>
Nike CEO may have just admitted the company went too woke as stock hits 12-year low
Will Europe Be Annihilated Over Kaliningrad?
The Last Asset--You Will Own Nothing
Most artificial limbs rely on silicone or plastic to mimic human hands.
Flying cell tower beams phone signal to Japan from 10 miles up
Chinese Commercial Reactor Achieves Nuclear Fusion with Clean Hydrogen-Boron Fuel
Med Beds Just Took a MASSIVE Step Forward, Healing People in Days!
Palmer Luckey: Autonomous Weapons Are Ancient and Why Anduril Won't Build Humanoids | EP #295
A laser just photographed objects through six feet of concrete
Elon Musk's Next-Gen Motor Destroy Entire EV Industry
China's disputed satellite refueling heralds new space war era
BYD Will Put Solid-State Batteries In An EV Next Year: Executive
FDA-cleared exoskeleton puts spinal-cord patients back on their feet

Today's post is brought to you by my sponsor, Mechanize. They're hiring junior software engineers at $300K/year base salary.
On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court declared by a 6-2 vote that American universities that accept federal funds were no longer allowed to racially discriminate when making admissions decisions. The case—SFFA v. Harvard—concerned the fact that Harvard was making decisions using students' race as a variable in admissions.
Advocates on the side of Harvard argued that racial discrimination was necessary practice to preserve diversity. Opponents argued that racial discrimination was wrong and illegal. The opponents are best described as 'correct'; but the advocates do also have a point, albeit one that should only be responded to with 'So what?': racially-fair admissions should undermine diversity, because certain groups—namely, Asians and Whites relative to Blacks and Hispanics in the U.S.—tend to have higher levels of academic achievement.
So, three years on, has the verdict in SFFA v. Harvard resulted in universities becoming less 'diverse' and more reflective of what a fairly-admitted student body would look like? The answer is 'partly', not entirely. A recent article in Econ Journal Watch looked into this and reached just that conclusion. But why? From the changes or lack thereof alone it's hard to tell. But the most likely possibility is that universities are still discriminating even though the Supreme Court has declared doing that to be illegal.
The Department of Justice has been looking into this issue using the methods I outlined when I showed that Columbia and NYU were still discriminating. They've recently opened cases against UCLA's medical school, Yale's medical school, UC Davis' medical school, UC San Diego's medical school, Duke Law School, George Washington's medical school, UC Berkeley Law School, UC San Francisco's medical school, and UCLA Law School. They've also sued Harvard for withholding race-related admissions documents, run broader compliance reviews at Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, and UC Irvine, and began a broader investigation into fifteen medical schools.