×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Middle East Beats the West In Female Tech Founders

timothy posted about 9 months ago | from the domestic-relations dept.

Businesses 156

PolygamousRanchKid writes with this except from the Economist: "Only 10% of internet entrepreneurs across the world are women, according to Startup Compass, a firm that tracks such things. Except in Amman and other Middle Eastern cities, it seems. There, the share of women entrepreneurs is said to average 35% — an estimate seemingly confirmed by the mix of the sexes at 'Mix'n'Mentor,' a recent gathering in the Jordanian capital organised by Wamda, an online publication for start-ups. Reasons abound, and they are not always positive, says Nina Curley, Wamda's editor. Although more than half of university graduates in many Middle Eastern countries (51% in Jordan) are women, the workforce is dominated by men (women provide only 21% of it overall, and a paltry 16% in Jordan). The internet, however, is a new space that is more meritocratic and not as heavily male. The technology also lets entrepreneurs work from home, making it easier to raise children."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

156 comments

Yeah, well.... (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280349)

France beats the UAE in implementation of Sharia Law. Take that, Islam!

Re:Yeah, well.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280439)

Have you ever been there ?

Re:Yeah, well.... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280527)

No, but I've lived in Quebec. They don't make the French look good.

It is not the females who excel ... (0, Flamebait)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 9 months ago | (#44281289)

... it is the males of the Middle East who are totally useless.

In the West, most of the men work.

In Middle East, most of the men just sit there, doing nothing.

In fact, some got so bored they decide to become human bombers.

Re:It is not the females who excel ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281383)

It's not quite that simple, but there is definitely unemployment as well as a lot of angry men who will never be able to find a wife thanks to unemployment and polygamy. It's not a good combination.

Re:It is not the females who excel ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44282133)

It has nothing to do with unemployment.

It has everything to do with attitude.

In the Middle East, the male species think that they are the KING, that they should be served by others, that their women are slaves.

Or to put it more succinctly, in the Middle East, most of the males can be categorized as "Male Chauvinist Pigs".

I am not being inflammatory, I am speaking the truth. I am from the Middle East myself, and I am sick and tired of watching lazy men sitting their twiddling their fucking thumbs while their women (mother, wives, daughters) working non-stops, just to feed the family.

That is why I moved out of the Middle East when I was a young chap, for I do not want to have any association with those lazy religious fucktards.

Everywhere I go, from Pakistan to Afghanistan to the Middle East, I see them lazy religious fucktards everywhere.

And finally, I have left Islam and converted to Christianity, because the stone-age viewpoint of Islam goes counter to the world I am living in.

Re:It is not the females who excel ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281481)

You make a rather inflammatory point, but that doesn't mean you are wrong.

All other things being equal, women appear more driven to help their families, especially when they have children to support. A country with no benefits system or compulsory child support for fathers is going to result in more female entrepreneurs, although the reasons for this could be condemned as being hugely unfair to 50% of the population.

Middle east guys beating their females ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280375)

à_à

captcha: brutally

3. ??? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280399)

Seems that the cultural contribution of the West that Middle Eastern women should wear less hijabs and more bikinis has not, surprisingly, been a primary vector for women to reach equality in high-status tech roles.

Perhaps the secular plan should be filled-out a little better in implementation, before being forwarded as an essential requirement to leave behind their primitive religion, with all the benefits that seems to be failing to entail.

Re:3. ??? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280731)

Breastpounding of this being a western influence aside, if the times for women to be tech founders in the ME is now, then as a result it will be more popular and more will do it (and this is all good) but that does not mean it is a lasting effect, it could level out much lower than in the west or it could level out much higher, only time will tell - but for now we should be happy for the people who now have one more choice of path to make their life better.

Re:4. ??? (3, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about 9 months ago | (#44281105)

Breastpounding of this being a western influence aside, if the times for women to be tech founders in the ME is now, then as a result it will be more popular and more will do it (and this is all good) but that does not mean it is a lasting effect, it could level out much lower than in the west or it could level out much higher, only time will tell - but for now we should be happy for the people who now have one more choice of path to make their life better.

Large percentages of the ME men, (yes, even in fairly tame countries like Jordan) have been shunted off to jihadism or the armies that attempt to control it. So they have had a decade of war (or closer to two decades), with disproportionate male losses.

Meanwhile the women start "companies", although the story says "Many firms run by women entrepreneurs deal with what are labelled female issues (weddings, parenting advice, recipes, and web businesses)". So other than keeping other women entertained, these are hardly the same thing as running industry, developing resources or running banks.

If you count these empty-afternoon enterprises as business you have to realize that this kind of stuff doesn't even get counted in the west. (And in the US you can't even tell except by inspecting first names if businesses are owned by men or women, gender tagging business licenses just isn't done).

It seems likely, when when the ME men settle down and stop trying to force Islam on the world, they will start forcing it on their families, and this "trend" of female entrepreneurship will disappear.

When you can look at a news photo of an Arab street and see 50/50 ratio of men to women (instead of 100males to 1), call me. Because until then, all the filling of afternoons while the children are at school with pretend companies means nothing.

Re:4. ??? (5, Interesting)

phantomfive (622387) | about 9 months ago | (#44281419)

I have a friend from Korea, he told me, "My grandpa always forced my mom to eat at a separate table from the men, until she started making the money. Then she didn't give him any until she could eat at the normal table." Now that tradition has disappeared from Korea.

Making money is one potential road towards equality.

Re:3. ??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280899)

how do you know they arent wearing them under the hijabs or is that Victorias secret?

Re:3. ??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281295)

That explains why I read "The middle east breasts ..."

Re:3. ??? (1)

sFurbo (1361249) | about 9 months ago | (#44282167)

TFS indicates that this is due to sexism holding women out of traditional jobs, leaving starting your own tech company as the only possibility, and you somehow interpret that as a negative for secularism? Wow.

Oh yeah? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280441)

Well the middle east also beats the WORLD in blowing themselves up to kill people.
Maybe thats why they need women in tech.

One good thing can't undo all the flat out evil they have done either way.

Fuck the middle east. Wall it off until they get civilized. Could take awhile... We're on 2000+ years and counting waitin on that...

Re:Oh yeah? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280473)

Says the person who uses arabic numerals instead of the more cultured roman ones.

Re:Oh yeah? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280489)

Please come up with an innovation that is less the 2000 years old please.

Re:Oh yeah? (1)

_xen (79742) | about 9 months ago | (#44281013)

Please come up with an innovation that is less the MM [ftfy] years old please.

Just two off the top of my head for which we still use names derived from the Arabic, Chemistry and Algebra. There are plenty more of course.

Re:Oh yeah? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281515)

These achievements where not made in a vacuum Algebra for example being a development on earlier Greek and possibly Chinese work. in general the whole history of the "Islamic golden age" is more properly titled the Arabic golden age, and an example of exactly how bad fanatics are for science and progress. It also however acts as an example that otherwise most people are not too different.

This work was started by the Greek pagans but was in in the process of being burned/banned by Christian fanatics when it was taken from Greece and translated into Arabic. After ths for a great while the Arabian empires where the only people working from this body of work due to the fanaticism in Europe, and so made more discoveries than their European counterparts. All things come to an end however and the great empires of the Arabic world broke apart slid apart and into fanaticism themselves and started burning their own books. The Europeans meanwhile where starting to drop their own fanaticism, at which point it was the increasingly secular "Western" countries that made the new discoveries. None of these differences have anything to do with the people's inherent nature and Arabic societies even now damaged as they have been are not that substantially less culturally advanced, only the level of religious belief is different. This is not something unchangeable in either direction, see some of the crap from American "conservatives" to see how it could so easily pan out differently without much change in culture.

Re:Oh yeah? (1)

_xen (79742) | about 9 months ago | (#44281691)

These achievements where not made in a vacuum Algebra for example being a development on earlier Greek and possibly Chinese work.

Of course ... human knowledge always progresses by out standing on the shoulders of earlier generations. And as regards Algebra and number theory, my understanding that it is Indian, even more than Greek mathematicians, who influenced Arabic scholars.

[T]he whole history of the "Islamic golden age" is more properly titled the Arabic golden age ...

Which term I employed elsewhere [slashdot.org] .

... and an example of exactly how bad fanatics are for science and progress.

Well in any number of ways. Not only do we have Christian mobs skinning Hypatia, but it has been argued [citation needed] that one of the effects of the crusades was to shift the Islamic world from a relatively tolerant and free-thinking culture to one of defensive belligerence and fundamentalism. And in turn the adoption of this defensive posture re-inscribes the danger fanaticism poses to the growth of human knowledge.

Re:Oh yeah? (1)

_xen (79742) | about 9 months ago | (#44281709)

Oh and I meant to write, the point of the post was not to claim Arabic invention ex nihilio of these disciplines, but to address the ignorant notion implied by the GP, that for the past 2000 (ahem ..) years, Islamic culture has been barbaric in comparison to that of Europe.

Re:Oh yeah? (2)

Xtifr (1323) | about 9 months ago | (#44280759)

Says the person who uses arabic numerals instead of the more cultured roman ones.

Except, of course, that the name is somewhat of a misnomer; since they actually come from India, and are known as "Hindu numbers" in the middle east.

Hindu-Arabic numerals (1)

_xen (79742) | about 9 months ago | (#44281067)

Except, of course, that the name is somewhat of a misnomer; since they actually come from India, and are known as "Hindu numbers" in the middle east.

Except of course we lifted it directly from the Arabs (who use a system developed from Hindu numerals) as evidenced by the fact that we still write our numbers backward. (Ie. from small to large in Arabic right to left direction.) Which is the opposite of how we [used] to speak our numbers, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen ... four'n'twenty

I've just been highlighting this fact in teaching why *nix, r, w, x run 4, 2, 1 instead of the other way round (the first 8 binary numbers thus forming a truth table).

Re:Hindu-Arabic numerals (1)

Livius (318358) | about 9 months ago | (#44281165)

Well, we lifted it indirectly from the Arabs, as Arabic numbers came from the Western Muslims in Spain. The numbers used by actual Arabs look quite different.

Re:Hindu-Arabic numerals (1)

_xen (79742) | about 9 months ago | (#44281293)

Well, we lifted it indirectly from the Arabs, as Arabic numbers came from the Western Muslims in Spain.

Yes, I should have written we lifted them from the Arabic rather than the Arabs. Though I thought that Fibonacci learnt the numeral system in Algiers (still Berbers not Arabs) rather than in Spain. Nor was Fibonacci necessarily the first to attempt to import them into Europe. But yes, still Western-Arabic.

The numbers used by actual Arabs look quite different.

I'm pretty sure the numerals used by Fibonacci looked a tad different from those we use today as well. At least the 1 and 9 in modern Arabic numerals look similar :), none of the Brahmi numerals bear any resemblance to ours.

Re:Hindu-Arabic numerals (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about 9 months ago | (#44281249)

The GP is right, and what's more, the Arabs didn't change or enhance anything that the Indians did, so calling it Hindu-Arabic or Arabic just misappropriates the credit. Even in the West, it was very often described either as Hindu numerals or sometimes, Hindu-Arabic.

Re:Oh yeah? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280791)

Even though we call the numbers we use in the west 'arabic', they are actually hindu.

Re:Oh yeah? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281113)

Even though we call the numbers we use in the west 'arabic', they are actually hindu.

Well no ... they descend from Hindu numbers, but I challenge you to read and understand the old Hindu numbers. You'll have a [slightly] easier time with the Arabic version.

Our numerals are derived from Arabic numerals derived in turn from Hindu numerals, for which reason they are conventionally known as 'Hindu-Arabic numerals'. Europeans definitely took them from the Arabs not the Indians. I guess cultures adopting our numbers should call them Hindu-Arabic-European numerals, though Euroarabihindu numerals sounds better to me. ;)

Re:Oh yeah? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281489)

You got to be fucking kidding... THATS your addition to humanity? arabic numerals? really...

fuck you guys are so lost in the past you actually think thats something special.

i almost feel bad for people so delusional... almost.

In reality tho i see you as a giant setback to humanity. The middle east should be sterilized. 100%.

You are a negative to the human race. Stop it. Get with the fucking future already. Stop killing people just because you disagree with them over IMAGINARY SHIT.

Fucking animals. The lot of you. I don't understand why we waste time on you anymore. History has shown, time and again. You are not ready for the modern world and living in a global society.

You... disgust me.

And that's hard to do.

Congrats i guess.

Stupid fuckers.

Re:Oh yeah? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280503)

And the U.S. beats the world in sending drones to kill people.

Point?

You have a case of obviously asymmetrical warfare, and you attack the necessities of what's available on their side of the economic asymmetry, and praise the means of death we use on the rich side of the asymmetry.

If we had a war where one side had muskets and the other arrows, you'd probably be praising the innovativeness in killing of the guys with muskets and reserving special outrage for the "savages" using killing-by-arrow...

Oh wait.

Yes, you definitely aren't alone, demographically or historically. Still, remains unarguable fact you're all ridiculous hypocrites.

Re:Oh yeah? (1)

tnk1 (899206) | about 9 months ago | (#44281423)

Use of arrows, as opposed to muskets, doesn't require you to find civilians to use them on. You can stick an error in the eye of a soldier just as well as some kid eating lunch or shopping or watching a marathon.

"Asymmetric warfare" is hit and run tactics on military and governmental targets by guerrilla forces. Blowing civilians up is plain old terrorism. Sometimes guerrillas use terror tactics as well. That just makes them assholes too.

Please don't try and suggest to me that because we won't throw stones at them instead of bullets that they're now entitled to blow up women and children.

Which is not to say that I agree with the "wall it off" sentiment, but I'm not buying that it is their "only weapon, so they have to use it". They don't have to do anything, they particularly don't have to blow themselves or anyone else up.

Re:Oh yeah? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281119)

Well the middle east also beats the WORLD in blowing themselves up to kill people.
Maybe thats why they need women in tech.

One good thing can't undo all the flat out evil they have done either way.

Fuck the middle east. Wall it off until they get civilized. Could take awhile... We're on 2000+ years and counting waitin on that...

Idiot. maybe...just maybe...i means women in the middle east are smarter and more "civilized" than YOU are?
My English is even better than yours. I am much smarter than you. Now be a good sport and admit that you come from a uncivilized country full of imbreds and white trash rednecks.
Why are you posting here anyway? Shouldn't you be busy molesting children or something?
We all know that this is all the US culture can amount to.

Again with women (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280445)

They live longer than men ... yet more is spent on women's-specific illnesses.

When underage boys are raped the woman can successfully sue them for custody and child support [chicagotribune.com]

Violence against men in the media is rampant. Remember Theon Greyjoy in Game of Thrones? He was tied down and sexually assaulted by two women [youtube.com] . He then had his penis cut off [youtube.com] . Imagine if something similar was done to a woman.

Remember when Catherine Kieu castrated her husband because he wanted a divorce? This is how this women's daytime talk show covered it [youtube.com] .

Need more info: Man Woman and Myth [manwomanmyth.com]

Re:Again with women (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280653)

Feminism / Political correctness has now swung so far in women's favor, that many women are now drunk on this newly found power.
Here's what a retiring Australian Family Court judge said last week:

Allegations of child sexual abuse are being increasingly invented by mothers to stop fathers from seeing their children, says a retiring Family Court judge.

False abuse claims are the new court weapon, retiring judge says [smh.com.au]

Re:Again with women (1)

icebike (68054) | about 9 months ago | (#44281141)

Please tell me you didn't cite a television show as part of your argument!!!

Re:Again with women (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44282057)

What exactly are your issues with the AC's citations?

Please list the items that weren't suitably cited and I'll go fetch more for you.

Feminism (-1, Troll)

rhyder128k (1051042) | about 9 months ago | (#44280449)

Usual feminist nonsense. The countries that adhere least to feminist philosophy have the most female tech entrepreneurs.

Remember how feminism works:

Some tech jobs are male dominated = men and women are equals.

Jobs such as working with young children are female dominated = female brains are different!

Any argument that could be made in favour of affirmative action for women in tech could also be made for affirmative action for men in nursing or working with kids. This could be extended to non occupational roles such as being a homemaker.

I remember reading a quote along the lines of "Apartheid cannot be reformed, it must be abolished.". Feminism can't be tweaked to make it male inclusive, it has to be either replaced with a new, gender-neutral philosophy or attacked by a male orientated one.

I wonder what the gender composition of most the penal system in that country is? Oh hang on, that's because female brains are different, right?

Re:Feminism (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280559)

Did you know that most jurisdictions around the world bias sex assault laws in favor of women?

India just saw this get passed: Only men can be booked for rape [hindustantimes.com]

In NSW Australia the NSW Crimes Act [nsw.gov.au] requires that a vagina or anus must be penetrated for it to be considered "sexual assault". So if someone fingers a drunk women and then gives a handjob to a drunk man: (there being no legal consent in either situation):

- violating the woman = "sexual assault" (Section 61I) = punishable by 14 years prison
- violating the man = "indecent assault" (Section 61L) = punishable by only 5 years prison

Re:Feminism (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281285)

But in all Islamic countries, which is what all the Middle Eastern countries - except Israel - are, Sharia law prevails. Under that, a woman's testimony is worth half that of a man. So a woman just needs one witness to prove her case, right? Wrong! Under Sharia law, a woman who is raped has to have 4 witnesses that will vouch for her, and only then is the rapist in trouble. Otherwise, the woman's accusation of rape would translate as an admission of fornication, and get her in jail. In fact, in most Islamic countries, a high number of rape victims are in jail due to exactly this reason.

I do question the authenticity of the above story. The only way the above stats would be correct would be if the Middle East == Israel - that's the only place where women have the same rights as men. I know that Judeophobes here on /. will have a hemorrhage on reading this, but Israel has been at the front when it comes to women's rights, while its Muslim neighbors have always lagged. And recently, with the collapse of secular regimes in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia, their rights would be even less, not more. Even the coup in Egypt is not going to change that.

Bottom line - if you are a woman and want to start a tech business, anywhere in the West, as well as Israel and Eastern Europe would be fine. In the Middle East, you can work from home, but your work had better exclude ANY facial interaction with clients or customers.

Anonymous Loooser (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281819)

In NSW Australia the NSW Crimes Act ...

You are wildly wrong here. The amendments to the Crimes Act which abolished rape and introduced sexual assault made it possible for the first time in NSW for a man to be "raped" and for a woman to "rape."

Under the common law 'rape' required the penetration by a penis of a vagina. By definition rape was something done by a man to a woman. The replacement by the gender neutral sexual assault provision now made it possible to "rape" either a man or woman, by either a man or a woman.

So if the man-hating lesbians of your fantasy tie you down and violate your anus with a broom handle, they can now be charged with an equivalent crime, which they could not before.

So if someone fingers a drunk women and then gives a handjob to a drunk man ...

I can play this game too. So if someone (male or female) drunk gropes a woman's breast, or sticks their pinky up a man's butthole ...

- violating the woman (Section 61L) = punishable by only 5 years prison

- violating the man (Section 61I) = punishable by 14 years prison

ZOMG women are being discriminated against even today in NSW!!! Sheeeesh!

I understand that life has been a disappointment for you. But your failure stems from your inability to compete with either men or women of greater competency (or maybe simply fewer personality defects). Mate, you really need to stop blaming feminism for your personal inadequacies and have a good look in the mirror.

Re:Anonymous Loooser (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281995)

I can play this game too. So if someone (male or female) drunk gropes a woman's breast, or sticks their pinky up a man's butthole ...

I see what you did there: you removed genitals from the example. Yet the ENTIRE POINT was that a woman's vagina is given greater legal protection than a man's penis. DO YOU DENY THAT ?

You then spun a flawed example about anuses and breasts. A more accurate assumption would be for someone to stick their pinky up the butthole of a man AND a woman, in which case:

- violating the man / woman (Section 61I) = punishable by 14 years prison

In response to your ad hominem (ad feminem?) all I'll say is "nice try man hater".
Next time, a little less emotion. Try argue the facts.

Re:Feminism (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280615)

This link highlights that females receive lighter sentences when they commit the same heinous crimes as males:

Scrutiny, sentences different for female sex offenders [idahostatesman.com]

From the article:

When he sentenced Reschke, Judge Wilper disagreed with the prosecutor's assertion that women who sexually abuse boys should be treated as harshly as men who abuse girls. He said he couldn't articulate the reasons why, only that it was different.

Re:Feminism (1)

rhyder128k (1051042) | about 9 months ago | (#44280779)

In Britain, feminists are campaigning for this practice to be made part of the law, and the government are supporting it. I wrote about it in this article [avoiceformen.com] .

Re:Feminism (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280857)

I'm confused ... help me out here.

Men have testicles, which means we have significantly higher levels of testosterone coursing through our veins compared to women.
Now, testosterone gives rise to certain characteristics:

* men are larger, stronger and faster than women
* men also have a much higher libido (sex drive)
* however testosterone means that men also more violent, aggressive and risk-taking

Given all this, shouldn't men get LIGHTER sentences than women for most crimes?

On the one hand, how can a society chemically castrate men [wikipedia.org] for sex offences, and on the other hand deny lighter sentences due to hormonal influence?

Meanwhile, women have successfully used PMS (menstruation) as a legal defense [neulaw.org]
Even the government-funded Australian Institute of Criminology has written about PMS as a legal defence [aic.gov.au] (PDF)

Can anyone explain the double-standards to me? Anyone?

Re:Feminism (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281651)

He's stupid. The main reason is because boys don't get pregnant. Think about it. Who pays the cost if the perp runs away and the girl finds herself pregnant? If the perp is the girl, the perp bears most of the cost.

Fact is most of us boys don't want our "girl friend" to go to jail if its consensual. quote: "In most instances, the boys don't want to get the woman in trouble and are reluctant to tell authorities what happened. "

In fact it might be that exposure to the US criminal "justice" system might be far more traumatic and scarring than a MILF's "abuse" of us.

Re:Feminism (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about 9 months ago | (#44281753)

In many (Most? All?) states in the US, women can dump their child off at any hospital or fire department and not have any more legal responsibility ever. On the other hand, not only will the state financially come after any man who is the biological father and not raising the child themselves, they even go after men who are not the biological father, but were conned by the the biological mother into thinking they were for a while.

Re:Feminism (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44282041)

Fact is most of us boys don't want our "girl friend" to go to jail if its consensual. quote: "In most instances, the boys don't want to get the woman in trouble and are reluctant to tell authorities what happened. "

Yes, I read that possible explanation in the article as well.

However we still punish perps because we consider underage people to be incapable of giving consent. The feeling of being violated may dawn on them years later. This is not questioned with underage girls. I reject any excusing of this when it happens to underage boys.

That judge had a warped view; the entire reason why the article was written. If the judge ever had underage son abused by a mature woman, he may have a different response instead of buying his son a beer and shaking his hand.

Re:Feminism (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44282085)

Apologies Belial6, my response (above) was intended for the post above yours.

Re:Feminism (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44282097)

On the other hand, not only will the state financially come after any man who is the biological father and not raising the child themselves

Indeed. Even if the father was underage and statutorily raped by the woman [chicagotribune.com]

Meritocratic not so much (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280461)

It's mostly an optimistic delusion that the Internet is a meritocracy.

Sure, pockets of meritocracy exist, especially in open source development communities with lots of eyeballs to weed out the bad contributors. But outside of those, the Internet is mostly ruled by the clueless, and they gang up against the occasional visitor who tries to fix things and upset their status quo.

It's simply a matter of numbers. The clueless are so many that unless you are one of them, you are overwhelmed regardless of your input --- good or bad, because the clueless can't distinguish good from bad. They CAN distinguish that you're not one of them and are rocking their boat, and they will defend their clueless status quo with every means at their disposal.

Meritocracies are sustainable only when the majority is clueful and there is an effective negative feedback mechanism operating, such as code review. Elsewhere, it's rare.

Re:Meritocratic not so much (1)

icebike (68054) | about 9 months ago | (#44281163)

the Internet is mostly ruled by the clueless, and they gang up against the occasional visitor who tries to fix things

Since you hide behind the same name as the people you lament, and several thousand others posting here, how would anyone know the relative percentage of clueless vs cluefull?

Arab potential (4, Insightful)

EmperorOfCanada (1332175) | about 9 months ago | (#44280509)

Up to about the years 1200-1400 the Arab world was pretty cool. While we Europeans were living in an age appropriately designated the Dark Ages much of the Arab world was doing cool math, Cool science, Exploration, trade, arts, and medicine. They were fairly tolerant of other religions and were one of the few bright spots on this planet. Then around 800 years ago it all seems to have gone wrong. "Trouble in the Middle East" has been a newspaper headline since the invention of the newspaper. Personally I would love to know what changed 800 years ago as it might give a clue as to how to make it right again. Maybe lots of female internet entrepreneurs is a step in that direction. I wonder if there were more female entrepreneurs in the middle east 1000 years ago?

So all I can say is good luck!

Re:Arab potential (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280595)

If by "tolerant of other religions" means "forcing other religious groups to pay a poll tax" then I guess that's true. And that was in that 1200-1400 bracket, and of course in that same period those same "peaceful people" were slaughtering, ransacking and still persecuting people in Spain after the Umayyd Conquest of Hispania nearly 500 years earlier. It really hasn't been any different at any point in time over the last 1500 years. People were slaughtering each other, by the time muslims finished up in the 1300's, they'd killed, captured or slaughtered anyone who was in a semi-advanced civilization and were riding on the coat tails of them. Until the smart people dried up, or fled to other countries.

Re:Arab potential (2)

dkleinsc (563838) | about 9 months ago | (#44280743)

If by "tolerant of other religions" means "forcing other religious groups to pay a poll tax" then I guess that's true.

Meanwhile, in most of Europe, the Christians were busy killing anyone who disagreed with them, sometimes with spectacular methods like burning at the stake. Yes, paying a tax was far more religiously tolerant than their contemporaries.

Re:Arab potential (1)

Mashiki (184564) | about 9 months ago | (#44280781)

Meanwhile, in most of Europe, the Christians were busy killing anyone who disagreed with them, sometimes with spectacular methods like burning at the stake. Yes, paying a tax was far more religiously tolerant than their contemporaries.

And meanwhile in the muslim world, they were burning people alive, quartering them, and throwing them out in the desert with no water when they committed heresy. And if you refused to pay the poll tax, they killed you. Also to note, that said religious minorities had a weaker standing in all laws, but still ranked higher than women.

Re:Arab potential (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280845)

Also to note, that said religious minorities had a weaker standing in all laws, but still ranked higher than women.

"Had?" In the past tense?
Take a look at the current traffic fines if you happen to kill men and women of various religious backgrounds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diyya#Saudi_Arabia
In Saudi Arabia, when a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the prescribed blood money rates are as follows:[9]
                100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man
                50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman
                50,000 riyals if a Christian or Jewish man
                25,000 riyals if a Christian or Jewish woman
                6,666 riyals if a man of any other religion
                3,333 riyals if a woman of any other religion

Re:Arab potential (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44282307)

In the cited article above, they mention this:

And he who kills a believer accidentally must pay Diyyat to the heirs of the victim except if they forgive him.

Now, this part unwittingly explains why honor killings are not crimes in the Muslim world, since believers are the property of their relatives. Therefore, if someone kills his wife/sister/daughter/mother, then the sentences for it are pretty light, if at all. And the new Sharia regimes that are coming up - including the one that's attempting to take over Syria with Western support - are seeing to it that honor killers do not get ANY sentences AT ALL, since the Quran allows them to kill their relatives.

Some of these women entrepreneurs (ha!) had better make sure that they're not degrading their family honor by their innovation (bida), which is another strict no-no in Islam

They pay a tax on the mind (1)

Pathoth (2637433) | about 9 months ago | (#44281033)

Many people of all religions still "pay a tax" today. That being a weaker grasp of science limits their success in the modern world. Be it getting a tech job or just getting duped by bad food and medicine.

Atheists still pay a poll tax (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281393)

Many people of all religions still "pay a tax" today.

The non-religious still pay a tax too. At least where I live Churches (and their businesses) enjoy a tax exemption. So my taxes, in effect, are subsidising someone else's religion.

Dr. Tyson has a fairly good bit on it (4, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about 9 months ago | (#44280703)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1te01rfEF0g [youtube.com]

In particular the part you are interested in starts at 23:45, though the overall segment starts at around 19:20.

The short version? Religious fundamentalism.

Re:Dr. Tyson has a fairly good bit on it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281407)

If it's on YouTube it must be true. I know I sold all my investments and put everything I had into silver based on what YouTube economic genii told me.

Re:Dr. Tyson has a fairly good bit on it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44282237)

Based on the quality of youtube vs the economist, there happens to be an elephantine camera here,

"where the israeli statistics?"

if i go buy a *cook-book*, i would select one written by a female.

Re:Arab potential (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280787)

I think the root cause of the decline was probably the opening of other routes to China and India that dried up the stream of money flowing along the silk road. It wasn't quite 800 years ago but I think that's one thing that ended the glory days of the Caliphate. Oil money started a little bit of a turnaround, but by that time foreigners had conquered a lot of the middle east, it took foreign technology to extract the oil, and the culture had evolved a lot of features better suited to lean times.

I'll take a shot. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281059)

Personally I would love to know what changed 800 years ago as it might give a clue as to how to make it right again.

Part one of your question: What could have possibly caused change 800 years ago in the Arab world?

Pulled off Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]

Reconquista (718-1492)
People's Crusade (1195–1196)
First (1095–1099) and Immediate Aftermath
Second (1147–1149)
Wendish (1147–1162)
Third (1187–1192)
Northern crusades (1193–1290)
German (1195–1198)
Fourth (1202–1204)
Albigensian Crusade (1208–1241)
Fifth (1217–1221)
Sixth (1228–1229)
Seventh (1248–1254)
Eighth (1270)
Ninth (1271–1272) and aftermath in the Middle East and North Africa
Nicropolis (1396)
Hussite (1420–1431)
Varna (1444)
Seige of Belgrade (1456)
Arguably many more 'secular crusades' right up to the present day.

Part two of your question: How to make it right again?

I hope the answer is now self evident. :)

Re:I'll take a shot. (2)

_xen (79742) | about 9 months ago | (#44281237)

Not to argue that the Crusades did not contribute (they clearly did), but your list omits the Mongol conquest of Baghdad in 1258, which is generally reckoned to be the end of the Arabic Golden Age.

Also a few entries on your list --e.g. the Wendish, Northern and Albigensian Crusades --probably had little influence on the Middle East.

Re:I'll take a shot. (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 9 months ago | (#44281439)

You think the crusades were what caused the Middle East to change from a scientific powerhouse to a ethnic backwater? Isn't that a little Eurocentric? There are other things that happen in the world besides Europe. Not everything good, or bad, comes from there.

Re:I'll take a shot. (1)

tnk1 (899206) | about 9 months ago | (#44281477)

I hope you realize that throughout most of that, the Muslims were also attacking their way into Europe. Please don't get the impression that they sat down after the Crusades and got beaten down. Right before that Siege of Belgrade was something called the Fall of Constantinpole in 1453. And Turks were still besieging Vienna in 1683.

The reason the Muslim empire fell apart was because it fractured internally. Eventually everyone and their brother wanted to be caliph. The Turks managed to get some control over things at the end, but they rotted from the inside as well. The crusades were a blip and frankly had little to do with anything. The Reconquista was different, but that was basically the Spanish fighting to get Spain back from the previous Islamic conquerors, and it really didn't go much beyond the Iberian Peninsula.

The fact is, the Muslims had their time in the sun and they simply fell apart just like the Romans and Persians did before them. Indeed, much of the learning of the Arabs was as a result of absorbing Greek territories where there was a great deal of literature they picked up. People like Plato and Aristotle were on the reading list. The Islamic scholars added to that, just like the Romans did before them.

Re:Arab potential (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about 9 months ago | (#44281091)

Personally I would love to know what changed 800 years ago as it might give a clue as to how to make it right again

Civilizations are suprisingly like any living creature: they rise and collapse. Do not only look at collapse reasons, the raise reasons may also be insightful.

Re:Arab potential (4, Interesting)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 9 months ago | (#44281171)

Then around 800 years ago it all seems to have gone wrong. "Trouble in the Middle East" has been a newspaper headline since the invention of the newspaper. Personally I would love to know what changed 800 years ago as it might give a clue as to how to make it right again.

I know I'm going to get mod-bombed to hell and gone for this, but christianity happened. There's an old African proverb, "Once we had the land and the white man had the bible. Now we have the bible and the white man has the land." The Arabs were busy unlocking scientific secrets and storing up knowledge during that time out of necessity -- it's not a forgiving land. It has limited resources, and if you aren't smart about managing it, you die. Generations of resource scarcity meant that their culture stressed history. The first written languages came from the same region. Moving from a barter economy to a cash economy also came from there. And the thing is, this knowledge was shared -- it wasn't kept secret, or considered blasphemous per-se. Not like it was in Europe where the idea that the Earth wasn't the center of the universe nearly got Copernicous nailed to a cross anyway.

The Christians made numerous attempts to send armies into their lands -- and failed each time. But although the military campaign failed, the cultural changes that contact with them brought was ruinous to their civilization in the long-run. Think of it as being a bit like how America reacted to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 -- they really hadn't much exposure to terrorism before, so their first real taste of it caused a massive overreaction that has crippled the economy, sent millions into poverty, and triggered far-reaching changes in their way of life. But in reality, it was just a couple dozen guys who knocked down a few buildings. It did more damage though than fifty hurricanes.

There's plenty of other historical examples too -- Japan and China's isolationist policies, for example. When America steamed into Japan, they forced them to open their borders, and thousands of years of culture caught fire and burned in a matter of years. Similar things have happened to China repeatedly when people have crossed the mountains into their territory.

Cultural contamination is what brought them down -- specifically, from European christians.

Re:Arab potential (2)

Nimey (114278) | about 9 months ago | (#44281429)

No, it was really the Mongols sacking Baghdad that brought an end to the Islamic golden age and the rise of fundamentalism.

It's not unparalleled - in the Old Testament we see incidents of the Jews picking fights with bigger countries, losing, and deciding that they had lost because they'd been too socially liberal so they'd lost their god's backing, followed by a wave of fundamentalism.

Re:Arab potential (2)

tnk1 (899206) | about 9 months ago | (#44281507)

You are viewing the history from a slanted angle. Yes, there were Crusades, but so too were there significant inroads by the Turks and Arabs before them into Europe. Recall that most of the Middle East was a set of Christian Eastern Roman Empire provinces when the Arabs attacked in the 7th Century. Christianity didn't "happen" to the Muslims, Islam happened to the Christians. It's just that they were fighting back ever since.

Aside from in Spain, the most territory that the Crusaders every got their hands on was between the First and Second Crusades in the late 11th to early 12th Centuries. By 1250 or so, the Crusader states were pretty much history.

On the other hand, the Turks steadily attacked into Anatolia and the Balkans well into the 17th Century, and were still considered a major threat into the 18th. Constantinople fell in 1453. Trebizond in 1461. And Vienna was under siege in 1683. All of these moves were aggressive Ottoman actions into the heart of Christian Europe.

Please don't get the impression that some Christians with red crosses on their tabards spelled the end of Islamic civilization. Ottoman and Arab society in general broke down under it's own weight, and they had plenty of time at the top, despite some petty Crusader states that barely controlled the cost of Palestine.

You might be on to something... (1)

bayankaran (446245) | about 9 months ago | (#44281703)

Your assertion on Islam versus Christianity might be true on a certain level. I am a Chrisitan from India. The Hindu beliefs I carry - which were not imposed by anyone - are far more stronger than whatever Christianity has tried to impose. India and the polytheist Hindu philosophy with its 33 1/3 million gods always found space for new religions. We absorbed any new god, compared to other Abrahamic and monotheist religions who felt a "new god" stole the thunder and the adherents had to be blocked/killed/raped/pillaged. This is the reason Hindu philosophy shines over others when it comes to tolerance and acceptance. Even the most rabid Hindu nationalists are tame compared to the Islamic and far right Christian counterparts. They are angry pussy cats rather than feral dogs. But if I follow your assertion fully, I have no answer why the science and technological development starting with European renaissance escaped India and China. May be everything is cyclical, a paradigm shift might be underway, India's young population - 65% is under age of 30, bodes well for the future unless we pick a dumb war with China or Pakistan.

Re:Arab potential (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281807)

I'm not sure where the concern about being "mod-bombed" comes from, as it's well-known that the quickest way to get modded-up on Slashdot is to post any anti-christian argument, regardless of logical or historical veracity.

Yours would be a case in point.

Re:Arab potential (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44282261)

interesting point, but it was not "Christians" from the European continent who bore the conaminants; it was the private-for-profit EAST-INDIA companies, the market dominators/cornerers/monopolist oligarchy which used the CAMOFLAGE of Christendom.
Baghdadi Jewry was not forced labour for the construction of the Silk Road, nor the telegraph-line from Coalcutter to Diamond-Harbour.
well-trolled.

Re:Arab potential (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281493)

this is what happened: dry climate

Re:Arab potential (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281503)

The Mongols happened:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Baghdad_(1258)

A good reason (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280543)

All the men are busy planning suicide bombing.

As TFA Points Out, It's Not a Good Thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280545)

Women are going into tech jobs because it's one of the only places they can find work. It doesn't represent gender equality, but gender inequality.

Re:As TFA Points Out, It's Not a Good Thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280789)

Most other jobs pay worse and have worse working conditions...inequality sounds like a good deal.

From The Department Of Pointless Statistics (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280593)

IOW, who gives a %@^&.

What's the percentage of Middle Eastern tech successes, regardless of gender, as compared to Western or far Eastern tech successes. Or is ot more important for us to focus on a particular subset? Is MORE affirmative action on the agenda?

Compare all the data (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280633)

I'm an American working in the Middle East. Some of my friends work for men's universities; others work for women's universities. While it is nice that there is a women make up a higher percentage of people involved in tech startups, we need to examine the percentage of all people in tech w/r/t to the overall population. I'm making up numbers here, but if the F:M ratio in the western tech sector is 1:9 and 10% of the total population is involved in the tech sector, then women in the field have 1% of total employment; if the F:M ratio here in the Middle East is 1:2, and the sector only makes up 2% of the total population, then women in the field have 0.65% of total employment. While we're seeing some innovation from privileged upper classes (who, as often as not, are hiring Indian developers and still claimig ownership for the project), this does not seem to be the case in grassroots society.
There is also the statistical problem of comparing an entire country in one georegion with isolated cities in another; urban populations have different demographics than national/regional populations.

Hmmm, rah-rah for equality aside (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280659)

All things being equal, this is true of the west too, so I'd suggest caution until the data is better analyzed.

Feminist fall (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280747)

Well wooby doo!

Also had female head of state before most of us (1)

terjeber (856226) | about 9 months ago | (#44280807)

Pakistan, a fairly radical islamic country had a female head of state before the vast majority of western democracies... Just sayin'.

Re:Also had female head of state before most of us (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280833)

Might be more impressive if her daddy wasn't prime minister before her.
Political families don't impress me much.

gender/class/ comfort (1)

redwagonfive (2834945) | about 9 months ago | (#44280883)

This is interesting. It may be the harsher conditions that limit options, and part of it is likely class. Part of it may be the acceptance of over-the-top misogynistic behavior in some Western tech communities is constrained by tighter constraints on speech overall. The US is doing terribly at inclusion of women in cs and engineering. The percentage of women in engineering and in CS peaked in the eighties and continues to decrease. Microsoft being cool with a rape joke for Xbox One and the widespread acceptance of rape not only as a trope for every female character in gaming but also as a trivializing verb is part of the problem. Gender hate speech in tech culture is a problem in the West, I do not know if it is a problem in tech forums in other languages. The same sexual repression that harms women may have a minor positive secondary effect in the prohibition of the explicitly sexually violent language. In India, for decades nearly half the engineering classes have been female. So there is a significant pipeline issue. If women are 50% of the graduates and 35% of start-ups, well that is better than the numbers here. (About 14% in EE last year, about 3% of start-ups.) Another possible explanation is that these are places where rape is more endemic and there are more women is start-ups. The happy idea that the internet is a gender-free meritocracy is funny to anyone with access to a search engine. However, if some people are actually prevented from traveling alone outdoors, either by law in Saudi or by threat of rape, then doing your own start-up is one of fewer employment options. So women may be driven to this. Constraints on women working with men in some cultures may mean that there can be no situations where one woman gets a team of men. A college education is much more of a luxury good in these countries. A much much smaller percentage of the population has a college degree. Thus, those with those degrees are more likely to have access to capital to have a start-up; even if it is as simple as having housing, health insurance and subsidized Internet. This is interesting. There are many possible explanations. Perhaps we could learn something applicable locally.

Re:gender/class/ comfort (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44280961)

Just how many women are raped in computer games?
I know what you're thinking: just 1 woman is 1 too many. And you'd be right in thinking that.

But in contrast 99.9% of victims in computer games are men, and these men are routinely:

* eaten alive
* burnt
* drowned
* cut in two
* shot by regular guns
* shot by plasma rifles
* shot by arrows / javelins
* blown-up
* stabbed
* crushed
* ejected into the vacuum of space
* ripped apart
* dropped into acid
* electrocuted ... shall I go on?

You see, men are the disposable gender. Society is hyper-sensitive to violence against women (oh noes, that scene implied that the woman was going to be raped) but doesn't react to violence against men.

Heck, even "Funniest Home Videos" -- a show aimed at the whole family -- routinely shows clips of men being struck in the testicles. Could you imagine a regular segment dedicated to women having elongated objects thrust against their vaginas? With canned laughter played in the background?

You are right about one thing, redwagonfive: there are double-standards in this world.

Re:gender/class/ comfort (1)

Belial6 (794905) | about 9 months ago | (#44281803)

The anonymous coward is right. Our society even accepts rape as an institutionalized punishment for men. Raping men is considered comedy in the west.

Gender relations (1)

Livius (318358) | about 9 months ago | (#44281261)

I wonder is this could be one factor:

In societies where male and female normally interact with each other at all ages, males with poor social skills in general might gravitate towards fields that are dominated by interactions with machines or technology rather than people. Therefore women perceive the male community in these fields as hostile.

In societies with gender segregation, everyone has poor skills interacting the the opposite sex, so technology is the same as every other occupation.

Just shows you how missoginistic the west is (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281311)

Another thing the west does is force black people to play in professional sports. Today a black man is not allowed to do anything but play mother fuckin basketball. Do you have any idea how demeaning it is for a proud black man to be forced to play what is essentially a children's game day after day. 'No negro you are not allowed to program computers, your moneky ass has to play basket ball day in and day out.' I really hate the west and our racism. Make some cracker play some bball once in a while. Black men are sick of it. We also don't allow women to start 'high tech' computer companies. The only people who are allowed to take math and science classes are East Asians. I really think there aught to b a law saying that only black people can study math. All east asian should b forced to make a living playing professional sports. All Whites and arabs should be killewd. Wites bcause they are all racists, and arabs bcause they are anit-semitic.

No, but seriously we should have a commision to determine exactly how many people of every possible race / demographic are doing one pathicular thing, and then coorelate it to the world population as a whole. If these numbers don't exactly match up there neeeds to be an uproar on NPR. Personally I have found that there is a disturbing lack of female transgendered caucasian thirld world banana republic dictators. I can therefore only logically conlude that the 'third world' is systematically undermining the efforts of white transgendered females to take over and rule their countries.

Different culture (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281445)

I live in a third-world country where there is a similar phenomenon.

We have a huge number of female entrepreneurs here - many of them are extremely successful even by Western standards, and many more earn a Western wage in a poor country, which gives them an extremely comfortable standard of living.

What is the secret? It's largely down to motivation. The concept of family is extremely important here - much more so for women than for men. If a woman gets pregnant and has a child, the husband/boyfriend can leave without any financial consequences, and few social consequences.

Women in general (in this country) are much more driven to help their parents, sibilings, children and extended family than their male equivalents (on average, of course). Men are still generally the biggest wage earners, and hold the top positions in most big companies, but women rule the world of small and family businesses.

I am not saying it is fair or correct, but the absence of sexual equality and a benefits system here has had some interesting consequences. I'm not trying to give my opinion about sexual politics, just commenting on how things work here from my day-to-day personal experience. Counter-intuitively, inequality here has led to a large group of middle class female entrepreneurs. Perhaps a similar effect is in action in the Middle East.

Middle East or just Jordan? (2)

styrotech (136124) | about 9 months ago | (#44281529)

Middle eastern countries are a somewhat diverse bunch in terms of overall attitudes. I can imagine quite a large difference in how well women do overall in say somewhere like Lebanon vs Saudi Arabia.

I didn't notice any links in the TFA, but they only really mentioned (vaguely) stuff from Jordan. I don't think Jordan is at the Saudi end of the scale here.

Re:Middle East or just Jordan? (2)

shervinemami (1270718) | about 9 months ago | (#44281679)

Actually I worked in a university in United Arab Emirates near the border of Oman, and there were about 10x more females studying IT & post-grad in computer or engineering related fields than male students!

We assume it is because the local Emirati's in UAE are so rich that they don't need to study or work, but since females are expected to marry and become a house-wife & mother, the most obvious way for them to not have that way of life is if they become a professional. so we believe this explained why UAE has so many female IT & Engineering students of high quality, but almost no male IT or Engineering students and most of the males there are of very low quality since they are just doing it for fun.

35% of what (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281799)

100?

come on

Useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44281951)

Because most of these "IT companies" are not very serious!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...