First, I was specifically responding to the “abysmal” characterization — I think there's plenty of room for improvement. The main point was that when making comparisons across countries we have to perform some corrections if we're looking for ideas about where we could improve. Since wealth isn't evenly distributed across countries or within them it's easy to find a smaller country which looks like an outlier, run some editorials about how they've discovered the secret to education, and not really have learned anything other than that life easier if you're not poor.

What we'd want to look for in setting goals are the countries with high social mobility because, as you mentioned, it's better when students can do markedly better than their parents. The results of that comparison likely also ideas outside of the educational system itself: for example, if the child of poor immigrants in Scandinavia does better it might be that their teachers and curriculum are about the same but the better social support system means their parents aren't working 3 jobs to make rent or asking their oldest child to stay home to watch their siblings while they work.

Part of why I mentioned immigrants in that previous example is that this is also a complicating factor for the U.S. because we have a relatively large number of immigrants compared to many of our peers and a large fraction don't arrive speaking English. Many older children score poorly that way due to language proficiency, so using those figures to attack the educational system is a disservice to both sides.

[removed]

Drinking one or two cocktails a day may protect against dementia, while having three or more could increase risk, new research suggests. Investigators assessed the risk of dementia using changes in alcohol consumption in nearly four million people in Korea and found that after about 7 years, dementia was 21% less likely in mild drinkers and 17% less likely in moderate drinkers. Heavy drinking was linked to an 8% increased risk of getting the disease.

The findings were published in JAMA Network Open on February 6. According to CNN, lead author Dr. Keun Hye Jeon, assistant professor at CHA Gumi Medical Center in Gumi, South Korea, said in an email:

“We found that maintaining mild to moderate alcohol consumption as well as reducing alcohol consumption from a heavy to a moderate level were associated with a decreased risk of dementia.”

The new study examined the health records of people covered by the Korean National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) who get free medical examinations twice a year if they are 40 years or older. The current study looked at data collected between 2009 and 2011 and categorized people by their self-reported drinking levels. If a person said they drank about 0.5 ounces daily, they were considered “mild” drinkers. If they consumed the equivalent of two standard drinks in the U.S. (a standard drink is 12 ounces of regular beer, 5 ounces of wine or 1.5 ounces of distilled spirits), they were considered to be “moderate” drinkers. If the participants said they drank more than that, researchers considered them “heavy” drinkers

https://www.newsmax.com/health/health-news/alcohol-consumption-drinking/2023/02/09/id/1108060/

Ok but if they’re starting in 1920 you’re pointing out the existence of problems that no longer exist. Do one from 2000-2020 and there might be something worth talking about in there.

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

This is just bad. Why use a century as sample size. What we define as AI researchers now, is in not even comparable 100 years ago. Like computers almost were non-existent. A better window would be 2000 -2020.

And what roles were those AI's performing? How many warbots were male or female? How many ships AI's were male or female? What about space stations, what about power armors?

The 'gender' of the AI changed along with it's role, not with it's artificial existence. Just like another commenter said, it's pointless data.

[removed]

In the least gender biased countries women tend to choose more people oriented work, and men gravitate towards math and machines.

Check my post history if you care to. I am a huge advocate of degendering everything. Biologically personality and sex are correlated to a significant degree. Less than most people seem to think, but again it's significant.

Women in general around the world don't want to spend 60 hours a week coding. No bias needed. I know some incredibly talented data scientists who happen to be women. It would be great if more people in general took an interest to the field.

But please let's stop assuming that industries are discriminating based on little more than enrolment

What were excess deaths in Tanzania and other African countries compared to US/Europe and others?

You can hide causes of deaths, but hiding excess deaths if you keep track of them would be extremely difficult.

Good point. I'm also left wondering whether movies should represent reality. If 10% of programmers are women, then should movies have 10% female representation as programmers?

Some people may not have much competition between lousy family and an affectionate pet.

[removed]

As a fellow enjoyer of progressive music, I feel you. If my gut reaction is to like a song, I tend to grow tired of it pretty quick. But if I'm uncertain about the track for whatever reason, and it makes me stay curious enough to listen to it more, then it's a track I'll enjoy for life, pretty much.

[removed]

Forgive me if I’m wrong but isn’t that title “something happening for the first time challenges the idea that thing doesn’t happen much”

It is my understanding that the latest vaccines have zero efficacy against the current variants, FYI

Because they were more aware and vigilant resulting in earlier diagnosis and treatment. The familial connection is social not genetic.

Interesting question, an answer to that could be groundbreaking. I suspect some forms of autism could benefit. But then you'd have to question whether it was the stem cell treatment or if it was simply early intervention's psychosocial impact.

Life expectancy for autistic people is actually disturbingly low. Taking their own lives, being victims of physical assault, victims of the justice system, undiagnosed health disorders... it's a bit grim. Physically, there are few seizure disorders and other co-morbid physical ailments, but aside from that they are indeed physically normal.

Me and Kpop , if i dont listen 10 times i hate it and it grows on me with time :D

Otherwise yes i usually am sure most of the time if i will love a song from first listen :D

Agreed! Whenever I go through my liked songs on Spotify turns out I dont really like most of them on the second listen and most of the time it's because they're just a loop

[removed]

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[removed]

I think this may have to do with tropes about AI as well as gender roles. I'd be interested to see a breakdown between "Ai goes rogue" stories and more benign portrayals and whether this influences the figures.

My suspicion is that narratives built around AI being dangerous and a bad idea will overrepresent men more than positive or neutral portrayals and somewhat close this gap though not entirely. I think its difficult to draw a conclusion about women being underrepresented in a prestige field without evaluating how that field is being portrayed.

"If it goes wrong men did it and if it goes right women did 50% of the work" isnt quite the misogynistic portrayal some might draw from these findings. I think more analysis is necessary to draw conclusions about this data given the absolute glut of "AI bad" stories.