Orlando is not in south Florida it is in central Florida.

In the US criminal records are public records the exception is for juveniles. Once you are an adult you are expected to follow rules.
What I do not get is this statement. "i spent 22.5 months in Florida prison's, all because I got caught with some MDMA and weed at a rave in Orlando, FL in 2001."
If it was that guys first conviction and he did not have "a lot" of MDMA and weed aka amounts that make it look like you are dealing. Up to 20 grams is only a misdemeanor. MDMA is another story but unless he refused a plea deal or resisted arrest he should not have gotten anything but some community service and probation.

When I was in college I took several courses from the famous scholar of Japanese literature, Howard Hibbet. In one of the classes there was student who liked to talk about Japanese culture's "Samurai values". The professor listened politely to this student, until one day he said somethign that has stuck with me for thirty years: "You should be careful about uncritically accepting the way a culture likes to present itself."

I have found this to be very true, even of corporate cultures.

Many years ago there was a brief vogue among a few companies for psych testing potential employees. So I paid to have myself tested so I'd know what my potential employers "knew". Among other things, the tests informed me that I have an IQ that is 4.3 standard deviations above the mean.

This got me thinking. Which is more likely, that I'm smarter than 99.999% of the population, or that the test score was bogus? It should be obvious that it's far more likely that my test results were bogus!

Just because we can assign a single number to a person's intelligence the way we can to that person's height or weight doesn't mean that that number is as objective as height or weight is. What IQ tests purport to measure *cannot be observed directly*, and therefore cannot be measured directly. So we must not lose sight of the fact that IQ tests are *devised* by psychologists to correlate with something. How do they do this? By comparing a test's scores against something easy to measure -- rank in school for example. An IQ test that correlates poorly to performance in school would be considered "faulty", but one that correlates strongly to performancve in school would be considered "accurate".

In other words, IQ tests are only as meaningful as the outcomes they're deisgned to correlate with. An IQ test correlated to school success doesn't necessarily correlate precisely with "street smarts", many components of which are evolutionarily important (e.g. reading facial expressions).

Another thing to consider about how the test are calibrated is that the result is bound to be reliable ONLY near the mean, simply because confirmatory data out on the tails of the distribution is necessarily rare. So while I'd lend considerable credence to the 20 point spread between a 90 IQ and aa 110 IQ, I wouldn't lend the same credence to a difference between 140 and 160. I'd lend no credence whatsoever to the difference between a 140 and 160 IQ.

Basically, I consider distinctions betwen IQs over 125 unreliable, and distinctions between IQs over 135 as absolutely meaningless. There's no epistemological justfication for ranking people's intellectual abilities by IQ at that level. It's entirely possible that John Sunnunu would score 2.6 standard deviations higher than Stephen Hawking, but that's an artifact of the test, not reality.

You must be too young to remember the uproar over the Kane & Lynch/Gamespot incident from a few years back.

I don't, probably because it wasn't as rage-filled and rooted in misogyny as this roundabout is.

There have been plenty of other similar explosions over the years, and none of them involved sexism that I recall.

They weren't nearly as hateful or accompanied by vitriolic attack campaigns against small handfuls of individuals who had the temerity to point out the piss poor behavior of those on the "gamergate" side.

But you keep believing all the embarrassed game journalists who keep saying "The ethics of game journalism are just fine, no need to...HEY LOOK OVER THERE, IT'S SEXISM!!!!"

Gamergate was horribly sexist and misogynistic the moment it appeared, and harped on an indie developer in was they never ripped into an AAA developer.

But please, keep defending a (loosely knit) group who so far has rape and death threats under their belt, who whine about "censorship" then engage in abusive campaigns to silence those who point out that "hey, you're being horrible to other people for no real good reason."

Take two people, put them in a room, one guy has a net worth of $100 and the second has a net worth of $5000. What harm is the second person doing? We're talking about a factor of 50x here.

Idle examples are pointless.

Take away the room, let them live their lives, what harm is that second guy perpetuating? Make the difference a factor of 1000 or a 1,000,000, and where do we see him doing harm?

At a factor of a million here he's probably able to exploit loopholes that reduce his effective tax burden well below what the guy with way less money has to deal with. He's probably also wining and dining politicians to get his way. Likely he's also contributing to the continual depression of wages to ensure that his own wealth goes up at the expense of others.

When I hear folks talking about this, what I really hear is, "since one person doesn't need that much money to live, the government should take the difference and use it to make MY life better,"

Money is, currently, pooling at the top of the income ladder. The problem isn't so much that they have high wealth so much as it doesn't move. This is bad for the economy as a whole.

because from where I'm standing in a first world country, it seems to be just so much complaining over sour grapes.

That just means you're myopic. 90% of a nation's wealth being held by less than 10% isn't healthy, particularly when they're complaining about how consumers aren't buying.

Your observation would be insightful if holding a software patent demosntrated ability in the field.

It's about unethical journalists.

But only when a game designer's jilted ex-boyfriend posts hearsay about it. AAA publishers were doing worse shit all the times but there was no uproar of this intensity. Now Gamergate is about fueling a false persecution complex and attacking anyone who points out how horrible they're being.

Those same journalists have been trying for weeks now to deflect this focus away from them and pretend it's about sexism, changing gamer culture, etc.

No, "gamergaters" instantly made it that when they began their hate campaign and harassment.

they themselves don't have to answer for a decades-long games journalism tradition of "journalists" being in bed with the very companies they're supposed to be covering (through advertising, bribes, press releases disguised as "previews," etc.)

And where was the unbridled hatred and rage towards EA over the whole Shadow of Mordor controversy? Oh, right, it was virtually nonexistent because that's not the point anymore. The point now is solidarity against whatever enemy-du-jour that is seen as "attacking gamers" or other such delusional bullshit.

They used 8 for a number of reasons. The biggest was because they didn't want to spend money on a reactor that was so big it could only be used on a carrier.

Sad little person.
Spysats and spy aircraft save lives. The have prevented more wars than you can count. Sorry that that world is not all fairy farts and unicorn poop but the reality is that Lockheed's spy planes and spysats are what allowed the first arm limitation treaties and later arms reduction treaties.
Lockheed's greatest planes the U-2 and SR-71 never fired a single shot in anger.

But the flip side is a spouse can prevent other family members from seeing you.
So a spouse that does not like your parents can block them out of spite.

This could all be solved by just simple good manners and kindness but those are in short supply.

Except this is from Lockheed. While I would not stop all other research Lockheed has a history of making things that most people think is impossible possible.
First production US jet fighter.
First aircraft to fly over 70,000ft "level flight".
First US mach 2 fighter.
First Spysat.
First Mach 3 aircraft.
First stealth aircraft.
I really would not dismiss this one. It is as least very interesting.

No you are wrong.
https://www.pacificpower.net/y...

Peak usage in summer is around 4PM to 8PM peak solar generation is centered on solar noon and has a span of about 5 hours.
So take 1PM for daylight savings time and take it out 3 hours and you have the end of peak production at the start of peak usage.
That is a bit optimistic since I am extending peak generation time by an hour since it is summer.
In winter it is far worse. peak starts at 6am and runs to 10am and then you have a peak at 5PM to 8PM.
Peaks will very a bit by location but peak time is always evening and often early morning.
It will become an issue if solar ever gets to be around 30% of total power since it will demand even more peaking plants.

No you are wrong.
http://www.dol.gov/oasam/progr...

The rate of women joining the workforce has been more or less constant since 1948. The increase in the divorce rate, the pushing of women to have a career instead of staying home, the reduction of well paying manufacturing jobs, and many other issues has caused this.

I know of a couple where the mother has the higher potential to earn and the father stays at home which is fine. The key is not that women must stay home but at least one parent should stay home during the early years of the childrens life.

You left out divorce a swell which started to climb in the mid 70s.