On the other hand, if you work with RF you will most likely need a lot of math. If you work with high level optimization algorithms you will need Abstract Algebra. If you work with Geolocation you will need a fair amount of high level Geometry, specially Non Euclidean ones.
So in the end the answer is: Higher Math is not necessary in all fields of programming but it is certainly very necessary in many.
f course, as 19th-century observers frequently noted, a poorly capitalized bank that printed notes it couldn't redeem was, in the end, little different from a counterfeiting operation.
As is any government that prints too much money and causes inflation.
Rights as long as they are included in the law should be as unconditional as possible, always, and the difficulty of doing that is just another motive why rights should never exist in the law. The law should be negative only and anything it doesn't deny should be an inviolable individual right.
But if they really think they need a female only competition make it like chess.
Chess has a female ranking and a universal ranking. Any person, woman or man who wants to compete in the universal ranking can as long as they have the necessary ELO.
And you are completely wrong in your assumptions. The more regulations you have the easier is to keep competition out. It has always been this way and you won`t ever find an example of the opposite.
If the houses in your examples burn it will be a trivial matter to determine the cause and there will be a lot of witnesses. The company will have to pay a lot of money in compensations which will make it much cheaper for them to do it right, even because the maintenance costs for doing it wrong are considerable. Regulations are irrelevant here, the responsibility for any accident generated by their equipment is theirs and that is enough.
The funniest part on your example is that the worse and most irregular electrical installations are those made by State owned power companies in countries where the State tries to do even more than in US, and in these cases there are no consequences at all, you can't even sue them with any hope of receiving anything.
Regulations only serve to create gargantuan regulatory bodies, which basically exist to sell favors, block competition and perpetuate themselves. Bodies that do not grant any measure of increased security compared to a judicial system that works.
The truth is: there is no monopoly in the face of the Earth that was able to survive more than a very short time without the help of a government.
The State has very clear roles which is to keep peace (police), protect people from external threats (military) and solve disputes that can`t be solved by mutual agreement (judicial system). That is very far from doing nothing and the only reason that justifies the existence of a an entity that is based on violence and coercion. Everything else is better done by the private initiative, especially when the State keeps out of it.
Having to work not to starve does not make it non consensual. From the damn of mankind it is a choice every single human being has. Sorry, but nobody has the duty to work to feed you.
In a free market you don't need to sign to work for someone else or starve, you can work yourself without signing for anyone. It is the STATE that forces you to sign by making expensive and too risky any endeavor you decide to start. For example, if you want to be a taxi driver good luck, you won't get a license. Want to open a hair cut shop? I hope you know somebody in the mayor office. And so on.
Oh and if you point a gun at me and say: "Your money or your life", you will be the State, because that is exactly what the state does.
There are several mechanisms used to pass such laws, from the infamous "national security", to the "defense of poor victims of society", to the equally horrible "we are giving this right you didn't ask for and because of that we own you", among many others.