When they tell you they're going to stop doing something you don't like, you should be very worried.
Because it always, always means they're going to keep doing it, and they're going to do it more, but they're going to call it something else.
CIA, NSA and FBI have been doing this since their inception.
Why do they get to violate the DMCA?
If it is protected by encryption, no matter how weak, it is a federal offence to break the encryption.
Why do police cruisers get to break the speed limit?
And what is it like to give up all the apps you use on a daily basis and replace them with links to mobile versions of that app's website?
Here's the problem though:
If you raise a group of people with the expectation that they're unsuitable for a particular field of work, they will de facto be unsuitable for that type of work.
So the problem is not that people who are minorities or who are female are discriminated against in hiring considerations for those jobs: The problem is that they are, in fact, less suitable for those jobs due to their environment and due to no fault of their own.
You can't fix the problem by forcing companies to hire people who are unsuitable for the job.
You'd have to fix the problem by changing all of the systems that make those people grow up unsuitable for entry into those fields.
First you'd have to make it acceptable to open a conversation about how people are being traditionally steered away from seeking a life that would make them suitable for those jobs.
The Commodore brand is now only a brand.
It's been whored around quite a lot.
Remember that awful MicroATX PC in a C64-shaped box that came out a while back?
When will people stop being surprised about brand whoring...
I mean, look what they did to the Care Bears.
Those who claim the dead never return to life haven't ever been around here at quitting time.