First of all, there are several protesters who have been trying to police their own and talk people down. But if the bad protester is already committing acts of violence, trying to reign him in will get you hurt/killed by either him or the cops that come for him.

Second, police have a history of using agents provocateur as recently as the 2008 Republican Convention. And historically police have targeted left-wing protests for these sorts of incitements. I'm not saying that the Ferguson police are guilty of such a thing, but it's one of the reasons why policing your own people doesn't always work. That, and the folks are really, really, REALLY pissed off.

Just say no to the clauses you disagree with. I had an apartment owner let me lease there despite disagreeing to the big fine for keeping a Weber on the balcony. If you're signing a contract with a real person instead of a corporate "person" you'd be surprised at how reasonable they can be.

At work they made me sign a contract that included some language I knew would make the contract unenforceable in my state. So I helpfully revised it. They threatened to fire me if I didn't sign it as is. So now not only is it unenforceable, but I signed under duress! Yay! Big international corporate takeovers are fun!!

True, but which is more likely: "A carefully programmed and thoroughly tested robot" or "A shoddily kludged together POS that failed most rounds of safety tests, but passed the one (in demo mode) when the people signing the checks showed up to witness."

Even NPR calls the Affordable Care Act by the moniker "Obamacare." If that's not tying it with one party (hence "partisan"), I don't know what is.

It's not really right to compare CIO and CTO in this regard. The CTO at my company is a PE and damn smart. But he doesn't know squat about IT security. That's not his job. The T in CTO stands for technology, but it refers to the technology that the company makes, not information technology.

You are joking right? If not, are you aware that the MPAA is a private organization?

I had a tutoring student with a teacher who gave zero credit on three correctly-answered test problems, because the student did not show her work. The problem? "Give the point slope form of the linear equation shown in the following graph." I told the girl's mom there was nothing I could do. The math wasn't the problem, the teacher was.

There is much debate over I Cor 7:21. Some scholars disagree with your interpretation. If memory serves, there are two different translations of the actual text that are in direct opposition to one another. If I gave half a shit, I would look it up. But the point is that here is a religion which really didn't have much negative to say about slavery, or wartime slaughter of civilians. WTF?

While I agree that I am not bound by the OT, I think that Paul's reasoning was questionable. The law is fulfilled so we don't have to follow it anymore? What does that even mean?

BTW Paul was batshit crazy. He really thought the second coming was going to be like tomorrow. So most of his writing should be taken in that context. He advocated not getting married. He told slaves just to enjoy their lot in life. These things make a modicum of sense if the BMIC is coming back next week to destroy the non-believers and summon all us righteous folk to his fairy land.

Of course Jesus wasn't completely sane, either. He suggested self-mutilation if you were prone to check out women. Yeah, that's smart. Stick a fork in your eye instead of look at boobies. So much for being the temple of God.

You would be surprised at how popular a topic this is amongst economists

Now that's a smart algorithm!

The best example of a fairness algorithm is an old one used with siblings. Tell one kid to divvy up the candy/cake/toys whatever, and let the other kid choose which half they want.

Greece used something similar when trying to get people to honestly report the value of their antiquities. If they listed it for a price the government thought was too low, the agency could buy it for that price. I wish local governments would do something like that with home values. If they want to tax me for a house worth more than what I can get for it on the open market, then I should have the right to sell it to them at that price.

There's a difference between firing somebody for being gay, and not wanting to process payments for somebody doing something you think is illegal. Now if Stripe fired one of their employees for owning a firearm, then you might have a point.