This will just make being on the board even more exclusive. They'll just bring in somebody's wife or daughter that has a passing interest in the company and call it a day. Also, what about all female boards? I don't see anyone wanting to force them to get a man on there. Don't forget minorities too.
We ended up with IBM computers that were hand me downs from friends of the family who were IBM'rs and got them when IBM was throwing them out. We went through several PS/2 models and had an IBM dot matrix printer to go with them. Eventually the family started buying PCs from various brands. I didn't have a computer to myself until I was in high school and it was one I had rebuilt from spare parts we had from previous family computers. It didn't last very long though. The monitor blew and stunk up my bedroom for over a week. The family computer was always outdated, but it was a great teaching tool for keeping it running for the family. It was thanks to that and learning what it means to have others depend on me keeping it running that I learned a bit about the joy and frustrations of IT work when I was younger.
This system sounds just and fair to me. Only problem is getting people to accept using your official ID since that's been fought against tooth and nail claiming it was somehow "discriminatory". Personally I think any voting system MUST include the use of your official ID that can be verified and have reasonable protection against fake IDs. Nothing will be 100% but it's better than no verification at all.
While this probably should've been under NOAA instead of NASA, I can't remember the last time NASA was given something to do. It seems like any news is either funding cuts, project cuts, etc., or look at what their robot toys are doing. Maybe it's time to turn the military implications of satellites and the like over the military and let the military handle the military implications of space development and use and sell off the rest of NASA's assets to SpaceX or some other American company and be done with it. The government is clearly incapable of doing anything else worthwhile with NASA and it's pretty much just dead weight now.
I loved learning about all the good things NASA has done in the past with things like the Apollo program and the like and I thank NASA for doing it, but that age is gone and it's not coming back. At this time I'd rather see private companies move forward with space exploration run by citizens who actually care about getting results.
As for Trump cutting something related to climate change, is anyone here really surprised? Trump would rather have us turn back the clock before the information age and live lives full of pollution and bad living conditions because it's profitable for his wealthy friends and it's easy to cover up truths when information does not spread so easily. He and people like him who live in the past will doom the US to being left far behind by the rest of the world. Conservatives and Liberals both need to step up and modernize big time if we're going to get out of this funk we're in.
Here we go again with, "We're going to kill a punishment for a crime! Now lets find a way to be as humane about the killing as possible. We don't want the person convicted of killing 100 people after raping them in front of their loved ones to suffer in their last moments. I know, lets use this new method of execution."
It's the same thing over and over again. Society often deems crimes like murder as evil and inhumane and punishable by death. Never mind that the criminal taking a life is considered inhuman, when society deals out the death penalty which also has the same end result of taking a life, there's this double-standard that says we must be humane about it because society is supposed to be better than the criminal getting executed.
I really don't know if the death penalty is worth having since there are sound arguments for and against it, but regardless of which side of the fence you're on, I do think that too much time is spent on finding a way to be humane about executing criminals. If you really feel the need to force a way to be higher than the criminal while ending their life, then maybe you shouldn't be killing them in the first place and find some other punishment to fit the crime. If their death is your idea of justice for the crimes they committed then stop wasting time, get the job done, and move on. If you can't do it then you should probably rethink your idea of 'justice'.
One hand we need jokes here and there. It makes something more personable and sometimes easier to deal with when we lighten the mood up a bit.
On the other hand, I can see to a point the desire to avoid anything political since regardless of what side your on and whether or not you're offended it can be a distraction when you're trying to figure something out and get something done.
However, this is such a light joke on the subject and this is the Internet and there are far worse things being said out there and joked about out there that if someone gets offended by this, they need to grow a thicker skin and get over it. If we listened to all the SJW and snowflake nonsense out there, then we literally shouldn't bother talking and communicating at all since once one person has a different opinion on anything, at least one person will get offended and then all hell breaks loose against the person who dared to think different.
Good on Stallman for stopping the nonsense in its tracks before it grows larger.
If the judge paid attention in science class, they'd know that they aren't qualified to be making that kind of ruling. Leave it to real scientists to get to the research and lobby the government.
Agreed. The body's circadian rhythm will adapt to the situation when one makes an effort to do so. I'm getting fed up with how these studies keep coming out about how 'hard' life is for college students. It's just more pandering to the crybabies out there. These kids need to learn that the world does not pander to them. They need to adapt to the world.
I haven't used my FB account in over 5 years and I've started receiving the same notices. It's like that desperate ex that follows you around after seeing you pass on the street and won't stop nagging you.
I agree. It really depends on what they're taking it for. If it's just headaches and they work too much, they should consider a different job if they can't cut back the hours. I know several guys that need to rethink their life because they work themselves to death everyday and they aren't in a position to where they need to do so with family and kids to take care of for example.
It's good to shoot for the sky (or space), but you need to be able to enjoy life too. It's usually younger guys that make the mistake of overworking but it can happen to anyone.
Looks like the court ruling is a step in the right direction. Gerrymandering has been out of control for a long, long, time. I'd also go so far as to blame it for the reason why we haven't broken out of the two party system we're stuck in now where it's almost impossible for other parties to get any seats in office.
When politicians lose the ability to choose their voters, they'll have to start listening to the people for a change.
Written by a dreamer for dreamers. My take on it is they're looking for something other than x86 and x86_64 that's cheap for anyone to use. Well since even IBM's Power systems (I don't recall which models) are susceptible to Specter, jumping architectures won't prevent things like this happening.
I think I understand what they're going for with being able to quickly fix these design flaws when they're revealed, but methinks they don't have any understanding what so ever of how these things are developed and manufactured or that once the chip is made it can't be altered. Sure there are some advantages to being able to jump architectures since some architectures are better for different jobs, but for general computing nothing's been able to topple the x86/x86_64 dynasty (for one reason or another). Not even Intel could do it and you need to license the instruction sets from them! If they couldn't beat their own platform....good luck.
Also, design flaws like these don't break a system. The systems are already up and running and have been running pretty well with them for over a decade. When the new chips come out without the flaw, software designers will be able to speed things back up again. It's not like other flaws that cause miscalculations or fried CPUs.
For regular cars we all drive ourselves, I say NO! Even if the car is stopped it's unacceptable to bombard the driver with ADs while they're getting ready to go. We already have people sitting at lights and not going when they change from red to green and then almost hitting others when they do get going. That is just with texting and other mobile phone use.
For autonomous self-driving cars, there should be less of a threat to public safety so I can see that being a thing especially if they're surfing the net on the dashboard. However, I still say NO! The space people have in which they aren't bombarded with ADs is shrinking so the line must be drawn somewhere.
I too have decided to take the plunge and never look back. Besides not feeling like I'm learning anything new with Windows anymore I'm also tired of Microsoft treating us like a bunch of morons. I've seen how they've slowly taken away control from the end user with each new version of Windows and in Windows 10 it culminated into not being able to decide on which patches and driver updates they want to force upon you even if it breaks your setup.
Seeing Windows 10 break my setup by forcing broken drivers from Windows Update onto my PC was the last draw. I have better things to do with my time than hack the OS and install 3rd party tools on MY PC just to get it to obey me. To me this is far worse than the amount of data gathering they do because if I actually had control over Windows 10 and if the settings actually did what they said they would do I could turn all the data gathering off and it would stay turned off.
I don't care if they do it legally by burying it all in the EULA that nobody ever reads but has to accept. Now that they're finally loosing desktop market share, they can get away with more because they have 'competition'. I don't care if Google and Apple also do the same thing or what ever. Just because the industry is heading into a certain direction, it doesn't mean it's right so I'll keep running Linux.
It's funny, when I got my current job 4 years ago I was only running Linux on hardware that was over 7 years old and I didn't need MS Office to make my resume and the job was to support a Windows environment. After a while I saved up and built an up to date Windows PC for gaming. Now thanks to Steam, this isn't necessary anymore for the games I play and I still get funny looks and eye rolls from people at work when I remind them that I'm an exclusive Linux user at home now. That doesn't bother me a bit because I delight in them complaining on how expensive hardware is to get the best performance on their Windows PCs at home to run what ever AAA title they want to play and not have time for.
The MPAA in their current form is not needed in the 21st century and they know it and they don't want to change either. That's why they'll always talk up piracy as killing the industry so they can remain in power without changing. They already know they can't stop legitimate online streaming services so piracy is the only thing left that they can talk about and since the numbers don't add up they'll keep yelling louder and louder about it to try and discredit the actual numbers in the court of public opinion.
Piracy has been around for as long as the industry has been around and gosh darn it, it has somehow managed to survive with more people buying a copy of a movie or using some legal method to watch it rather than getting a bootleg copy of it from the pirates. The MPAA is as always full of shit when they start barking about the evils of piracy. So what if a movie brings in a few less millions of dollars of pure profit? We're not talking about not being able to cover costs of paying people to create the movie.
Honestly, when was the last time piracy caused a movie to not be able to be produced or not make enough to cover the costs? I honestly can't find a single case of this where it was clearly piracy and not mismanagement or the movie just being so crappy that it didn't sell that caused a studio to not make enough to cover the cost of producing the movie.
The MPAA is a relic from the past that's almost a hundred years old.
They largely aren't needed anymore. Nowadays people can make a movie at home and use the Internet to distribute it to a world wide audience without needing the help of a studio with ties to the MPAA. Content creators can also now work with Netflix and others to get their content out to consumers if they don't want to distribute it themselves.
They do help out a little with the ratings system, but only a little because the movie ratings are extremely biased to benefit the major studios while hurting the smaller ones. In some ways it's better than not having a ratings system at all, but it's also in a position to be abused and do more harm than good (which it already is).
Even if the students end up hating it, they should have to learn something about computers besides just typing and how to use office apps. Ignorance of them and assuming that they'll always 'just work' has got to end. We're in the 21st century now. The only way the masses are going to wake up and start making changes for the greater good is through knowledge. This has happened before with other industries, now it's time it finally came to the computer industry.
Microsoft is weak. Regardless of all the billions of dollars they have and their dominance in the software they've released, they obviously feel threatened to patent and then sue over a tiny little slider in an app.
To the folks at Redmond:
Keep it up Microsoft. While you nickle and dime customers with outrageous licensing practices and then add telemetry on top of it, and while you extort as much money from the broken patent system as possible, your actions do not go unnoticed. Your actions are indicative of a company that so weak in innovating and putting out new products that you must resort to exploitative business practices that hurt consumers.
You have been able to get away with this for years so naturally you don't think there's anything wrong. However there is something wrong. Your customers aren't as dumb and helpless as you think they are. There are plenty of viable lower cost solutions to the products you sell and they get more popular every time you keep making life harder for your customers.
To defeat Donald Trump you need to hear what he says to counter it, not run away from it or ignore it. Ignoring him lets him continue to run wild like our government.
If your beliefs and what you value is truly worth anything when you get offended by ONE man, then get off your lazy ass and DEFEND YOURSELF. Stop running and hiding from those that offend you and defend your beliefs.
To defeat the other side you also have to LISTEN to them to understand their arguments to be able to counter it. Or is your view on the issue at hand so weak that you can't take a little criticism or in Trump's case a loud argument that has more holes in it than swish cheese? Trump may be loud, derogatory, and downright mean and offensive, but as an opponent on actual issues facing the country he's got next to nothing to stand on. It's all fear mongering. He should actually be EASY to defeat when it comes to the real issues and best part is you don't have to make him look stupid since he does it so well by himself.
Ignoring the issues so don't have to get offended or 'just not have to look at it right now' doesn't do any good. You can't just assume it'll go away on its own. That's already been tried in 2015 and it DIDN'T WORK.
Why is it that people aren't afraid to join movements and protests, but once someone dares to challenge them and have a debate they cover their ears and refuse to listen? If they can't take any challenges or criticism then their movements and rallies are worthless.
~Written by someone who will likely get blocked by the next chrome extension.
It's not a bad idea, but it's not a fix for the problem and it is by no mean "debt free college" when wages are garnished to pay it back. It really depends on the career the student has after college too. They may not make enough money to do anything for the economy like buying a house, car, settling down with a family, etc while they're paying it back which means the net result is no change for the college tuition problem.
What about OS/2 for a temporary solution? It can run many of the apps that Windows 3.1 could and thanks to derivatives that are still actively developed like eComStation it can run on more hardware than in the past which would help give them time to port it over to something else.
I'm not saying to just abandon their old system right away since they can't just drop it and move away from it overnight they have to eventually do something about hardware support because eventually supported hardware for old systems goes away and they're already using eBay. Given OS/2's reputation for running Windows programs from back then, it may at least open up some options while they work on replacing the old system and if they had to make some updates to it, it may be a little more cost effective to jump to a platform that's known to run those apps that still has a company backing it up.
Ultimately they are going to need to abandon their old system, however in the meantime they have to do something about the hardware and this looks like something that can't be virtualized.
There is an obvious conflict of internet that needs to be addressed when the chair and vice chair of the department wrote the required book. The math department there votes on what book to use so that they can standardize what the students are getting, BUT there's no mention of chair and vice chair not voting on it. If even if they didn't vote, it doesn't resolve the conflict of interest completely since they're the chair and vice chair of the department and therefore you can't prove that the others didn't vote in favor of it to be in favor of them.
If the rich were really feeling 'left out' as this ridiculous article suggests, then why aren't they doing something about their image? It's not like they don't have the money to invest into some PR or to do something to help people out.
This is also seen in Washington. They've already bought out the politicians, they have the influence already to put themselves into a better light by getting things passed to help the common man (universal healthcare, higher taxes on the rich, high minimum wage, etc). Instead, they don't. They do the opposite. They get government to make them richer and poor poorer.
If they really are feeling like they're segregated from everyone else, well congrats to them. They succeeded in doing so in spades and personally I don't think a single one of them is actually sorry about it (or will ever be).
I'm all for seeing more women in coding and IT in general, but why force it? Sometimes women just aren't interested. Granted the thing with Sarah Sharp and Linus Torvalds doesn't help make it look like an inviting environment, and that could be off-putting, but anyone serious about getting into it ought to be smart enough to realize there are a lot of other projects they can get involved with or they can start their own if they don't want to deal with people like Linus Torvalds.
Slashdot Mirror
This will just make being on the board even more exclusive. They'll just bring in somebody's wife or daughter that has a passing interest in the company and call it a day. Also, what about all female boards? I don't see anyone wanting to force them to get a man on there. Don't forget minorities too.
We ended up with IBM computers that were hand me downs from friends of the family who were IBM'rs and got them when IBM was throwing them out. We went through several PS/2 models and had an IBM dot matrix printer to go with them. Eventually the family started buying PCs from various brands. I didn't have a computer to myself until I was in high school and it was one I had rebuilt from spare parts we had from previous family computers. It didn't last very long though. The monitor blew and stunk up my bedroom for over a week. The family computer was always outdated, but it was a great teaching tool for keeping it running for the family. It was thanks to that and learning what it means to have others depend on me keeping it running that I learned a bit about the joy and frustrations of IT work when I was younger.
This system sounds just and fair to me. Only problem is getting people to accept using your official ID since that's been fought against tooth and nail claiming it was somehow "discriminatory". Personally I think any voting system MUST include the use of your official ID that can be verified and have reasonable protection against fake IDs. Nothing will be 100% but it's better than no verification at all.
While this probably should've been under NOAA instead of NASA, I can't remember the last time NASA was given something to do. It seems like any news is either funding cuts, project cuts, etc., or look at what their robot toys are doing. Maybe it's time to turn the military implications of satellites and the like over the military and let the military handle the military implications of space development and use and sell off the rest of NASA's assets to SpaceX or some other American company and be done with it. The government is clearly incapable of doing anything else worthwhile with NASA and it's pretty much just dead weight now.
I loved learning about all the good things NASA has done in the past with things like the Apollo program and the like and I thank NASA for doing it, but that age is gone and it's not coming back. At this time I'd rather see private companies move forward with space exploration run by citizens who actually care about getting results.
As for Trump cutting something related to climate change, is anyone here really surprised? Trump would rather have us turn back the clock before the information age and live lives full of pollution and bad living conditions because it's profitable for his wealthy friends and it's easy to cover up truths when information does not spread so easily. He and people like him who live in the past will doom the US to being left far behind by the rest of the world. Conservatives and Liberals both need to step up and modernize big time if we're going to get out of this funk we're in.
Here we go again with, "We're going to kill a punishment for a crime! Now lets find a way to be as humane about the killing as possible. We don't want the person convicted of killing 100 people after raping them in front of their loved ones to suffer in their last moments. I know, lets use this new method of execution."
It's the same thing over and over again. Society often deems crimes like murder as evil and inhumane and punishable by death. Never mind that the criminal taking a life is considered inhuman, when society deals out the death penalty which also has the same end result of taking a life, there's this double-standard that says we must be humane about it because society is supposed to be better than the criminal getting executed.
I really don't know if the death penalty is worth having since there are sound arguments for and against it, but regardless of which side of the fence you're on, I do think that too much time is spent on finding a way to be humane about executing criminals. If you really feel the need to force a way to be higher than the criminal while ending their life, then maybe you shouldn't be killing them in the first place and find some other punishment to fit the crime. If their death is your idea of justice for the crimes they committed then stop wasting time, get the job done, and move on. If you can't do it then you should probably rethink your idea of 'justice'.
One hand we need jokes here and there. It makes something more personable and sometimes easier to deal with when we lighten the mood up a bit.
On the other hand, I can see to a point the desire to avoid anything political since regardless of what side your on and whether or not you're offended it can be a distraction when you're trying to figure something out and get something done.
However, this is such a light joke on the subject and this is the Internet and there are far worse things being said out there and joked about out there that if someone gets offended by this, they need to grow a thicker skin and get over it. If we listened to all the SJW and snowflake nonsense out there, then we literally shouldn't bother talking and communicating at all since once one person has a different opinion on anything, at least one person will get offended and then all hell breaks loose against the person who dared to think different.
Good on Stallman for stopping the nonsense in its tracks before it grows larger.
Eh, maybe, maybe not. Don't underestimate Microsoft's powers of creating messes where none should have existed in the first place.
If the judge paid attention in science class, they'd know that they aren't qualified to be making that kind of ruling. Leave it to real scientists to get to the research and lobby the government.
Agreed. The body's circadian rhythm will adapt to the situation when one makes an effort to do so. I'm getting fed up with how these studies keep coming out about how 'hard' life is for college students. It's just more pandering to the crybabies out there. These kids need to learn that the world does not pander to them. They need to adapt to the world.
I haven't used my FB account in over 5 years and I've started receiving the same notices. It's like that desperate ex that follows you around after seeing you pass on the street and won't stop nagging you.
Even though Ajit Pai won't listen to them, maybe the next FCC chair can look into it after Trump leaves office?
I agree. It really depends on what they're taking it for. If it's just headaches and they work too much, they should consider a different job if they can't cut back the hours. I know several guys that need to rethink their life because they work themselves to death everyday and they aren't in a position to where they need to do so with family and kids to take care of for example.
It's good to shoot for the sky (or space), but you need to be able to enjoy life too. It's usually younger guys that make the mistake of overworking but it can happen to anyone.
Looks like the court ruling is a step in the right direction. Gerrymandering has been out of control for a long, long, time. I'd also go so far as to blame it for the reason why we haven't broken out of the two party system we're stuck in now where it's almost impossible for other parties to get any seats in office.
When politicians lose the ability to choose their voters, they'll have to start listening to the people for a change.
Written by a dreamer for dreamers. My take on it is they're looking for something other than x86 and x86_64 that's cheap for anyone to use. Well since even IBM's Power systems (I don't recall which models) are susceptible to Specter, jumping architectures won't prevent things like this happening.
I think I understand what they're going for with being able to quickly fix these design flaws when they're revealed, but methinks they don't have any understanding what so ever of how these things are developed and manufactured or that once the chip is made it can't be altered. Sure there are some advantages to being able to jump architectures since some architectures are better for different jobs, but for general computing nothing's been able to topple the x86/x86_64 dynasty (for one reason or another). Not even Intel could do it and you need to license the instruction sets from them! If they couldn't beat their own platform....good luck.
Also, design flaws like these don't break a system. The systems are already up and running and have been running pretty well with them for over a decade. When the new chips come out without the flaw, software designers will be able to speed things back up again. It's not like other flaws that cause miscalculations or fried CPUs.
That said, it must be nice to dream.
For regular cars we all drive ourselves, I say NO! Even if the car is stopped it's unacceptable to bombard the driver with ADs while they're getting ready to go. We already have people sitting at lights and not going when they change from red to green and then almost hitting others when they do get going. That is just with texting and other mobile phone use. For autonomous self-driving cars, there should be less of a threat to public safety so I can see that being a thing especially if they're surfing the net on the dashboard. However, I still say NO! The space people have in which they aren't bombarded with ADs is shrinking so the line must be drawn somewhere.
I too have decided to take the plunge and never look back. Besides not feeling like I'm learning anything new with Windows anymore I'm also tired of Microsoft treating us like a bunch of morons. I've seen how they've slowly taken away control from the end user with each new version of Windows and in Windows 10 it culminated into not being able to decide on which patches and driver updates they want to force upon you even if it breaks your setup.
Seeing Windows 10 break my setup by forcing broken drivers from Windows Update onto my PC was the last draw. I have better things to do with my time than hack the OS and install 3rd party tools on MY PC just to get it to obey me. To me this is far worse than the amount of data gathering they do because if I actually had control over Windows 10 and if the settings actually did what they said they would do I could turn all the data gathering off and it would stay turned off.
I don't care if they do it legally by burying it all in the EULA that nobody ever reads but has to accept. Now that they're finally loosing desktop market share, they can get away with more because they have 'competition'. I don't care if Google and Apple also do the same thing or what ever. Just because the industry is heading into a certain direction, it doesn't mean it's right so I'll keep running Linux.
It's funny, when I got my current job 4 years ago I was only running Linux on hardware that was over 7 years old and I didn't need MS Office to make my resume and the job was to support a Windows environment. After a while I saved up and built an up to date Windows PC for gaming. Now thanks to Steam, this isn't necessary anymore for the games I play and I still get funny looks and eye rolls from people at work when I remind them that I'm an exclusive Linux user at home now. That doesn't bother me a bit because I delight in them complaining on how expensive hardware is to get the best performance on their Windows PCs at home to run what ever AAA title they want to play and not have time for.
The MPAA in their current form is not needed in the 21st century and they know it and they don't want to change either. That's why they'll always talk up piracy as killing the industry so they can remain in power without changing. They already know they can't stop legitimate online streaming services so piracy is the only thing left that they can talk about and since the numbers don't add up they'll keep yelling louder and louder about it to try and discredit the actual numbers in the court of public opinion.
Piracy has been around for as long as the industry has been around and gosh darn it, it has somehow managed to survive with more people buying a copy of a movie or using some legal method to watch it rather than getting a bootleg copy of it from the pirates. The MPAA is as always full of shit when they start barking about the evils of piracy. So what if a movie brings in a few less millions of dollars of pure profit? We're not talking about not being able to cover costs of paying people to create the movie.
Honestly, when was the last time piracy caused a movie to not be able to be produced or not make enough to cover the costs? I honestly can't find a single case of this where it was clearly piracy and not mismanagement or the movie just being so crappy that it didn't sell that caused a studio to not make enough to cover the cost of producing the movie.
The MPAA is a relic from the past that's almost a hundred years old.
They largely aren't needed anymore. Nowadays people can make a movie at home and use the Internet to distribute it to a world wide audience without needing the help of a studio with ties to the MPAA. Content creators can also now work with Netflix and others to get their content out to consumers if they don't want to distribute it themselves.
They do help out a little with the ratings system, but only a little because the movie ratings are extremely biased to benefit the major studios while hurting the smaller ones. In some ways it's better than not having a ratings system at all, but it's also in a position to be abused and do more harm than good (which it already is).
Even if the students end up hating it, they should have to learn something about computers besides just typing and how to use office apps. Ignorance of them and assuming that they'll always 'just work' has got to end. We're in the 21st century now. The only way the masses are going to wake up and start making changes for the greater good is through knowledge. This has happened before with other industries, now it's time it finally came to the computer industry.
Microsoft is weak. Regardless of all the billions of dollars they have and their dominance in the software they've released, they obviously feel threatened to patent and then sue over a tiny little slider in an app.
To the folks at Redmond:
Keep it up Microsoft. While you nickle and dime customers with outrageous licensing practices and then add telemetry on top of it, and while you extort as much money from the broken patent system as possible, your actions do not go unnoticed. Your actions are indicative of a company that so weak in innovating and putting out new products that you must resort to exploitative business practices that hurt consumers.
You have been able to get away with this for years so naturally you don't think there's anything wrong. However there is something wrong. Your customers aren't as dumb and helpless as you think they are. There are plenty of viable lower cost solutions to the products you sell and they get more popular every time you keep making life harder for your customers.
To defeat Donald Trump you need to hear what he says to counter it, not run away from it or ignore it. Ignoring him lets him continue to run wild like our government.
If your beliefs and what you value is truly worth anything when you get offended by ONE man, then get off your lazy ass and DEFEND YOURSELF. Stop running and hiding from those that offend you and defend your beliefs.
To defeat the other side you also have to LISTEN to them to understand their arguments to be able to counter it. Or is your view on the issue at hand so weak that you can't take a little criticism or in Trump's case a loud argument that has more holes in it than swish cheese? Trump may be loud, derogatory, and downright mean and offensive, but as an opponent on actual issues facing the country he's got next to nothing to stand on. It's all fear mongering. He should actually be EASY to defeat when it comes to the real issues and best part is you don't have to make him look stupid since he does it so well by himself.
Ignoring the issues so don't have to get offended or 'just not have to look at it right now' doesn't do any good. You can't just assume it'll go away on its own. That's already been tried in 2015 and it DIDN'T WORK.
Why is it that people aren't afraid to join movements and protests, but once someone dares to challenge them and have a debate they cover their ears and refuse to listen? If they can't take any challenges or criticism then their movements and rallies are worthless.
~Written by someone who will likely get blocked by the next chrome extension.
It's not a bad idea, but it's not a fix for the problem and it is by no mean "debt free college" when wages are garnished to pay it back. It really depends on the career the student has after college too. They may not make enough money to do anything for the economy like buying a house, car, settling down with a family, etc while they're paying it back which means the net result is no change for the college tuition problem.
What about OS/2 for a temporary solution? It can run many of the apps that Windows 3.1 could and thanks to derivatives that are still actively developed like eComStation it can run on more hardware than in the past which would help give them time to port it over to something else.
I'm not saying to just abandon their old system right away since they can't just drop it and move away from it overnight they have to eventually do something about hardware support because eventually supported hardware for old systems goes away and they're already using eBay. Given OS/2's reputation for running Windows programs from back then, it may at least open up some options while they work on replacing the old system and if they had to make some updates to it, it may be a little more cost effective to jump to a platform that's known to run those apps that still has a company backing it up.
Ultimately they are going to need to abandon their old system, however in the meantime they have to do something about the hardware and this looks like something that can't be virtualized.
There is an obvious conflict of internet that needs to be addressed when the chair and vice chair of the department wrote the required book. The math department there votes on what book to use so that they can standardize what the students are getting, BUT there's no mention of chair and vice chair not voting on it. If even if they didn't vote, it doesn't resolve the conflict of interest completely since they're the chair and vice chair of the department and therefore you can't prove that the others didn't vote in favor of it to be in favor of them.
If the rich were really feeling 'left out' as this ridiculous article suggests, then why aren't they doing something about their image? It's not like they don't have the money to invest into some PR or to do something to help people out.
This is also seen in Washington. They've already bought out the politicians, they have the influence already to put themselves into a better light by getting things passed to help the common man (universal healthcare, higher taxes on the rich, high minimum wage, etc). Instead, they don't. They do the opposite. They get government to make them richer and poor poorer.
If they really are feeling like they're segregated from everyone else, well congrats to them. They succeeded in doing so in spades and personally I don't think a single one of them is actually sorry about it (or will ever be).
I'm all for seeing more women in coding and IT in general, but why force it? Sometimes women just aren't interested. Granted the thing with Sarah Sharp and Linus Torvalds doesn't help make it look like an inviting environment, and that could be off-putting, but anyone serious about getting into it ought to be smart enough to realize there are a lot of other projects they can get involved with or they can start their own if they don't want to deal with people like Linus Torvalds.