In my first year of computer science in CEGEP, we were 60 students. 2 of them were women. They accepted pretty much anybody who applied based purely on your highschool grades. Right off the bat you've got a 97% male program, and there was no bias in that selection either (for what it's worth, the person deciding on applications was female). Women simply did not apply for the program in the first place.

It's always been obvious to me that the reason that there are so few female developers has little to do with hiring practices and a lot to do with the lack of interest in computer science among women. You just have to look threw a stack of CVs when people apply for jobs at your company for it to be obvious: when there are so few CVs from women in the pile, statistically you're not going to hire as many of them.

It's not, but the statement was "Macs before 2009 can't run the current version of OS X".

The reason the earlier Mac Mini isn't supported is apparently due to the lack of a 64-bit driver being available for the Intel GMA 950 used. It's probable that by the time a 64-bit driver was needed (the move to Mountain Lion) in 2012, those mac minis had been out long enough that they didn't consider it worth writing a new driver to get them supported.

There are, however, workarounds to install Mountain Lion and Mavericks on those machines. Unfortunately, while it's possible to get Mountain Lion running relatively stably, Mavericks isn't very stable on them.

Those older Mac Minis aren't entirely useless, though. They run Windows 7 and 8 just fine via BootCamp :)

OS X Mavericks explicitly lists support for the 2007 iMac, the 2007 MacBook Pro, the 2008 or newer MacBook Air, and the 2008 or newer Mac Pro. All older than 2009.

If memory serves, when Apple's A7 came out, benchmarks showed it as being faster than low-end Atom processors, and there are faster ARM chips on the market than the A7 now (including Apple's own revision of it, the A8). There's a lot of overlap in the performance spectrum between high-end ARM and low-end x86.

They don't have a cubby for large bags on the newer trains (there is literally no storage for larger bags anymore), but we were lucky enough on the various times that we rode it.

Yes, how minor an accomplishment for a country still recovering from being destroyed in a devastating world war to produce trains in 1963 that were a mere 31% faster than the GG1. Shattering the speed record for actual passenger service is such an inconsequential accomplishment.

The Shinkansen may not have held that record for long, but it's been on the forefront of high-speed rail ever since. And compared to the average speed of the fastest trains between Montreal and New York City in 2014 (around 50 kilometers per hour), it's blazing fast.

Uh, no... nobody said that. The Shinkansen first ran in the 1960s. It's not a conspiracy, it was a big deal in the international news back then. The original 1960s cars were given the nickname "bullet train" due to the funny-looking nose of the train.

The train from Montreal to New York City averages something like 50 kilometers an hour.

They also have no luggage area. If you're trying to replace flying with the Shinkansen, you need to hope that you get lucky enough to find a place to fit your non-carryon luggage.

Have some irony:

C:\Users\Guspaz>tracert www.spamhaus.org

Tracing route to cdn-cf.spamhaus.eu [190.93.243.93]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

    1 <1 ms <1 ms 1 ms 192.168.1.1
    2 10 ms 39 ms 14 ms 10.245.x.x
    3 11 ms 13 ms 10 ms 10.170.x.x
    4 10 ms 8 ms 17 ms xe-0-1-1_0-bdr01-mtl.teksavvy.com [206.248.155.109]
    5 16 ms 15 ms 16 ms xe-1-1-0_2210-bdr04-tor.teksavvy.com [192.171.63.161]
    6 22 ms 17 ms 23 ms gw-cloudflare.torontointernetxchange.net [206.108.34.208]
    7 17 ms 16 ms 15 ms cf-190-93-243-93.cloudflare.com [190.93.243.93]

Trace complete.

SNC wasn't going to launch DreamChaser, ULA was.

Untested? SNC has been around for half a century, and has extensive experience building satellites. They're the ones who built all those Orbcomm satellites that SpaceX is launching.

Neither Boeing's CST-100 nor SpaceX's Dragon v2 (which is substantially different from Dragon v1) have any past performance for orbital flights either.

If you want to do real work on a mobile device, a tablet would seem to be more appropriate.

That may say more about a problem with the Targus thing you're using than anything else. My iPhone 4S running iOS 8 is still charging fine plugged into my Windows PC or my various battery packs... but the fact that you're using your BlackBerry's charger just goes to show that it can charge off regular USB without issue.

Now, it's definitely true that Apple went a non-standard route for high-power USB charging (charging over USB at amperages in excess of the half amp standard of USB 2), but the worst case scenario there is that it will charge slower, not that it won't charge at all, and the point becomes moot when most accessories (like decent battery packs) support both Apple's high-power standard and USB-IF's own. I think I paid $20 for my Anker battery pack, and my giant NewTrent one was pretty cheap considering it's got a battery of a size you might expect to find in a laptop. Both work fine with Apple devices.