RSA probably feels that it's a technology conference, so using sex to sell products is inappropriate. It's not really the sexism, it's the fact that it harms the reputation of the conference as a serious technology driven event and not just another consumer tech party.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
How did you get from my suggestion to give them more choices to "take away all their choices"?
Religious freedom only covers individuals, not businesses. It also doesn't seem to trump discrimination.
The mere mention of someone being offended or people sending in letters to complain require a company or station to react and make prostrating apologies.
It's the same as how the US went through a phase of people suing for the most ridiculous reasons before it mostly calmed down to a sensible level. Of course most of those lawsuits were thrown out at the early stages, or if not turned out to have merit (like the infamous McDonald's "hot coffee" incident).
The UK is getting over its stupid reaction to PC as well. If you look at recent decisions Ofcom has been rejecting a lot of complaints from overly sensitive people. Same with Health and Safety - the government body for H&S even went as far as naming and shaming idiots who took it too far.
The other problem is that a lot of legitimate complaints about discrimination and harmful behaviour get labelled as "PC" when they are not. Personally I'm more worried about the increasing xenophobia in the UK, which seems to be partly a reaction to the misconception that complaints about discrimination and xenophobia are just "PC" and thus not really harmful or morally dubious.
Here's the video where he says "nigger" on camera: https://youtu.be/UraJ5FN80xo
It wasn't broadcast, but he did say it and it was recorded. That's his problem, he can't control himself. He likes to do risky and edgy stuff like using that rhyme, but can't handle it and ends up doing or saying something stupid.
Then the consumer decides whether they care or not.
That's the fundamental flaw in your argument. It assumes that consumers are informed and have enough money to make choices like this. Even if you are happy to blame people for not knowing enough about olive oil, you can't really deny that people with little money often can't afford to pay the premium for better quality products.
By raising the minimum level it ensures that there will be cheap but safe and reasonable quality olive oil available to everyone. Otherwise the market will do its usual thing of screwing consumers so corporations can make big profits. This is food we are talking about, it's too important to let the market run wild with it.
Lexus is a Japanese brand. The LFA is built in Japan.
Passive cooling towers don't work so well in hot countries where the differential with ambient is lower. France found that even modern supposedly passive reactors ended up needing a lot of water to cool them during heat waves, and the ended up dumping hot water into rivers and killing all the fish.
You know people have had that thought before but it didn't work out for them... Put it this way, if it was that obvious and that much of a good idea someone would be doing it. I don't see anyone other than governments doing research trying to build them though.
nuclear power is the ultimate source of income for lawyers.
Funny because most of the lawsuits have been trying to stop the plants being built in the first place, and most of the ones over accidents and emissions have failed due to lack of proof. It's hard to show that the cancer you developed 20 years later was the result of a leak at the local nuclear power station.
Do you have any evidence of massive income for lawyers, compared to say coal or even renewable plants? Can't include any actual accidents of course, which are entirely justified.
I knew someone who stepped in front of a train. The driver was pretty badly affected by it. He wasn't a narcissist, he was just mentally ill with depression. In that state a person's brain isn't working properly and they sometimes act on faulty logic. In the case of people who kill their families before killing themselves they probably see it as the "right" thing to do, because they want to die but don't want their families to suffer grief, and see death as a way of ending suffering.
It's hard for us to imagine but when your whole world is pain things like that seem to make sense.
If it was terrorism the guy would have said something instead of just leaving everyone guessing. Kinda pointless if your actions don't get your message out. Probably would have targeted something other than a remote valley too.
It's almost certainly depression or some other mental illness, possibly "inspired" by MH317 which seems to have been the same thing.
Agreed, the show will be much better without him. He hates EVs too, so they never get to review any of those. No Tesla Model S.
They could carry on with just two presenters, or get someone like Alan Partridge in to replace him. The most interesting features are always the May and Hammond ones anyway.
Lots of people in the UK watch iPlayer without paying. You only need a TV licence to watch live broadcasts. If you stick to recorded programmes on iPlayer it's perfectly okay to use it without a license.
You mention fairness... Currently people in Europe have no ability to pay for most BBC content even if they wanted to. Chances are it wouldn't stream very well to them anyway, due to all the servers being located in the UK. If they get it for free it doesn't take anything away from the people who have to pay.
The only real issue I can see is the extra server load, and thus cost, that it would generate. That could be offset easily using BitTorrent. Just make
Some tress can't be removed because they have historic or particular aesthetic value. That sort of thing is common in many countries in Europe as well.
On the other hand, after the war Japan planted a lot of trees to provide a source of cheap building material. Unfortunately they produce a lot of pollen that causes allergies, especially if not carefully managed. For that reason many are now being removed, and either replaced with less bothersome trees or the land used with something else.