You code, girl!

The Anita Borg Institute has published a list of famous women computer scientists. It's pretty impressive.

Gotta love my systers!

Contraception Costs

Rush's obscene comments are based either on a profound ignorance of how most woman-based contraception works, or on a profound cynicism about the American public's ignorance of how it works. Or (since we're talking about Rush, here) both.

I'm a computer scientist, so let me put it in computer science terms.

Cost of the most popular male-based contraceptives (i.e. condoms): O(n), where n is the number of sexual encounters. (Withdrawal not included.)

Cost of most female-based contraceptives (e.g. pill, IUD): O(1), with a large constant.

For non-computer scientists: to oversimplify somewhat, a function f(n) is O(n) if it is roughly proportional to n. In other words, as you increase n, you also increase f(n). A function f(n) is O(1) if it really doesn't matter how big n gets, it's always the same value. A good example of an O(n) function might be cost-of-gas-per-week as a function of number of miles driven. As the number of miles goes up, so does the amount I'm paying for gas (assuming prices don't drop). An example of an O(1) function: price-per-gallon as a function of the number of miles driven. It really doesn't matter how many miles I'm driving -- the cost per gallon remains the same.

Which brings me back to Rush. He thought he was being so clever with accusing Ms. Fluke of having so much sex that she couldn't afford to pay for it. Whereas for most forms of birth control that are fully in a woman's control (and I think that last bit is significant), it really doesn't matter whether you're getting it once an hour or (as primly as Rush or Rick could desire) conceding it once a year...the cost is the same. And it's jolly expensive, even for once a year.

Which is in stark contrast to the most popular male method: pay per use, and a fraction of the cost of the dinner/movie that precedes its use.

Why is that?

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that we're having this national conversation about who pays for birth control. Who wants to pay more to let women have control?

Bullets for Boobs

Amidst all the flap about the Susan G. Komen foundation de-funding of Planned Parenthood, I was amused to find a reference in the NYT editorial to a pink-ribbon branded, pink shotgun shell.

I guess some people just feel better killing Bambi knowing they supported a couple of boobs along the way.

Should we regulate babies?

There's some very thought-provoking discussion on assisted reproductive technologies in today's New York Times Room for Debate section.

The fertility industry in the United States is largely unregulated. This lets consumers and business people dictate what is acceptable, what is normal and what is allowable -- including the extreme cases like the one sperm donor who had 150 children. Are such situations a problem? Many other nations, like Britain, regulate the fertility industry more closely. Should the U.S. emulate them?

Personally, I think our society might benefit from a little regulation in this area...at very least things like truth-in-advertising about the successes and problems of these technologies, requirements on practitioners' training, quality control on procedures, that sort of thing. However, I am horrified to read that to the extent that there are current FDA guidelines, they suggest that gay men should not be sperm donors unless they have been celibate for 5 years, ostensibly to prevent AIDS issues. Don't straight men get AIDS, too???

Suffocating women

Picture worth 1000 words.

Shame on the SCOTUS.

No vacation nation

Oh yeah... and while we're at it... another reason it's not so hot being a (working) US mom: not enough vacation time.

CNN has a piece on how lame our national vacation policy is, compared with other "advanced" nations.

Germany is among more than two dozen industrialized countries -- from Australia to Slovenia to Japan -- that require employers to offer four weeks or more of paid vacation to their workers, according to a 2009 study by the human resources consulting company Mercer.

Finland, Brazil and France are the champs, guaranteeing six weeks of time off.

But employers in the United States are not obligated under federal law to offer any paid vacation, so about a quarter of all American workers don't have access to it, government figures show.

That makes the U.S. the only advanced nation in the world that doesn't guarantee its workers annual leave, according to a report titled "No-Vacation Nation" by the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a liberal policy group.

For the record, mandatory (paid) leave is not just good for your mental health. It's a must from a computer security point of view -- it's one tool for detecting fraudulent activities -- the vacationer's backup will be exposed to the vacationer's records and may come across fishy transactions.

It's not so hot to be a US mom

In fact, "The United States ranked number 31 out of 43 developed countries," according to this article. It goes on to say,

Only 58% of U.S. kids go to preschool compared with 98% in Iceland, 95% in Norway and 82% in Australia.

Compared with other developed countries, U.S. scored dead last is in the issue of paid maternity leave, Powers said. In the U.S., the typical family leave is 12 weeks compared with six months to a year in Europe, where mothers can bond with their babies and establish good breast-feeding practices.

The CNN article is based on statistics Save the Children's 12th annual Mothers' Index, which "analyzes health, education and economic conditions for women and children in 164 countries". It is worth taking a look at. Among the other horrifying statistics, we have

• An under 5 mortality rate of 8 per 1000 live births -- only 10 "developed" countries countries do worse (places like Albania, Belarus, Romania, etc.)
• A lifetime risk of maternal death of 1 in 2100, higher than any of the 43 developed countries except Albania, the Republic of Moldova and the Russian Federation

It never fails to amaze me how we manage to be the richest country on earth, and yet take such poor care of women and children.

Macy's "Magic Mirror"

Wow...I just had to ask myself if this wasn't April Fool's Day. I've just seen about the worst idea I've come across in a long time.

"Macy's shoppers can now check their look in a "magic mirror" in a fitting room, thanks to touchscreen computing. A large mirror, linked up to a touchscreen tablet computer, lets visitors to the iconic department store chain's flagship New York location scroll through their options, then digitally "try on" clothes in the mirror. Then they can get quick feedback from friends by posting their image to Facebook or sending it in an e-mail or text.

How long until

1. Someone figures out how to hack the system and turn on the magic mirror remotely, capturing unwitting customers in the fitting room in various stages of undress?
2. (Variant of 1) Someone in the Macy's IT Department figures out a way to run the system in "test mode" to turn on the camera on unwitting customers in the fitting room in various stages of undress...and starts collecting the images?
3. Macy's starts capturing that Facebook or email address you enter, and starts sending you messages like "If you liked that DKNY dress, you'll just love this Ann Taylor"?

Thank goodness it's only scheduled to be available until November.

Edited to add: It all makes sense to me now. It seems that the company that's making this capability available to Macy's is UK-based RetailCam...that would be UK as in the country that brought you Big Brother and 21st century quality surveillance.

US Maternal Mortality rate on the rise

The US maternal mortality rate (essentially the rate of women dying from childbirth-related causes) was reported as 13 per 100,000 live births for 2004, up from 12 per 100,000 in 2003, which according to this article was the first time since 1977 that it was above 10.

Let's compare that with our neighbors to the north...an otherwise similar culture, by most accounts. WHO cites Canada's maternal mortality rate as 4 per 100,000 live births in 2000.

The US rise in maternal mortality is attributed to (among other things)

• a whopping 29% C-section rate
  
• obesity
• changes in how maternal mortality is reported
• older women having children

The first two factors, at very least, are highly addressable.

This is unforgiveable.