I was not going to participate in the discussion because most every viewpoint was already covered... but then you had to go and say what I quoted above. *sigh*

She is claiming that men are attacking her. So right there, we have an issue about men. The woman is talking exclusively about men.

Is it surprising that people are talking about men? Especially when her words accuse ALL men?

Personally, I see some of the discussion about women and some of the discussion about men, which makes sense since ultimately, it is a discussion about how women and men interact.

Note how I avoided discussion the merits, or lack thereof, of her entire thesis? There is one thing I would really really like to say though:

There appears to be a group of alpha males and wannabe alpha males (trolls) who attack everything. Female, male, whatever. They try to find the weakest point of that person and tear them down. She seems to be a victim of that and is trying to express it in terms of sexual assault.

It is not surprising that she would do so; after all, she can only speak of things from her experiences. What she does not realize is that it happens to everybody. Being a woman, the attacks are more sexualized in nature but even men get assaulted in that manner. Hell, most of the Slashdot regulars have been assaulted like that. There is a reason for all of the basement jokes. It is safer down there.

Back to the main point, the reason you see so much discussion about mens' issues is that she has made it one by claiming that men in general act that way. It is simply not true and most Slashdot readers are tired of being assaulted by this claim. We do not want women to be assaulted any more than we want ourselves to be assaulted... and yet here we are, the male regulars of Slashdot are being assaulted. Again.

Take your womens' issues and stick them up your ass. This is a dominance issue. It has nothing to do with gender other than most of the alpha type folks are male. Even then, not all alphas play dominance games like that. And to top all of THAT off, the majority of males are not even alphas or wannabe alphas.

Agree

That is a benefit. It can be spun as, "they are counterattacking", etc.

Agree. We might want samples to create a cure... so samples of our own is still a good idea.

The nightmare scenario is some Hitler-like dude inoculating his followers and letting lose the virus to destroy all of the impure people. As a state sanctioned weapon, biological warfare is virtually useless.

WTF dude? Is your name Steve Ballmer or some such? Microsoft and Google are NOT competitors.

Microsoft does operating systems and other software, Google does search and advertising. There is some crossover to be sure, such as Bing and Android... but if Microsoft were to fail, it is NOT Google that will be replacing them. Perhaps Apple, perhaps not. Not Google.

It should not be strange to Americans either. Peterson Air Force base uses the other end of the Colorado Springs Airport.

https://www.google.com/maps/@3...

And there are others, this one was merely convenient for me to point out.

Does it? On the surface, it seems that what you say is true. Do you have any data to back that up with?

Personal anecdotes:
When I was in school, all the cool kids smoked marijuana despite its illegality. Numerous people were induced to use it despite not showing the desire to use it. Marijuana was most definitely illegal at the time. Legality had no effect on usage that I saw.

When I have visited Amsterdam, there were coffee houses and such that sold marijuana openly. The businesses did not seem overly busy and at most, i saw one or two small groups of people chatting away inside. Definitely not of apocalyptic proportions. Once or twice while wandering around downtown looking at the amazing architecture, I smelled some marijuana smoke but despite my efforts, I never saw who was smoking it. Legality had no effect on usage that I saw.

Ok, let's talk facts. Provide links to reputable studies demonstrating genetic damage over and above genetic damage from background radiation, drinking water, or eating bananas. I did a quick search and the top article was this:

http://cosmosmagazine.com/news...

Honestly, it sounds rather hokey. They submitted cells directly to smoke condensates and they did not specify the type and amount of genetic damage. It seems to me that if they had subjected cells directly to any kind of condensed chemical that cell damage of some type is sure to occur. This is not normally how cells are exposed.

Tobacco was also measured this way and found to cause genetic damage. Again, seems rather suspicious to me. No studies not performed in this manner seem to indicate genetic damage.

I recognize this talking point. It is laughable because hashish has been available for thousands of years (condensed marijuana). Marijuana has been cultivated for thousands of years as a recreational chemical. It does not seem reasonable that all of the strains from the 60s were so weak when it is clear that farmers have known how to create selective strains for thousands of years, e.g. corn and wheat.

Indeed.

Hm. If it is a lie, then why does the federal government grant prescriptions for marijuana use? Sure, at the state level, the requirements are much (MUCH!) less strict, but even at its strictest, the federal government knows there are actual medicinal uses for marijuana.

It seems like you need to do some more investigation. Yes, there is a LOT of political spin from both sides. The idea is that YOU research the facts and come to a conclusion yourself. It appears as if you have not actually researched the subject deeply and are making an opinion based on "things you have heard".

Really, try researching it with an open mind. It will not attack you and hurt you.

Please note that I am not arguing for or against, I am merely responding to what you have written.

Kind regards

Thank you. I was considering going with the authoritarian angle: Lazy, crazy, incompetent, but I figured in the current climate, it would not work as an illumination device. Apparently, someone didn't see the illumination from the religious angle either, but I knew that was a risk. I am enjoying the troll moderation though, so it is all okay. :)

Can purchases still be made for a while (10 minutes? Half an hour?) without reauthenticating? If so then they are still allowing an avenue of unexpected charges.

For example, the child says, "Mommy mommy! I want to add this Free application to my iPad. Can I please please have it?", so the mother thinks to herself that the app is free so what is the harm about logging in to the app store and installing the app on her child's iPad. The app installs and the child is then given the iPad... but for the next X amount of time, the iTunes store holds the authentication for purchases open and the child unwittingly makes a large amount of in-app purchases without needing to authenticate.

WTF? Really? Why would I need to understand algorithmic complexity when designing a user interface? A user interface is about allowing an end user the ability to manipulate and control the code in a program: giving the user choice, freedom, and empowering them to make a decision.

Algorithmic complexity is something that is either already decided behind the UI or is decided by the user through the UI.

In other words, if you are hiring for UI coding, why are you asking questions about big O notation unless you plan to use the coder/programmer for reasons other than UI?

No no no! If you are even slightly "high" you can not be pure and one with God. We absolutely MUST fight against the recreational use of chemicals, any chemicals, that might in any way lead to a sense of euphoria. Life is pain. Pain is suffering. It is only through suffering that we can be close to God. Drugs and drug use is absolute evil. We must go to ANY means necessary to prevent their use.

Who cares? It is only the evil people that will be affected. It will afflict them with suffering and as we already established, it is only through suffering that we can be close to God.

In the 1920s we did not have Echelon and TIA. The NSA and FBI have it all covered now. You can expect a reinstatement of prohibition rather soon. The only lesson that was learned from Prohibition is that without effective enforcement, the evil sinners will continue to seduce the righteous.

Look, everything is in place for 100% enforcement. All of the sinners will be removed from society so that the righteous will not be distracted from becoming closer to God through suffering. 100% focus on work will ensure that the righteous never stray from the True Path. There will be Heaven on Earth... or Nuclear Apocalypse. It is up to you as to what happens. If you follow the one True Path, there will be pleasure in the afterlife when you have finished toiling and suffering in this fallen world. If you sin, this fallen world will be destroyed so that all may meet their Final Judgement soon.

All of this absurd talk of weakening the battle for your soul is the work of the devil. The fight will not merely continue, it will intensify! The fate of the entire world is at stake.

My apologies John. I was counting Microsoft's ownership from when a Microsoft Executive (Elop) took over Nokia. This is not the standard definition so I will concede that I was wrong when arguing that Microsoft bought a failing phone company.

Dave

I explored the Oculus Rift for two weeks and what you are describing fits exactly with what I experienced. The first time I used the Rift, I coudl not keep it on for more than 2 hours. The next day, I had it on for about 8 hours. The strain was so bad that I could not use it at all the following day.

I eventually became "comfortable" with all aspects of the Rift but no matter what, my eyes still felt "odd" after removing the headset. That is why I did not order the future development kit. In theory, it would be awesome... but I am not sure my eyes can handle it. The Rift was a very fun experience but it can not be a day to day experience for extended periods of time for many people.

Ah. Thank you. It was driving me nuts trying to figure out what to put in there.

Really, you should just say what you mean and be honest about it. Censorship is just wrong even when it is not intended to be evil.

I apologize if I offended you with my previous response filled with vulgarity. The vulgarity was an intentional device but not meant to offend.

You know what? I am an American. I can only assume you are not. You are partially correct in your post:

I do not care in the least that my government is spying on you. The reverse of that is that I do not care that your government is spying on ME.

I do care if your government is spying on you. I do care if my government is spying on me.

The laws of your government can not really effect me unless your government invades my home. The laws of my government can not affect you (this appears to be changing somewhat) without invading your home.

I assume your government has laws against your government spying on you. My government has laws against my government spying on me. Sharing information is the same as spying directly with the added charge of conspiracy.

Your government does not have laws about spying on me and my government does not have laws about spying on you. Even if we objected in principal, there is nothing to actually stop each government from spying on another government's citizens other than the governments themselves.

In other words, if you do not want the NSA to spy on you, get your government to do something about it. Mandate secure protocols, invade America, something. Expecting the NSA to not spy on you is absurd on its face. For myself, I think it is a HUGE waste of money for my government to spy on you but that is my only absolute objection to it.

I do object to my government spying on you in a general social sense but I can be easily convinced to not care if there is the slightest whiff of danger to an American citizen and spying on you, a non-American, could alleviate that danger.

And again, the reverse is true. It is not generally considered nice for GCHQ to monitor me while I am visiting Thailand but it is really not a big deal to me if they are... and it is a HUGE waste of their money.

Ultimately, I think pervasive monitoring anywhere anywhen should be outlawed. Now, the people in my government can blackmail or otherwise nefariously influence your government and the reverse is true too. If your government is sweeping up everything about the people in America, your government could dramatically affect political discourse too. Perhaps your government, through pervasive spying, is who decided to take down Eliot Spitzer... this article says no: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...

But you see my point, yes?

Did you even read the post by Mark Taylor? What he is saying, what Verizon (David Young) is saying, and what you are saying are utterly different things.

Verizon (David Young) is saying that the problem is in L3s network. Verizon's diagram does NOT show what you are saying

because in the diagram that Verizon is providing, the area that you say is the problem is all green.

So explain to me why I should believe your analysis over Mark Taylor's analysis (an L3 employee) when you are not directly involved with L3 or Verizon?

Perhaps it is because you do not actually understand this...

Come on dude. Censorship is so fucking annoying.
An arrogant what?

I know it is five letters long and we can guess that it is disparaging and uncivil but there are no letters to even give a hint. Most of the words that would normally fall in there do not fit: Jackass, asshole, shit, fucker, cunt, etc.

For fucks sake tell us what is hidden behind those god damned stars! Either say what the fuck you mean or don't say it at all.