It's not about me discarding data that doesn't fit, it's about usefulness.

Look, lets say I have a test that determines who who should go to Harvard and who should go to community college. If the test says 41% of people should go to Harvard, that is useless.

If 41% of people are experience activity X, than that means that X is NOT THAT BAD. Otherwise people would take steps to avoid that experience.

Say we were were talking about people getting "Cragled" in Central Park. If 41% of people are getting "Cragled" in Central Park, than one of two possibilities:

Either "Cragled" is a horrible thing, and the newspapers are going to immediately start reporting about it, while cops stake out Central Park, and everyone in the world refusing to go into Central Park. If that does not happen, than that means that "Cragled" is not such a bad thing.

Most importantly, Sexual Assault suffers from psychological issues. The same activity could be called 'flirting" if both people like it, while it is Sexual Assault under other circumstances.

If you are not bothered by the activity, then it is flirting. If you are bothered by it, it becomes sexual assualt.

More importantly, ridiculously paranoid people do not have the right to stop those of us that like to flirt from flirting, simply because you can't tell the difference between flirting and sexual assault. If neither of me nor the girl I am flirting with at work are bothered by the behavior, then let us do it and stop trying to call us nasty names and kill our fun.

Rape is RAPE, Consensual sex is CONSENSUAL SEX, and the same goes for Sexual Harassment and Flirting. The mere fact that you can't tell the difference does not mean the rest of us have to stop doing the things we like to do.

But but but she said the mole makes my bald head look GOOD! He he he

And disconnect them from this end? If he doesn't want us, why should we offer ourselves up to him?

Step 1) Do the same query on men.

2) If the men have a significant response rate, then just maybe that means the problem is YOUR QUESTION IS TOO VAGUE, rather than both genders experiencing sexual issues.

The mere fact that this article claims that 40+% of men experience 'sexual harassment', proves that their definition of 'sexual harassment' is not reasonable - the kind of thing only a PC fool trying to prove a problem exists would use.

Similarly, 6% of men experience sexual assault seems on the high side, though not as ridiculous as the 41% claiming harassment.

The only thing going on here is idiots using bad definitions for their poll.

I think Mythbusters did an experiment that showed that it was VERY difficult to slip on a banana peel. Basically you had to be an idiot.

Grapes are round, so it is not a surprise that people slip on the rolling grape, rather than slip on a slippery surface.

We can create bioweapons. The main problems with creating them are:

1) Total lack of ethics - and the resources to get away with murdering thousands of human test subjects along the way.

2) Suicidal tendencies - not just for individuals, but for the funding group. Because any realistically dangerous weapon will have a good probability of killing it's creators first, and a very high probability of killing it's creators in the long term (either directly, by evolution, or by revenge nuclear attacks.

3) You still need Highly intelligent and highly trained people involved. Most of whom lack Suicidal tendencies.

This armegeddon scenario is actually far more likely than a nuclear war, as that requires far more people to behave far more stupidly and unlike nanite fears, is actually physically reasonable.

Uhm, phones give your GPS data now. Cars will not be a dramatic shift in potential privacy issues.

All the data that they are afraid cars will give out are already given out by people's phones.

So, basically exactly the same situation that we already have.

War, what is it good for?

Decreasing excess human population. That's what is good for.

And we have quite a few potential human population decreases being set up right now - ISIS and Russia are just waiting to decrease some extra human population.

You have several choices here. 1) Sue, claiming that the government can neither force you to design your software differently, nor require them to sell a specific software. It is a very different thing than the existing system where people are required to provide access to existing backdoors, rather than being required to create backdoors.

2) Move your corporate headquarters off shore. Then tell them they have no authority over you, but if they want to sue your country or publicly demand you stop selling your product in the US, they can do it - but your warrant requiring secrecy does not affect them in any way shape or form.

3) Separate the hardware and software, using different sub-companies to produce each one. Then have the software company declare it is hereby closed, and will provide no more updates. Tell the government that they can't force you to be in business anymore. Hire a new company to provide software and REPEAT.

They do that already. But they get so much that they still have to burn it off

I have been desperate before. I would still never fall for this kind of stupidity.

In America, they use a similar technique to get desperate people, it's a variation on the "Multi Level Marketing Scheme".

Here they make you buy 'samples' to sell to your customers. No. If the company is real, they provide all samples and tools you need.

People that buy the samples are desperate. But paying a head hunter to send you to another country, that is not desperate, that is stupid.

So true. If it's a real job, then you NEVER have to pay any amount of cash to get it. The employer should be paying the headhunter, not you.

Why? Mainly because of the exact kind of crap that they are describing here. The employer has the money, which he demonstrates by paying the headhunter. If he can't afford to pay the headhunter, he can't afford to pay you.

Also note they use the payment as a filter. That is, they don't want smart people working for these crap jobs.The smart people refuse to give up their passport and call the police after you bring them to your country. So they make sure to only 'hire' less smart people by giving you an intelligence test - if you are unwise enough to bribe the broker to get a job they promise is 'good', then you are unwise enough to give them your passport and not call the police.

But I can easily see a small scale usage for it.

Primary examples would be installed on sea installations, like say oil drilling platforms. Why ship in fuel to an oil drilling platform, when you can simply install a wavepower generator to provide the power. Then, once you find oil, you don't have to get rid of the wave power generator. Keep it and use wave power to get the oil, rather than burning oil just to get more oil.

Also, I could easily see a small scale wave power generator designed for boats, particularly house boats.

Once Russians lived in a world where they KNEW communism would last forever.

Your cynicism reflects poorly on yourself, not on my hope for a better world.

Truecrypt is the perfect example proving you wrong. It is fairly obvious that the NSA came to them with a court order not to talk about the court order. They choose to close down as opposed to following that order.

If Truecrypt could do it, then other foundations can do it. In fact, so can a company.

The fact that you wallow in the filth of today's society and can not see a greater future does not prevent me and others like me from working toward that future.

The consumers are not aware what they are doing with their money. They know what they are doing with their money, so the responsibility is theirs.

Now, if we passed a law that required all meet raised with antibiotics to be labelled as such, then the consumers would either stop buying it or bear the responsibility for their actions.