The delusion amongst many academics, that students enroll in programs for any reason but to cash out and make money, continues unabated. We are still subjecting people who are paying an awful lot of money to general ed requirements, when advanced and focused trade schools would probably be the right solution for the the majority of applicants. Academia is a calling, one that requires either extreme dedication or a trust fund to hear.

...are people who aren't likely to be the ones who trigger some form of global genocide.

Does anyone really expect governments will obey these laws? Would there be a way for more than a handful of tightly controlled people to even know until its too late? The pieces are very separable, they can be assembled by a relatively small number of people. It's not at all like a nuclear bomb, which always will look like a nuclear bomb, and quite a few people have to know they're designing and testing a device capable of nuclear explosions.

Who cares? Are that many geeks worn down by the brutal requirement to wear something slightly more formal than gym clothes?

I'd call having to pay for dry cleaning a pay cut. Dress codes help only the fashion industry, otherwise i's the cheapest thing that covers the naughty bits.

HP has been on that slow train to MBA city for years now. I doubt there's anyone left that would object to a dress code, they've all moved on to successful technology companies instead.

Unless the API is very low level, and a lot of black box between API and end user application needs to be filled in by the community. And perhaps that black box might be more than one black box, for various industries. It sounds like they don't want to write those black boxes (maybe don't even understand them) and what customers to write open source implementations around their API. OpenGL is a nice API that's apparently way too low level for say, many game development companies to directly target, and most of them seem to use Unity/UE etc. and are just fine fitting within those frameworks.

Of course, if a community sees the need there, they're not going to be entirely pleased with building around a single, low level API that they have minimal control over and which may be used to extort them years later after investing a lot of work. I personally have very little trust about corporate stewardship of anything at all.

Football, basketball, soccer, hockey... all those are games. The day professional basketball/soccer players stop bouncing/kicking balls and get "real jobs", that day you can ask the same from professional videogame players.

I hope this day comes. All of these "sports", while individually fun to play in to some degree, stop being fun when there's money and spectators involved. I don't know how anyone can watch so-and-so pratfall to draw a yellow card, or billy joe step in front of a ball to get on a base, etc. etc. just to "win". This same gamesmanship has turned video games of almost every variety into a circus show.

The only way to kill it all dead is not to watch, buy the merchandise or otherwise pay money into the system.

If she were of a stronger moral character she would not be running for president, nor would she be capable of winning should she have tried. If she were not running for president, this issue would have dropped years ago. She's too powerful to prosecute, the best they can do is try to drag her through the mud like they did her hubby.

No, the trend is they ask you how much you are currently making, and offer you a bit more if you get the job.

Holy Crap! You just unearthed the dialog from the next "Under The Dome" episode!

You wouldn't believe the amount of porn I find on 127.0.0.1. Don't they know kids use the internet? What if some kid went there and saw, and I quote directly "Belt-sanders and Geese, Teen, Facial, Fetish"? Google really needs to lock this down.

I'm probably not going to be interested in any videos that target my 90 year old Two-Spirit facebook avatar, but it will make for some fun stares when I check facebook while waiting for the kids to exhaust themselves in the local jump-o-rama

Gamers gonna game.

First made first my by history professor in freshman year in college. She was a woman. She predicted Scotland would try for independence one day in my lifetime (and we laughed), and that Russia would once again become a talked about threat, in addition to a number of other things. This was 20 years ago. She seemed pretty smart, but she wasn't the type to suffer idiocy.

Or, because housewives was the headline term, and the subject of the article, thus it was brought in to the discussion by the author. If this was about how influential Vector Graphics was, the title might have read "Vector Graphic - The Influential PC Vendor You Never Heard Of" or something along those lines. Clearly however, this article is about two housewives and their failed start-up.

Absolutely nothing in the article substantiates your claim that Vector Graphics was at all relevant to the PC industry other than an ability to get headlines and make itself known. It failed in every way that marked the success of the PC, was defeated in the PC market by Apple and was eliminated entirely by the IBM PC. It's one of many, many companies that had a brief moment in the sun and disappeared. This article isn't about that, it's about the two housewives who ran it and the ensuing drama of the 70s tech biz. It's entire value is "hey look what these women almost did", you could say the same about countless people in countless businesses, the only thing unusual is that it's two women, particularly two housewives. That doesn't make it newsworthy for most people, particularly if you see no reason why housewives couldn't be successful. It's more useful to people who somehow think they can't.

Recruiters find applications and refer them, someone internally would normally phone screen the applicant to ensure the plane ticket, hotel stay and time investment is justified.

I've never gone straight from recruiter to on-site interview unless the job was in the same town and the company was very small.

. Someone above them has to either be actively allowing them bring people back in who have already been rejected three times before or they're just so disorganized they don't keep records on that kind of thing.

It's weird to me, because most companies have on their application "Have you ever interviewed at before? If so, list dates." Normally an HR recruiter will ask those things on the phone, or at least make you fill it out on the application before inviting you out.