If you want to go full-on nerdy, a pneumatic tube system can't go awry... ;) Bonus points if it connects to your mailbox. Extra bonus points if there's an outlet on your roof that you can fire things from.

Alright. I read that, what is your point? That she was fired just like 20 other people in a clear company policy that has nothing to do with her race, gender, or lawsuit?

This.

I'm in the early stages of building an underground steampunk cave home, and "futureproofing" is one of my design principles. I'm going with a very open floor plan, on the concept that it's easier for people to add in walls than to take out walls that were never designed to be removed (and may consequently be providing structural support). I'm not including any drywall; the exterior walls, a pozzolonic concrete, will be pressure-washed to remove the cement from the surface, exposing the aggregate. All piping / conduits will not only be visible, but shown off as part of the style (as is typical for steampunk). If someone wants to change something that they can't just feed into an existing conduit, they won't have to rip out the drywall, change what they want to change, reinstall the drywall, and then repaint. Plus, there can be no "critters" living in the crawlspace when there is no crawlspace.

Even if I never want to change the house, I want it to significantly outlive me, and whatever future owners are around may want to change things. Plus, it's kind of fun when you keep future owners in mind. For example, I plan to paint a really creepy, gigantic (meters across) blood-red sigil underneath the flooring - an inverse of the ægishjálmur (protection against all evil), pointing inwards as if to trap evil in, with some runic writing along the lines of "All May Enter, None May Leave" (hopefully my Old Icelandic is passable :) ). I hope that whoever owns the house after me and decides to redo the flooring gets a kick out of that one. ;)

This. Trademark GIMP, NMAP or whatever. Take it with you. SF can fork the code, but they need to put a different name on it so users are led into thinking the code has a provenance other that what it actually has.

The first two people I hired to work at my business were females. The first was a stenographer/secretary. The second was a programmer of some note that I stole from a buddy (he did not mind too much) who owned his own company as well. The third was a black male who was also a programmer. Then came a bunch of females as a sales force - being held accountable to a female. For quite some time my other business friends called my shop, "The Bunny Ranch."

Actually, the first person I hired was Amerindian, Black, and White. It was me. I had an asshole for a boss too. He made me work long hours, sometimes without pay, and seldom paid me for all the hours I put in until long after the company was secure.

Anyhow, my point has nothing to do with me wanting diversity. In fact, that was the furthest thing from my mind. I wanted to hire the best, pay them well, and encourage low turnover by incentivising (spell check says that is not a word, if it is not then I declare it as such now) remaining with the company. I was easily approachable (then HR was) and if one felt they were inclined to leave we would do our best to ensure that they were given reasons to remain. We paid more by default, we offered better benefits by default and immediately upon hire, and we offered "telecommuting" long before such was a word. Due to the expense we paid for their connection and hardware as well - allowing them to keep the hardware (even if they resigned) and generally left the connection running for some time as well. This was seldom applicable though, and this was a good thing.

It is not diversity that matters (though it can happen by accident as you see above). What matters is merit, low-turnover, and an employer that does not treat you like an asset or a piece of meat.

Yep. I once heard the line

Easy. Repeal the laws against made up crimes like "money laundering".

There's an inverse relationship between the cost of software (including software included with hardware, like industrial devices), and the quality of that software.

"Enterprise" software is widely regarded as crap, but the software on expensive industrial machines is probably even worse.

So? If that's any metric to go by, a couple pharma CEOs would have a hard time explaining why they're still alive.

Wherein the person being persecuted files a malicious prosecution case. Malicious prosecution being illegal is an entirely different issue than the question of whether a person being investigated has a right to interfere with the investigation simply because they believe themselves to be innocent. And furthermore, in what way was investigating a person who appears to be laundering money "malicious prosecution"? The police are supposed to investigate reports of money laundering.

You no more have the right to interfere with an ongoing investigation than you have the right to punch the officer doing it. If you think the investigation is persecution, bring it to court. If you don't want to talk, plead the fifth. What you don't have the right to do is lie to the police who are doing their job investigating suspicious financial transactions.

Depends on your country or your sex. Mine does not allow same sex marriages. Which is a pity, I could surely need the benefits married couples are granted. Of course, if you happen to be female this problem does not exist.

I do insist in a contract, though. I would not want you to have the power to pull the plug on me, and I would recommend against giving me the power to pull it on you.

No it shouldn't. If gender is a predictor of ability then the probability distributions are BY DEFINITION not independent. If therefore you use the knowledge of gender after evaluating ability then you are treating them as independent variables when you combine them. This is mathematically bogus.

Actually, that's just mathematically simplistic. Here's what your reasoning does not account for: There are leanings, abilities and competencies that do not exist in isolation from other influences. Gender can be one of those. Therefore, to the extent that affect is possible, it is a valid consideration.

It could be a positive for either sex.

For instance, the air force has definitively determined that females are significantly better at maintaining more comprehensive situational awareness in complex aerial situations. This is because of a real world gender-based difference in information processing.

On the other hand, if one was hiring a bouncer, the competencies lean strongly the other way.

There will be outliers, of course, but that's why we need to think about these things rather than operate by rote. The law, unfortunately, but needfully (due to blind prejudice), specifies decision by rote. This is why many parts of the decision making process have gone missing from public view.

What about the person who is formally known as Prince? I bet not even Burger King calls him back.

Your username is Kaiser. I am not sure how unbiased you can be. ;)

The government's ability to monitor everyone's financial transactions is part of the broad surveillance state enabled by technology. We face a choice between an Orwellian future, where the state is capable of monitoring every aspect of our lives: what we buy, where we go, who we talk to, or a future where technology empowers individuals by making government transparent, efficient, and accountable. That is one of the biggest choices of our time, and this story is another warning that we are on the wrong path.