Don't get me wrong. It does suck to be cheated on (even if it's just online). But if the couple isn't formally married to begin with, I don't think society should interfere. Society has too much to deal with already.

Also, you say "fraud", but to me fraud usually involves a specific monetary value that was taken under false pretense. In that sense, financial fraud is much easier to deal with because it's much more quantifiable than just emotional fraud (and yes, my own definition of "fraud" could be wrong, you don't need to prove it by quoting a dictionary for me. It's just that my point remains. As a society, financial fraud is much easier to deal with than other kinds of fraud).

Also, does anyone else see the parallel with gamergate? With gamergate, the guy started his campaign of accusations against the woman after he claims she had started cheating on him. In this case, the woman started her campaign of accusations against the Professor after he lied to her about other women.

And then the Professor blocked her from seeing his friends on Facebook, bolstering her claim of online infidelity even more.

So what we have here is two people who can't take "no" for an answer. In the first case, it's called sexual harassment because it's a woman who is saying "no", and the guy just can't take it because of his feelings of attachment towards her. In the second case, it's a 80 years old guy saying "no" to online exclusivity, but it's the woman who can't take that "no" because of her feelings of attachment towards him.

And of course MIT sided with the sexual harasser in that second case. That's what companies and organizations do nowadays. They have no interest in protecting their employees against true sexual harassment, or against sexual retaliation. They have no interest in trying to understand a situation. Their only interest is in covering their asses and implementing zero tolerance policies across the board.

Well, it does sound like he lied to them (about exclusivity).

It's probably just me being cynical, but had the first degree women friends of the Professor on Facebook not replied to that first woman saying that they were also in an online sexual relationship with the Professor, then the first woman wouldn't have considered his behavior sexual harassment, and she would have never retroactively taken back her consent to the online relationship.

She also said she felt trap near the end, but really how trapped could she have been? She started all of this more than a year after the fact. Wasn't she finished with the course by that time? Shouldn't the power relationship be nullified once all the grades are in and the course finished? Also the Professor was already pushing 80 years old and had already retired? How much power did have from across the ocean as an 80 year old?

Did he try to blackmail her with the pictures he already had? From the detailed article, that doesn't seem to be the case. If the detail of him lying about other women is any indication, that seems to be the most relevant part of her grievance, and that's how he "psychologically compelled" her -- by lying to her. And by the time she found out about the online infidelity, she was already emotionally attached to him, that's why she felt trapped (at least, that would be my cynical interpretation of her statements, because I just don't buy the I-felt trapped-because-he-kept-on-contacted-me reason.).

You're right. The idea that roughly 65,000 new jobs each year can not be filled with US citizens is mostly rhetorical BS.

Just double the wage, and US applicants will come out of the woodwork. And if that doesn't work, double that wage again, and just see what happens.

That's essentially what happened with COBOL for Y2K. People came out of retirement for the money. Others quit their management jobs to come back as lowly COBOL developers (for a language and a job they had mostly forgotten). And others still just bit the bullet, and learned COBOL from scratch just to take advantage of the temporary money windfall.

Who knows? If the demand from employers becomes desperate enough without being mitigated by the H1B program, parents, school boards, and government officials may even be crazy enough to make math and sciences the number one priority once again for their own kids.

Yes, I know this, but how many H-1B employees do you know who have made the successful transition?

I know it happens, but it's an incredibly stressful event for the employee in question and there is actually no guarantee that it will succeed considering the temperamental nature of the INS and the unnecessarily small pool of companies willing to go through the trouble of sponsoring a worker already in the US.

I was personally involved in the sponsorship of one Indian employee who had gotten their doctorate from a top US Ivy school, and yet the INS still delayed the visa unnecessarily by an extra year. Thankfully, that person was living in India at the time and my company could afford to wait for the paperwork to finally settle, but imagine if that person had been already living in the US, or if my company had been less patient.

I guess one could try to say the same thing about employment in general. There is actually no guarantee of a job for anyone, even for US workers, but my point is that the constraints are completely different when you're under an existing H1B visa.

And my comparison with indentured servitude is still just as valid. After all, indentured servants in Colonial America were still free to find new employers, assuming those new employers bought out their original contract.

Even the workers on H1B know the real reason for the H1B program.

After all, they're not idiots. They realize that the H1B program was designed to prevent them from leaving their original H1B sponsor, than staying in the country working for a different US-based employer, so this guarantees them that they have very little negotiating power when it comes to negotiating salary increases, or negotiating for better working conditions.

This works the same way indentured servitude used to work for immigrants two hundred years ago. Except now, there is no need to hold a financial note over one's head, in exchange to have paid for their trip, now the builtin limitations of the H1B visa fulfill that purpose instead.

Everybody knows, the symbolic pregnancy test for the anti-Christ is still the most accurate scientific indicator for doomsday. At least, the result of that test is binary. Either someone is pregnant with the anti-Christ, or no one is pregnant with the anti-Christ. Thus far, the result has been "no anti-Christ yet", which tracks pretty well with most sonograms we know about.

5 minutes on the doomsday clock? What the hell does that even mean? Does it mean we only have 5 minutes left to live? or fifty years? or an additional five thousand years? The claim isn't even falsifiable, since it's not anchored to any specific meaning whatsoever.

Assuming police officers are as good at reading inter-office emails as I am, there is really only one piece of advice I'd give people.

Prepare yourself and prepare your home for imminent Swat arrival. Give away the dog (if you have one). Evict your roommate (if you have one). Keep all the doors to the outside wide open (so that they don't break them). Keep some fresh coffee in the pot and some fresh cookies on the table (so that the Swat team doesn't get low blood sugar and cranky by the time it reaches your bedroom). And sleep with handcuffs already on (so that they don't think you're trying to resist arrest). Also, it probably wouldn't hurt to pepper your walls leading to your bedroom with portraits of Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and Dick Cheney.

May be, he's right. He criticizes pharmaceutical companies both in China and in India, and his own company manufactures antibiotics in China. If his own company is having this problem of not being able to enforce proper procedures in China, I would tend to trust the guy, after all he's the CEO of that company.

And you actually believe that?

Many times, patches are just punted to QA even thought the developer knows full well that they're not going to pass QA. After all, I should know, I'm a software developer myself. Also, I can tell you that finishing the last 10% of a project is always the hardest part. May be it's because we naturally like to work on the easiest parts of a problem first, or may be it's because we don't actually start understanding the real requirements until we're almost finished with the project (therefore possibly requiring us to start all over from scratch), but whatever the reason is, I can tell you that a feature sitting in QA doesn't necessarily mean that it's almost finished, or anywhere close to finished.

Actually, no. The title doesn't make much sense. The title and summary should really have said:

Well, technically, they're passing on the information to the OEMs, so they're passing the buck.

Also not to sound like a Google fan-boy, but I'm not sure how you would know that a flaw with a WebView is indeed a "gaping security flaw". The article doesn't seem to be much help in that regard. Also, I'm not sure how the first story about Microsoft is even relevant to this latest story, unless the Microsoft PR department is behind these two narratives in the first place.

Ok, I stand corrected on the hire-for licence, but I've got to disagree with the following.

I never said that Uber was required to have that insurance, I'm just saying that Uber covers the drivers/owners of the car with its own commercial coverage while they are driving and logged into the application on their phone.

Thank you very much for proving that I actually did my research, as the first result in your search results is the exact same link I already provided in the post you're replied to.

I personally can't. I don't live in the same city where I work.

I've voted with my feet. It's too bad my workplace hasn't followed suit.