Were the sexual comments directed towards the person in the article? Is this an individual teenager complaining or are there others who can corroborate this view of the behavior is a reasonable one? What facts exist that point to the Lena image being the exclusive cause of the "boys' sexual comments?"

The whole thing is written by a teen (not exactly a demographic known for mental and emotional maturity, stability, or experience) and the comments contain many instances of previous students of the same program in the same school that express the opposite view of the program as a whole and the choice of Lena's image in particular. Unless there is more evidence, it seems this isolated individual is the only one who has a problem with anything. There is no logical or rational reason to change anything to suit one emotional teen's vague public whinging.

Citation needed. Where exactly is the proof that "kids are acting like little shits because of a teacher's fuckup?" I'd love for you to expressly point that out.

It's not porn. Bettie Page was considered "porn" in her day and I don't see anyone calling it porn now. Society's standards change over time. It would seem that they've left you far behind. Do you get an erection from seeing some bare elbow? The nudes in Playboy are not pornographic images by modern standards. This is what is considered porn in society today. If you have a problem with that, fine. You're entitled to hold an opinion. You're not entitled to have others agree with it and pretend that a head shot crop is porn or that a tastefully composed nude photograph (which doesn't even have visible genitalia and isn't even sexually suggestive) from which that crop was produced is pornography.

Well, that escalated quickly.

You're wrong but even if you were not, the fact remains that there's *nothing* wrong with "sexualized images." If you think teens in first world countries haven't seen "sexualized images" far more sexually explicit than the backside and reflected nipples of a woman in a tastefully shot vintage nude photograph, you're living under a very large and naive rock.

If you type the woman's name, you don't get any results for the original image, even in image search engines.

If you think the 512x512 Lena image used in image processing for 40+ years is "a pornographic picture" then you're a Puritan lunatic. On top of that, you have spoken for Lena in assigning the "sexual object" label to her; it was never your choice, it was hers, and she chose to have that picture taken. You don't get to speak for her or be offended on her behalf. Take five seconds to actually understand what you are talking about before you spout off and look like a fool.

Mobile touchscreen devices will simply never be as capable as actual general-purpose computers. The Transformer has poor performance compared to available standard laptops. For people who actually use their computers to do actual work, tablets and phones are not sufficient. From transcoding to database work to web development to gaming, low-power low-speed touch-as-primary-input devices (almost entirely running mobile operating systems) are useless. Atom-class ULV and ARM Cortex CPUs can't keep up with an i5, i7 or AMD FX or A8 chip. Hybrid graphics laptops can both save power and run high-end 3D stuff. There isn't any room in a thin slate form factor for all the stuff that normal laptops and desktops can do. They will never die. They will also never be as convenient as a phone. Each has their place in the grand scheme of things. I'd hate to write a long paper on a cell phone with a docking station, I'd hate to have to whip out a laptop just to check my email, and I'd hate to wait on either of them to compress 1080p 60fps video with x264.

Nope, Anita actually said that. (Link to Thunderf00t because that's the only transcript a Google search found for that text, not because "MRA, MRA, ermahgerd.")

He was quoting Jack Tramiel, the founder of Commodore International. Commodore's computers enjoyed over a decade of success against Apple and IBM as well as the game systems of the late 1970s through early 1980s because they were unorthodox and clever with their marketing (Commodore computers were sold at toy stores in the same display cases as electronic game consoles, for example), they ruthlessly found ways to cut prices, and they didn't even bother trying to be the next IBM. Commodore was successful because they didn't play in the boundaries of the established computer and electronics industries. That's what the point of the statement was.

The computer company that beat the pants off both Apple and IBM in the home computer market throughout all of the 1980s and the start of the 1990s until Tramiel left (and then it all went to shit due to gross mismanagement). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

There are about 60,000 eligible households in the sample for this survey...Every month, one-fourth of the households in the sample are changed, so that no household is interviewed for more than 4 consecutive months.

Approximately 115,610,216 households in the United States.

Despite the BLS claim that "The CPS sample is selected so as to be representative of the entire population of the United States," it is difficult to believe that 0.057% of all households in the United States being sampled monthly results in accurately representative unemployment figures.

If anyone ever figures out how to "document" experience and hands-on skills, I think they'd be the next Bill Gates.

Oh look, unemployment stats. Too bad they don't count the people that aren't on unemployment anymore but can't find work.

Who moderated my comment "overrated?" I made a perfectly legitimate point. If you have a problem with it, tough nuts.