I think you didn't understand at all what I wrote. I'll do the short, short version : privacy laws are why our society is the realm of liars and dishonest people.

BTW, I don't live in the US either. As for who I am, you already know my name and, since I have a unique name, a search on the Internet will give you my address, my phone number and a lot of other information (just so you're sure, I live in Montreal). And that's perfectly fine with me.

From a science point of view, climate change is not a divisive subject at all. It's only people who don't know what they are talking about who are divided in whether they accept science or not.

When you ask for my "source", you're just dishonest and playing games. You know full well those sources. All your argument is only rhetoric. Worse, it's teenage level rhetoric. Sorry, but I find teenage level discourse a bit boring.

It's politics who's trying to use science (or far more frequently trying to deny science), not the other way around.

Here's science : our climate is changing and that change is mainly (and probably exclusively) the result of human activities. What politicians or anyone with a political agenda do with that scientific knowledge has nothing to do with science.

If you want to hide some truth about yourself, it's because you indirectly try to control how I act with you. Limiting knowledge is like putting blinders. You do that because you're trying to make me go where you want. You are afraid I will act in a certain way if I know some particular facts about you, so in order to make sure I don't act that way you put those blinders on me. I call that a form of manipulation. You may use another word, but it won't change what it is.

Are you justified to use this form of manipulation? Considering everyone does it, I'm tempted to say yes. In a world where everyone cheats, not cheating would be foolish. But it doesn't change it's a form of manipulation.

As for what information I can get about you, I'm certainly entitled to do whatever I can to get any information, provided whatever I do is legal. I have control over what I do and you have nothing to say about it. Can I force you to disclose information about yourself? Of course not. Can I search your past and talk to people who know you in order to learn whatever I can? Of course I can. Don't like it - bite me.

That's the world I live in. Is it the real world? I believe so.

Now my point for all this is I dream of a world where no one could lie and pretend to be better than they really are. I dream of a world where people would be judged for who they are instead of being judge by how well then can lie and manipulate. Do you think that world would be bad?

No, my brain is working just find. Science has nothing to do with politics. If you believe otherwise, you're just an imbecile.

So because a few scientists participate in political activism, science should be considered political?

If I follow your "logic", I guess if a plumber somewhere is advocating for a political party, it does mean plumbing should be considered political and government employees should be forbidden to use words like "faucet". Is that what you mean?

I don't use Facebook, so that company knows very little about me. However, since I use Gmail, Google search and I have an Android Phone (which tracks me all day long), Google does know a lot about me. But why should I be concerned? What could Google do?

Beyond Google, you already know my name and since it's a quite a unique name, a simple search on the Internet will allow you to know my address and my phone number (yep, it's there). In fact, if you take a bit of time, you'll be able to learn a lot about me, but I don't care. In fact, I think you have the right to know who I am even though I'm certainly not someone who is politically correct. Maybe you'll hate me, but that's your right! I'm sure some other people will love me. So why should I be concerned about it?

It's me who gets to define what I think is important about you, not you, so you should not have any control on the information I get about you. Controlling what I information I get about you is a form of manipulation. And I don't like to be manipulated.

In that way, programming is a social activity. Boys compare their works, they talk about the problems they encountered, the bugs they had and the solutions they used. But that's not what the original poster had in mind. What he had in mind was something more like what girls like to do. It was about not doing any task alone, constantly sharing their thoughts and feelings with everyone, learning how to reach a consensus without confrontations and most importantly, doing all this without any form of competition.

And you are the perfect example of asshole who try to make believe men are victims of sexual assault by women in order to blame women for something.

I don't think the goal is to equip them for the world of work, but only to make them understand basic concepts like what is a variable or what is a loop. Java or C# are far too complex for that task (not to mention their horrible syntax).

Also, if you want a deep understanding of how computers work, the only choice is assembly.

I disagree with C. Pointers are something a lot of children have difficulties understanding. Also, languages which use symbols like "&&" and "||" instead of words like "AND" and "OR" should be avoided.

(I (also) (completely (disagree (with) (Scheme()))). Seriously.

Finally, I disagree with any object-oriented language. Object programming requires too much structure. A beginner's language should as straightforward as possible and look as much as possible as English writing.

Pascal (not object Pascal) or simple BASIC languages (not .NET Visual Basic) are much better as first languages.

As for assembly, I first learned ARM assembly when playing with my Nintendo DS. It's a bit more complex than 68000 assembly, but certainly not "baroque" (and obviously much, much better than 8086 assembly).

Where does this obsession about social activities come from? I'll agree girls generally prefer social activities, but there are still those things we call "boys".

You're either a fucking asshole or a complete moron. I'm not a feminist. Far from it. I'm openly against feminism. But saying men are victims of sexual assault by women is plain bullshit. It's an abject lie. You're just trying to excuse men by implying women do the same. You're nothing but a bastard. I truly hate people like you.

I already know more about the life of Mark Zuckerburg than Mark Zuckerburg knows about my life, you silly man.