I live here. $300 won't even get you a shared room unless you are very far from the city. Rent is crazy expensive, even in previously less expensive areas in Brooklyn and Queens. Plus there is little connection between what we pay in rent and the "social safety net", unless you want to stretch the impact of low rent housing on surrounding rents. No wonder the original post was as AC.

What amazes me is that anyone considers it ethical to impose restrictions upon the poor the wealthy do not have to deal with. Want society's support? You better be willing to uproot yourself and move or you are out of luck. Surely we can do better.

"Most humans will be lazy if you let them be." Citation Needed.

"In NYC the average person pays $300 plus a month in rent just to cover the social safety net" - I don't believe you. Source?

We DO have an idea what happened. Read rabtech's insightful comment: http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

Harassment claims are not always he said/she said things - that is a pretty gross generalization. In this case there were plenty of witnesses, as well as admissions (direct and tacit) from the company itself!

If you are letting your religious views drive your politics, you have more in common with the religious right than with liberals. It's very hard to be "further left than the democrats" and not support a woman's right to choose because your personal religion believes it is wrong.

This is *before* those limits were lifted. As a citizen, I'm looking forward to seeing the power of the wealthy further cemented in this country, and so exquisitely draped in the pretense of democracy that my fellow citizens believe themselves empowered. It's gonna get better! (For the wealthy). How exciting for those of us who imagine ourselves upwardly mobile within the American caste system.

Why it's no secret where these traders and shops operate. The place where anything and everything you want is sold! I'm speaking of course about Portobello Road!

What you are citing is *collective* economic pressure. Big difference.

Exactly, it's near impossible. And these companies are lobbying hard to remove options that allow consumers to vote with their wallets. We need more than just individual economic pressure to have any realistic impact on companies this big.

A group owning different devices to the design elite is not a valid reason to neglect their needs.

A group spending less money on your app is a valid reason to prioritize other groups first, or exclusively (depending on the cost of development and potential money on the table).

Hopefully you aren't in charge of people at whatever job you work at, as it would be liable for sexual harassment lawsuits. A spurned love interest deleting your work in the way he did is - alone - serious. A non employee trying to exercise power over employees and intimidating one when it doesn't go as planned is serious. If I worked at a company and the spouse of a higher up pulled that on me, that would feel like a hostile work environment.

If you have a group of female programmers exercising at work, and a bunch of male co-workers lined up to watch them, it reinforces the idea that "you are here to be pretty objects for the men to look at". In combination with everything else, I can see why that would be the straw that broke the camels back.

A spurned colleague taking revenge for being spurned is textbook sexual harassment, actually.

Not true. If they are upfront and transparent and in the right they can easily win back the day. The question is are they in the right. Did a single creepy and jilted co-worker (who aggressively professed his love) remove her code? Is there a data trail to prove this one way or the other? Does the founder's wife act like an employee? If so, I bet other employees have similar stories. When someone acts that unhinged at a company it generates a lot of eye witnesses.

If I was a C-level guy at github, I'd come right out with as much info as I could to counter the claims, or to address them seriously and productively, as soon as possible.

The article details some serious allegations, and is worth reading in it's entirety. I'm eager to read github's side of the story as well. Some of the claims ought to give users pause about trusting their private data with github. That's hugely problematic. Other claims show an unprofessional and hostile environment, and a company whose HR department (if they have one) is screwing up very badly. I hope they are able to resolve all of this, as I am a very big fan of git, and of github. But at the moment the claims sound plausible and distressing.

If the prices of the products remained the same, yes, it would be a value. That might not always be the case however, as they have been accused of raising the price on individual products for prime customers, so the "free shipping" is not free, and the shipping charge is buried in the product price.

Yes there are ways around this for tech savvy users. That's not the point. The point is Comcast pulling something like this at all - and the way they have gone about it - all say "we can't be trusted with the power we already have". What's to stop them from mandating customers use their equipment? Especially if they are the only show in town.

I hope this provides further fuel for efforts to stop Comcast's merger with Time Warner.