Female Privilege or Femme Fatale?

[Trausti]

Trausti, the more interesting question is why you think female privilege is a thing but white privilege is not.

If Holmes was a dude no one would have fallen for the fraud. But the Establishment was so desperate for a female tech success that it overlooked the red flags.

 

[laughing dog]

Trausti, the more interesting question is why you think female privilege is a thing but white privilege is not.

If Holmes was a dude no one would have fallen for the fraud. But the Establishment was so desperate for a female tech success that it overlooked the red flags.

Riiight - there are no instances of male con men defrauding investors.

 

[ZiprHead]

Trausti, the more interesting question is why you think female privilege is a thing but white privilege is not.

If Holmes was a dude no one would have fallen for the fraud. But the Establishment was so desperate for a female tech success that it overlooked the red flags.

Says the guy who supported the con man in chief.

 

[laughing dog]

Ok, so how many rounds do we do this?

Exactly three times. My first post, my second one mansplaining my first post to you and this final one, since you have no counter argument, don’t know what “integral” means and pathetically resorted to stuffing straw.

And there were more red flags that were more blatant with Trump.

 

[blastula]

EXCLUSIVE: Juror speaks out after convicting Elizabeth Holmes

Elizabeth Holmes trial juror Wayne Kaatz told ABC News he thinks Holmes "still believes" in her dream.

abcnews.go.com

By the end of day three of deliberations in the Elizabeth Holmes trial, the jury had already decided to find the fallen Theranos founder guilty of defrauding investors who had poured millions of dollars into the Silicon Valley blood-testing startup, according to one juror who spoke with ABC News in an exclusive interview.

And yet, the group grappled for several more days over whether to convict or acquit Holmes -- who faced 11 counts of fraud -- on three other counts also related to investors, juror No. 6, Wayne Kaatz, said.

They reached a decision on day 3 on the charges they had verdicts on and the rest of time was spent on the ultimately hung charges.

Kaatz also said that, early on in their deliberations, the jury had decided to acquit Holmes on all four counts of fraud against patients, because the CEO was "one step removed" from the alleged victims, and thus the jury didn't feel they were directly defrauded.

They didn't think she was directly responsible regarding the patients. I wouldn't agree. She didn't directly conduct the tests, but it was ultimately up to her to even use them.

On the abuse allegations, in the video the juror Kew said they mostly avoided it in deliberations, they felt it was irrelevant to the charges.

 

[TomC]

I'm glad I'm not on that jury.

On the one hand, I've little sympathy for venture capitalists. You invest in 5 startups. 2 go bust, 2 break even, one makes gazillions of bucks. That's how it works.

But she and her company weren't making over enthusiastic promises about some software. Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff. They were messing with people's medical diagnostics. People do die from badly done diagnosis.

That's just not the same as electric supercars at all.
Tom

 

[blastula]

Trausti, the more interesting question is why you think female privilege is a thing but white privilege is not.

If Holmes was a dude no one would have fallen for the fraud. But the Establishment was so desperate for a female tech success that it overlooked the red flags.

Evidence? Or just your article of faith?

 

[bilby]

But she and her company weren't making over enthusiastic promises about some software. Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff.

People have died from bad computer stuff.

In the 1980s, five patients died, and one was seriously injured, as a result of a programming bug in the Therac-25 radiation therapy machines used in their treatment; The bug caused them to be given massively higher doses of X-rays than was intended.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25

 

[TomC]

But she and her company weren't making over enthusiastic promises about some software. Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff.

People have died from bad computer stuff.

In the 1980s, five patients died, and one was seriously injured, as a result of a programming bug in the Therac-25 radiation therapy machines used in their treatment; The bug caused them to be given massively higher doses of X-rays than was intended.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25

Well, you angry floof you.

Go back enough decades and you can find five people, out hundreds of millions, who suffered horribly from a programming error.

If we just got rid of computers from the health care system that wouldn't happen ever again.

I'm not recommending that. I personally think that keeping track of huge amounts of data, from the individual to the societal, is in everybody's best interests.

You differ. We'll just have to agree to disagree because you aren't going to change my mind on this one.
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But she and her company weren't making over enthusiastic promises about some software. Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff.

People have died from bad computer stuff.

In the 1980s, five patients died, and one was seriously injured, as a result of a programming bug in the Therac-25 radiation therapy machines used in their treatment; The bug caused them to be given massively higher doses of X-rays than was intended.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25

Well, you angry floof you.

Go back enough decades and you can find five people, out hundreds of millions, who suffered horribly from a programming error.

If we just got rid of computers from the health care system that wouldn't happen ever again.

I'm not recommending that. I personally think that keeping track of huge amounts of data, from the individual to the societal, is in everybody's best interests.

You differ. We'll just have to agree to disagree because you aren't going to change my mind on this one.
Tom

It's an indication of a big problem with the profession. The Therac-25 should be a classic taught to all programming students--yet most programmers have no idea about it. Engineers should learn from disasters, not relegate them to the dustbin of history.

And note there is possibly quite a few more than 5 that died in Desert Storm because of a programming error. We don't know given how poorly the Patriots performed against incoming Scuds but the one golden BB Saddam got through flew through the engagement envelope of a Patriot battery--which failed to engage due to a floating point roundoff error coupled with having two sources for a "fact". Again, it should be in school--it's after my time so I don't know if it's taught but I would be quite surprised if it is.

(Mid 80s--I astounded the entire department by demonstrating X = X + 1 for sufficiently large X. Nobody knew about floating point roundoff and how it can bite you, so obviously they weren't teaching it.)

And while it didn't cost any lives there's the spectacular failure of the first Ariane V launch--an unchecked exception was allowed to take out the whole guidance computer. Once the launch clamps disengage it's do or die, while normally failing fast is good it's not acceptable in a do-or-die scenario. Muddle on through no matter what, if it's a sufficiently bad answer the range safety officer will push the button.

 

[TomC]

It's an indication of a big problem with the profession.

Which profession?

Venture capitalists?
Or medical diagnostics?

Those are dramatically different professions.
One is expected to be risky. One is expected to be safe. Confusing those two things is a huge disaster.

I'm not sure which of the principals did the most wrong. There's so much wrong here. "Follow the money" seems like a reasonable way to go. How much is bimbo worth, compared to her "professor"?
I dunno.
Tom

 

[bilby]

But she and her company weren't making over enthusiastic promises about some software. Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff.

People have died from bad computer stuff.

In the 1980s, five patients died, and one was seriously injured, as a result of a programming bug in the Therac-25 radiation therapy machines used in their treatment; The bug caused them to be given massively higher doses of X-rays than was intended.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25

Well, you angry floof you.

No, that's someone completely different

Go back enough decades and you can find five people, out hundreds of millions, who suffered horribly from a programming error.

That's just one of the most well known examples of why you are wrong to claim "Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff."

If we just got rid of computers from the health care system that wouldn't happen ever again.

Literally nobody is suggesting that. It's an idiotic thing to say (though not factually wrong, so perhaps not quite as idiotic as "Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff.")

I'm not recommending that. I personally think that keeping track of huge amounts of data, from the individual to the societal, is in everybody's best interests.

I doubt that many people would disagree. I certainly don't. Nevertheless, the statement "Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff." remains false.

You differ. We'll just have to agree to disagree because you aren't going to change my mind on this one.
Tom

That's a pretty dumb approach to life. When you are shown to be wrong, the smart option is to note your error and stop making it. Becoming defensive and determined to remain wrong is not a very productive or useful idea. However, I strongly suspect that I HAVE changed your mind on "this one", where "this one" is the counterfactual claim "Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff."

That I have failed to convince you of a claim you pretended, as a defense against admitting error, that I was making, but which in fact nobody made at all (outside your imagination) is hardly a surprise, nor a disappointment to me. It does make you look bloody ridiculous, though - so if you care about your reputation, you might want to avoid that. You would surely have done better to just admit that your claim was false, or even to simply note my correction of your error without comment. But here we are, with you looking like a clown. Oh well.

 

[Toni]

The FDA approved only one of the tests on the Theranos platform: herpes simplex 1.

Any other results released to patients could NOT have been Theranos test results. My understanding is that Theranos performed patient testing on their platform in tandem with conventional testing platforms. This is not unusual. In fact, labs must prove that their testing methods provide the same accurate test results as other labs on their testing platforms. But my understanding is that Theranos fraudulently claimed that the results produced by the other platforms were achieved using Theranos technology.

That said, I have no idea what the qualifications of those performing the testing were or whether they met industry standards for quality control, accuracy, etc.

 

[Swammerdami]

Trausti, the more interesting question is why you think female privilege is a thing but white privilege is not.

If Holmes was a dude no one would have fallen for the fraud. But the Establishment was so desperate for a female tech success that it overlooked the red flags.

So. the conviction of a female executive becomes another argument FOR the doctrine of female privilege. Got it.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Did I read that Ms. Holmes will be free for several months, awaiting sentencing? What's that about? If she were a poor black, convicted of selling loosies on the sidewalks of New York, she'd already be trying to make friends with her cell-mate, Butch.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's an indication of a big problem with the profession.

Which profession?

Venture capitalists?
Or medical diagnostics?

Those are dramatically different professions.
One is expected to be risky. One is expected to be safe. Confusing those two things is a huge disaster.

I'm not sure which of the principals did the most wrong. There's so much wrong here. "Follow the money" seems like a reasonable way to go. How much is bimbo worth, compared to her "professor"?
I dunno.
Tom

Programming.

 

[Gun Nut]

But she and her company weren't making over enthusiastic promises about some software. Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff.

People have died from bad computer stuff.

In the 1980s, five patients died, and one was seriously injured, as a result of a programming bug in the Therac-25 radiation therapy machines used in their treatment; The bug caused them to be given massively higher doses of X-rays than was intended.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25

That isn't the impact of bad "Computer stuff" versus bad "medical stuff"... That's simply bad "medial stuff" versus bad "medical stuff"

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But she and her company weren't making over enthusiastic promises about some software. Nobody ever died from bad computer stuff.

People have died from bad computer stuff.

In the 1980s, five patients died, and one was seriously injured, as a result of a programming bug in the Therac-25 radiation therapy machines used in their treatment; The bug caused them to be given massively higher doses of X-rays than was intended.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25

That isn't the impact of bad "Computer stuff" versus bad "medical stuff"... That's simply bad "medial stuff" versus bad "medical stuff"

It's a computer software failure--the fault lies with the programmers, not the doctors.

 

[Metaphor]

Trausti, the more interesting question is why you think female privilege is a thing but white privilege is not.

If Holmes was a dude no one would have fallen for the fraud. But the Establishment was so desperate for a female tech success that it overlooked the red flags.

Riiight - there are no instances of male con men defrauding investors.

Trausti did not say that, and neither does that follow from what Trausti said.

 

[laughing dog]

Trausti, the more interesting question is why you think female privilege is a thing but white privilege is not.

If Holmes was a dude no one would have fallen for the fraud. But the Establishment was so desperate for a female tech success that it overlooked the red flags.

Riiight - there are no instances of male con men defrauding investors.

Trausti did not say that, and neither does that follow from what Trausti said.

No one claimed Trausti said it. I made a sarcastic response to Trausti's hand-waved claim. Con artists come in all genders and sexes - Trausti's observation had no evidence-driven basis.

 

[Metaphor]

Trausti, the more interesting question is why you think female privilege is a thing but white privilege is not.

If Holmes was a dude no one would have fallen for the fraud. But the Establishment was so desperate for a female tech success that it overlooked the red flags.

Riiight - there are no instances of male con men defrauding investors.

Trausti did not say that, and neither does that follow from what Trausti said.

No one claimed Trausti said it. I made a sarcastic response to Trausti's hand-waved claim. Con artists come in all genders and sexes - Trausti's observation had no evidence-driven basis.

I'm not sure you've understood Trausti's claim. It wasn't a broad claim about all con artists and situations, but a particular claim: that Holmes's sex in the context of a tech startup increased investor willingness to accept (and forego due diligence in evaluating) the viability of Holmes' business. Specifically, Holmes being a "woman in tech/science" triggered more support from investors in a way that, if Holmes had been a man, she would not or could not have gotten.

As for there being 'no evidence' - that isn't true, either. The evidence is that no man managed to build a multi-billion dollar company in the tech space based on an idea so obviously fraudulent. Or, at least, I assume Trausti is not aware of such a case and neither am I.