Are you talking about France? Or Russia? Or where then?

You sure as heck aren't talking about the US. The military (read Naval) reactor program parted ways with the civilian world decades ago - they're simply too dissimilar. Nor can civilian reactors effectively make plutonium, nor were they needed to. And the for companies involved in military reactors, government contracting is only one small corner of their business. Etc... etc...

Well, whatever. She has as good a chance at banning jargon as she does banning creole. It's human nature for distinct groups to communicate in distinct ways. As a man who has run afoul of jargon (I really embarrassed myself with "side effects" at some point) I didn't get bent out of shape about it. I learned and moved on. If you want to empower women, teach them how not to lose confidence when they look stupid. If looking stupid discourages you, software is no place to be. Anybody who has been programming for a while should have quite a few stories about how some bug made them feel stupid. Indeed, "all bugs are shallow" is a cliche, and yet they continue to bug us.

What do you mean by tech fetichism? Tech places a huge priority on energy efficiency. Computing is going increasingly mobile, lighting is shifting to LED... all of which is high tech by the way. Do you think old incandescents are better?

And defeated by something as trivial as snow.
Where a human driver will estimate where the road is, and blaze a new trail.

" I'd certainly rather return to Dominican Republic, then go to Canadian prison (in winter!). "

Then you don't know very much about the DR. Once you leave the hotel compound, it's quite violent and corrupt.

Is this a joke? Current Iraq, sans IS territory is basically a de facto vassal state of Iran. It's very difficult to imagine a change where Iraq would be any more pro-Iranian than it is today in such a short period of time. Vice news had a really good video on their reporter who went embedded with Iraqi Shiite militias. Unlike government which has to at least maintain plausible deniability, militiamen themselves are fairly open about who their support and materiel comes from and who they see as their own.

While it's true that current Middle East situation is not "as bad as it could get", that's only because "as bad as it could get" is a nuclear exchange between Israel and Iran or one sided nuclear strikes into Iran by Israel. And the current situation is not that far away from it now that Iran became a true regional hegemon after Iraq became it's vassal state and feels quite empowered by it. If anything, IS actually serves as a dam containing Iran's influence's westward expansion in the region.

That's quite incorrect, because there will be no US for Europe to help in your scenario, nor Russia to help against. Both would be irradiated no-go land.

This is something many US residents tend to forget because they didn't have a war against an aggressor capable of fighting on their land for centuries. To them, war is something that happens far away with no real impact on their lives. A war with Russia on the other hand would be a war against a foe capable of unleashing the real consequences of the war against the people of US.

And mind you, US is doing a lot against Assad. The real problem is that people in White House right now are not quite as "american cliche" in their utter ignorance of situation on the ground and understand that any help against Assad equals improving Iran's position in the region, one way or another. Just like Iraq intervention ended up being nothing more than surrendering Iraq, the former anti-Iran bastion straight to Iranian hands. As a result most of anti-Assad action taken is typically in the form that avoids straight up supporting Iran's position in the region, which severely limits potency of any measures taken. It's mainly undercover support of semi-independent Sunni militias and support for the only anti-Iranian force in the region - ethnic Kurds. And then there's of course the political pressure on allies of Allawites.

Because in the last few years, we've seen what "reputation" really means. Bill Cosby, Lance Armstrong, Jian Ghomeshi, Colonel Williams, the list goes on.

But we must protect "reputation", because that's less expensive than, you know, actually being good or worthwhile.

No, excluded implies that steps or barriers were put in place to prevent them from participation. That is not the case here.

It may be news to you, but in many countries the population is far more homogenous than where you may be, and in some of them, black people are few and far between. That no black volunteer students participated is not due to exclusion but because of there being none to exclude.

Can you point at just one "black participant that was removed from consideration"?
In other news, they did not exclude any Sami or Maori students either.

If privacy is your end goal, buying an iphone over android is proverbial shoving head in the sand I'm afraid. While apple certainly isn't quite as bad at violating your privacy as google, it's does it in incredible amounts regardless.

To paraphrase, your choice is between anal rape with a baseball bat or with a crowbar. One may be thinner than other, and one may have less sharp edges than other, but both will hurt so much that difference is largely inconsequential.

In fact, ALL major current smartphone OSs and their applications do. It's an inherent part of their business model. In fact one of the major attractors of non-major operating systems in mobile world is privacy (I include privacy-minded android forks in this particular group).