izg

Yup. Doesn't surprise me at all. I always suspected this.

Controlled leaks (and fake rumors?) achieve the following, also:

- builds suspense, makes fanboys drool in anticipation - the media of course rides these waves because rumors are exciting, hopefully novel... this ensures that Apple is in the news daily (it gets tiresome for those of us who care about truly, actionable news) and thus boosts their brand recognition - a secret/something hard to obtain is more desirable - engineers/designers get early feedback

@jballanc as i procrastinate myself, allow me to tell you your comment was not a waste of time. i thoroughly enjoyed it and it addressed a very significant problem under the previous administration which has and will continue to have major repercussions, not just within the scientific community.

I agree that this should be inclusive of everybody, regardless of ethnicity or gender. The goal is to just have more stem majors. The more diverse the better.

I won't get into the other topics.

First, this isn't about affirmative action--this isn't about establishing quotas. It's about funding programs that will help attract and retain minority students in stem majors. If you don't understand that key difference, let me know. And if you don't understand the value of such programs, then you fail to realize what it will take for any company or country to compete globally.

Second, there are too many factors at play to just dismiss a student's abilities to start the next google, for example, by just assessing standardized test scores--especially, to assess his/her potential by how well on average his group/ethnicity performs. parse_tree, go back to my first point.

Such programs, I don't think, are intended to have immediate results. The goal is to retain as many people who are interested in stem majors as possible. Yes, but I think the biggest impact will come as a result of their kids having much more exposure and such people understanding the value of such programs that they reach out to others.

Finally, I think a lot would be best spent at an early age--early in a child's development. If you think a person's abilities are tied solely to genetics, you're wrong. Nurture plays an important role, and I've seen enough evidence to support that. Funding programs that compensate for parents not having an adequate education (and thus have to work multiple jobs, don't read enough to kids, etc) to offer their kids a good start.

Quick poll: of all you hackers here, how many had parents in stem majors? How many had parents who went to secondary school? These are much better indicators as to how well a person will do in life than race or gender. Think about it. Many of you played with legos. Did you ask your parents to buy you legos? Or did they buy them for you?