If you give an inch, they take a foot. Any time you give an overarching exception to the rule of law, it will be abused. I'm not interested in comparing our freedom losses relative to anything or anyone else. We can do better than we are doing now. For example:
--US Gov. can hold you indefinitely without pressing charges. (gitmo)
--Big data queries without warrants can cause false positive flags on innocent civilians
--Recent choke hold fiasco has shed light on the police force being slapped on the wrist for killing using methods outside their own approval
--CIA lies to senate in front of the world (about spying on citizens). Faces no charges or repercussions
--Michael Chertoff (got money from US citizens for backscatter machines without the proper vetting and RFPs)

I don't think you're familiar with the patriot act.

I realize my earlier statement could be construed as an ambiguous "everything effects everything" chaos theory type of statement. But, believe me, it is more than just wild conjecture. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E... . IF this theory is true (and there is certainly a fair amount of evidence) then it would explain how hormones effect motivations for STEM careers. Yes, there is still culture in there. They are not desperate systems, and could even create a feedback loop. So, failing other more compelling explanations, I'll go with the theory I linked.

Your #2 should be responded to as "Yes. While social pressures can make us make choices we would not otherwise, so too can hormones. Motivations are varied by hormones, and hormone levels are influenced greatly by sex." Pump someone full of different hormones and see their actions change.

You are right about that. Objectification of women is rampant across the whole entertainment industry. There is not a "gamer culture" of objectification. It far transcends this. This reporting is the same thing that happened with violence. People see something repulsive, and instead of realizing it's a problem that occurs everywhere and needs to be addressed they blame it on a sub-culture. Violence in video games is .... etc etc... It's one thing to call out entertainment across the board for all the drug, sex, and violence. It's quite another to turn a blind eye to all the content one consumes and blame content that their peers consume as the culprit.

There are problems, but lets not blame "gamers" for the problem. And if one only blames the objectification when it's in something that they don't already like then it becomes obviously hypocritical.

I think this has less to do with Gamer culture than it has to do with Marketing culture. It is not unique to gaming. Beer companies and any other company that markets to men uses the same techniques. This story and many other use the response to topics involving Misogyny as a reflection of gaming culture. I'm not sold. There is no data on this that I am aware of. I imagine if they had done the same video and posts about a book or beer commercials you would have the same sort of response. People that have Misogynistic prejudices are drawn to the types of things that bring them out of the woodwork.
Let's see problems and fix them. Let's not construe things. Objectification of women in marketing is an issue. The same goes for art (books, games, tv, movies). We don't see shows like game of Thrones and say "Tv watchers have a culture of Misogyny".

I chose funding since the tech I would want is not something feasible at the moment. My state has pilot programs with these recorders and they have to manually turn on and off the recording and the battery is only so good. If we decide we want these and buy them across the board we'll end up with another back-scatter fiasco and a billion dollars in paper weights. If we let departments get these slowly we will see the tech get refined and updated. Having said all that, it's a moot point if the data is handled incorrectly.

That actually isn't the issue. That exposed the issue. The issue was that admins were fighting over the common.js for the site. They were changing the defaults javascript and having a fight. You can see the fight here:
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/inde...

What happened, was instead of the general use of talks to resolve the issue, wikipedia germany said "screw this, lets create a new page lock that only we can edit, not just admins". This new protection status is superprotect:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...

In my mind the issue is that superprotect was created, not so much that they have a disagreement on the media viewer.

The summary doesn't describe the "flawed system" or what superprotection means. Here it is from the change petition

The "superprotect" page status introduced to keep the Media Viewer enabled is even more extreme: for the first time, a software feature has been designed to take the ability to edit pages away from Wikimedia project communities, giving that ability exclusively to unelected Wikimedia staff members.

My favorite is the following scenario that's happened to me at multiple clinics in some form or another:

Nurse: "Well, I don't think there is anything wrong with you, but lets do an extra scan just in case"
Me: "Sounds good. How much does the scan cost?"
Nurse: *looks aghast at such a request* "You have insurance, why would you care?"
Me: "..." *thinks of explaining how the cost ends up being payed by me in either case*

Another experience calling the Hospital after having a child:
Acc = Hospital accounts receivable personnel

Me: "I've received 7 different bills over the last few months. I would really like to pay off any balance so I can budget appropriately"
Acc: "You have paid off all balance with the hospital"
Me: "So, I shouldn't receive any more bills for the birth?"
Acc: "I didn't say that. You will just have to see if more bills arrive."
Me: "How will I know when everything has been billed?"
Acc: "I can't imagine bills arriving next year."

Turns out the hospital, nurse midwives, doctor, anesthesiologist, etc etc etc. all bill separately and don't all put their bills in any timely manner. Took 12 months for all the bills to arrive from my last child's birth.

My debit card is insured like my credit card. My bank has no ATM fees pays others ATM fees for me (up to a certain amount per month). There are always companies that will screw you, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The future is full of wonders. Imagine your kid playing around with his guitar in front of a few friends. His mandatory house anti-terrorist (kinect like) system recognizes patented chord sequence.

        TV: *BEEP BOOP BAP* RIAAfia has determined that there are sufficient humans to constitute a public performance of patent 539fe34 "Chord sequence C A". Please cease and decist or the appropriate fees will be applied to your SSN credit line.
        Kids: Ahh man...

Fixed.

I don't feel like we are communicating well. What are you trying to tell me? I am talking about years after he published his Thesis. I'm talking about 2004 or so, when it became the fad to start calling things RESTful. At that time if you did a google for "REST" you would get a webpage from Fielding. That's what I found at the time and went with until I researched it more. And, no, I don't put effort into correcting people on this topic. You seem to think it warrants correcting people, I don't. Words change, that's what happens to language. Amazon, Google, Twitter, et al use it to mean the calling style and statelessness (as per their API docs). If enough people care to correct their colleagues (I don't) then it'll change, but don't hold your breath.

I understand what they mean. Multiple business partners use the term. This isn't just "the people that work next to me". This is my observation among web developers across the board. I'm talking about all the big players, they use the term wrong. While I can applaud people for having concise definitions, I'm not about to tell all the third party APIs I use daily that their REST api's aren't REST. It's too much work. If you campaign to get everyone to use the term correctly, more power to you.

(PS - I didn't read his thesis at the time. He came out with some web pages that described REST. They didn't mention linking as a part of REST, but that it was useful. As in MAY/RECOMMENDED, not even SHOULD or MUST. I'm not excusing people, I'm just letting you know how the current usage came about)