Google can start something like this, but they should reach out to individuals, Universities and other corporations that may be interested, form a foundation, and let it be free as in freedom. If it is something interesting and people want to use it, more people will contribute effort to growing and maintaining the environment. If Google finds it useful, then Google can contribute money or time to the foundation and leverage the efforts of everyone else involved. In the long run it is better for Google and for people using it.

That's blunt, but more often than not it is the truth. For the good of society, I don't like home school, because of its effect on universal education, but it is a response to a problem that nobody seem willing to correct. For Chemistry: http://www.amazon.com/Illustrated-Guide-Home-Chemistry-Experiments/dp/0596514921/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1339100841&sr=1-1

I mean, really.... Grey hair, Fred Thompson look alike... They don't exist in IT. Is federal security locking up the punch cards?

Wouldn't it be easier to just add sensors to Rock Hill, SC? Or better yet, play Sim City.

Assuming that you aren't installing raised floors and a HVAC unit, there are plenty of racks, both full and half hight available. Or you can look at portable rack systems for shows. You can hide it in a closet (well ventilated) and pull it out to work on it.

Wouldn't it be easier to recognize and appreciate you if you didn't post AC?

And before I get jumped on, Linus deserves it. Linux and open source in general, created more opportunity and employment than all the politicians combined. While the wealth wasn't concentrated in his hands like the Ellison's and Gates' of the world, what he started created a lot of income for many others. Stallman deserves credit too, for the creation of the GPL and the GNU tools Linus used, but his ideology would have prevented the operating system's success and effected the ecosystem that grew around Linux. We're lucky that the balance of technical savvy and tame ego of Linus allowed this revolution to happen.

I think the fix was on.

I agree that it isn't a young male developer specific issue. The subject of the original article was young male developers and I was continuing the theme.

I agree that there is little to no overt exclusion of any race or gender. Yet, I've observed young male groups of developers use language that is not polite in mixed company. Males and females are inherently different, and technology is a boys club. The women I've seen in the field are generally more tolerant of the normal behavior of a pack of young males. I think the solution is age and maturity, and if you want a diverse workforce, it has to be age diverse as well. Regardless of how silly the article is (probably written by academics that have never seen the real world), there is a lack of black, Hispanic and female representation in IT in general. The typical classroom/workplace where engineers and IT workers are groomed is male white/Asian. You have to question why black and Hispanic males and females of all genders avoid the technology field? Maybe they haven't embraced the Geek culture, because it isn't the companies. As a consultant, I've walked through hundreds of companies, large and small, and seen highly diverse workforces, until I get to the IT department.

The rumors may not be true, but there is a shakeup in the ruling class. Some has leaked out in official releases around the sacking of Bo and his wife, but the people in power are reacting to unexpected events. Some are falling out of favor and some are trying to consolidate power. All in an environment where the loser and their families don't just retire to a quiet life in the country. It is unlikely the government will change, or there will be a popular uprising, but something is happening in the halls of power.

Nashville doesn't have any bookstores either, unless they reopened the B&N in the flooded mall by the Opry.

First, the project couldn't have even been done financially using any other OS/hardware combination. Second, the real reason technology doesn't improve education is we are treating it like magic and not as a productivity enhancement tool. The first computers used by government and business replaced rooms full of people by calculating stuff faster and with fewer errors. Even today, a smart phone replaces the need to have a map, newspaper and phone booth in a strange city when you want to see a movie (recent experience). In education, you don't have the incentive, or the viewpoint, to use technology to make the teacher more efficient at educating, and/or the student better at learning. For example, in the United States, teachers and other workers in education, but not educating, spend a significant amount of time on non-educational activities. Putting effort into automating and reducing the impact of those activities on the learning day, is a good use of technology. A bad use of technology, is replacing an existing working tool with a complex device that does the same thing, but adds overhead and requires more effort.

You have to have infrastructure to support tablets for a roll out to be successful. 1:1 Laptop deployments on existing network infrastructure have shredded wireless networks in schools. TCO of tablets will be 4X initial capital expenses, assuming you can get more than 1-2 years out of them. Plus teachers have to know how to use them inside their lessons, and to be viable from a cost perspective, nearly every learning activity will have to use the device in some form.