"It's clear that there are people who are hurt by them and who are made to feel unwelcome by their use due not to technical reasons but to their historical and social context. That's simply enough reason to replace them."

What about the people who are offended are feel no longer welcome by the new names, or by the change itself. Usually names have a *domain specific* meaning, so, yes, it is offensive to any professional to rename some well established term to appease some people *who might not even work in that field*. Who decided whose offense taken is to be valued more? Policing language will lead down a dark and hideous rabbit hole...

Whoever does not understand Opera 12.x, is doomed to reinvent it.

As a SJW she added so much negative value to the company that even just handing her $36K is a net gain for the company in short and long term. It's basically like containing a virus which can spread to infect other parts of the company, if not acted upon fast and decisive.

Since SJW add negative net value to companies, Lambda even threw money at her to rid themselves of her. Another cautionary tale to not ignore warning signs, there sure were plenty before.

Why are people and companies so afraid of the SJW twitter mob?

No Mr. Lebowski, that had not occured to me.

What is the natural expected value for the number of plants threatened by extinction? If we learned one thing from Darwin, it's that life is a constant struggle all the time, and species will die out of they don't adapt. Modern methods allow us to classify and discover far more plants and species than in the past, so there is also a bias there.

So, without knowing and mentioning the average ratio of plants threatened by extinction over the course of life on earth, it's impossible to know whether one third is a high, low or average number.

The "irony" is that the same crowd who deny differences between sexes clamour that we have to "believe the scientists" when it comes to clinate change.

So, a large part of the community used the same code without checking or understanding what it does, then the fix is "published" behind a paywalled journal. The sane approach would be to dismiss all results based on the "script" until this is published to be really peer-reviewable.

In our age "code" is what "mathematics" was until the digital age, so it should be published alongside any scientific publication. And "published" obviously means free-as-in-beer, so it can actually be reviewed.

She started studying CS and half-way in discovered she does not like coding. Your number for INT is way too high as well.

That software development needs to catch-up with hardware development was nicely presented by Jonathan Blow.

What the show portrayed was that guys with an interesting job and fun hobbies got dragged into a world of boredom by appeasing the whims of the women around them. It was a warning to all nerds to not budge to social pressure. At the same rate the guys gave up their hobbies and interests, the show got more and more boring and went into (awkward) romcom territory. It finally jumped the shark when the three most unlikely people, Penny, Amy and whatshername were hanging around with each other, without sharing a single interest, except for "we (have to) like the guys across the hall".

This is a non-sequitur. There is still no reason to store it somewhere out of your control.

Though the code itself should be safe, it might be really annoying if the "hacker" runs amok in the project and deletes all the metadata (issue tracker, discussions, wiki, etc.) on the hosting site.

In Soviet Russia, PHP uses you!