Slashdot Mirror

Tech jobs: Minorities have degrees, but don't get hired

I don't understand why so many are not willing to even consider that there is some bias against minorities in tech hiring.

This guy did it last week, except using his head instead of a drone:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

Of course, Texas, not to be outdone by some goddamn yankee, had to try to outdo him in the "where can I attach something that explodes" department:

http://www.syracuse.com/us-new...

I have high hopes for the "let's attach a gun to a drone" idea. It could get very entertaining.

Also, a single Boeing 777 is $320 million (source: google it. It's in huge numbers at the top, with a link to this USA today article: http://www.usatoday.com/story/... ).

A small airport hub's actual cost is $5.8 billion and a large one can be as much as $55 billion. Source: http://www.aci-na.org/static/e...

In short, AC is right. We've spent hundreds of billions on airline travel, why would its replacement be significantly cheaper? Why are we more worried about the approximately equivalent financial cost, and less worried about the significant positive impact on the environment that this would have?

According to your logic, the USA should give up the US Dollar, and instead have all 50 states print their own separate currencies.

Fiscal union works in America because Maine and Mississippi have far more in common, both economically and culturally, than Germany and Greece.

For an example of fiscal union failing, look at Puerto Rico, which is "America's Greece". They are tied to the US dollar, and stuck with the US minimum wage that is far too high for their level of productivity. They are deep in debt, and on the verge of default. They are unlikely to get a bailout from a Republican Congress, so the bondholders are going to get a haircut.

As the queer population in Seattle is decreasing, violence against queers is increasing. My neighborhood is a homogenizing community with increasing conflict.

The gay population in Greater Seattle is increasing, not decreasing. If you've got stats saying otherwise, let's see them.

Certain "gayborhoods" in Seattle have declining gay populations, and this is attributed to growing acceptance of LGBT in Seattle generally:

"In Seattle, the historically gay-friendly Capitol Hill neighborhood saw same-sex households dive by 23% from 2000 to 2012, while such households were on the rise in nearly every other neighborhood in the city as well as surrounding suburbs."

.

Sorry, if I'm in charge of security for a church, I'm still frisking the nuns, because to do otherwise would be irresponsible.

Poe's law strikes again. I literally can't tell if you're being satirical or stark raving mad. You're not cold fjord, at least (then I'd know for sure).

I merely convey (often unwelcome) facts to you, and report the goings-on of a mad world. If you cannot separate the teller from the tale, then you are in no position to judge whom is mad. But of course you may be a madman yourself.

What do you make of these?

Fears grow Boko Harm may use suicide bombers dressed as Catholic nuns for attacks
Sublime irony: Muslim TSA guard feels Catholic nun's genitals
In a Chilling Phone Call, Yazidi Woman Made a Sex Slave by ISIS Begs for West to Bomb Brothel
Isis use torture device dubbed 'The Biter' to impale women who breastfeed in public

Islamic State updates horror show

Last December, in a video addressed to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, a veiled woman representing "Muslim mothers" argued that beheading was too humane for the Jordanian pilot. She recommended that al-Kaseasbeh be subjected to a traditional Ottoman method of execution called the Khazouk in which the victim is impaled with a thick spike hammered up his rectum and through the torso. She felt that this would deter other foreign pilots from flying missions against the Islamic State. And we may yet see the Khazouk on Youtube.

Does ISIS risk blowback, or is there a plan?

Enough. I'm not even promoting rightist shit.

Actually you are, just like you always do. Your rant post is a laundry list of bullshit talking points from mental midget conservative talk shows and "pundits." I'm sorry you're a fucking brainwashed idiot, but don't try to disguise your fucking idiocy as anything other than that.... most everyone else here isn't as stupid as you are. Quit projecting your fucking failures onto other people.... us leftists are tired of you conservatives fucking everything up.

Health care costs: http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

Housing prices are going to go up regardless.... same land, more people... an idiot could figure that out; unless of course you crash the entire economy like Shrub did.

Jobs... oh, jobs..... http://politicsthatwork.com/de...

Crime? Seriously, you are a fucking idiot. Crime is dealt with from min to max, not the other way around. Cities, Counties, States, Federal. If you think either of the parties has much control over criminal activity, you are too fucking stupid to ever be taken seriously on anything. One thing that has increased when democrats are in charge is an increase in right wing terrorist groups http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06...

I'll add one more note.... THE most progressive event since the signing of the Magna Carta was a group of citizens deciding they didn't need a king, but they needed a government where everyone had representation, and where the rights of everyone where not theirs by the whim of someone else. So you say you don't like the United States? Go fuck yourself.

Furthermore they haven't even really hit their stride in quite a few less mature markets like China.

Indications are, Apple won't be selling many more 'luxury class' personal electronics to China at all.

Oh, and while looking up that link about China, I noticed that today, Apple lost $69B in value. Ouch!

So Bradley Manning was treated in accordance with existing US laws while being tortured and without access to counsel? Come on. In the information age, the powers that be can't afford more Snowdens. Snowden saw what happened to Manning and knew how previous whistleblowers were treated. It's up to you to prove the government follows the law.

http://www.theguardian.com/wor...
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...
They are very good at sucking money from their audience. It will probably net far more then facebook.

But last year, 4.5% of all new recipients of bachelor's degrees in computer science or computer engineering from prestigious research universities were African American, and 6.5% were Hispanic, according to data from the Computing Research Association

Source...
Tech jobs: Minorities have degrees, but don't get hired

Blacks and Hispanics make up over 9% of CS grads. Source.. Tech jobs: Minorities have degrees, but don't get hired

On average, just 2% of technology workers at seven Silicon Valley companies that have released staffing numbers are black; 3% are Hispanic.

But last year, 4.5% of all new recipients of bachelor's degrees in computer science or computer engineering from prestigious research universities were African American, and 6.5% were Hispanic, according to data from the Computing Research Association

From...
Tech jobs: Minorities have degrees, but don't get hired/a.

The only alternatives to SpaceX are NASA's AtlasV and the Russian offerings. That's well known.

What's less known is that a major component — the RD-180 engine — of AtlasV is supplied by Russia as well. Russia is threatening to stop delivering it, but the US ought to stop buying it in the first place — and cut off billions of dollars for Putin.

If the SpaceX fails, the US may be forced to appease Russia — such as by forgiving the armed invasion and recognizing the annexation of Crimea.

A Russian agent, who'd successfully sabotage SpaceX, would certainly be richly rewarded back at home.

We lost $9.3 billion on the auto bailouts. We broke even overall - which means a zero interest loan for 6 years. Most would consider "treading water" for 6 years hardly as making money; actually most would consider zero gain over 6 years - while inflation increases - as a net loss.

The readers will be cheap..... it's only a matter of time before there are 3rd party agents who roam around operating the readers and catch the data for sale to insurance companies, PIs, and reporters as a subscription service.

Already done by at least one group.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

Mr. Krebs, thank you for the time.

My question is about defining "computer security" in relation to public perceptions vs technical facts.

It was reported in 2006 that the NSA was keeping massive databases of American's phone calls and metadata: http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news...

Obviously, Snowden's revelations were much more heavily reported, and contained more info, but the public was shocked at information that was already public.

When it comes to cyber security customers, how do you explain and contextualize what service you are providing given the vast differences in perception of "security"?

A lot of this hit the fan about 10 years ago when a crash was partially blamed on the pilot working two jobs, being overtired and overstressed, and then crashing with a load of passengers. People were shocked at an airline pilot would have trouble feeding himself on just one job. I don't think much has changed since then.

There have been changes. Standards for pilots of the tiny airlines have been raised a bit, extra restrictions were put on their schedules, and loopholes that allowed reducing pilot pay have been closed.

But most importantly, the big airlines are now held responsible for those tiny regional/commuter airlines they're contracting with. The big guys no longer get to take your money and book you on a tiny turboprop (with their logo on the side) while washing their hands of the poor safety record of those "regional" airlines. Their own big pockets will be the target of any future lawsuits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

However, the practice has continued:

"A government study recently found 61% of all advertised flights for American, Delta, United and US Airways (now merging with American) were operated by regionals in 2011, up from 40% in 2000." http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

If you're smart, you avoid regional airlines. The accident rates are dramatically higher, and you're saving little, if any, money booking flights on them.

I'd like to add that with employers intruding more and more on our personal lives - we are on the clock 24/7 these days even though we're only paid for 40 hours. They are starting to scrutinize every aspect of our lives.

And what I find disturbing is that younger folks, who grew up with facebook and other crap like that, think nothing of posting pictures of parties or other gatherings where one might be doing something that your current or future employer may find objectionable.

I am more paranoid about what a backgroundcheck would turn up than even government persecution - I haven't started hiding Mulsims from stormtroopers yet in my basement. But being denied employment because someone put a photo of me holding a tray of shots and hanging out with some cross dressing friends frightens me. The job is too capricious and managing ones image is extremely important - and it is a sucky World that we live in - thanks corporate America for having privatized Stasi!

"A news report says Japan's tsunami-ravaged nuclear plant was so unprepared for the disaster that workers had to bring protective gear and instruction manuals from elsewhere and borrow equipment from a contractor. The report, released by operator Tokyo Electric Co, is based on interviews of workers and plant data. It portrays chaos in a desperate and ultimately unsuccessful battle to protect the Fukushima plant from meltdown, and shows that workers struggled with unfamiliar equipment." ap.org/ - "Scientists have found traces of radioactivity in fish off the California coast that migrated from the waters off of Japan, site of the Fukushima nuclear reactor disaster of 2011, the San Francisco Chronicle reports. The researchers say the evidence is unequivocal. The young tuna were found to be contaminated with two radioactive forms of the element cesium from Fukushima." http://content.usatoday.com/co... - "Japanese whalers caught 2 animals along the northern coast that had traces of radiation from leaks at a damaged nuclear power plant, officials said. 2 of 17 minke whales caught off the Pacific coast of Hokkaido showed traces of radioactive cesium, both about 1/20th of the legal limit, fisheries officials said. They are the first whales thought to have been affected by radiation leaked from the Fukushima nuclear plant since it was hit by a 3/11/11 earthquake and tsunami." nhjournal. com - http://www.newser.com/story/19... http://www.newser.com/story/20...

Bieber!

And before you think they are really in bad shape, according to this National Donut Day article, Canada has more donut shops per capita than the US. http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

I presume this is a US national holiday and that donuts are sold by the dozen and not in some stupid metric count like deca.

In your first response you make an unsupported claim.

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you might be familiar with the facts, e.g.:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com...

Then you divert from that one to pose a typical Straw Man argument.

My second point isn't an argument, it's pointing out Etherwalk's hypocrisy.

Where have all the good trolls gone?

Dunno. But Slashdot has increasingly been taken over by left-wing idiots.

That seems to be for the troops' recreation and communications, not propaganda.

Because I'm so sure that the military's top priority with enabling its workers to use facebook is so that they can trade cat pictures with their relatives, rather than spread the "information" their employer needs them to spread. Who do you think you're kidding?

Remember that the military put out an effort to secretly recruit bloggers back in 2008: http://www.wired.com/dangerroo...

Again, all the way back in 2008, the military was throwing money at web propaganda outlets in other languages, under phony names: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com... The websites suggest a pattern of Pentagon efforts to promote its agenda by disseminating information through what appear to be independent outlets, says Marvin Kalb, a fellow at Harvard University's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy.

Yet, even further back in 2006, US Central Command publicly stated its efforts to "engage bloggers who are posting inaccurate or untrue information".

http://www.defense.gov/news/ne... "We were given the mission to do electronic media engagement," Flowers said. "The idea was put forth that so many people are getting their news from online sources that we would be remiss if we neglected that audience."

But clearly when he says "people", he's talking about non-US citizens, right? Try to find some evidence of that in the entire article. Go ahead.


The notion that the US government was somehow *new* to web propaganda even in 2006, even compared to the Russians, is absolutely absurd. Just as blogs were targeted by the military after coming into vogue in the mid 2000s, using social media was the obvious next step. What "propaganda programs" do you think Leon Panetta was referring in that previous USA today article, that they wouldn't involve Americans? Especially considering the military propaganda budget was 580 million dollars by 2012: http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

That's the same article, that the AC above linked to, while making an allegation I rebutted.

You didn't "rebut" anything, you simply mentioned that the Russians also had active propaganda programs, and that we don't know "what has become of that software development effort". I really love the way you tried to turn the thread back around to being about the Russians, even though that wasn't being discussed, and you just wanted an excuse to use that news link. It's very telling that you're more worried about Russians propagandizing to you than your own government.

The article specifically said that a 2.76 million dollar contract was awarded to Intrepid for their sockpuppet software. It would be incredibly naive to think the military threw down the money and forgot about the effort, especially considering their other web propaganda efforts (above) are evidenced at least back through 2006.

The article also mentioned "It would not disclose whether the multiple persona project is already in operation or discuss any related contracts." I'm sure you, in your neverending puppydog trust of our government's good-will, could only take that to mean that the programs were discontinued.

If you think the DoD would encourage its workers to use social media, and would not be willing to utilize sockpuppet software it had already paid for on Americans--at the very least after 2013 when this sort of propaganda is now technically legal!--you're more naive than anything else you've said thus far could possibly let on.

So, it was not done by a go

That seems to be for the troops' recreation and communications, not propaganda.

Because I'm so sure that the military's top priority with enabling its workers to use facebook is so that they can trade cat pictures with their relatives, rather than spread the "information" their employer needs them to spread. Who do you think you're kidding?

Remember that the military put out an effort to secretly recruit bloggers back in 2008: http://www.wired.com/dangerroo...

Again, all the way back in 2008, the military was throwing money at web propaganda outlets in other languages, under phony names: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com... The websites suggest a pattern of Pentagon efforts to promote its agenda by disseminating information through what appear to be independent outlets, says Marvin Kalb, a fellow at Harvard University's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy.

Yet, even further back in 2006, US Central Command publicly stated its efforts to "engage bloggers who are posting inaccurate or untrue information".

http://www.defense.gov/news/ne... "We were given the mission to do electronic media engagement," Flowers said. "The idea was put forth that so many people are getting their news from online sources that we would be remiss if we neglected that audience."

But clearly when he says "people", he's talking about non-US citizens, right? Try to find some evidence of that in the entire article. Go ahead.


The notion that the US government was somehow *new* to web propaganda even in 2006, even compared to the Russians, is absolutely absurd. Just as blogs were targeted by the military after coming into vogue in the mid 2000s, using social media was the obvious next step. What "propaganda programs" do you think Leon Panetta was referring in that previous USA today article, that they wouldn't involve Americans? Especially considering the military propaganda budget was 580 million dollars by 2012: http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

That's the same article, that the AC above linked to, while making an allegation I rebutted.

You didn't "rebut" anything, you simply mentioned that the Russians also had active propaganda programs, and that we don't know "what has become of that software development effort". I really love the way you tried to turn the thread back around to being about the Russians, even though that wasn't being discussed, and you just wanted an excuse to use that news link. It's very telling that you're more worried about Russians propagandizing to you than your own government.

The article specifically said that a 2.76 million dollar contract was awarded to Intrepid for their sockpuppet software. It would be incredibly naive to think the military threw down the money and forgot about the effort, especially considering their other web propaganda efforts (above) are evidenced at least back through 2006.

The article also mentioned "It would not disclose whether the multiple persona project is already in operation or discuss any related contracts." I'm sure you, in your neverending puppydog trust of our government's good-will, could only take that to mean that the programs were discontinued.

If you think the DoD would encourage its workers to use social media, and would not be willing to utilize sockpuppet software it had already paid for on Americans--at the very least after 2013 when this sort of propaganda is now technically legal!--you're more naive than anything else you've said thus far could possibly let on.

So, it was not done by a go

I got plenty of citations

Military Announces New Social Media Policy (Feb. 26th 2010)
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com...
"Many months behind schedule, the Department of Defense on Friday issued a new policy that, on the surface, seems likely to expand access to popular social networking sites like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter by troops using military computers."

Well, that's pleasant, but.. just how "expanded" has the "access" been?

Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media ( March 17th 2011)
Military's 'sock puppet' software creates fake online identities to spread pro-American propaganda
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tech...
"A Californian corporation has been awarded a contract with United States Central Command (Centcom), which oversees US armed operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, to develop what is described as an "online persona management service" that will allow one US serviceman or woman to control up to 10 separate identities based all over the world."

Convinced yet? Want to explain why US contractors had an active online social media presence in 2011, if they couldn't make money off of it?

Propaganda programs hard to justify, Panetta says
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

"USA TODAY found that the owners of the top propaganda contractor in Afghanistan, Leonie Industries, had failed to pay $4 million in federal taxes on time despite earning more than $200 million in contracts from the government. Their tax bills were paid after the story was published.

Shortly after USA TODAY made inquiries about the tax bills, fake Facebook and Twitter accounts, as well as phony fan club websites, were set up to disparage USA TODAY reporters. The co-owner of the company, Camille Chidiac, admitted to setting up some of the sites but said he did not use company resources in doing so. He had been suspended from receiving federal contracts because of the campaign, but the military lifted the suspension late last year."

As to it being more expensive, you're forgetting the value of actually keeping track of that information a more accessible way. We could use that for a lot of other things. And there are side projects doing the same thing already in a more half assed way. We could roll it all together which should reduce the cost.

As to the TSA being incompetent, not any more than any other government agency. They're all equally incompetent.

The TSA's real problem is that their priorities are wrong. Security is not their primary priority. The illusion of security is their primary job. Just looking like they're doing something is what they actually do. Hold them to empirical standards and set everything up in a goal oriented way to obtain actual security and they'll be just fine.

As to chris roberts... come on:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

I hesitate to link to other sources because you're likely going to say they're not credible. Even though those are the sources that have the technical information that actually show how it works and that it not only was done but could be done again RIGHT NOW.

As to assumptions... ask more questions.

By stopping subsidies for oil and in fact, raising the gas/diesel taxes so that they support the roads properly, it will encourage Americans to move off ICE.

I'm all for getting off of oil. As far as raising taxes, all that will do is push the cost to consumers. The vast majority of the road wear is due to trucks, who regardless of oil/ICE will continue damaging the roads disproportionately to commuter vehicles because of the weights involved. One 18 wheeler does as much damage as 9600 cars. As far as raising fuel taxes to support the roads appropriately, this operates under the faulty assumption that not enough taxes are collected, which just isn't the case. Road funds are raided and spent by local governments (do a search for transportation tax misappropriation, example). In essence you're arguing that people aren't paying enough in taxes. We pay plenty, how about not diverting money explicitly collected for one thing and using it elsewhere?

No. The reason the US never returned to the Moon was for one reason - the cost of the Vietnam war. It was the war that was a huge waste of money, and that achieved little or nothing, and wasted 3 million human lives.

And that's of course also the reason the Soviet Union didn't go back to the moon, right? The moon landings were a PR dick measuring contest with the USSR, a way of developing missile technologies, and a means of funneling money to government-favored corporations (Northrop Grumman, TRW, ...).

In fact, both the Vietnam War and the Apollo program are really symptoms of the same problem: overbearing politicians manipulating and forcing the public for their self interest and the benefit of their corporate cronies. In the case of Vietnam, people eventually figured it out (I guess too many dead bodies), in the case of the Apollo program, people are slower to figure it out: lefties like it because it is science-y, and righties like it because a US flag got planted. Nobody really hates it because it didn't leave a visible trail of dead bodies.

Those programs are only stepping stones to future exploration, but they also had a huge boosting effect on science, and they helped open up the whole of humanities future. If you cant see that you are mentally blind. Short term thinking - that's what the cow does.

No, they actually held back science and the future of humanity by tying up a lot of smart people and resources on a badly conceived and badly engineered project. And the fact that the Apollo program was so wasteful and inefficient has instilled the false idea in Americans that going into space is hard and can only be done with massive government spending and ludicrously wasteful rockets:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

If it hadn't been for the Apollo programs, we'd probably have a lunar hotel by now; von Braun's original ideas about how to go into space were much more sensible than the crap the Apollo program delivered.

You are being led by your nose, just like a "cow", for the financial and political interests of politicians and corporations. If you like Apollo, you better love Vietnam, because you can't have one without the other. Personally, I prefer to have neither, and instead get cheap and efficient space technologies.

The SATs and GREs are not state tests. They are run by private companies.

Distinction without difference — in this case.

Besides, cheating private companies — if they are sufficiently omnipresent to be thought part of "the system" (you know, maintained by "The Man" to keep you down) — is part of Americana since, at least, the hippies.

If it is Ok to squat a bank-owned house or to loot and burn a pharmacy, then cheating on a nationwide standardized exam is Ok too.

Chinese students in particular can further legitimize their case by the racism of American college Admission Boards, which favour Whites over Asians (and Blacks over Whites). This article, for example, provides a table from this book, which calculates the SAT-points benefit/penalty for different races: if Whites are treated neutrally, being a Black gains you 310 points, while being an Asian penalizes you by 140 (out of 1600)!

Cheating to protect oneself from such mistreatment would seem rather acceptable...

Globally, cold weather kills 20 times more people than hot weather (study by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine).

In the UK, cold weather kills 25 times more people than hot weather.

So global warming, if it happens, is going to cause a significant decrease in net weather-related fatalities.

Or has he missed? If you know what I mean. Do you know mean? Know? Know what I mean?

No, I don't.

(And, yes, that breakin was mentioned in TFA.)

Or has he missed? If you know what I mean. Do you know mean? Know? Know what I mean?

No, I don't.

http://www.usatoday.com/videos...

The justification for going to war was based on all the bad intelligence pushed by the Bush administration. For example Colin Powell said that his incorrect statement to the United Nations were "a 'blot' on his record."

The Blair government in England published the September Dossier claiming that Iraq was seeking yellowcake uranium and that it could used weapons of mass destruction in 45 minutes, It was found to be completely wrong: "Without exception, all of the allegations included within the September Dossier have been since proven to be false". An inquiry after the war was told by Major General Michael Laurie, one of those involved in producing the dossier: "the purpose of the dossier was precisely to make a case for war, rather than setting out the available intelligence, and that to make the best out of sparse and inconclusive intelligence the wording was developed with care."

The British, like the Bush administration, deliberately lied. They did not, in fact, have credible or actionable intelligence.

I pointed out not only that they were wrong about everything, but that they had previously stated intentions to topple Saddam Hussein. If it was a crime investigation, this would supply clear motive.

You have quoted nothing. Your reply is an opinion with no external references. I made a point to quote sources like Wikipedia that have some claim to objectivity.

Bush, Cheney, all the people who signed the PNAC statement, are far right ideologues who instigated an unnecessary war of aggression. They used propaganda and lies to achieve their ends. The result is an unmitigated disaster that has destabilized the Middle East. You are an accessory after the fact and you share their guilt. You are known by the company you keep.

Insulation can keep cool things cool as well as warm things warm. Inefficient insulations means energy spent to refrigerate a mall is wasted as the heat is transferred back to the mall. It's scary but we I really thing AC is a large part of the problem and continuing to do so. This post says 40% of power consumption in Mumbai is for air conditioning: http://www.usatoday.com/story/... and an undergrad doing some basic calculations I'm quoting here: "I have some basics doubts regarding how air conditioners and refrigerators work. I am putting one most basic pertinent doubt here (it has troubled my small brain for a long time now- please address it with a little patience): At the core of all AC’s is the basic refrigeration cycle: 1) There is the surroundings (label it ’1) with surrounding temperature (call T1). 2) There is the air conditioner in the interface which contains a compressor that takes in electricity to be run. 3) There is the place to be cooled (label it ’2) and we want its temperature to be T2 that would make our bodies comfortable. And no rocket science funda involved when I write that T1>T2. Now when I turn on the air conditioner and a little time later I see the following energy transfers taking place: a) Heat is being absorbed from place to be cooled. Call this Q2. b) Energy/Electricity is being fed to air conditioner. Call this W. c) Heat is being rejected to the surroundings. Q1. A little energy equation funda involved when I write that Q1=Q2+W. Is this right? So, Q1=Q2+W => Q1>Q2. That is heat being rejected to surroundings is greater than the heat that needed to be taken out of my room to make me feel at comfort. So, HERE comes my basic troubling doubt, the above implies that if there was a simple heat transfer to be taken place between my room, Q1 should have been = to Q2, which would have meant that temperature rise of surroundings would have been in accordance to M*C*deltaT equality. But since now, my Q1>Q2, means that deltaT1, the rise in surroundings temperature is greater than the proportional (by MCT euality) fall in room’s. And this is attributable to compressor work being converted into this additional heat. Now, multiply this effect by millions for the millions of AC’s and refrigerators working across the globe. And what you see is the overall temperature of surroundings rising further. (Which by the way makes us feel even hotter and pushes us further closed to our AC’s and thus the vicious circle). Wait a minute here Is something really horrible wrong here? Because in the first place I wanted to be cooled down a little, I bought an AC, and eventually that AC made the earth even hotter, forcing me to buy more AC’s?? Will the temperatures just go on rising?? ALSO, not taken into account in this explanation (my doubt rather) is the work W that is being fed to the AC. Where does that W aka electricity come from? Yes, the electricity plant- again efficiecny of about 30% burning of fossil fuels, more heating ever heating?? — Note to all the readers: Please understand that I am just a naive with small exposure to mechanics and thermodynamics of refrigeration and AC’s stuff. But this (the mammothic query above) has given me many a sleepless night Please if I am missing a basic truth, correct me. In any case, answer me. And enlighten me. Abundant Thanks." puts this in the limelight. We need better insulation, more efficient airconditioning, and we need to think carefully about airconditioner use particularly as its use skyrockets in the developing world, and it is being used to combat heat and also contributing to the problem...

Afraid not, a friend of my and myself actually tried contacting some of the old shareware companies to get permission to make the old shareware on a flash stick with a preconfigured DOSBox so kids could see what it was like in the early 90s.

What we found was

This is why you follow the license on the shareware, and what you did was essentially allow the copyright holders to restrict you retroactively. Most shareware, IIRC, had something along the lines of distribution was fine, you had essentially a "trial" free version, and payment to unlock the entire thing. Abide by those rules, and you should be fine. IANAL....

This is why I think copyrights should be a "use it or lose it" situation, where if a company does not sell their product in retail markets for x number of years they lose the rights which then go into public domain.

I'll agree with this. Personally, I feel the following should happen

• 1) bring back the register the work with the Library of Congress portion within a year of publishing. This will ensure the work remains available even if the publisher goes away.
• 2) make the copyright term truly limited. Since the average life expectancy for men in the US is 74 and you cannot realistically recall most things until you're at least 10, that means the max would have to be less than 64 years to effectively be limited. I would argue 32, rounded down to 30, which is darn close to the original copyright terms. I also am fine with the original clause that required re-registering the copyright halfway through.
• 3) putting something in "the vault" (a la Disney) automatically puts it in the public domain. (the anti-Disney greedy money grubbing clause)
• 4) copyrights are non-transferrable and distribution agreements cannot extend beyond half the copyright term. (guarantees that the copyright creators maintain ownership)

If you really believe that a minimum wage can increase the welfare of poor people, why not raise it to $500/hour? Then we can all be rich!

Silly lad.

That's like saying that if the minimum wage is too high, and it hurts employers, we should just not pay anyone anything at all. and we'd all be wealthy

But let's get back to reality for a second. One of th ebaxtoipnzs of right thinking, God fearing economic rightness, Walmart (genuflect) Who just happens to be the largest employer in the country http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

http://www.goodjobsfirst.org/c...

looky who's on medicaid!

While we are at it: http://www.bloombergview.com/a...

Which is all to say, that if you support keeping th eminimum wage at present levels, you are an avbid and enthusiastic promoter of our tax dollars allowing them to pay that minimum wage.

Highly socialistic there, Tovaritsch. Are you going to the communist party meeting tonight, Comrade?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

These things aren't rare: we're just not allowed to talk about them as a society, because "white male privilege", is my point.

The reverse of all of those things SJW go after, happen every day. They're a tiny fractions of all discrimination, but what makes them worse IMO, is that not only they happen, but when talked about, even in the news, people will be like "Err...whats wrong with it?"

As of today, its really not that bad. But we're definately going in a direction where instead of having equality, we're just flipping the table. "Ha!, its your turn to suffer!" kind of deal. And again, its happening with a round of applause.

A case from Kansas which set legal precedent back in 1993: Hermesmann v. Seyer

And a more recent case from last year (just to prove this is still happening): Statutory rape victim forced to pay child support

That the Big Education discriminates against Asians and Whites has long been very well known.

Citation needed.

I did offer a citation. Here it is again.

None of these links cite any studies.

Ah, so you did see them — you just didn't like them. Why, then, did you pretend, I have not offered anything? Could it be something personal?..

The first is the story of a girl who believes

What? Since when is one girl's account not enough to prove everything and destroy the reputations of all involved?

But, jesting aside, the 2011 article you dismiss as "one-girl story" says:

Studies show that Asian-Americans meet these colleges' admissions standards far out of proportion to their 6 percent representation in the U.S. population, and that they often need test scores hundreds of points higher than applicants from other ethnic groups to have an equal chance of admission. Critics say these numbers, along with the fact that some top colleges with race-blind admissions have double the Asian percentage of Ivy League schools, prove the existence of discrimination.

Seems rather convincing to me — which is why I cited it in the first place.

primarily to allow them to admit "legacy" students, who are children of other Harvard alumni

In that case, they wouldn't be favouring "underrepresented minorities" over Whites. The phenomena you describe may well exists, but it would not account for all of the observed discrimination. And, besides, I've encountered plenty of Asians among Harvard students even 20 years ago. Their children are now "children of alumni" too, which further reduces the effect, with which you try to explain the existing anti-Asian bias.

They simply must discriminate against the more successful races, because otherwise they will have disproportionately many Asians and too few Blacks. This would make them a target of various boycotts and governmental investigations by the assholes favoring equality of results over that of opportunity ...

Actually, affirmative action is reverse discrimination

Though I agree with the spirit of what you are saying, the term "reverse discrimination" is a misnomer at best and discriminatory at worst — because it implies, that discriminations are or can be different. They aren't and they can not — any preference given to one race, sex, etc. is discrimination and there are neither "forward" nor "reverse" among them.

Back to the topic, I'm surprised, it took so long. That the Big Education discriminates against Asians and Whites has long been very well known. Asians in particular have been advised to not identify their race at all — this would put them into the same category as Whites, which is an improvement. For ultimate win, claiming to be Black — if you can pull it off — is the best. The suit, apparently, compares the treatment of Asians with that of Blacks — which is a safer ground — but the real outrage is the Black privilege ... Too bad, the claimants in this suit are too chicken to go all the way.

I can not imagine, who — other than people with serious dislike for America and a wish to hurt it — would impose such policies on the country. No one would set out to find a surgeon of a particular race to treat them — why is it Ok to seek out a firefighter or a judge of a particular origin? It is so patently idiotic, a sinister motive is easier to imagine...

Good call bro. This shitty law needs to be repealed pronto. Extremist assholes with no ethics shouldn't be allowed to run roughshod over common sense. Like, do we really want a polio epidemic caused by vaccines? FUCK NO. That's some scary shit. And the side effects can be even worse than the disease.

Vaccines have been in common use for many decades. If there were unknown problems, they would have shown up long before now.

Problems like being ineffective - that is, they just don't work or even worse, exacerbate the problem? Or problems like being generally dangerous with horrific side-effects that happen on a large scale? Never mind that, who gives a shit about Africa. Go USA!

Another: http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

Fortunately, I don't think so. Religious people got a lot louder, and became stronger in politics (this article, for example, claims that politics became much more Christianity-infused after 9/11). But in terms of population number I don't think they ever increased by a measurable amount.

If you can find a source that proves me wrong, I'd be interested to read it, though.