If you have no idea what's in them, how would you even recognize evidence as evidence?

Neither. I agree with the hype about IoT. I think it will be as big a change to society 40 years' time as the Internet has been so far.

Now what is irritating, though, is all the Slashdot posts complaining about IoT...

I'm using Windows8.1 and it auto-calculates folder sizes.

I'm a Microsoft developer. I and most of my colleagues develop on Win8.1. I don't know why your imagination is failing you.

My team does much of our work on VMs running recent builds of VS, and those VMs typically run Win8.1 -- presumably because it has a lower memory footprint than Win7.

As an engineer who actually uses win8.1 for my daily work, the only main UI difference with Win7 is the start screen, and that has negligible impact because I launch apps either by clicking on the taskbar or by pressing Win and then typing by keyboard the name of the app. Exactly the same workflow and same number of keystrokes as before.

Well the Charms bar is apparently dead so it no longer matters that its name is terrible.

Apple already came out with "Continuity". So Microsoft's "Continuum" sounds pretty similar. You might just have to knuckle down and live with a new term for seamless transitions between phone+tablet and laptop+desktop devices. Of all the terms they could have chosen, "Continu*" don't seem too bad.

Correction: 80% of people said they agreed with the government's food labelling policy on food including DNA.

That's literally the exact opposite of what you said. That's the majority following the lead of the government.

Indeed. The strongest nutritional advantage seems to be "Monsanto's executives and stockholders are able to eat much finer food now."

I support mandatory labels on *all* food products. Therefore I support mandatory labels on food containing DNA, and I've have ticked the "yes" box on this questionnaire too.

But to be pedantic the question actually asked "Do you agree with the government's policy to require mandatory labels on food containing DNA". If you had to answer yes or no to this nonsense question (since there is no such policy) I'd assume the questionnaire, like so many others, was badly written and was referring to an actual government policy on something useful.

Yes there is something wrong with you. You lack empathy and compassion.

(I'm not sure if you "chose" to lack these things or if they're a product of your upbringing, and so I don't know whether your logic would blame you for lacking them or not).

The law itself doesn't say anything.

Teachers may be *required* to "demand" a password (if that 's what the school's anti-bullying policy compells them to).

But there's nothing here to say that students must *comply* with those demands.

Now there's usually a separate set of laws which compel people to comply with certain demands made by certain officials. It's too hard to tell here whether password demands will fall into that bucket.

And manage network connectivity. And printers. And other hardware. And the clipboard. And other means of sharing between applications. And multiple user accounts. And virtual desktops. And VMs. And a way to search the stuff on your machine. And task scheduling. And updates. And joining your company network. And syncing with your phone. And credential management for internet certificates. And cryptographic and other similar services. And language support. And network device discovery. And I'd hope for a seamless way to manage network files like on DropBox or OneDrive. And logging/diagnostics. And screen-reader and other assisted technology support. And 3d graphics. And privacy controls, a way to stop apps from stealing information themselves.

What I've written down isn't "windows bloat". It's in linux and mac too. It's just what we've come to expect of an operating system.

I think you've confused my quote. I used it to quote the item I was *responding* to, like you do in conversation, like I'm doing it right now. You've bizarrely taken it to be a quote of evidence I'm using.

The thing is -- I read your post, and I think "that's institutional sexism right here".

I agree with most of what you wrote. But other bits are a sort of weird distorted view of the tech industry, or a picture of an undesirable workplace that should be changed. For instance, "men often like solitary complex tasks working long hours" -- (1) as a married man with a child, I'm delighted that I don't have to work long hours; (2) the successful senior folks are those whose work is accomplished through meetings like in any business, not solitary. And your insults (like those of Linus) are ones I'm glad I don't face at my work, where everyone really genuinely is polite and "nice".

I agree there's no evidence that universities or companies are discriminating. However, I think YOU PERSONALLY are discriminating, and if you're in tech, I bet you contribute to a discriminatory workplace.

Read the article. This is about RECRUITERS. They go out and find candidates. If you're passively waiting for applicants, I'd fire you as a recruiter on the spot.

They're CANDIDATES. No "at the expense of".