for having the integrity to admit that they screwed up the first time.
Absolutely. So many companies would have tried to say that protection was "good enough" or "unlikely to be exploitable in real situations".
Dunno how often this needs to be told to you yankees, but Europe is not a country.
Though Germany did its best to fix that
You get what you vote for,
If you call a choice of 2 with the same policies a choice
No, seriously, why would anyone do anything else if the goal is gender parity in the industry?
Let's take gender out of the equation. Say you have a jar full of ten million marbles. 95% are green, 5% are yellow. 10000 marbles are added to the jar every year. Your goal is to make the jar 50% green, 50% yellow, and you can't take any marbles out of the jar. Changing the distribution of marbles added each year to 50/50 will never make the entire jar 50/50. The only way to solve the problem without removing existing marbles from the jar is to raise the distribution of marbles added to more than 50% yellow. Clearly the most effective solution problem is to only add yellow marbles to the jar at all.
Back in the real world: you either need to fire men who don't deserve it, hire equal numbers of men and women and wait a generation or two for enough people to retire, or try to hire more women than men. Because math.
You could paint the green marbles yellow - oh wait keep those scissors away from me!
Some people think this is OK. Sort of like "you got yours, now I get mine". However, sexism is still sexism. Any group that isn't fighting ALL sexism are hypocrites.
Also it ends up being counterproductive. If there are enough programs like this then schools will push girls that don't have the same ability or interest through them just to get the money. Then people will notice that "women coming into IT don't do so well" (unofficially of course) and that will end up being the initial assumption even for women who were interested, able, and would have taken that career without any cajoling.
The only thing I can conclude from your Islamophobia is that you don't actually, personally, KNOW a single Muslim. Not really *know*.
How wrong you are - where I live Muslims are the majority
Funny how you ignored the Anders Breivik example
he never claimed that Christianity had anything to do with his attacks. If even if he did there would not have been thousands of Christians celebrating and saying what a good thing it was and christian priests encouraging others to do the same.
Christians are still doing that today as well. Ask the non-Christians in Nigeria, Sudan and Algiers a little about the religion of universal-brotherly-love.
Uhm you might want to look at the causes of these incidents. Typical Muslim reaction - try to eradicate non muslims then complain that they fight back!
>but the pedophilia, brutal killings, etc. are all spot on.
Perhaps - but hardly unique - exactly the same things were happening as standard fair in Europe among Christians at the same time. Hell Christianity would keep it up for at least the next 400 years - average marriage age for women didn't go past 16 until the early 20th century and age-of-consent laws weren't passed anywhere until well after that.
So whether it's true or not- it says absolutely NOTHING about Islam. There is nothing in there about Muhammed that wasn't also true of Richard the Lionhearted.
The obvious problem (unless you are one of those Muslims who think that anything that has ever been done by a non-Muslim at any time in history should be permitted for Muslims today) is that Muslims are still carrying out brutal attacks, raping women, etc today. Just ask the Hindus in Pakistan about the 'religion of peace'.
Ah, yes, our own islamophobe-in-chief strikes again.
I don't claim to know whether IoM is truthful or not. I think it's unlikely to be 100% true or false. As any contemporary account of centuries-old events must be. I do know that its makers are not historians, or theologists, which kind of makes me think more false than true.
I'm not claiming that its 100% accurate, but the gist of it (violent religion based on teachings of a nasty sex-mad warlord) are true. Personally I have never heard any evidence that Muhammad and Umar had a gay relationship
But it's a function of time. Since the projectile traverses the distance in, e.g., 1/5 the time, the gravitational drop (I forget the real term) will only be 1/5 as much.
Maybe not at those speeds, you are approaching orbital velocity at sea level. With no atmosphere gravity would just about keep it level with the ground, curving it around the earth.
"he's not famous, he's in famous."
He's also a becile (as opposed to am imbecile).
HELP!!!! I'm being held prisoner in /usr/games/lib!
