AFAIK that's already recorded as far as snail mail is concerned.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
I wouldn't care but I'm also aware I'm part of a tiny minority.
I'm not saying they should submit to it, I'm saying there are other things one could do first, before running to HR or the judge with tears flying off their cheeks.
Have them pay the customer a sum equal to the amount the customer paid for the house.
It is not the same thing because the undercover cop stalking you gathers data, not metadata. It's the difference between counting how many envelopes you're getting in your mailbox and how thick they are versus reading their contents.
When they work in an all-female team for a while, yes they can become pretty savage.
According to undisputed court testimony Pao did complain multiple times and was eventually side-lined and eventually fired.
Maybe because she was the girl who cried wolf too many times and people eventually got sick of all the drama queening.
If you're a dickhead (pun not-intended), you'll be treated like a shithead.
Sexual poetry book? Talk to the dude who gave it to you, tell him it's inappropriate. or go to HR (which is usually women-biased) and tell them you felt offended, they will talk tot he dude.
Colleagues discussing pornography on a plane? Tell them to keep it quiet (add "please!" because it's polite) and they will stop. if they don't, do as above.
Men tend to slip back to pseudo-savagery if women aren't around in a workplace for a while, and when a woman comes in, they tend do remain savage unless their eyes are opened. Don't pry their eyes open with a crowbar and acid, do it nicely and all's gonna be okay.
As for the other "reasons", they're dumb and weak.
A male partner touched your leg under a table? C'mon, really now. gender bias right there: imagine a male complaining about the same thing performed by a female: I bet everyone would laugh at him. but noo, when a woman experiences it, it's baaad, it's almost rape! Unacceptable!
It looks like currently the appropriate action is "shut up and sue" rather than "talk to the offender, then HRm then escalate, then sue if issue isn't resolved and he continues".
Here's something that happened at my workplace (which fields men and women almost in equal percentages). There was this new dude who had a rather unpolished character, swearing a lot, etc. One female colleague felt offended and went to HR. Another talked to him directly, in private and explained that he's crossing some lines. Dude got it, stopped, then a week later he's called to HR (follow-up from the first woman's complaint) and slammed with 10% pay cut for 3 months.
After that, everyone (men and women alike) isolated themselves from that woman (socially) because they felt uneasy around her. One could never be sure that they might slip and say something that "offended" her somehow and end up being punished for some little thing they might not have realized.
Being an arsehole swings both ways and can backfire.
Yeah, let's transform "metadata" into "data" - because it's scarier that way!
I mean... who in their right mind would NOT blow this out of proportion?
Accordin ta BBC Hype, Jeremy Clarkson, longstandin main host fo' tha automobile televizzle show Top Gear, aint gonna have his contract renewed. Y'all KNOW dat shit, muthafucka! This decision came bout two weeks afta da thug was suspended cuz of a altercation wit a Top Gear balla involvin caterin durin filmin fo' tha show fo' realz. Admittedly not tha nerdiest shizzle of tha dizzle yo, but it can be holla'd dat his cold-ass thirteen-year run on tha freshly smoked up format of Top Gear has interested nuff Slashdot playas whoz ass ludd they rides n' tha entertainment dat tha show has brought ta em.
How about conditioning the deal like this: Doesn't already have broadband, I ain't gonna buy it.
Sorry. Let me rephrase.
No, just retarded joke.
No, just retarded logic.
Unless we have a plausible alternate theory for why there's such an increase in that time period then it's compelling evidence to start from.
1. TV. Shows a lot of skinny chicks and athletic dudes with perfect bodies, making kids feel ugly and insecure.
2. Accelerated lifestyle. The day is still 24h, bot more activites need to be crammed into the same space, both for kids and adults alike.
3. High expectations from kids. The number of children with crushing amount of extracurricular activities (from swimming to chess club to math club to piano to ballet to football to horseriding to god-knows-what-else) is rising, because parents look at various examples of successful people (see point 1) and push their own kids as hard as they can to outdo everyone else.
4. Helicopter parenting. Kids grow to teenagers without as much as one single day on their own. All of a sudden, they need to cope with life things they never knew. I've seen 14 years old kids having their shoelaces tied by their parents, I mean seriously WTF.
To summarize: correlation ain't causation.
Not saying that increased exposure to Interwebz isn't a risk factor, just saying it ain't THE risk factor. It's also heavily dependent on how thik one's kid skin is. if they are not educated enough to not make a life-ending drama out of a couple bad words thrown their way by some AC, well, yeah, they're at risk.
But I agree with the phone staring phenomenon spinning out of control. I had a big argument with one of my closest friends not so long ago because he was coming to our pool game session and staring at his phone for the entirety his stay when he wasn't playing. Told him that if he wants to stay on Facebook, he needn't come, he could simply stay home and enjoy that activity. Man, was he pissed. I compared his reaction to how some people behave when their religion is mocked.