"Talking about your sex life," to me, implies that you are talking about the specific details of what you do in the bedroom with someone. Talking about your partner, or what kind of people you like to date, is not talking about your sex life, no matter how much you want it to be.

And nobody would have a press conference to say that they were heterosexual because being heterosexual is not punishable by death anywhere in the world ... homosexuality is still punishable by death in some countries.

Nobody ever tells you that you are a terrible person for being 5'10" or being male, so you have no reason to worry about it. He does.

The problem with this line of thinking is that if you say something like, "I went to the beach with my Wife this weekend," nobody says that you are talking about your sex life in public. If you say something like, "I went to the beach with my Husband this weekend" all of a sudden a bunch of bigots like you are throwing a hissy fit. If he says that he's gay, that is not "talking about his sex life." Moron.

What a bunch of fucking morons. They're eliminating a huge number of potential candidates who would otherwise be qualified for the job. I just ... I don't even have the words to describe how ridiculous this is.

Of course, if all they want are upper middle-class drones who follow every rule that has ever been made, just because it's a rule, then I suppose this is effective.

(their PR department probably scans slashdot)

I suspect that you are overestimating Slashdot's relevance to the general public.

It said he made "about half of 1 percent of the value of all the share transactions done by individuals on the Tokyo Stock Exchange." That's not the same thing.

+1

Gates doesn't even control the company anymore.

This was modded as funny, but I would say that it's actually insightful.

They probably counted each spell multiple times, one time for each upgrade ... Fireball 1, Fireball 2, Fireball 3, etc.

No, that's a terrible idea. With income tax, you can lighten the tax burden on those most affected by using tax rates that scale with your income. If everyone just pays a flat sales tax rate, the poor bear most of the economic burden. Plus, if we eliminate income tax, we have to raise sales tax to cover the deficit, so pretty soon we'll all be paying 20% (or higher) sales tax.

Think of it this way; if you make $24,000 a year, a 20% tax that reduces your income to $18,000 a year is a much greater burden than it is to someone who makes $200,000 a year and has their income reduced to $150,000 a year.

It will do bad things to your credit score, though.

I was going to say that unclosed parentheses are what causes high blood pressure.

What if the police got to the scene of a crime after the victim (a black man) managed to turn the tables on the attacker (a white woman) and the only thing the camera saw was the victim (a black man) attacking the attacker (a white woman) in a panicked frenzy? Camera and the police says the victim (a black man) is the attacker, therefore the victim (a black man) gets arrested. Investigation? Why conduct one when the police (partly) caught a black man beating a white woman on camera?

How is this any different from the current situation? Currently, said officer will simply testify in court, "I arrived at the scene and the only thing I saw was a black man attacking a white woman in a panicked frenzy."

At least, with the camera solution, we can be 100% sure that the officer isn't telling a flat-out lie when they say something like that in court.

I'm 26. I started driving when I was 17, and my Dad gave me a used car when I moved out at 18. By the time I was 19, I sold the car. In the past 7 years, I've relied almost exclusively on public transportation, and only operated vehicles on a couple of different occasions; these were rental vehicles that I used to move my furniture from one apartment to another.