You don't seem to have actually read the post. But, if you have and just don't understand, there are a lot of different custody situations with children that are possible, and when you throw a hostile ex-spouse in the mix, it's really pretty easy to see why having a way to communicate with your child in that way, if the other person will agree to it, could be very good for the child and parent. It could have something to do with having an opportunity to talk to the kid when he's not actively being monitored; it could have to do with the kid being able to call the other parent if they're being abused. It could just have to do with wanting to be able to stay in touch with your kid when they aren't with you, and have a video call before they go to bed at night. It's not a perfect solution, and it raises a different set of issues, but in the context of a weird custody situation it's easy to understand why it might be desirable.

This study wasn't about the difference in performance for those who take notes on a laptop versus by hand. It was about people who surf the 'net while in class. Unsurprisingly, people weren't able to focus on the class as much when they did that. Derp.

I can't imagine your lack of experience with actual addiction makes your condescending advice useful for people struggling with substance abuse problems.

This article makes a HUGE - assumption - that 12-steps programs, and AA, work, and work specifically better than other programs. That is highly questionable and I don't believe there's been any conclusive evidence either way. Of course, there's the question of whether AA works versus just going to some sort of social program... the article doesn't differentiate much, but it's a big question. Our knowledge of addictions and ability to treat them is in its infancy and is sadly not a priority for many... this article just proves that.

I think they probably put a lot of thought into exactly this when they implemented their system. I have no doubt that the NSA has the ability to search the e-mails of their own employees. But, I also agree that they most likely built their system so that they could fend off open records requests in a way that at least seems feasible to outsiders. They may have implemented additional "security features" or add-ons that make it difficult/impossible. But, I just don't see an intelligence agency NOT having the ability to search their employee's e-mails (both individually and system-wide)... I think that internal monitoring is probably very heavy. They don't want any more Snowden incidents, after all.

Just so long as we're focused on what's important.

Not standing up to them doesn't really cover it. That top percent exists because our government props them up substantially and removes a lot of their personal risk. I'm all for people keeping the money they earn, but we provide a seemingly endless supply of tax breaks, subsidies and shelters for corporations, which isn't quite in the spirit of a free market.

I'm female and am not overtly offended by vendors using women as allure to sell their products. What's tiresome about the situation is that it's old school and it doesn't reflect reality anymore... and it probably isn't even effective, but sometimes people keep doing the old things that used to work without really thinking it through. I think the assumption that men will buy a product because there's a scantily clad woman being paid to flirt with him near said product is very demeaning to that gender. I'm tired of this whole "men can only think with one of their heads at a time HAR HAR" stereotype. Yes, men do like looking at attractive things, obviously, but most of the ones I know do actually have a brain and even the nerdy ones are not deprived basement dwellers who melt at the sight of boobies. The times have changed, we're somewhat more enlightened, and E3 needs to get on the ball.

Apparently you're right. I'm aghast that anyone is still making the "Honda can build a reliable car but my developers can't build reliable software" argument. I thought everyone started figuring out that cars are not like software (in about a million different ways) in the 90's.

A lot of people are pretty intimidated by jargon and feel shut out if we go into it, and I think that's the cause of the reaction you're seeing. In my experience people can be self defeatist about it because they're afraid of looking stupid, or being made to feel stupid. If we're talking about the same type of situation, they aren't mocking your knowledge or the area of expertise, but they're dismissing their ability to understand it due to hearing jargon or concepts that they aren't familiar with. Just my two cents (and worth the paper it's printed on).

I agree, and seeing Microsoft flip Google off so blatantly is pretty amusing to watch.

People change careers mid-life all the time and make the leap to something new. There's nothing magical about programming or coding that means people can't learn it; but at any age, if you don't have a familiarity/comfort with computers, and if you don't "get" them, it will be an uphill climb. There are people who will discriminate against you, but the reality is that almost everyone gets judged unfairly for something at one point in their lives or another. And, while there's a lot of ignorant comments to your post, most of those people aren't hiring managers.