There is a reason there is *intellectual* property law.
No. There is not. There is copyright law, there is patent law, there is trademark law. None of these relate to "property". Calling them "intellectual property" is inaccurate, an attempt to obfuscate.
It's rather disingenuous to criticize them for not getting all the way to 100% in one fell swoop.
No it's not, not when they themselves are talking about getting to 100% in one swell foop, about building cars with no steering or brake controls.
Bwahaha you slackjawed imbecile, you realise you've just described the actual outcomes of everything marxist?
Bwa-ha-ha you slack-jawed imbecile, you realize there are more possible ways to structure an economy than capitalist so-called "free markets", and Marxism-degraded-into-Stalinism-or-Maoism, right?
On maybe, like most Americans brought up on a century of Red Scares, you don't.
The argument is that a concerted push to end sexism *just for women* is itself sexist.
Yes, it is. But for any given instance of sexism against women, some making a push to end it will be motivated only to end sexism against women, and some will be motivated to end all sexism. Thus one cannot determine merely from participation in, or advocacy for, a specific attempt to end an instance of misogynist sexism, whether one is merely misandrist or is truly in favor of equality.
How many women fly fish? Not many. Guess how much sexism there is keeping women from fly fishing? Zero.
You post about how it's important to provide evidence for a hypothesis, then spit out a hypothesis about sexism with zero evidence for it. That's so remarkably thick-headed I have to think that maybe you're engaged in some sort of meta-troll? If not, then let me point out that a minute with the search engine of your choice can help prevent you saying stupid things:
SEXISM in FISHING ADVERTISING, SHOWS & MAGAZINES
Why not let women do what they want instead of trying to force them in to places that aren't necessarily their thing?
I see no "force" here. I see no objectification here. You are using hotbutton keywords that have no relevance.
If a certain group of people don't feel invited to your thing, it's entirely appropriate to re-write your invitation. If your infrastructure isn't supportive of a certain demographic, it's entirely appropriate to remediate that.
OTOH, if (at TFA suggests) you've got a demographic that's socialized to avoid conflict, and you've got a project that inherently involves conflict between different POV, you've got a problem.
According to the market...
...which is a completely irrelevant way to measure quality of tech. The success or failure of a company has more to do with its ability to manipulate markets than with the quality of its products. MS got its market dominance by making a deal with IBM, not by creating a great product. Apple got its market dominance by cultivating an image, not by creating a great product.
No need to paint the male gender as a whole as being filled with sociopaths. It's just the law of large numbers at work. There's maybe 30 million American men in the age rage that are likely to pick up srange women; if just 1/10 % of them are sociopathic predators that's 30,000 predators; and since they *are* predators they'll be overrepresented in young women's encounters with men in pick-up scenarios. Small numbers can produce disproportionate problems. In this case it represents numbers the actions of such a small proportion of men that our ideas about how normal people act aren't a reliable guide.
Drink spiking is a very rare crime. Most studies that look for evidence of it find very little. The highest I found was a government study which found date rape drugs in 4.5% of the cases from four sexual assault clinics. Note this is 4.5% of the cases where the assault occurred, so we're not talking about 4.5% of encounters, we're talking 4.5% of rapes. 4.5% is certainly high enough to be a concern in certain situations, like residential parties at a college. In such a situation a date rape drug detector might actually have some utility, even though it addresses relatively rare actions by a tiny proportion of men.
A bigger concern than what we think of as a "date rape drug" is alcohol itself. The same study that found date rape drugs in 4.5% of sexual assault samples found alcohol in 55%. This result is consistently found across studies: alcohol is very frequently associated with sexual assault -- around half of the time. This is especially concerning because some people (men and women both) don't believe that surreptitiously incapacitating someone with alcohol in order to have sex is rape. They don't distinguish ethically between two people getting drunk and having sex and one of them slipping extra alcohol into a drink.
But the fact remains most men wouldn't do something like that. But that doesn't preclude the possibility that a woman might often encounter the few remaining men who would. A typical man has sex with a small number of women many times; a man who has sex with a large number of women only once is bound to be encountered by women disproportionately often.
Exactly. If you want to regard yourself as an engineer, you have to start by accepting you are working to serve the interests of the client, not your career. I've seen so many problems occur because programmers want to have a certain technology on their resume. And the sad thing is that it works to get them through the HR filter. If HR is told to look for experience with a particular technology, it doesn't seem to matter whether the candidate's experience with that technology is failure.
I really don't understand why people hate targeted ads so much. Sure they might miss the mark.
I care about the covert surveillance which enables targeted ads.
I care about powerful corporate and political interests attempting to manipulate my decisions. That's nothing less than mind control, black magic.
The ads themselves? Adblock Plus removes them from my sight anyway.
A republican FCC shouldn't do anything a democratic one won't like either. Unless they enjoy being hypocrites.
And your point would be?
You realize calling the Big Bang an "explosion" is a metaphor, right?
You do realize that settlements are basically private contracts right?
There is no such thing as a "private contract". A contract, by nature, is an agreement that the state will enforce. State actions are not private. If two people make an agreement and will never disclose that agreement to anyone else under any circumstances, then a court will never see it, and it is in no meaningful way a contract.
Of course that only goes double when one of the parties is a government agency. Nothing a government agency does is private.
Except water vapor is the gaseous form of water; the plankton would have to be transported on individual molecules of water to reach the ionosphere.
If plankton were transportable in microscopic *droplets* in the troposphere as you suggest, a more plausible explanation is that the equipment was contaminated -- both the station itself and the gear used to test it.
Or he may have spent years building up a tolerance to iocaine powder...
Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.
