[ajross]

> Saying that any of those variables that correlates with gender should be forbidden is crazy.

Once again, they are not saying that. You have applied a maximalist interpretation to the article that simply isn't present in the text.

The point of the article is that the end result is still discriminatory, something that Facebook had promised to fix. And they didn't fix it, and that's newsworthy.

Your point seems to be that solving the problem is really hard, so we shouldn't try to solve it, nor talk about whether or not it's being solved by parties who have promised to try to solve it?