I have a similar issue with most modern entertainment.

It's not that it sucks. It's that there is too much to keep up with. And that's when I'm retired. I could potentially watch tv and read books 15 hours a day and I would be more behind every day than when I woke up.

So I have to select on some basis.

Price and quality are pretty obvious primary filters.

First, I think you are not up birth rates and the projected racial mixes in the very near future in the united states (and other countries as well).

And hispanics own a lot of businesses and are already discriminating.

And there are plenty of non caucasians in positions of power at many businesses.

And there are plenty of women in positions of power at many businesses.

I've seen members of both these groups abuse their power first hand.

While under represented in the boardroom, hispanics, blacks and asians make up a third of the executive and supervisory employees. They have the power to hire, fire, promote, decide what work you get, protect their friends and fire their enemies. I've seen pretty extraordinary discrimination (like the black female executive who only hired and promoted black female managers) which would have gotten a white male manager sensitivity training and a lawsuit.

Whites and Asians are no longer having children at a replacement rate (1.8). Blacks are having children slightly over replacement rate (2.1) and hispanics are having about two and a half children per pair. In 35 years, whites will be a minority group.

I think you are not really considering the way trends are flowing and the way the law is enforced (i.e. unequally).

I'm out of the game myself- retired a year ago. Glad I made it.

Except studies are not inconclusive. They have consistently found no link between games and violent behavior. The only evidence from anti-gamers are anecdotes about the Columbine killers or Adam Lanza being gamers, or conjecture that games are the "obvious" explanation for the "dramatic rise" in shootings (reality: there has been a dramatic DECLINE in shootings).

If it is "well studied" then can you provide a reference to one of the studies?

This is a testable hypothesis, and there is no evidence whatsoever that it is true. If (bad parents + games) is worse that (bad parents without games) then the games themselves would be negatively correlated with morality (unless the games somehow cause parents to be better). Yet they aren't.

I would be far more concerned about people basing their opinions on wild conjecture rather than actual data. As video games have become more popular, crime, and violent crime in particular, has fallen dramatically.

No, my question was exploring the limits of the ruling.

i.e.

If you are not in a relationship and someone shares nude photos.
If you are in a relationship and they have nude photos plastered all over the place because they are a nude model.
If you are in a public space and take a picture of someone who is nude in a public space.

People capable of rational thought discuss issues and explore their limits, boundaries, and implications. If you don't want to see "dumb" questions, don't read internet discussion forums.

I'm sure I've asked some howlingly dumb questions in my life but I don't consider this one to be particularly dumb or especially inappropriate for a discussion about the subject matter.

If this was true, there would be plenty of data with a positive correlation between game playing and immoral behavior. Can you point to any evidence that shows that games cause kids to "get out of control"?

So we disagree.

If someone gives me a gift while sober and sane, I don't consider myself a wanker if I keep decide to keep the gift when they change their mind four years later.

Your assertion is your opinion and has no more value than mine.

In my case, it's especially true because she never asked anyone to delete photos. She was very proud of her boobs and happy to share pictures of them with us.

And the number of united states residents who do NOT "use too much fat, sugar and watch mindless crapp" exceeds the population of several european nations so please don't stereotype us. We are a complex population with a wide range of behaviors and beliefs.

A Google search brings up nothing that backs up this assertion. This article says that only 3 of 24 annual fatal construction accidents in Hong Kong involved a fall from bamboo scaffolding. Can you provide a link to these "HK accident statistics"?

Bamboo is safer than steel for scaffolding. It you fall into a bamboo scaffold, it will flex, absorbing much of the impact energy. When steel scaffolding was first used in China, there were several fatalities that would not have happened with bamboo. So the construction workers refused to return to work until the steel was taken down and replaced with bamboo.

Many universities have policies that forbid or discourage directly hiring their own graduates for faculty positions. The reasoning is that it inhibits fresh thinking and the cross fertilization of ideas.

You sound so much better than those egotistical rich kids.

You appear to be not only brilliant, but extremely eloquent as well. I can't imagine why all those employers declined to hire you.

Except that only three of the "top ten" schools in the list are in the Ivy League, and none of those are in the top five.
Here is the list from TFA:
MIT
UC Berkeley
Stanford
Carnegie Mellon
Univ of Illinois
Princeton
Cornell
Univ of Washington
Georgia Tech
Harvard

Do you firmly believe that enough to change who you vote for, and to convince others to do the same? If not, then it doesn't matter what you believe.

Political parties in favor of ethanol subsidies and mandates: Democrat, Republican
Political parties opposed to ethanol subsidies and mandates: Green, Libertarian

A cat can be substituted for possum in any recipe. You can sample a wide variety of possum and other varmint dishes at West Virginia's annual Road Kill Cookoff. You can check Wikipedia for a summary of laws and regulations concerning collecting and consuming road kill in other states.

Perhaps you are confused because I said "appearance" instead of "race."

I was not saying it was because she was ugly or fat. I'm saying it is because she appeared of a particular racial group and the target company/manager/owner didn't want to her people of that racial group. This still happens and it happens to all races now.

I was presenting a scenario where she was turned down for a job because of her race and it was clear (perhaps because of a stupid interviewer or because of the staff being 100% of one race) that it was because of her race.

If that were to occur, I was asking would the parent still say on principle that race didn't (or at least shouldnt') matter and would ignore rather than try to address the discrimination. And further, would the parent even feel race shouldn't matter and that the matter should be ignored.