Still missing the point. The point was we're biologically wired to want different things - male brains and female brains are hardwired differently from birth. Advertising, social differences & behavior, pink vs blue - these aren't causes of the differences we see in boys vs girls or men vs women, they're tailored to what we're biologically included to do. Differences in brain development can already be seen at 26 weeks in the womb.

Even babies react differently depending on the gender. How are you going to pin these differences on nurture instead of nature?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2486497
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19334302
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10692611

"Hey I didn't actually sell financial information, I only helped set up a system that allowed criminals to sell stolen credit card details!"
"Hey I didn't actually molest those children, I only created a forum that let people purchase CP from eachother!"
"Hey I don't own any slaves, I only helped some sellers find some and shipped them across to people willing to buy!"
"Hey I didn't kill those thousands of civilians, I just helped facilitate a deal between an arms dealer and a corrupt dictatorship!"

Yeesh. "merely providing a forum to communicate". It's assholes like you that make the world burn - you damn well know the consequences of the actions of a scheme, a forum set up specifically for selling stolen financial information , but somehow rationalize it away in the name of some libertarianish idea of 'all free speech should be allowed' because you're actually facilitating in the crime yourself!

I can't help notice the irony of the GP posting "People are really bad at understanding statistics.", yet you use a random stat (3/20 Tesla Accidents had an auto-fire) to make it sound like the Tesla Model S is "more likely to catch fire". Kind of ignores the ridiculously small sample size, the fact all 3 cars were going extremely high speeds (maybe sports cars in general have higher accident rates?), or that fire-related problems are less likely with a more detailed on board computer etc... And where's this 20 coming from? (honest question, I don't see anything in the links - are there only 20 reported Tesla S accidents to date?) . There were only 3 fires in the Tesla Model S... ever! You can't make a statement with odds that low.

I don't agree with your assumption that law enforcement can confiscate a bitcoin "because this bitcoin was used in a crime X months ago and Y transactions ago". By that logic, a cop could confiscate paper money because it has trace amounts of cocaine on it (so 90% of your money, or whatever the actual percentage is if that's too high). Why would a bitcoins using during the process of ANY CRIME be subject seizure anyway? I don't see how that would assist in prosecution.

That must be a imperial first, not a metric first.

"One time about 6000 years ago, a magical unicorn from a different dimension farted the universe into existence"

Prove me wrong!

I know! It's like watching two school bullies argues start to argue over something, as you're secretly hoping they'll get into a fight and both be suspended.

I could see MasterCard taking more of the hit for this though, Paypal funds can be added without any fee from a bank account, or with some new MoneyPak thing I'm just reading about for the first time - I forsee more people using this option if they have hefty fees when transferring from a credit card (Because the whole reason you're using Paypal is because you can't use your credit card in the first place, the money will be transferred if it has to be).

Ah, I kid I kid.. I just wanted to be the first person that said yes after 67 comments of NO. Slashdot is united in opinion for the first time ever! I doubt it would have made a difference

You know what would have been nice though? If twitter had been around for a couple of years before that, and it had today's popularity back in 2003. I saw somewhere earlier in this thread that claimed 90% of America was in support of the war at the time. That seems a bit high, but regardless of what that number is, I'll bet most of them are silent now. It would be nice to know which politicians, celebrities, friends & neighbors were fully supporting war back then. So when the next middle east war "opportunity" rolls around and the same people shout "We want war! But this one's legitimate this time we swear, not like Iraq", their twit / blog / wall post history can be used against them.

The conservatives didn't pass the last similar bill through, though they could have. They *could* pass any bill they like, but if there's enough public backlash they may decide against passing it. They do plan on winning seats in future elections, so they won't just pass anything unless it has a minimum threshold of public support.

What can you make out of $100 bills? Besides crappy paper airplanes.
Better question, what can you make out of a $100 bill with a value close to $100?

I'd like to see some more detailed data on a course by course basis (or in different programs). I've taken some bio courses that are about 95% pure memorization - I'd be inclined to think the online courses like this wouldn't have 90% attrition rates. Conversely, I'd be lost in some math or comp sci courses without a teacher explaining how a concept or formula actually works. Some classes have a lot more students asking teachers than others.

See this is your problem right here, slashdot users. Instead of just reading the summary/header and commenting - you've decided to first RTFA. Maybe you even clicked on all the links the summary.

If you dumb asses would have read the comments first, you would instantly known it was a fluff piece / disguised advertising. But NOOO, you have to try to be knowledgeable about the subject before deciding you're qualified to comment. Well that'll learn ya for next time - *always* read the comments first!

What? We don't get to vote on this - this isn't a referendum. Harper and the conservatives have a majority government, they can vote whatever they want in.

Or do you mean the MPs will vote on this? Sure they will. But the end result is really no different than an "executive order from harper". Canadian MPs virtually never vote against their own party . They vote against their own party less than 0.5% of the time, if EVER.

The only reason Bill C-30 didn't go through was because Harper and his crew didn't like the negative press that was received by the bill (Facebook posts, Michael Geist blogs, etc..); the conservatives COULD have passed it but ultimately they'd like to win another election again. So they can this bill due to public outcry (damage control), but simply try to sneak in the same provisions in Bill C-55. On the same day no less.

You know, for such an Orwellian sounding program, you'd think the marketing droids there would have picked a better acronym than RIOT. Like Worldwide Online Overlord Technology or something on the lines of that.