trump. To have it all evaporate, is something.

    At any rate, we need more of these incidents, not less. These episodes serve to impoverish manginas who jump to put money into something that a woman is running.

    Anita Sarkeesian keeps defrauding manginas on kickstarter without consequence. She never makes her videos, and just pockets the money. This may be more of the same..

    More women need to become more active in draining money out of manginas.

  66. Peter Blood says:

    Holmes looks incredibly life-like.

  67. Anon says:

    Boxer,

    When you guys imply that no woman can do technical stuff, you sound as kooky as the feminists who squawk about all men being rapists. Not only is this nonsense tired, but it’s simply not true.

    Indeed. It is important to point out that of the 100 top Chess Grandmasters, two are female. Not zero, but two. Hence, outliers do exist…

  68. Heidi_storage says:

    Most people are not geniuses, great artists, etc. Why, then, do people get their knickers in a twist about “representation” among the top of the line? Is it not enough to celebrate human achievement as a human, without insisting on a certain number of female/minority/whatever geniuses? I am profoundly grateful to Mozart for creating beautiful, enjoyable music, of which I am a consumer. I can never be more than a consumer of music, and the same is true of most people. So who cares if a genius who is not me is a man or woman? Let genius–and business savvy–stand on its own merit, and we all benefit.

  69. Opus says:

    @Avrahan Rosenblum

    Mathematics is way out of my league and above my pay-grade (as is computing). There is no Nobel Prize for Mathematics but there is The Fields Medal instituted in 1936 awarded every four years to a recipient and usually more than one recipient then under forty years of age and is usually regarded as the Nobel Prize of Mathematics. The Medal has been awarded fifty six times. Until the most recent awards (2014) no woman had ever been awarded the Medal. One cannot now but suspect that any award to a woman is based not on ability but on genitalia for otherwise The Fields committee must be institutionally sexist. The Equality Theorist will thus claim that the failure to award a woman must be because:

    1. The Awards Committee are sexist chauvinist pigs, but if not
    2. Women are burdened by Motherhood, but if not
    3. Universities exclude women from Mathematics Degree Courses, but if not
    4. Secondary schools discourage women for Mathematics, but if not
    5. Parents discourage women for Mathematics,

    Chess is an ancient Game; it has been played by women for centuries – we know that because there are ancient oil paintings – old masters – of women playing Chess. No woman, despite some having become GrandMasters, has ever got into the world’s top fifty Chess players. The Equality Theorist will have a list of reasons why this might be which will have nothing to do with inherent lack of female ability.

    The Grawemeyer Award (an American award and in a number of fields) is, there being no Nobel Prize for writing music, the world’s top Music composition award because it is or was before the 2008 recession worth a lot more Dollars than any other prize. Awarded annually and commencing in 1986 it has seen approximately thirty winners. Of those only three are women. There are, I would say, some surprising omissions although otherwise it seems to reward the great and the good rather than the experimental or risk-takers.

    The likelihood that Eliz Holmes is the next Bill Gates, Steve Jobs or Tim Berners-Lee must be remote, however a pretty face has often persuaded even the most worldly-wise of men to abandon financial sanity.

  70. dragnet says:

    @ Opus

    I admire your erudition, but you are mistaken about no woman having ever been among the top 50 chessplayers.

    The remarkable Judit Polgar was ranked as high as 8th in the world according to FIDE Elo ratings. That said, she had extreme negative scores against the great champions of her era (Kasparov, Kramink, Anand and others). And in her only world championship tournament appearance, she finished in last place. Which was not unexpected.

    None of this diminishes her genuine and inarguable brilliance, however. Just setting the record straight.

  71. Anon says:

    I am stunned how many ultra-desperate men claim that Elizabeth Holmes is hot. Lighting, make-up, and photoshop do wonders. By contrast, here is a video from a few months ago :

    Her voice is not particularly feminine either. Nor is her speaking style particularly impressive…

  72. feeriker says:

    Heidi_storage says:
    June 3, 2016 at 11:48 am

    It’s all reflective of the fixation our society has with form over substance. This itself is another attitude that, like feminism itself, is sustainable only in a wealthy society.

  73. SirHamster says:

    When you guys imply that no woman can do technical stuff, you sound as kooky as the feminists who squawk about all men being rapists. Not only is this nonsense tired, but it’s simply not true.

    Your inference that I implied “no woman can do technical stuff” is incorrect. You really like accusing people of sounding kooky using strawmen.

    Based on how many people you’ve accused of that particular state, I think you ought to examine your own cognitive biases. You may be using a mental filter that incorrectly reads that bias into other people’s words.

  74. thedeti says:

    “I am stunned how many ultra-desperate men claim that Elizabeth Holmes is hot.”

    She is not hot. She is cute. She is attractive enough to be attractive to most men. For nearly all, men, that is sufficient.

  75. Avraham rosenblum says:

    Maybe I have a natural bias towards Emmy Noether because of my interest in her field. There after all were great people that made the giant leaps like Galois and Gauss before her. But my experience with women has been overall very positive.

  76. Anon says:

    She is not hot. She is cute. She is attractive enough to be attractive to most men. For nearly all, men, that is sufficient.

    I don’t know. I can’s say she does it for me. I would put Marissa Mayer higher on an age-equalized basis, but even she was a 7…

  77. Anon says:

    *I can’t say…..

  78. Boxer says:

    Dear “Sir Hamster”:

    Your inference that I implied “no woman can do technical stuff” is incorrect. You really like accusing people of sounding kooky using strawmen.

    Did you, or did you not, write the following:
    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2016/06/02/what-else-could-they-want/#comment-211100

    Based on how many people you’ve accused of that particular state, I think you ought to examine your own cognitive biases. You may be using a mental filter that incorrectly reads that bias into other people’s words.

    I enjoy pointing out the foolish comments from feminists: and that’s exactly what you are — a scroungy feminist — precisely similar in outlook to Lindy West (though without her personal courage).

    Your victim mentality whining and anti-intellectualism will continue to be fodder for my outbursts, rest assured.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  79. Boxer says:

    Dear Fellas:

    I am stunned how many ultra-desperate men claim that Elizabeth Holmes is hot.

    Definitely not hot. To me she has a vaguely amphibious face, with eyes that are just a touch too far apart. Her smile makes her look like some sort of salamander or newt.

    That said, I can see people finding her attractive, particularly in our contemporary society, where the average woman looks more elephantine than toadish. Holmes at least makes an effort to stay fit and healthy, which is much more than can be said about so many others.

    Boxer

  80. Anon says:

    To be fair, I think there is a lot of recent deterioration in her looks, partly due to being over 30, and partly due to the stress of this situation. See that video and other 2016 photos…

  81. Novaseeker says:

    Marissa Mayer has significantly better genetics. You can especially tell if you dig around to find pics of them when they were in their early 20s (right when Mayer was joining Google, and then, years later, when Holmes was founding Theranos) — you can see the superior genes there. Having said that, Holmes has improved her appearance over time, and is in shape. She’s in the cute category, i think.

  82. SirHamster says:

    @Boxer:

    Did you, or did you not, write the following:
    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2016/06/02/what-else-could-they-want/#comment-211100

    Yes. Congratulations on being capable of reading the name above a post.

    Would you like to now explain how my stated question, “… who?” implies “no woman can do technical stuff”? In case you missed the hints: I didn’t imply that.

    that’s exactly what you are — a scroungy feminist — precisely similar in outlook to Lindy West (though without her personal courage).

    Your victim mentality whining and anti-intellectualism will continue to be fodder for my outbursts, rest assured.

    That’s a fascinating amount of detail you have derived from a few posts in this thread.

    Does intellectualism mean pulling things out of your ass? Because I’m not fond of that, no.

  83. SirHamster says:

    Sorry for the failure at quotation.

    test

  84. Anon says:

    Well, in High School, Marissa Mayer looked like this :

    I am surprised the let that image be the one that Google produces upon searches about ‘Marissa Mayer High School’..

    Money can buy looks after all (for confirmation, check out the high school pics of any famous female actress)…..

  85. SirHamster says:

    @Boxer:


    Did you, or did you not, write the following:
    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2016/06/02/what-else-could-they-want/#comment-211100

    Yes. Congratulations on being capable of reading the name above a post.

    Would you like to now explain how my stated question, “… who?” implies “no woman can do technical stuff”? In case you missed the hints: I didn’t imply that.


    that’s exactly what you are — a scroungy feminist — precisely similar in outlook to Lindy West (though without her personal courage).

    Your victim mentality whining and anti-intellectualism will continue to be fodder for my outbursts, rest assured.

    That’s a fascinating amount of detail you have derived from a few posts in this thread.

    Does intellectualism mean pulling things out of your ass? Because I’m not fond of that, no.

  86. Opus says:

    One day some decades ago whilst walking in The Strand and on my way to Chambers I passed Nigel Short the British No. 1 Grandmaster who was at the time wearing a long fur-coat and in conversation with a male friend. At the time he was engaged in a much-publicised series of matches against a famous Russian. Short, I recall, lost. I see that he has raised the ire of female Chess players in Great Britain by observing that female brains are not sufficiently hard-wired to be good at Chess. Some years later whilst listening to a programme on the wireless about Games a couple of chess experts (perhaps including Short – I forget) were asked about the lack of female ability at Chess; their answers were suitably embarrassed. Once upon a time, I venture to think such embarrassment would have been perceived as very odd. We nevertheless now live in the west in a world where to state the bleeding-obvious is seen as some sort of social faux-pas.

    Were I to assert that but for fate I would have been and probably could still be the greatest pitcher in the World Series, you would all laugh at me yet seemingly when a woman effectively makes equally outlandish claims one is supposed to silently nod ones head in assent. Consider – and you might have thought that they would have known better – the Williams sisters delusion that they could beat a lowly ranked male tennis player. They selected a German who agreed to play one set against each girl and his warm-up consisted of a round of golf and a few beers. Having comprehensively beaten both sisters a reporter when interviewing the Kraut said that although he was only ranked 200 in the world the girls felt sure that if they could find someone ranked about 350 they would stand a chance. He replied hat as he had done poorly in this most recent tournament his ranking would drop to around 350 and so if they liked he would play them again next week – and they say the Germans do not have a sense of humour.

    Then there are Carousel riders who think they are worthy of marriage to a quality man and are capable of marital fidelity. Thinking makes it so.

  87. White Guy says:

    How about this ‘special snowflake’: Simone Giertz
    25 yr old Blonde – Check.
    Makes ‘robots’ – Check
    Is celebrated online for making really, really bad ‘creations’ – Check.

    Lets call it what it is, a female comedian who uses terrible sight gags for attention. ugh.
    (At least she’s self aware enough to know she creates crap!)

  88. DrTorch says:

    Off topic but of note, scientists are pushing for robot brothel to reduce STDs and human trafficking.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/amsterdam-sex-robot-brothel-will-8070584

  89. Feminist Hater says:

    It seems oddly wasteful to try and promote the one or two females who might achieve some level of greatness, when to do so would shut out the 20 to 30 men who would have achieved the same level or greater had society focused on them.

  90. Feminist Hater says:

    Better still, if society segregated the sexes in education, both pre university and post. Both could achieve the level of greatness they were destined for without the sexism of the other. A solution if ever there existed one.

  91. Feminist Hater says:

    both pre and during, sorry…

  92. Boxer says:

    Dear Kooky “SirHamster”

    Does intellectualism mean pulling things out of your ass? Because I’m not fond of that, no.

    To be an intellectual includes the appreciation of significant achievements of others. For you to imply Noether was some unknown nobody (which is what you did) reveals two things about yourself. In the first place, it lets everyone know you don’t have any real education to speak of. (Noether’s name is recognizable by anyone with any knowledge of history or the sciences). In the second, it illuminates your own willingness to scoff at real-world achievement, which is only done by total losers, who feel slighted by the achievements of others.

    In short, you’re a feminist, even if you deny it to yourself. Those of us who have been around a while know this already, but I appreciate your self-identification for the newcomers.

    See ya, faggot.

    Boxer

  93. Daily Llama says:

    They want everything money can buy. Don’t believe me? Take a look around your house and count how much stuff there is actually yours. I got lucky and married a minimalist but the drawback was when I had to have a few business dinners here and had to go out and rent furniture to give the impression we bought into the American Dream (stuff) and Capitalism (more stuff) in order to be considered “partner material” for the firm I work for. As soon as that month of dinner meetings was over, the furniture went back. There are women like that out there but they are rare in this country. The Japanese aesthetic is minimal and sleek. I heard they change once they get here though.

  94. Boxer says:

    Off topic but of note, scientists are pushing for robot brothel to reduce STDs and human trafficking.

    I remember a guy calling himself “Fifth Horseman” who predicted this. At the time I first read his manifesto (still around someplace) I thought he was just another babbling internet loon. Every passing day since, his ideas have been vindicated.

  95. Feminist Hater says:

    Boxer, you’re being a dick. He made a wise crack and you drew an amazing straw man from that.

  96. Daily Llama says:

    NPR will be talking about what happens when a robot kills a human this weekend. Will it be considered murder? And the abuse of robots has been a hot topic for at least a decade already. http://www.agentabuse.org/bartneck.pdf

  97. Boxer says:

    Boxer, you’re being a dick. He made a wise crack and you drew an amazing straw man from that.

    His wise crack is illustrative of feminist mentality. I don’t care who has feminist mentality. I criticize it wherever I see it.

  98. Hmm says:

    BTW, the Fortune video shows that Holmes does have a ponytail, or something like one.

  99. SirHamster says:

    @Feminist Hater

    Boxer, you’re being a dick. He made a wise crack and you drew an amazing straw man from that.

    I did make fun of his post-graduate degree and peer-reviewed credentials in a past thread.

    *shrug*

    I have nothing against him showing off his lofty intellect the way he best sees fit. I don’t think it’s helping, but who am I to tell such a great man how to behave?

    @Boxer:

    I thought he was just another babbling internet loon. Every passing day since, his ideas have been vindicated.

    As I’ve said, I think your mental filters need adjusting. Not that you should listen to kooks, obviously.

  100. SirHamster says:

    For you to imply Noether was some unknown nobody (which is what you did) reveals two things about yourself. In the first place, it lets everyone know you don’t have any real education to speak of.

    I questioned that the two examples were great. One isn’t even dead yet (but is pretty attractive if Google images isn’t lying).

    Ask me if I think “not great” means “unknown nobody”.

    You’re extrapolating a lot from a skeptical single word question.

    (Noether’s name is recognizable by anyone with any knowledge of history or the sciences).

    Since I have committed such a self-evidently ignorant statement, why would you need to explain this? Everyone will be agreeing with you and piling on my ignorance.

    Or, perhaps everyone doesn’t have a real education like yourself? Must be a great sacrifice for you to condescend to this corner of the Internets.

  101. Boxer says:

    Dear Fellas:

    I had to dig around and see what kooky “Sir Hamster” was babbling about. Not surprising to find that he’s still sore a full year after our last exchange (which I had completely forgotten about).

    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2015/05/25/what-current/#comment-178908

    Then as now, he can be seen babbling about things he knows nothing about, using words he doesn’t understand, and etc.

    Thanks to the host for this eternal archive of kookspank theatre. It’s fun to relive the past.

    Peace,

    Boxer

  102. jg1 says:

    According to Wikipedia this what they say about the subject of Abstract Algebra.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_algebra

    Emmy Noether is one of the contributors that helped buld up the subject area but there are a lot of her contempraries who also did work at the same time as her to bring the field up from what it was. I did not see anything about her in the history of abstract algebra being the sole creator of modern abstract algebra. As a physicist, I know that Noether’s theorem relating to flux conservation being the cornerstone of quantum field theory and continuum mechanics.

  103. Dave says:

    Off topic but of note, scientists are pushing for robot brothel to reduce STDs and human trafficking.

    Surprise, surprise, this won’t reduce STDs. In fact, it might worsen it. STDs generally come from exposures to multiple sexual partners, something that is not and cannot be addressed with robotic prostitutes. Moreover, depending on which way you look at it, STD symptoms could be a good thing, in that they alert the affected individual to the presence of an illness, and urge them to seek treatment, and gives them an opportunity to warn potential partners before they also get exposed. A robot won’t develop STD symptoms (e.g. herpetic blisters, or lymph node enlargement), so its customers will only know they have been infected after they are already exposed.
    Even if the robots were scrupulously “washed” in the right places, there is no guarantee that some viruses and other microscopic bugs would still not be lodging in its crevices somewhere.
    Human trafficking may be somewhat reduced with the introduction of robotic prostitutes, but it will likely be replaced with all manner of crimes against the robots—“stolen robots”, “robot abuse”, etc., all of which may constitute “robot trafficking”, for want of a better term.

    Well, I guess robot trafficking is better than human trafficking. Again, depending on which way you look at it. In today’s world, women value pets more than children. In the future, it won’t be a surprise if some people value their expensive robots over humans.

  104. Anon says:

    Sheryl Sandberg’s 1991 Harvard thesis examined by Milo Y.

    She is truly hell bent on believing that domestic violence is only done by men, and that women who do it are justified in some way as retribution for ‘what the man did to her before’.

    It raises questions about why her husband’s freak death, which happened when it did, in a very unusual manner, and outside of the US, was really an accident..

  105. “Even if the robots were scrupulously “washed” in the right places, there is no guarantee that some viruses and other microscopic bugs would still not be lodging in its crevices somewhere.”

    You could sterilize the crevices in a number of ways between johns. These are robots, not humans and plastic/styro vaginas, not flesh. Pathogenic bacteria and viruses are relatively easy to kill. Imagine a built in UV light right down the side of the box. Or a squirt of disinfectant. Or a heating element right where it is needed.

  106. BillyS says:

    We have no troubles making sure things are completely clean today, right?

    Not really, though the idea of sex with a robot is repelling enough that it may face some resistance.

  107. They Call Me Tom says:

    Opus, the more I read about Military History in Western Europe…the more often I found the same battlefields being tilled over and over and over again. I would’ve thought that technology would have to change what areas the battles would be best fought on…but the English invasion of France during the hundred years war was across almost the same stretch of land as the Allied invasion of France in WWII. Caesar before that. An invading force over the course of history always seems to strike through that area. I can’t remember for sure, but isn’t that also the path that the armies took to attack Paris under Napolean way back when as well?

  108. Avraham rosenblum says:

    jg1: I did not make a study of the history, but I read a few books on Algebra and two on Field theory. One was by a fellow Robert Ash and another by Allen Hatcher and the name “Emmy Noether” seemed to pop up all over the place. [The one book by Hatcher was called “Algebraic Topology.” But I admit the lecture notes by Nathan Jacobson did not mention her very much–maybe at all. I don’t remember.] Maybe the only reason I remember her specifically is the conservation laws coming from symmetries, and the exact sequences which are more related to Topology and Homology. Maybe it is not the whole field of Abstract Algebra that I am thinking of.

  109. Linx says:

    Condemns others for generalising.
    “When you guys imply that no woman can do technical stuff, you sound as kooky as the feminists who squawk about all men being rapists. Not only is this nonsense tired, but it’s simply not true.”

    Makes a generalisation of others.
    “(Noether’s name is recognizable by anyone with any knowledge of history or the sciences).”

    Has the gall to then say
    “Then as now, he can be seen babbling about things he knows nothing about, using words he doesn’t understand, and etc.”

  110. Opus says:

    TCMTom

    I am sure that you are correct. We hate the French. A friend of mine who worked in computers told me that in his office each computer was named after a Victory over the French the rationale being that no matter how many computers they acquired they would never run out of names to christen the new computer. Imagine the chagrin of the French visitor to London who on alighting at the railway station observes that he has arrived at Waterloo – sadly the Eurostar is these days sent to one of the other stations.

    Fighting the Germans was a terrible mistake if for no other reason than that they are much harder to beat. Brexit for the win!

  111. PokeSalad says:

    Fighting the Germans was a terrible mistake if for no other reason than that they are much harder to beat.

    Not these days. I don’t think the Bundeswehr could defeat Luxembourg at the present time.

  112. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Opus: Were I to assert that but for fate I would have been and probably could still be the greatest pitcher in the World Series, you would all laugh at me yet seemingly when a woman effectively makes equally outlandish claims one is supposed to silently nod ones head in assent.

    That very scene occurs in Little Women:

  113. one hand typing pls excuse typos….rotator cuff op screws up typing

    Noether’s name is recognizable by anyone with any knowledge of history or the sciences

    Boxer…..not so. I have a tad more than “any knowledge” of the sciences. Maybe I was exposed to her name but I have no recollection.

    I dont know your training but you may have highlighted a key difference between people with math/science skills and people who know about people with math/science skills. The latter name names and can write mildly descriptive sentences about the math or science of the party in question. Those who do the math so to speak will know the names of those who have functions or processes or procedures or operations or discoveries names after them.

    i know Bernoulli because of the specific type equation and its solution. LaPlace, same. etc. I know them because I know the math. Their solutions and the derivations of same.

    I ask genuinely, are you of the sciences or maths? Or well read of history of same. Or both?

  114. Kevin says:

    Boxer and Rollo may be at some tension. While Rollo is correct if it was a man in this story no one would bother pointing out that Smart men exist. But Boxer points out that there are clearly people in the manosphere who take the kooky position that women are only good for make work paper pushing. More than 50% of graduating doctors are women – what do you need? High empathy and the ability to memorize ordered information. Skills girls evolutionary have greater than man. Clearly women excel at a lot of stuff of professions.

    If I understand Dalrock, it’s just that women can start a scam company because of the culture and men and have it survive for a long time because of the lack of scrutiny the female gender is approached with once they pretend to the part. Men must put up or shut up a lot sooner. Woman puts on lab coat and we stop thinking we start awarding her. Man does and he better bring results.

  115. Linx says:

    @Kevin
    “High empathy and the ability to memorize ordered information. Skills girls evolutionary have greater than man.”

    Says who?

  116. Jim Christian says:

    I notice all women working at their benches in the lab coat photo.
    Diversity? Uncheck. That’s ALWAYS the case with women’s businesses. Discrimination in favor of WHITE female employees. Check.

  117. Feminist Hater says:

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/7190537/Around-the-world-in-80-lays-Travel-fan-bonked-away-heartbreak-after-split-from-partner.html

    Women do not have higher empathy than men, provide some proof, please Kevin. Should be easy enough. You really have to scrap the bottom of the barrel to find something women are better than men at.

    The idea that women are really only good as paper pushers is because majority of them are really only good for that and child birth. As Boxer said himself:

    Problem with great female minds (legit ones, like Noether) is that they’re outliers, and more importantly their promotion gives everyday girls (who largely aren’t outliers) the idea that modeling their lives on these outliers is a phony expectation which will lead to great happiness and fulfillment. Dr. Noether really wasn’t happy as a woman, and a casual perusal of her papers suggests she’d have been happier as a wife and mother than as a teacher — though she was a great teacher and did important work. She was sterile (had to have a hysterectomy in her 20s, IIRC) so marriage wasn’t really in the cards anyway.

    There are some women who can achieve like men but by doing so miss all the other stuff women do. Still, there is nothing in society that is standing against these women to pursue their dreams of science or mathematics. Nothing. The problem comes with training the women who then don’t pursue this and instead stop men from taking these positions. Thus becoming a strain on society and then having the gall to complain about the lack of eligible bachelors as if their choices had nothing to do with it.

    Their empathy is not high at all. Rather low if you asked me…

  118. Dale says:

    Linx, Kevin
    >“High empathy and the ability to memorize ordered information. Skills girls evolutionary have greater than man.”
    >Says who?

    I knew one girl studying for a medical secretary-type position. She had to memorize hundreds of medical terms. Most words would have made no sense to the average person.
    She memorized the words, simply by writing each one out on paper, once. That was the extent of her required effort.

    That one case is no proof of one sex’s general superiority in a certain area, but she is vastly better at memorizing than I. I found it interesting, as my memory is, in many ways, very bad.

  119. Feminist Hater says:

    Memorising can be a learned trait. Your brain can be trained to perform better at doing such tasks.

  120. Dave says:

    @BPP

    Pathogenic bacteria and viruses are relatively easy to kill. Imagine a built in UV light right down the side of the box….

    Theoretically, you’re right. But reality is something different though. Even doctors don’t always get it right when it comes to cleaning those colonoscopy probes. And those are professionals, trained in the art of sterilization, and moreover, they are performing colonoscopy—something that has no emotional highs attached to it, and no preprocedure consumption of Vodka and weed.

    To borrow what Yoda would say in this instance, “Plenty of the claps I see in the future”.

  121. seventiesjason says:

    During her “fame” they never mentioned she was a Stanford dropout. They always said “she attended Stanford” which to the untrained ear means ‘she graduated from Stanford’

    And real inventors, and innovators are struggling to find a dime of funding, parents….friends, and people who actually believe in them are laying it on the line for them……yet she has a “brilliant” idea evidently and gets a ton of VC funding. Makes me wonder…..

  122. Daily Llama says:

    The vast majority of people are mediocre at best. Still I teach young people to aim high and shoot for the rhinoceros anyway, knowing that if they somehow make it a fraction above mediocrity, they’d be outshining most of humanity. Why teach boys or girls to aim for average?

  123. Daily Llama says:

    “Surprise, surprise, this won’t reduce STDs. In fact, it might worsen it. STDs generally come from exposures to multiple sexual partners, something that is not and cannot be addressed with robotic prostitutes”.

    When costs plummet and everyone can have their own robot, the problem will be taken care of. 3D tactile holographic experience will likely replace robots before it even gets to that point though.

    “Human trafficking may be somewhat reduced with the introduction of robotic prostitutes, but it will likely be replaced with all manner of crimes against the robots—“stolen robots”, “robot abuse”, etc., all of which may constitute “robot trafficking”, for want of a better term. ”

    I recently read that robots are being returned to manufacturers with knife marks to their heads, chests and genitals. What is wrong with people? We need to address mental illness before anything. TIME magazine also reports that the first generation of young men to grow up on internet porn from the age of 9 are rejecting it because of erectile dysfunction as early as 21. They have to rewire their brains somehow to be turned on by the live flesh of a naked woman in front of them. Apparently gonzo makes boobs irrelevant. What a culture!

  124. Daily Llama says:

    To be fair young women are also negatively affected by internet porn. They report copying what they see and thinking that’s how sex between humans is supposed to work. Performance art or something. But the report did cite some benefits to moderate consumption of non-degrading porn.

  125. feeriker says:

    You really have to scrap the bottom of the barrel to find something women are better than men at.

    Here’s a small starter list:

    http://www.judgybitch.com/2015/04/01/5-things-women-do-better-than-men/

  126. Spike says:

    Anon says:
    June 3, 2016 at 11:21 am
    Boxer,

    When you guys imply that no woman can do technical stuff, you sound as kooky as the feminists who squawk about all men being rapists. Not only is this nonsense tired, but it’s simply not true.

    Indeed. It is important to point out that of the 100 top Chess Grandmasters, two are female. Not zero, but two. Hence, outliers do exist…

    …Well, yes. Outliers do exist. Data has existed in IQ tests that show men and women equal in intelligence. The difference is that men’s curve is flattened in the middle: there are more intelligent men than there are intelligent women, as there are more low-IQ men than there are women. This translates into income as well: women tend to be clustered around the middle income of the curve, men at the top and the bottom.
    What annoys me – and most men here – is that you wouldn’t know this from feminist-inspired media and entertainment.
    Advertisments: Men are stupid morons who need women and children to guide them in the simplest of tasks.
    Movies: “The best man for the job…is a woman!”
    News: “The number of female CEOs is under-represented”
    -this one is a crime that needs a quota system imposed. They never mention the over-repesentation of men working as garbage collectors and sewer cleaners.

    It is THIS nonsense that is tired, and unfortunately, it is true.

  127. Hippopotamusdrome says:

    The difference is that men’s curve is flattened in the middle

    Not true in fact. See:

    Sex differences in WISC-r
    Sex differences in Raven progressive matrices
    Taken from Sex Differences in IQ

  128. Hippopotamusdrome says:

    @Dale
    I knew one girl studying for a medical secretary-type position. She had to memorize hundreds of medical terms.

    Good thing male doctors have secretaries so they don’t need to memorize those words themselves.

  129. Linx says:

    @ Dale
    Thank you for sharing your experience.
    Here is the experience of a woman of renown in the medical field who was both loved and respected by men.

    “Now if I were to write a book out of my experience, I should begin Women have no sympathy. Yours is the tradition. Mine is the conviction of experience.
    Now look at my experience of men. A statesman, past middle age, absorbed in politics for a quarter of a century, out of sympathy with me, remodels his whole life and policy – learns a science the driest, the most technical, the most difficult, that of administration, as far as it concerns the lives of men – not, as I learnt it, in the field from stirring experience, but by writing dry regulations in a London room by my sofa with me. This is what I call real sympathy.
    Another (Alexander, whom I made Director-General) does very nearly the same thing. He is dead too. Clough, a poet born if ever there was one, takes to nursing administration in the same way, for me.
    I only mention three whose whole lives were remodeled by sympathy for me. But I could mention very many others…
    I have never found one woman who altered her life by one iota for me or my opinions.
    Now just look at the degree in which women have sympathy – as far as my experience is concerned. And my experience of women is almost as large as Europe. And it is so intimate too. I have lived and slept in the same bed with English Countesses and Prussian Bauerinnen. No [other woman] has ever had charge of women of the different creeds that I have had. No woman has excited “passions” among women more than I have. Yet I leave no school behind me. My doctrines have taken no hold among women…and I attribute this to a want of sympathy.
    It makes me mad, the Women’s Rights talk about “the want of a field” for them – when I know that I would gladly give £500 a year for a Woman Secretary. And two English Lady Superintendents have told me the same. And we can’t get one … they don’t know the names of the Cabinet Ministers. They don’t know the offices at the Horse Guards…Now I’m sure I did not know these things. When I went to the Crimea I did not know a Colonel from a Corporal. But there are such things as Army Lists and Almanacs. Yet I never could find a woman who, out of sympathy, would consult one for my work.
    I do believe I am “like a man,” as Parthe says. But how? In having sympathy.
    Women crave for being loved, not for loving. They scream out at you for sympathy all day long, they are incapable of giving any in return, for they cannot remember your affairs long enough to do so…They cannot state a fact accurately to another, nor can that other attend to it accurately enough for it to become information. Now is not all this the result of want of sympathy?
    I am sick with indignation at what wives and mothers will do of the most egregious selfishness. And people call it all maternal or conjugal affection, and think it pretty to say so. No, no, let each person tell the truth from his own experience.” – Florence Nightingale

  130. Dale says:

    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Thanks for the IQ link

  131. Avraham rosenblum says:

    Chesterton GK: said the trouble with women is not that they feel too much or have too much sympathy. It is that they don’t have any sympathy and feel too little. Or something along those lines. Just saying.

  132. Spike says:

    Hippopotamusdrome says:
    June 4, 2016 at 11:01 pm
    The difference is that men’s curve is flattened in the middle

    Not true in fact. See:

    Sex differences in WISC-r
    Sex differences in Raven progressive matrices
    Taken from Sex Differences in IQ

    Doesn’t your first graph and explanation say what I said?

  133. They Call Me Tom says:

    Yeesh… looking at those IQ charts… I figured if one wasn’t at the farthest end they weren’t an outlier… but that’s a pretty spiked bell-curve there. I thought above-average was simply that, but apparently above average and below average are pretty rare things.

  134. Gunner Q says:

    Dale @ June 4, 2016 at 1:09 pm:
    “That one case is no proof of one sex’s general superiority in a certain area, but she is vastly better at memorizing than I. I found it interesting, as my memory is, in many ways, very bad.”

    An interesting neuroscience study I read claimed this is due to the length of processing the brain does. Actual, measured length of travel through the brain. Less creative brains do little more than put the fact straight into memory whereas more creative brains first shuttle the fact through various other areas of the brain. The researchers believed this promoted lateral thinking but at the cost that at the end of all those neurons, what got stored was the associations not the fact itself. Hence the absent-minded professor cliche. He hears “the meeting is in ten minutes” but only remembers “I have time for coffee”.

  135. They Call Me Tom says:

    I know I’m a thinker by associations, people ask how I remember all the various (and random)information that I do… I always suggest that my brain seems to remember five pieces of information together by something they have in common. Remembering one piece of information in a vacuum seems to not come as easily, but if I can see a piece of information in relation to other pieces of information…then my brain retains all of it, with ease. I work in architecture so it’s extremely helpful, because I’m usually trying to integrate things together rather than work with them in a vacuum.

  136. N. Vandenberg says:

    “Federal regulators have barred Elizabeth Holmes, chief executive of Theranos, from owning or operating a medical laboratory for at least two years, raising new questions about the future of the embattled blood-testing start-up and its founder, once a Silicon Valley phenomenon.”
    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/07/09/business/theranos-elizabeth-holmes-ban.html?referer=https://news.google.com/

  137. nvandenberg says:

    Theranos exits bkood testing. Theranos to layoff half its workforce

    http://time.com/4520669/theranos-lab-closures-elizabeth-holmes/

  138. N. Vandenberg says:

    Theranos Inc. and founder Elizabeth Holmes were accused in a lawsuits of duping investors about the embattled medical-testing firm’s performance and technology in an effort to raise about $100 million in funding…

    …The hedge fund claims Theranos officials lied about the firm’s performance to raise funding. Another set of Theranos investors sued Holmes and the company in the same court on Tuesday, their lawyers said.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-10/theranos-sued-by-partner-fund-management-over-fraud-claims

  139. They turn on their own really, really quickly.

  140. N Vandenberg says:

    After being sanctioned by U.S. regulators, the company now faces at least eight lawsuits filed in federal courts in California and Arizona by patients who claim that faulty blood tests led to heart attacks or other issues.

    In one of the suits, a male patient said he got a Theranos test related to heart issues in February 2015, which returned results indicating things were normal. The next month, the patient said he’d had a heart attack. Theranos’s tests for the patient had initially come back normal, according to the suit, only to be invalidated by the company later.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-14/theranos-faces-growing-number-of-lawsuits-over-blood-tests

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s