This would be valid if the only change over the last 50 years was the introduction of violent video games

I've worked for several companies that diversified their development teams simply because they were told that the staff was not diversified enough. The result has always been a general decrease in the productivity because the new hire was not the best qualified candidate (many times the jobs were filled internally).

Workplace diversity for the sake of diversity is a stupid idea

Why stop there? The Internet aids terrorist groups.

The tolerances are designed to account for the slight inaccuracies in speedometers as well as the tolerance of the radar equipment. If the posted speed limit is 70 and you're speedometer says you're going 70 you might be going 70 or 65 because the speedometer is not supposed to display a speed that is lower than the actual speed of the car, only greater by 10%.

Yes, people have been unlocking phones but without the carrier's consent you have to 'jailbreak' the phone. I'm going to assume that the phone either needs to be out of contract or you need to pay the balance due on the phone to get it unlocked.

If providers are going to have to unlock phones then I can see them changing things up a bit. Instead of the phone company 'subsidizing' your phone which you are allowed to keep when your contract is up, I see plans that include a lease fee for the phone with a new phone every years (or two) option if you turn in your old phone. With this model, just like car leasing if the phone is beat up or doesn't include all the accessories you'll be charged a 'lease disposition' fee. Providers will keep their user base locked in and won't have to provide unlock codes because the phone remains the property of the provider. If the user wants to unlock the phone they will need to pay the lease buyout fee and the phone will be theirs.

Apple already has most of these restrictions and more.
The ability to turn off in app purchasing and / or making purchases. The also have 'allowances' which once reached the user can't spend pass that unless they provide an additional form of payment. iDevices also allow you to turn OFF the 15 minute window and specify that a password is required for every purchase.

Parents really have NO right to complain if their children are racking up purchases on their iDevice because they have the ability to limit that spending.

WHAT?

So, authors don't want to have a large price gap between a real book and an ebook? Do they NOT realize that with the real book you get an actual real book. With the ebook you get a limited, revocable license to read the book but only in the format you purchased your license for.

I'm still wondering why the price gap isn't larger.

No more so than the religious nut jobs. How many times have you browsed to a site thinking it to be a legitimate news site or scientific article only to find that it was a well disguised religious message.

Real religious belief requires blind faith, if someone loses their religion because of the wealth of information on the internet that refutes their belief system then they were clearly lacking in the faith department.

I went from agnostic to atheist after the death of my mother! long before the rise of the internet as we now know it.

If this were truly the case then GM wouldn't have changed the part and kept the same part number. I don't see anything mentioned about there even being a service bulletin released which usually happens when a part is changed because of a small chance of failure.

I have been treated differently based on my race. Promoting or hiring a less qualified person because they are of a minority race or gender is wrong and that is the fundamental problem with the way affirmative action is applied. Your vacuum environment isn't relevant because affirmative action wasn't designed to function in a vacuum, it was designed to function in the real world. When applications for a job are equally qualified it can work but this is seldom the case. For fear of being labeled or even sued for racial or gender discrimination I have seen businesses hire the lesser qualified minority.

My experience has been that IT is more color blind than many other departments in large companies I've worked at. The problem is lack of qualified job candidates. Hiring somebody or giving them preferential treatment in the hiring process based on their race or skin color is discrimination.

Stop affirmative action.

Out current vet is great. He makes house calls which is much less stressful for our cats. He doesn't seem to be aggressive about prescribing medication but will often tell us if there is a human OTC equivalent we can use when possible.

A good friend of ours has a cat that was chewing its fur off and required a cat food that is only available by prescription and she wasn't able to get it where she lived. Our vet recommended something similar and wrote us a prescription so we could get the cat food for our friend. After about 7-10 days there was a noticeable improvement in her cat's fur and about 6 months later her fur is fully grown back. She has the cat on 1/2 prescription food now and it seems to be working.

As with anything else, one should be wary of vets that are treating illnesses that are not visible and cost money to treat. As with human doctors, it's also wise to get a second opinion on these things.

Sometimes is has NOTHING to do with how small or remote your town/city is. I live in a well populated suburban town in New England and our choices for internet are either Cox cable or AT&T DSL. Cable speeds are between 10-15 Mb but the fastest DSL we can have is less than 5 Mb. Verizon advertises FIOS for our area but if you try to subscribe you'll be told they don't offer it in our town. Many New England towns are vendor locked and the consumers are left with little or no choices.

At some base level the point of health insurance is to have a large enough pool of people paying premiums to spread out the costs of health care so no individual is over burdened. Yes I know this is an idealistic and to some degree unrealistic view but it really is the basic concept. My wife's policy includes pregnancy related coverage even though she has had a hysterectomy and is NOT capable of producing a child.

Government provided services should not be allowed to make exemptions for any religious belief and it appears that this is the case here. Once you grant an exemption for one religious group where do you stop or draw the line? What about other religions that forbid the use of certain types of medicine or treatment, should there be exclusions put in place to deal with them as well?

Totally agree here.

This is what happens when you 'license' content. Disney is just exercising the management of their digital rights and this is why I strip the DRM from my content if at all possible.