If you want to call opposing gay marriage being a hate campaign then you'll also have to accept it when the other side calls pro-choice initiatives murder campaigns. Or other similarly stupid word transformations meant to coerce people to your cause.

What was done to Eich was unjust and indefensible. Everyone who had a hand in it should be ashamed of themselves.

You know, if you relabel things to suit your wishes you can make anything sound bad. Let's play pretend for a moment - let's say there was a bill introduced that would expand abortion rights for women. This bill ends up being pretty contentious with a razor thin majority voting in favor of it. Now 2 years down the road the abortion bill is overturned by the Supreme Court because politics have changed and now such expansions are frowned upon. Then 4 years after that we find a CEO who donated money to support this bill at the time because he strongly believed that women should have those rights. This causes an uproar in the now-majority and they demand that he be removed from his job because he supported a "murder campaign".

This scenario very closely parallels what happened with Eich, but I highly doubt anyone supporting Eich's ouster would support this hypothetical CEO being kicked. And calling Prop 8 a hate campaign is just as disingenuous and toxic to any meaningful discussion.

But he doesn't have the option to withdraw that support after the fact. What if the politics change in another 6 years and now everyone is opposed to gay marriage. Would it then be okay to hunt down people that gave money to oppose Prop 8 and make the step down/resign/quit/be fired? Going back and pursuing campaigns against individuals who opposed your views after the tide shifts in your favor is just plain vindictive. There's no justice or honor in that and it makes you out to be more bigoted and hateful than the people you were opposing in the first place.

Everyone who supported Eich's ouster should be hanging their hypocritical heads in shame.

It is unjust to harass or otherwise persecute someone for their political beliefs. By your logic it would be perfectly acceptable to run a CEO out of their job for donating to oppose Prop 8 because free speech. You can't have it both ways. This uproar is rooted in pure hatred and hypocrisy.

Oh, then you also had no problem with people being forced out of their jobs for supporting gay rights in the 80's. No? They you're a hypocrite. The worst atrocities in history have been committed by people convinced they were "morally right" - the Holocaust, the Salem Witch Trials, the Inquisition, the Crusades, 9/11 - do you really want to go down that road with secular humanism as your moral basis? We all know where that road ends and it isn't pretty.

I wish you hadn't posted anon, you made a brilliant statement about everything wrong with forcing Eich out of office. Every future thread about this topic should start and end with your post.

If you read the relevant California law, donating to a PAC or similar for a ballot initiative is also protected and they cannot make hiring/firing decisions based on it.

Okay, then when the political winds change you would also consider it "free speech working" if a CEO is forced out because he supported gay marriage once 6 years prior? Because that would be the exact same thing that happened with Eich for a reversed position.

Okay, they the GLBT community members who took part in this are hypocritical bullies who are using their newfound political favor to engage in the same acts they used to condemn loudly when they were done to their members.

For what it's worth, I'd be equally pissed if Eich was "forced out" for being gay or for donating in opposition to Prop 8. That would be equally wrong to do this for those reasons.

Donating $1000 to shoot pandas or any other thing you mentioned should be your right and you should not be afraid of losing your job over making such a donation, especially 6 years after the fact.

And both are part of the political process. By your logic, everyone that voted for Prop 8 should be fired from their jobs - which would be half the state of California. Incidentally, in California it is illegal to fire someone based on their political activities. That would include donations, voting, campaigning, and other such.

Also, societal definitions of morality are shifting sand. It used to be considered "immoral" to be homosexual. The people who ran gay people out of jobs and ruined their livelihoods used your exact argument as a justification for doing so. Congratulations, you have become what you claim to despise.

It's worse than that - at the time it was the majority held view (Prop 8 passed with 52% of the vote). Now, in order to hold down a job you must never hold a position that ever *becomes* the non-majority view. Doing so is apparently grounds for coerced resignation. I'm guessing next everyone that donated to support Prop 8 also deserves to be fired. I'm sick of the inherent hypocrisy in that.

You're not looking at it correctly. You have to consider voltage to get a picture of actual power contained in the device. 2ah * 5v = 10 Wh = 0.01 kWh. For convenience, we look at this in kilowatt*seconds = 36kWs. To charge in 30 seconds would therefore require an absolute minimum of 36kWs/30s = 1.2kW of power. Even with some line losses this will fall well within the output capabilities of a U.S. standard residential plug.

All NP-Complete problems reduce to each other. If memory serves, factoring is not NP-complete, but any NP-complete problem can reduce to factoring, just not the other way around. NP-hard is actually a harder set than NP-complete. Any NP-hard solution could be used to solve and NP-complete problem, but not the other way around.

One big problem with this approach is that ending characters on license plates will not be uniformly distributed. In California, for example, all non-vanity plates end in a number. In Nevada for the longest time they strictly ended with a letter. Now you have to consider that wherever Burning Man is held, the local license plate templates are going to dominate and your queues are going to clump accordingly.

I think before you can have credibility in submitting such an algorithm to them you really need to be on the ground directing traffic at the event. Then maybe you'll be able to see a solution they haven't thought of yet.