Isn't the problem that the choice between "self value" and "providing for your family" isn't even a choice, and employers are well aware of that?
Then how would you handle hostile environments for such minorities in the fields?
I just heard about something similar in a far less controversial situation: a woman who likes birdwatching who started a group for female birdwatchers to enjoy doing it together. She was sick of the male birdwatching culture that can be very belittling to others, certainly women, and it's things like that that keep women from then joining such activities, making the male domination & problem even worse.
It's just a vicious circle, a majority starts with a behaviour that drives away the minority, and the inequality rises.
If you see a better way to handle such issues, i'm curious
Ooh, it took quite long for a troll to come at me for not remembering the acronym.
Can't say i read that much about such courses to remember the acronym (although after looking it up it did sound familiar). If you feel that's enough to have a go at me, good for you, you must feel really special and good right now
*enough feeding trolls*
Since the summary didn't bother mentioning that tiny detail.
"Something strong enough to make him regret he did it and be exceptionally careful about it in future"
Sounds like an idea, but your suggestion of "forfeited his 6 months pay and made him apologize to producer on the show" is just ridiculous. He did the second, and would hardly notice the first.
He just ruined his own show, i guess he'll now regret he did it and be exceptionally careful about it in the future.
What planet do you come from, and how do i get there?
On this planet greed is one of the main things people are more than willing to shove their ethics aside for. Most companies if they can choose between the ethical thing (throwing JC out), or keep profiting from him since he's one of the main stars, will choose the latter. Greed and ethics often conflict, and it's nice to see a big company go for the ethical option.
I love it how when a big company for once doesn't choose for the money but actually takes a stance against a star misbehaving, and then everybody is like "sucks being them, they'll lose a lot of money over this".
Do we want them to be ethical, or just chasing money no matter the consequences? Either of both appear to be the wrong thing to do it seems.
Odd, i was thinking the opposite way. Have some selfdriving cars be modified a bit extra by the police (with some proper calibration of everything, and some extra sensors), and you've got near permanent police presence on every big road. And it's no longer just people driving to fast past a speed trap that get caught, but all other antisocial behaviors too. It'll make the roads hell for human drivers who are used to being jerks on the road
There are ways to go about it, but this isn't it...
I'm curious, which ways are that?
I find it hard to say what to think about such people. They're on the far end of the scale, but they do have a point. We all react more strongly to some things than to others, and they focus on that. What i'm wondering most, you start off by calling them crazy, but are they? Seriously, prove them wrong (or rather, they're being proved right a bit more every day). It's just not the immediate end of the world as they may view it, but is being more sensitive to such things being crazy?
they still have a comfy life and tons of money and are free to roam the world?
design and fashion is always such a cycle. I don't know why you feel these are " 256 color, flat, windows 3 style icons". They look far better than the old windows 3 icons do. To me they just look like the next evolution.
And seeing people freak out over icons that pretty much look as expected seeing current gui practices... yes, it makes me feel people are just opposing change. To me they look like a nice new set of icons, and if you prefer another set, put that on your windows
They're more in line with current gui design. They want to appear a bit more modern i guess. Every windows does some changes to the icons, is it a surprise this one does too?
I was thinking the same. But change must always be met with a lot of opposition it seems.
If this means nothing can ever get changed... no.
Why can't they change the look of things a bit from time to time? i think it's a nice look, and if you don't... you'll still get used to it
I just had to think about a little "customer riot" here in belgium. A big chain wanted to change the name of their cheap beer. It was apparantly a huge riot because people wanted the name to remain the same, and not just be renamed to the cheap brandname they use for all their cheap products. I was reading it and really wondering "wtf is wrong with the people complaining about this"...
And i've got a similar feeling about this. It's a fresher design, you may or may not like what the current gui design standards are. But is it really worth all this effort? i honestly think the screenshot in that article looks great. Probably better than the win7 icons i'm currently looking at.
But change must always be shot down it seems. And then afterwards we can all complain that nothing ever changes (or changes far too slowly).
But i'm wondering the same. I looked at those icons, and don't see the issue. Yes they're different, a bit more like a lot of modern things are styled. You'll get used to it...
And to answer your question: everybody wants the world to change, but nobody wants to change themselves
And i'm probably going to kill any chances of getting modded up by saying this: I had the same feeling with windows 8. I heard all these terrible things about it, how the UI sucks. Did install it, and gave it a try. It's certainly different, but i don't see the issue. I looked up how to configure the new screen, grouped my icons on the metro screen nicely in a way i find convenient.
Now we've said our thing, the microsoft bashing may continue