Worked great for Yahoo

Also, Hiltzik is spectacularly wrong and has been for years. He's dogmatic and dull.

If the question is reaching the unvaccinated, he is the exact wrong person to ask for strategy.

Interesting approach from Jason McLellan at U. Texas currently in trials. Take Newcastle disease virus, strip out the pathogens, add instructions to make a highly-modified prefusion spike protein from SARS-CoV-2, and dump it in chicken eggs using the process for making influenza vaccines. As this is available throughout the world (the first trial was in Vietnam), this can be reproduced locally. The prefusion spike is even more stabilized than the one in the Moderna, Pfizer, and J&J shots, as it has six prolines rather than just two. And because they use Newcastle disease as the manufacturing vector, it infects chicken eggs beautifully, giving tremendous yields.

I’m in the J&J 2-dose trial, which is what they’re trying to learn. They’re also dosing it as a 1/2 dose (compared to the approved one-shot).

We already know who the clown is, now we've got tents for this circus. Very good, Elon.

Quill invoked the Commerce Clause because the United States is set up as a free trade zone. If the states could regulate interstate commerce, they would start engaging in tariff wars -- as they did under the Articles of Confederation. To say this is "judge-created" is to express some rather deep ignorance about the Founders' intentions.

Feminist academics have also done a huge amount of working trying to understand why so many men end up in jail and what can be done to reduce it.

For instance, working to change the threshold of proof for rape to mere accusation. "Believe the victim", etc.

You're assuming that they do identical work, with identical performance. Before you go any further, you'll need to provide proof that this is true.

This, frankly, is where Google's objections lie: how much would it cost to find those differences? How much to have outsiders vet them? Salary data is trivial to obtain, something I'm sure the plaintiffs are very aware of, and which animates a good bit of the sniping at Google on this thread. The difficulties lie in why they differ between the sexes. That gets into a host of issues the plaintiffs would likely rather ignore, things like women's preferences for more time off and flexible work hours.

This might have been news in 2005. In 2017? Not so much.

How much in lab fees does a typical liberal arts major pay for?

The problem with "gaslighting", as I wrote here, is that it tends to be used in two contexts, one legitimate (people lying about factual events) and one illegitimate (people disagreeing on interpretations of those events). Based on what I'm reading here, it looks like some of both: the unscheduling in particular seems like a red flag, but a lot of the other stuff is contextual and missing details. Furthermore, the fact that the author complains about coworkers' criticisms — and in particular, the criticism of someone they label as a "superstar" within the company, i.e. a person who has developed a sterling reputation — leads me to question the submitter's competence. So, I would advise,

• If you know from prior work experience that you are competent and the work environment is toxic, leave, knowing you can find a better employment situation elsewhere.
• But also be open to the idea that you may have your own "crisis of competence" here.

That this still needs to be pointed out shows just how dangerous and naive the green left still is.

if you believe all income belongs first to the state. All this is legal, and the whining that inevitably goes on after such transactions reflects the belief that the "fair share" of a corporation's income is less than whatever the speaker wants it to be.

Get a sense of humor.

Is There Anything Good About Men?

Putdowns are endemic as a way to remind everyone that respect is in limited supply. ("This, incidentally, has probably been a major source of friction as women have moved into the workplace, and organizations have had to shift toward policies that everyone is entitled to respect. The men hadnâ(TM)t originally built them to respect everybody.")