It *doesn't* work that way. Natural selection causes traits beneficial to survival/reproduction to become dominant. "Civilzation" cannot "cause" anything.

The conclusion reached by the researches is also nothing but a romanticized opinion, as we don't see lower levels of aggression in current humans.

The most likely (and brutal) cause-effect relationship is that tool makers, who were smarter and at least as aggressive despite their testosterone leves, dispatched the less intelligent high testosterone rivals and/or outbred them.

When I am tired, I sleep.
When I am hungry, I eat with a scalpel and a caliper.
Your cup is overful, You insensitive clod!

"No, it's more like "why is ~50% of the country not pursuing IT?"... it seems like an issue that should be researched."

I think the appropriate answer to your "concerned" question should be along the lines of "screw you, misandrist pig".

Why is there absolutely no concern to research why 50% of the population (males) accounts for less than 40% of all college students (and continue to trend downwards)?

Given that education is ever more important in the information economy, shouldn't THAT be also an issue that should be researched?

Are boys not worth the same level of concern? Should companies like Google be skewing these ratios even more against male students?

...at least since C was initially created (and perhaps even before that).

When do We accept that this is a failure intrinsic to the programming languages themselves and move on to correct it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...

Carlos Santana.

Perhaps they could check with colleagues from older agencies that used to do the same kind of work.

I wonder what the Stasi and the Gestapo did to bolster employee morale.

"Researchers" were contacted by.. uh.. well.. the Museum... developed a "methodology" for the "experiment" after the fact, then based their definitions and metrics on an assessment program developed in conjunction with ... another museum.

Solid!. No way this is just another case of confirmation bias.

There were 24 works. 24 * 80k = 1.92m.

How is $1.2m the maximum penalty available under the law for this case, when back in 2009, Capitol vs Thomas, a jury awarded $1.92m to Capitol?

Even at $1.92m, that was NOT the highest they could have gone either, the judge established that each infringement would be penalized at $80k, down from a maximum of $150k per instance!

That would have worked out to $3.6m.

Why weren't AFP et al penalized per infraction, vs having a cap for the whole incident?

Their "new", great iPhone has been out for less than a month, with their latest super high tech, hyper hyped "secure" technology and a relatively trivial hack has already been published. We'll have teens with chewing gum hacking TouchID next, and yet, Apple fan bois will still continue to hype and buy Apple substandard, over priced technology.

I have worked out an elegant solution that can be collapsed to only 88 dimensions, where infinitesimally small unbound super strings made of pure dark energy are curled up in tiny unobservable sub-plank scale vibrating loops that create immeasurable gravity-like dark froth along the alignment axis.