Hey, if you don't like it, just go start a competitor to Facebook. That's what all the pedantic school marms who come onto Slashdot say when you assert that freedom of speech is equal parts a cultural value and that businesses have no business weighing in on speech most of the time.
the her campaign goals could be more bravado than reality
Please, enough with your sexist, cis-male, privileged bullshit. Everyone knows that Clinton has always run a clean, transparent operation wherever she goes and isn't one to blame significant swaths of the country for her failures. Next thing you'll be telling us she has a foundation that acts as a pay-for-play slush fund that enables assholes from around the world to get access to her and Bill.
Everything everyone does is part of history. The "right to be forgotten" is just the 1984 memory hole with a friendly face. It starts with misunderstandings and people saying "they were a kid when they did that" and ends with inconvenient facts about what people did before their "views evolved" being forcibly erased for the convenience of the one wanting their past hidden.
Because even in the face of this, no politician has the guts to propose a bill that would transfer OPM's work to more competent agencies, fire all of its staffers with a 90 day severance package and have GSA sell the agency's assets at public auction. The worst assault on US national security since the Rosenbergs' treason (yes, much much worse than any of the recent leaks) and no one high level is even losing a job, let alone facing indictment. And the best part, no one in Congress seems to think it sufficiently grave to raise that issue.
This is why when people say Donald Trump is a joke and we need serious candidates, I say bullshit. If you're talking foreign policy as a candidate and you don't have a comprehensive answer to this, you aren't serious because this is more serious than Iran getting a nuke or two. This compromises so much of our ability to do black ops.
And on top of it, you get a level of transparency the resembles what a blackhole does to sunlight her supporters will be just shocked--SHOCKED--that voting for a candidate with her horrendous record on honesty backfired on them.
I mean FFS, I'm generally a conservative and I'd vote for Bernie Sanders in a heartbeat over her even though he's an avowed Socialist because at least the man seems to have some real integrity and respect for the middle class.
Whenever I see some financial or health care site that has a stupid limit like "8-16 characters, letters and numbers only and only one of these three non-alphanumeric characters" I struggle with free market principles and not saying "there ought to be a law..." In fact, it'd be easier on people to just let them use a phrase that has a meaning only to them. You know, a sentence that has numbers in it and goes on to something like over 128 characters easily.
Many of them are the sort of folks who think Texas and Louisiana are barbaric states because they allow property owners to use force, including deadly force in significant cases, against people attempting to steal their property or destroy it. Yet they turn around and do the equivalent of torching an entire city block because one shop might occasionally host people who violate their IP rights.
Like medical device manufacturers, they seem to be in lala land compared to most fields that use computers when it comes to security. The worst part is that if the federal government mandates security standards, the most likely outcome is that they will likely only target a few bright lines tests and the standards will never keep pace with the evolving threat models.
I have a relative who dealt with a surgeon who was the only game in town in his specialty. Turned out that the man hadn't bothered to do much to update his knowledge of his specialty in about 15-20 years. Several surgeries later, the relative ended up going to a major regional university's affiliated hospital. They had to tell her that due to his use of outdated techniques, all of which were "safe" by the standards of the licensing committee, the best they could offer her would be to moderately repair the damage he did and there was simply no way she'd ever be right again. They said that had she gone to them or someone else in the same field who bothered to keep up, she'd have probably recovered just fine or at least would have had the majority of her pain and functional issues gone.
People in favor of licensing professionals would say "imagine how much worse it could have been." We say "imagine how much harder he'd have worked if he had more competition." If licensing and regulation doesn't keep professionals like doctors and lawyers in line, I see absolutely no benefit to putting up barriers to entry in jobs like taxi driving. Toughen up the liability laws and make it easier to win on "failure to do (what is reasonably known by practitioners) right."
On the other hand, you could have a watch loaded with a lot of mediocre apps that cause its power use to spike a lot, draining the battery and leaving you to charge it a few times a day. So either you end up taking the watch off once or twice a day or you end up with a cable linking your phone to your laptop or a wall charger.
Sounds like great options that are sure to drive adoption of the core product.
Naive is believing that a German businessman who travels to locales like Ghana would describe traveling to Italy as his dream destination, like it's something to aspire to as an adventure, when it's about like driving from Florida to Pennsylvania in distance. Stupid is when you believe that this man could rack up a bill in Ghana that would be a major medical scandal in the US (where hospitals don't even blink at bilking people in many areas) and then blindly start throwing that much money at him.
It is an issue because race doesn't correlate with competence. Therefore if you have one race being under-represented you know that there are many potentially great candidates from that race that you are failing to hire, instead settling for a potentially worse candidate from some other race.
If a race is under-represented, it could also mean that there simply aren't as many candidates period of those groups. So you have two main choices. You can believe that these companies are racist or biased and lying about their demand for this type of person, or you could believe that the market has spoken and it can't find enough of these people to meet the demand that is constantly being stated by reputable employers. Take your pick, but mine is on the latter since it follows the money on more levels than the former.
By your logic, white and asian people must be committing a ton of violent felonies because they're under-represented on crime stats. Either that or many of the hispanics and blacks that get convicted really are victims of racism and bias. It couldn't possibly be that some groups commit more crimes of a certain type or some groups tend to field more qualified candidates for different lines of work. Shit, by your logic I could argue that professional sports are racist because the disproportionate share of blacks in those lines of work must be a sign of bias, despite my lying eyes telling me that the ones I'm seeing are damn good athletes who could wipe the floor with most white and asian athletes.
You know what subset does a pretty decent job of focusing on diversity and lower credentials to get people in? Government contracting, and it's part of the same industry as Silicon Valley. You know what is also part of the same industry as Silicon Valley and whose big firms have wretched reputations for their quality vice Silicon Valley big firms? Government contracting.
What SJWs want to believe is that every group is perfectly equal or close to it, and we're just a few policies away from achieving the magic of diversity. That's bullshit and ignores the lived experience of every family that has worked its way up from the low end of the lower class into the middle class.
Some prison time for every OPM staffer involved in setting up the RFP and awarding contracts that lacked a "US citizens only" clause and that were know to have foreign contractors working on federal systems. Everyone from the first line contract officer and PMs up to past directors should be under criminal indictment for this. That, not legislation, would make things safer.
Setting aside cryptocurrencies, TFS is ludicrous. We mistrust the banks, so naturally we support moving in a direction that absolutely forces people to use financial institutions to facilitate basic transactions! Who do they think are going to be managing the deposits and transactions? Privacy? Forget about it. When everything is electronic, the government will be able to monitor everything beyond bartering.
There's no reason to protect any of those people from discrimination. It's not like there has been a history of any of these groups of people being oppressed, or anything like that... oh wait.
So what if there is? Do you really think making a skin head or klansman who owns a bakery bake a cake for a black family is anything other than a power play to force them to accept society's values when they're otherwise content to leave the people they hate alone? Does it even make sense to want to be served by someone who hates you? No, it doesn't. You are playing Russian Roulette with the possibility of them doing something spiteful, if not evil, to you. Particularly so because you are smugly forcing them to "accept you" and do business with you.
Speaking of wedding cakes, ever notice that gay rights activists are only going after Christians? Plenty of Muslims sell baked goods and cater weddings too. The difference is that if a Muslim version of Sweet Cakes by Melissa were attacked by gay rights activists, the gay community knows that someone in the Muslim community might at least burn down the couple's home, if not murder them in retaliation for attacking a Muslim business.
Maybe you're OK with taking in peoples' wash and sewing for low pay, no benefits or sick days, and a friendly "fuck you" when you're too old to work, but most people are not.
And most people have no real job skills that the market values. So where does that leave us? With a bunch of entitled, low-skilled people who think that being an awesome burger flipper or retail clerk should entitle them to a 2000ft^2 apartment or home, an iPhone, cable package, nice car and full health care coverage. This is despite the fact that their input into the economy is barely a drop in the bucket compared to what they expect to come back to them.
Don't whine about human rights and dignity here. Mathematics doesn't give a shit what you think is the right thing to do. The health care demands coupled with what people want to do with their bodies in modern industrial societies alone is beyond the productive capacity of modern economics to provide. That's why health care is becoming unsustainable even in countries that use socialized medicine aside from Cuba (which has some structural advantages such as being able to use medical workers' family members as incentives to work efficiently)
Several educational charities and two focused exclusively on women's education opportunities and anti-poverty efforts. Once again we see the SJWs make sexist choices in the name of equality and opportunity. Unfortunately, here's a rough truth that they're ignoring. All of the efforts to lift up third world women won't accomplish anything if the men aren't lifted up. This is particularly true in the poorest, most traditional societies. If we managed to make all Afghani women suddenly Sex in the City-esque educated women without doing the equivalent for the men, within a generation the Taliban would have that progress stopped and within 3, women would be back in their traditional role.
SJWs forget a crucial lesson from our own history. Women didn't fight for their rights and win them. Men gave them their legal rights. It was the change of hearts and minds that made the modern world in the industrialized countries. If women had rebelled in the pre-modern West and fought a real fight for political equality, those proto-feminists would have been put down without a fight by the government and with society's blessing.
Seriously, most Australians and Brits probably have no idea how pointless it is to bring up stuff like this:
The U.S. has some problems that Australia doesn't have. It's got a lot more racial crimes, it's got a lot more gun-related crimes, but I don't think that is going to drive a whole bunch of ultra-rich Americans out of their country,
What most foreigners consistently get wrong when looking at our crime stats is failing to note that the overwhelming majority of our gun deaths either have a criminal or a suicidal person on the receiving end of the bullet. Since it's illegal in all 50 states and DC to shoot someone over a non-violent offense or even a violent misdemeanor, that almost invariably means that when a criminal is shot it's either by someone who by definition doesn't respect the law (fellow criminal) or someone about to be on the receiving end of a violent felony.
I can't blame them for this misunderstanding. Our gun control lobby is notorious for manipulating stats by doing stuff like putting gangbangers near the age of majority, who are both eligible to be prosecuted as adults and involved in serious crime when killed, as "children" under the death stats. That's about as bad as most countries refusing to count the death of premature babies on their mortality rates and mocking us for our higher mortality rate because we record those as infant deaths.
But hey, if you want to outsource your basic daily safety to the state, more power to you. You have a rich tradition of subjection to royal and aristocratic authority. Who are we to judge your culture, even if it makes no sense to most of us how you can call yourselves "free citizens" when your electorate is basically at the mercy of your elites' willingness to use force?
Then clearly you have no condition for which there are a variety of treatments that carry their own "fine print" problems. I have one: psoriasis. It sounds annoying to most people who think of it as aggressive dandruff. The reality is that psoriasis often puts scaly lesions all over your body such that even if you're in great shape you may think twice about hitting the pool.
Treatments without insurance run as much as $350-$400 for a 1-2 month dose of medication for steroid treatments that make the patches mostly go away. Or you can opt for Humira which is non-steroidal and more convenient, but it works by attacking your immune system which is why the commercials say in friendly legal terms that you really ought to consider the wisdom of using it and traveling to locales that are friendlier to disease and fungus.
Now I can easily see some snarky ass saying #firstworldproblems to this, but it's precisely the sort of condition where there is a damn good reason for the pharmaceutical industry to keep a gene therapy cure postponed. Without insurance, it's a bitch and a half to finance full treatment for even "moderate psoriasis."
Parents and grand-parents who give their daughters princess dresses for christmas and act gleefully if the daughter wear it, express a bias.
Shocking that parents are happy when their daughters like feminine things. It's almost like they don't think they're defective males and their views on clothing is orthogonal to computer issues.
Parents who at the same christmas complain if the daughter plays to much on the new computer express a bias.
There's nothing biased about that unless it's clearly hostility to the idea of women spending a lot of time on it. Unless she's doing "something geeky" with it like learning how to write code, doing semi-advanced artistic work, etc. then they probably have a point. I knew plenty of parents of boys who told their kids to GTF off their computer and go outside because all they were doing is surfing the web and playing games. Nothing biased about that either.
Television programming where the only computer affiliate is a dorky guy who might be brilliant at computers but is awkward at anything else expresses a bias.
And in real life, geek =~ dork to a lot of people, particularly women and particularly with younger geek males. A number of us grow to the point of being able to match the charisma and confidence of "normal men," but many of don't get there. We have not, and likely never will, reach a point where this stuff is considered cool on par with sports and stuff like that.
Most of the reasons why geek culture is considered more palatable is because the STEM industry booms combined with the decline in many fields has reduced our economic competition for social status. If you haven't been paying attention, the legal profession has been hit very hard by a glut of graduates and a dearth of positions that pay a wage better than a VB6 legacy app maintenance position.
Yes, you can actually spark interest in computer science. Yes, you can actually kindle the awakening interest and encourage it.
Yes you can do it. Statistically, you won't and for the same reason that you will never kindle an interest in "nurturing jobs" in a majority of males no matter how aggressive you are.
I know a very religious family that has a very good track record of getting their daughters into STEM fields. The older daughter was naturally interested, so they just put the opportunities there in front of her. You know how they got their younger daughter involved? They told her that if she couldn't prove how she was going to support herself on the degree, they wouldn't pay for it. Didn't matter to them what she chose, just couldn't be something stupid like a BA in Psychology or Political Science. Worked like a charm at motivating her to be practical. Turns out that rather than focusing on bias, forcing women to choose a productive major or simply not go to college on their parents' dime works pretty well.
Of course the reason they didn't steer their daughter into computer science is "bias" and not "we are the two people who know our daughter the most for the last 18 years of her life and most likely can steer her toward what would make her happy." Because the happiness of diversity coordinators matters more the happiness of the actual women being fought over here.
This is nothing more than corporate Danegeld. It will probably end about as well for most of their customers. They'll be just shocked when Oracle comes back in a few years and launches another attack on them.
Virtually every database I've ever seen is a bit bucket. There's precisely zero reasons for them to be on Oracle because the data set is well into the size where PostgreSQL, MySQL and SQL Server could easily provide a more cost-effective alternative. If you use Oracle for that, you get what you deserve.
Oracle is just doing this crap because they've realized that nobody really wants them for big data. They know that their future is mainly limited to the sort of customers that are willing to buy and build SQL databases for their data. There's plenty of legitimate room for that sort of data and they'll do fine. They just can't accept that they're on the infrastructure side of cloud computing and big data that corresponds to where Microsoft is in mobile.
Heck, Microsoft at this point should black knight them by releasing a trojan that infects company networks and all it does is audit their Oracle stack and send Oracle sales an email telling what it finds on the company network.
Most government agencies would never have let this happen in the first place because they're not stupid enough to "save money" by creating such an unbelievably high value collection of data so easily accessible to the Internet. Another thing, they would never have hired foreign contractors to work on such a critical database. OPM's contract office should be headed to Leavenworth for that decision.
OPM is pretty legendary in federal circles as basically the sort of federal agency that inspired the bureaucrat jokes on Futurama. The only way to "reform" them is to just scuttle the agency and transfer its functions to the various departments. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence should get the investigators and that authority. Civil service management should be a per-department issue. Managing retirees' benefits could easily just be contracted out to whatever private companies already manage the asset pool of the pension funds. The federal retirees I know would love to deal with a bank rather than OPM. Why? A bank would actually give a shit about processing their communications in a timely fashion.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, if you don't like it, just go start a competitor to Facebook. That's what all the pedantic school marms who come onto Slashdot say when you assert that freedom of speech is equal parts a cultural value and that businesses have no business weighing in on speech most of the time.
Please, enough with your sexist, cis-male, privileged bullshit. Everyone knows that Clinton has always run a clean, transparent operation wherever she goes and isn't one to blame significant swaths of the country for her failures. Next thing you'll be telling us she has a foundation that acts as a pay-for-play slush fund that enables assholes from around the world to get access to her and Bill.
Everything everyone does is part of history. The "right to be forgotten" is just the 1984 memory hole with a friendly face. It starts with misunderstandings and people saying "they were a kid when they did that" and ends with inconvenient facts about what people did before their "views evolved" being forcibly erased for the convenience of the one wanting their past hidden.
Because even in the face of this, no politician has the guts to propose a bill that would transfer OPM's work to more competent agencies, fire all of its staffers with a 90 day severance package and have GSA sell the agency's assets at public auction. The worst assault on US national security since the Rosenbergs' treason (yes, much much worse than any of the recent leaks) and no one high level is even losing a job, let alone facing indictment. And the best part, no one in Congress seems to think it sufficiently grave to raise that issue.
This is why when people say Donald Trump is a joke and we need serious candidates, I say bullshit. If you're talking foreign policy as a candidate and you don't have a comprehensive answer to this, you aren't serious because this is more serious than Iran getting a nuke or two. This compromises so much of our ability to do black ops.
And on top of it, you get a level of transparency the resembles what a blackhole does to sunlight her supporters will be just shocked--SHOCKED--that voting for a candidate with her horrendous record on honesty backfired on them.
I mean FFS, I'm generally a conservative and I'd vote for Bernie Sanders in a heartbeat over her even though he's an avowed Socialist because at least the man seems to have some real integrity and respect for the middle class.
Whenever I see some financial or health care site that has a stupid limit like "8-16 characters, letters and numbers only and only one of these three non-alphanumeric characters" I struggle with free market principles and not saying "there ought to be a law..." In fact, it'd be easier on people to just let them use a phrase that has a meaning only to them. You know, a sentence that has numbers in it and goes on to something like over 128 characters easily.
Many of them are the sort of folks who think Texas and Louisiana are barbaric states because they allow property owners to use force, including deadly force in significant cases, against people attempting to steal their property or destroy it. Yet they turn around and do the equivalent of torching an entire city block because one shop might occasionally host people who violate their IP rights.
Like medical device manufacturers, they seem to be in lala land compared to most fields that use computers when it comes to security. The worst part is that if the federal government mandates security standards, the most likely outcome is that they will likely only target a few bright lines tests and the standards will never keep pace with the evolving threat models.
I have a relative who dealt with a surgeon who was the only game in town in his specialty. Turned out that the man hadn't bothered to do much to update his knowledge of his specialty in about 15-20 years. Several surgeries later, the relative ended up going to a major regional university's affiliated hospital. They had to tell her that due to his use of outdated techniques, all of which were "safe" by the standards of the licensing committee, the best they could offer her would be to moderately repair the damage he did and there was simply no way she'd ever be right again. They said that had she gone to them or someone else in the same field who bothered to keep up, she'd have probably recovered just fine or at least would have had the majority of her pain and functional issues gone.
People in favor of licensing professionals would say "imagine how much worse it could have been." We say "imagine how much harder he'd have worked if he had more competition." If licensing and regulation doesn't keep professionals like doctors and lawyers in line, I see absolutely no benefit to putting up barriers to entry in jobs like taxi driving. Toughen up the liability laws and make it easier to win on "failure to do (what is reasonably known by practitioners) right."
On the other hand, you could have a watch loaded with a lot of mediocre apps that cause its power use to spike a lot, draining the battery and leaving you to charge it a few times a day. So either you end up taking the watch off once or twice a day or you end up with a cable linking your phone to your laptop or a wall charger.
Sounds like great options that are sure to drive adoption of the core product.
Naive is believing that a German businessman who travels to locales like Ghana would describe traveling to Italy as his dream destination, like it's something to aspire to as an adventure, when it's about like driving from Florida to Pennsylvania in distance. Stupid is when you believe that this man could rack up a bill in Ghana that would be a major medical scandal in the US (where hospitals don't even blink at bilking people in many areas) and then blindly start throwing that much money at him.
If a race is under-represented, it could also mean that there simply aren't as many candidates period of those groups. So you have two main choices. You can believe that these companies are racist or biased and lying about their demand for this type of person, or you could believe that the market has spoken and it can't find enough of these people to meet the demand that is constantly being stated by reputable employers. Take your pick, but mine is on the latter since it follows the money on more levels than the former.
By your logic, white and asian people must be committing a ton of violent felonies because they're under-represented on crime stats. Either that or many of the hispanics and blacks that get convicted really are victims of racism and bias. It couldn't possibly be that some groups commit more crimes of a certain type or some groups tend to field more qualified candidates for different lines of work. Shit, by your logic I could argue that professional sports are racist because the disproportionate share of blacks in those lines of work must be a sign of bias, despite my lying eyes telling me that the ones I'm seeing are damn good athletes who could wipe the floor with most white and asian athletes.
You know what subset does a pretty decent job of focusing on diversity and lower credentials to get people in? Government contracting, and it's part of the same industry as Silicon Valley. You know what is also part of the same industry as Silicon Valley and whose big firms have wretched reputations for their quality vice Silicon Valley big firms? Government contracting.
What SJWs want to believe is that every group is perfectly equal or close to it, and we're just a few policies away from achieving the magic of diversity. That's bullshit and ignores the lived experience of every family that has worked its way up from the low end of the lower class into the middle class.
Some prison time for every OPM staffer involved in setting up the RFP and awarding contracts that lacked a "US citizens only" clause and that were know to have foreign contractors working on federal systems. Everyone from the first line contract officer and PMs up to past directors should be under criminal indictment for this. That, not legislation, would make things safer.
Setting aside cryptocurrencies, TFS is ludicrous. We mistrust the banks, so naturally we support moving in a direction that absolutely forces people to use financial institutions to facilitate basic transactions! Who do they think are going to be managing the deposits and transactions? Privacy? Forget about it. When everything is electronic, the government will be able to monitor everything beyond bartering.
So what if there is? Do you really think making a skin head or klansman who owns a bakery bake a cake for a black family is anything other than a power play to force them to accept society's values when they're otherwise content to leave the people they hate alone? Does it even make sense to want to be served by someone who hates you? No, it doesn't. You are playing Russian Roulette with the possibility of them doing something spiteful, if not evil, to you. Particularly so because you are smugly forcing them to "accept you" and do business with you.
Speaking of wedding cakes, ever notice that gay rights activists are only going after Christians? Plenty of Muslims sell baked goods and cater weddings too. The difference is that if a Muslim version of Sweet Cakes by Melissa were attacked by gay rights activists, the gay community knows that someone in the Muslim community might at least burn down the couple's home, if not murder them in retaliation for attacking a Muslim business.
And most people have no real job skills that the market values. So where does that leave us? With a bunch of entitled, low-skilled people who think that being an awesome burger flipper or retail clerk should entitle them to a 2000ft^2 apartment or home, an iPhone, cable package, nice car and full health care coverage. This is despite the fact that their input into the economy is barely a drop in the bucket compared to what they expect to come back to them.
Don't whine about human rights and dignity here. Mathematics doesn't give a shit what you think is the right thing to do. The health care demands coupled with what people want to do with their bodies in modern industrial societies alone is beyond the productive capacity of modern economics to provide. That's why health care is becoming unsustainable even in countries that use socialized medicine aside from Cuba (which has some structural advantages such as being able to use medical workers' family members as incentives to work efficiently)
Several educational charities and two focused exclusively on women's education opportunities and anti-poverty efforts. Once again we see the SJWs make sexist choices in the name of equality and opportunity. Unfortunately, here's a rough truth that they're ignoring. All of the efforts to lift up third world women won't accomplish anything if the men aren't lifted up. This is particularly true in the poorest, most traditional societies. If we managed to make all Afghani women suddenly Sex in the City-esque educated women without doing the equivalent for the men, within a generation the Taliban would have that progress stopped and within 3, women would be back in their traditional role.
SJWs forget a crucial lesson from our own history. Women didn't fight for their rights and win them. Men gave them their legal rights. It was the change of hearts and minds that made the modern world in the industrialized countries. If women had rebelled in the pre-modern West and fought a real fight for political equality, those proto-feminists would have been put down without a fight by the government and with society's blessing.
Seriously, most Australians and Brits probably have no idea how pointless it is to bring up stuff like this:
What most foreigners consistently get wrong when looking at our crime stats is failing to note that the overwhelming majority of our gun deaths either have a criminal or a suicidal person on the receiving end of the bullet. Since it's illegal in all 50 states and DC to shoot someone over a non-violent offense or even a violent misdemeanor, that almost invariably means that when a criminal is shot it's either by someone who by definition doesn't respect the law (fellow criminal) or someone about to be on the receiving end of a violent felony.
I can't blame them for this misunderstanding. Our gun control lobby is notorious for manipulating stats by doing stuff like putting gangbangers near the age of majority, who are both eligible to be prosecuted as adults and involved in serious crime when killed, as "children" under the death stats. That's about as bad as most countries refusing to count the death of premature babies on their mortality rates and mocking us for our higher mortality rate because we record those as infant deaths.
But hey, if you want to outsource your basic daily safety to the state, more power to you. You have a rich tradition of subjection to royal and aristocratic authority. Who are we to judge your culture, even if it makes no sense to most of us how you can call yourselves "free citizens" when your electorate is basically at the mercy of your elites' willingness to use force?
Then clearly you have no condition for which there are a variety of treatments that carry their own "fine print" problems. I have one: psoriasis. It sounds annoying to most people who think of it as aggressive dandruff. The reality is that psoriasis often puts scaly lesions all over your body such that even if you're in great shape you may think twice about hitting the pool.
Treatments without insurance run as much as $350-$400 for a 1-2 month dose of medication for steroid treatments that make the patches mostly go away. Or you can opt for Humira which is non-steroidal and more convenient, but it works by attacking your immune system which is why the commercials say in friendly legal terms that you really ought to consider the wisdom of using it and traveling to locales that are friendlier to disease and fungus.
Now I can easily see some snarky ass saying #firstworldproblems to this, but it's precisely the sort of condition where there is a damn good reason for the pharmaceutical industry to keep a gene therapy cure postponed. Without insurance, it's a bitch and a half to finance full treatment for even "moderate psoriasis."
Shocking that parents are happy when their daughters like feminine things. It's almost like they don't think they're defective males and their views on clothing is orthogonal to computer issues.
There's nothing biased about that unless it's clearly hostility to the idea of women spending a lot of time on it. Unless she's doing "something geeky" with it like learning how to write code, doing semi-advanced artistic work, etc. then they probably have a point. I knew plenty of parents of boys who told their kids to GTF off their computer and go outside because all they were doing is surfing the web and playing games. Nothing biased about that either.
And in real life, geek =~ dork to a lot of people, particularly women and particularly with younger geek males. A number of us grow to the point of being able to match the charisma and confidence of "normal men," but many of don't get there. We have not, and likely never will, reach a point where this stuff is considered cool on par with sports and stuff like that.
Most of the reasons why geek culture is considered more palatable is because the STEM industry booms combined with the decline in many fields has reduced our economic competition for social status. If you haven't been paying attention, the legal profession has been hit very hard by a glut of graduates and a dearth of positions that pay a wage better than a VB6 legacy app maintenance position.
Yes you can do it. Statistically, you won't and for the same reason that you will never kindle an interest in "nurturing jobs" in a majority of males no matter how aggressive you are.
I know a very religious family that has a very good track record of getting their daughters into STEM fields. The older daughter was naturally interested, so they just put the opportunities there in front of her. You know how they got their younger daughter involved? They told her that if she couldn't prove how she was going to support herself on the degree, they wouldn't pay for it. Didn't matter to them what she chose, just couldn't be something stupid like a BA in Psychology or Political Science. Worked like a charm at motivating her to be practical. Turns out that rather than focusing on bias, forcing women to choose a productive major or simply not go to college on their parents' dime works pretty well.
Of course the reason they didn't steer their daughter into computer science is "bias" and not "we are the two people who know our daughter the most for the last 18 years of her life and most likely can steer her toward what would make her happy." Because the happiness of diversity coordinators matters more the happiness of the actual women being fought over here.
This is nothing more than corporate Danegeld. It will probably end about as well for most of their customers. They'll be just shocked when Oracle comes back in a few years and launches another attack on them.
Virtually every database I've ever seen is a bit bucket. There's precisely zero reasons for them to be on Oracle because the data set is well into the size where PostgreSQL, MySQL and SQL Server could easily provide a more cost-effective alternative. If you use Oracle for that, you get what you deserve.
Oracle is just doing this crap because they've realized that nobody really wants them for big data. They know that their future is mainly limited to the sort of customers that are willing to buy and build SQL databases for their data. There's plenty of legitimate room for that sort of data and they'll do fine. They just can't accept that they're on the infrastructure side of cloud computing and big data that corresponds to where Microsoft is in mobile.
Heck, Microsoft at this point should black knight them by releasing a trojan that infects company networks and all it does is audit their Oracle stack and send Oracle sales an email telling what it finds on the company network.
Most government agencies would never have let this happen in the first place because they're not stupid enough to "save money" by creating such an unbelievably high value collection of data so easily accessible to the Internet. Another thing, they would never have hired foreign contractors to work on such a critical database. OPM's contract office should be headed to Leavenworth for that decision.
OPM is pretty legendary in federal circles as basically the sort of federal agency that inspired the bureaucrat jokes on Futurama. The only way to "reform" them is to just scuttle the agency and transfer its functions to the various departments. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence should get the investigators and that authority. Civil service management should be a per-department issue. Managing retirees' benefits could easily just be contracted out to whatever private companies already manage the asset pool of the pension funds. The federal retirees I know would love to deal with a bank rather than OPM. Why? A bank would actually give a shit about processing their communications in a timely fashion.