THAT, is a motherfucking roundhouse to all the general pissing matches about sexism around here. It just doesn't apply here because they can select for the ideal, sex be damned.

Well said, coward.

Imagine if you played a Disney DVD, say Pinocchio, and it determined that you had some pirated material, or content that overlapped with their IP, or material that violated their EULA and so it fried your hard-drive and bricked your computer.

Whose fault is that? Disney's for protecting their IP, or the user who had the audacity of downloading some fanart?

Holy shit, you're saying the AVERAGE home price is high in LA? Where hollywood actors live? And then you compare that to the median NY price? And then take a specific (yet generalized) example in Houston?

And somehow these values lend weight to the argument that a $100K is considered poverty level. Jesus christ dude, I don't think anyone is saying that there is variance in housing prices. It's the straw-man attitude to those prices and expected income that is making you look like a douche.

But seriously, if you're going to compare areas, at least use a consistent metric.

Yeah yeah, terrible crime. oh noes "outside person". That's almost as bad as "foreigner". As in "someone from outside the country".

I get what you're saying. People have probably used it against you in anger and tried to imbue it with as much hostility as they could. And now you don't like the term. You take offense to it. But guess what? It's only an insult if you let it be. Want to know how to disarm such cultural hostility? Own it. And oh so slowly something as offensive as "geek" was can become something like how "geek" is now.

In short, ease up cracker.

They tried that. It didn't' work. Turns out it just give a big fat income to organized crime. Kinda like how the cartels in Mexico are fueled by weed sales up here.

What works better is regulating it, taxing it, and dealing with the consequences. The campaign against tobacco has done fantastically well and should be a role model for how to steer culture away from self-destructive recreations. You know, to the extent that culture should be steered. But seriously, fuck those tobacco companies. Fucking death-mongers.

Also, I think it's fitting that alcohol and tobacco taxes pay for kid's activities. The more you have of one, the more you'll need help with the second. Why sports though?

It's not quite that simple. This has to do with how people learn a system and react to it.
You have a population that expects a warning a certain time before a condition applies. If you fiddle with the timing of when the warning comes up, the population will eventually learn the new timing and adjust to it. In the meantime they will either be surprised at a change in either direction. But shortening the light is more like "HOLY FUCK it's already red BRAKE SLAM" as opposed to "huh, I could have made it through this light".

But it's not quite that simple. You also have people from out of town that have learned their own light timing system and have an expectation when they visit you. You can essentially treat these people as people who haven't learned the new timing yet. And this is a bad thing because whenever you have two actors working on different systems they have different expectations and they both expect the other guy to do something different. We all expect to drive on the right side of the road in the USA, and we all have a general idea of how long a yellow light is supposed to last. It should be a rock-solid standard.

But it's not quite that simple. Even though there's a system and people learn it eventually, once it becomes a note-worthy thing and people start talking about it or worse, it becomes news, then you have the added factor of people preemptively stopping sooner or later. The benefit of having longer yellow lights is annulled if people know they're given a longer yellow light. Now you have people that haven't learned the new system, people who have learned the new system, and people who are trying to game the new system based on what they've heard.

Welcome to sociology where the factors are endless, the system is beyond our ken, and the points are billions of dollars and literal corpses.

I'd prefer if they didn't change the timing.

If it makes you feel better, I'm just bitching about the fact that he's dragging non-technical details into something that could otherwise avoid a lot of stupid drama. Really we need to focus on getting our ass to mars and not wade into the mire of political fights.

And I'd say the same thing if it were suggesting an all male crew. Especially if it were an all male crew due to the history of excluding women. Why the hell would anyone reopen that old wound.

And with your education, experience, and contribution to society, would you say you're entitled to that certain living standard?

Realize that you can take your statement, and substitute $10,000 or $1,000,000 and it can still hold true. It's more of a reflection of your own tastes than Silicon Valley.

What the fuck are you smoking? Possible? It's HAPPENING NOW. And arguably has happened since the 70's.

Why not work towards brain-in-a-jar technology?

Or how about, you know, robots?

No, this is the point I'm trying to make:
1) Find idea criteria.
2) Select people that best fit criteria.
3) OH LOOK, they're all female.

The part where you go out of your way to target women is where you forcefully insert sexism into a hole it doesn't belong in.

Yeah, that's great and all, but the right way to post this is that the ideal astronaut has a low calorie requirements and leave unsaid that the people who can fill that role is women. No need to drag sexism into the fight when there are perfectly logical rationals for crew selection.

He's probably modded up, in part, because people disagree with your charicature of all young people as "entitled masses". Another part of his modding could be the obvious internal conflict in your post.

While the "entitled masses" on the E/W coast might find $100K to be poverty level, somehow that's comparable to $100K in Houston makes a comfortable living. Despite the fact that $100K is a comfortable living in all locations and those with a sense of entitlement will think it not enough in all locations.

In short, you can take your agism and tribe-ism and go fuck yourself.

Sure sure, verifiable is important. But even with something to verify the information on the page, you still get those deletionists that will claim notability, and fast-track the page for deletion.

I don't give a rats fucking ass if you don't think that rat-asses are notable or not. If there are citable facts on the page, LEAVE IT BE. And let me make this clear. In your VERY NEXT BREATH you went from "it'll be a scribble-board without verifiability" to "no matter how trivial".

Who the fuck cares who trivial it is? You do. Because you have a stick up your ass about how important Wikipedia is.

And here's how search works: you type a search term into Google and the first hit you'll get is always wikipedia because it's the best and highest quality source for the topic at hand. The term "the sum of all humanities knowledge" comes to mind. But no, you're high and mighty and you just don't give a fuck about how many pokemon there are.

Hey man, you want to trim down Wikipedia of random meaningless shit nobody cares about? Try taking on football. Seriously, go hit that random wiki button a few dozen times and tell me how many miniscule sports trivia tidbits you get.

Anyone looking for a $150K range senior developer/CTO with a specialization in TCP/IP routing and filtering technologies?
. . . In Davenport Iowa?

If you have ties to the area, and have the skill and experience for a high paying job, there aren't a whole lot of options available to you.

On the flip side, getting highly skilled professionals to move out to the middle of cornsville is also a little tough.