HPV is listed as an STD, and really only becomes an issue when two or more incompatible strains interact - meaning, multiple partners within relatively short periods, again - a lifestyle choice.

Because you can quite easily get HPV sexually, that makes it an STD -- a "Sexually Transmitted Disease." But you can also get it via casual contact. Which you cannot control. Also, and rather finally, as you can't control other people's behavior or contacts, nor promise your behavior or contacts will keep you clear of this, it needs vaccination. Just the numbers alone tell you HPV needs vaccination: A 50% infection rate in the general population. No set of excuses can make that number go away. But vaccination can.

I strongly suspect that if "everyone" were to get on Google+, by which I mean to imply a Facebook-level of adoption, it would pretty much automatically ruin itself.

But I've been wrong before. Why, I remember back in 1959 when I thought I'd left my panda bear on the bed, but actually it was in the playroom. I was totally wrong. What a lesson that was!

society breaks down in 50 years and is utterly gone in 100 years, if no one has children

Who said anything about "no one having children"? There are some countries with (barely) negative population growth, but that is not even close to "no one having children."

people who raise children deserve credit: they are investing in the future of civilization

Meh. Civilization, in the sense of "people today, different people tomorrow, in an overall sense, is driven -- hard -- by the instinct to breed. I don't see it as something you should get "credit" for. If that's how you want to roll, fine.

What I'm talking about is the ability to exert control over your own reproductive system. You're a working person, you have a kid, likely you're no longer qualified to be a working person, because you now have a whole new set of responsibilities. If you are wealthy enough to slough those off on someone else (nannies, etc.) that's fine. Or if you're supporting a spouse who will carry that load. Otherwise, you're basically crippling your ability to be productive at work. From long nights up with baby to a whole slew of other responsibilities and necessities, some of which will extend past a decade, you will be less effective at your job, only assuming you were effective at it in the first place.

Birth control gives people a choice: They can pursue normal life without abstinence, yet slew the odds strongly in favor of not getting pregnant. It's no longer a general given that the mating process means high odds of pregnancy. Instead, we can control the when, and thereby large portions of the quality of the outcome.

Personally, I reserve giving "credit" to those people who plan the raising of children such that they are available, secure and ready for the task when they undertake it. Not when they punch a hole in the middle of their job responsibilities by pulling the "preggers" card. Furthermore, I think bringing an unwanted child into the world is downright awful.

While I am all for workplace equality, I see it as going both ways: If you do something that makes you less good at what you do than someone you could be replaced by, your job is at risk, and legitimately so in my view. Pregnancy, drug intoxication on the job (and that includes alcohol), not being where you're supposed to be when you're supposed to be, etc.

I have met many heteros who, thinking (I don't know why) that I want to hear about it (perhaps because I am hetero), like to confide details of all kinds of out-of-work issues, right down to their sex life, or lack thereof. Doesn't bother me, though I really don't find myself inclined to reciprocate on the level of specifics.

If people aren't telling you these things, perhaps you're simply not that approachable. Doesn't mean they aren't telling them to other people. It's ubiquitous in both white- and blue-collar environments.

Hetero or not, I am no more offended by a gay pride shirt than I am a football jersey or Old Navy branded tee, or someone wearing 3D jewelry depicting Christ nailed to a cross. Nor would I decline a gay pride ribbon at this point in time -- or a polygamy / polyamory pride ribbon, come to that. It's past time to push back. Hard.

Honestly, you will be interviewed by people who have no idea what your job is or how to do it.

I have to admit, that does seem to explain the serious problems with Google Base, youtube, GMail, Google+ and Adwords.

You made me laugh. Good for you. I like to start my days that way. :)

In a post entitled: "Re: child rearing impacts women disproportionately", AC says:

It's sad that nobody sees this statement as the serious social problem that it is.

There's an entire industry that recognizes this specific serious social problem. That industry is the condom and other birth control manufacturers.

What is the difference when a company does it?

The difference is that friendship isn't one of society's formal mechanisms to provide income, and thereby access to improving one's security and stability. Working is. So when it's okay for a company to say "no blacks" or "no gays" or "no women" or "no one over 35" or whatever -- basically discrimination by class unrelated to capacity to perform the work -- then we get into a situation where aggregate behaviors of this type result in whole classes being disenfranchised.

I have known a few [gay people], some throw it in your face, others keep it to themselves.

Yeah, I've known heteros like that too. It's shocking how they just act like it's "okay" to talk about the opposite-sex people they care most about in life. They should really know better and keep that damned hetero stuff in the closet.

Next thing you know, it'll be okay to say "wife" or "husband" in the office. It's a damned slippery slope, I tell you. Next thing you know, people will be acting like it's reasonable to talk about their kids. Next thing you know, they'll think it's okay to, you know, actually bring them to the office for a visit!

I'm sorry, I have to sit down and fan myself for a moment now. I'm just soooo upset.

Those who keep it to themselves are welcome to work for me. Those who don't, wouldn't get along with me anyway. Since I've never employed more than 20 people at a time, everyone who works for me more or less has to get along with me.

Thank God we have people like you working to make sure that these things Just Don't Happen On Your Watch. You, sir, are a true hero.

"Obama's America"?

So, people weren't working with people they hated, wasting away their lives, needing money, under Bush-II? Clinton? Bush-I? Etc.?

By "lifestyle", you imply choice, which is an incorrect analysis of threat vectors for HPV. In any case, even if it were only sexual behavior that resulted in HPV transmission (it isn't), sexuality is hardly a "lifestyle." The vast majority of people engage in it, and of the remainder, a large number are trying to or intend to.

HPV presently has about a 50% incidence in the US population.

Combine that fact with the knowledge that HPV 16 and 18 cause about 70% of cervical cancers and that these can be passed non-sexually -- now it is obvious we need to vaccinate.

I've had other interviewers ask me really abstract problems, such as how to calculate the number and types of elevators a particular-sized building needed.

The answer to that kind of question is the same kind of concept as the Drake equation: the point is not to give them a number, but to give them a formula for how one might arrive at the number. In your particular example, the answer might be: ([# of floors] * [# people per floor] * [# times each person uses the elevator]) / ([elevator capacity] * [elevator speed]), or something like that (since this is not an actual interview, I didn't bother to account for things like the fact that traveling to higher floors takes longer, etc.).

The interviewer is asking you the question so he can see how you approach the problem, not to see if you know trivia about elevator design. Do you go make a list of everything you think might matter first, or do you dive in and think up new factors on the fly? Did you leave something important out? Are you able to make even slightly reasonable estimates? (For example, "I figure there's about a million floors in a building and 1 person per floor, each of whom is constantly riding the elevator so you need 60,000 elevators per building" is probably not going to impress the interviewer.)

No. It isn't the same. Vaccines serve to reduce everyone's risk. Your immunity helps the little baby next door who is too young to vaccinate, and the lady down the street who is allergic to albumen or whatever. Then there's herd immunity -- once a certain proportion of an inter-social group are immune, it becomes much more difficult for a disease to really get any momentum going, and that helps everyone. We share our air, and it's very worthy that we don't share it in such a way that is dangerous insofar as we can avoid it.

Vaccination is a very, very good thing. Intentionally avoiding vaccination when vaccination is possible is an act of aggression -- or stupidity.

The only reason it's being "shoved" down people's throats is because there are clueless idiots (cough/Jenny McCarthy/cough) out there spreading dangerous unscientific nonsense and fomenting unrest with regard to this in any way they can. People were not getting vaccinated who definitely should have been getting vaccinated. It was bad for everyone. So, just as we don't let idiots take a crap on the sidewalks even if they might like to, we aren't going to let idiots (or their children) become transmission vectors for disease, either.

Buck up and go get stuck, and encourage everyone you know to do so as well. It's the right thing to do.

That sounds very hipster to me

...and...

Personal opinions of other people don't matter

I believe you've determined the precise value of your remarks. Zero. :)

If you can encourage others by honestly explaining the benefits of your life experience, please do so!

I try to do so. I write software I hope people will get good use out of; I write about social issues, superstition, AI issues and more. I keep an oar in around here most of the time as well, as you'll see if you navigate my comment history.

I'm old and creaky now, so these are the things I can realistically do.

Ok, then and users bitten by new OS versions that break the user's software have no right to complain either, amirite?

"no right"... don't think that means what you think it means.