No, it's not.

The point of that statement is so that ever growing population of assholes on this site can give themselves another intellectual reach around. "See. I'm not one of those grossly uninformed fools. I'm part of the intellectual and scientific elite. I don't worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster." It's old. It's tiresome. It's boring. It brings nothing of value to the discussion and undermines interesting information with inflammatory bullshit.

Every group needs to find their bitch I guess. Around here it's just all too fun and too cute to shred into religious fundamentalists or... you know... whoever isn't in agreement with the groupthink du jour. (And no, I'm in no way implying the vaccines are ineffective or that I'm against their use.) Reporting interesting news, stories, etc. can be done without that edge.

I mean for fuck's sake, the "anti-science" label is like the new Nazi label around here. We need to come up with some corollary to Godwin's law about when someone get's grouped into the dreaded "anti-science" crowd. "Oh, you don't like Barack Obama? You must be anti-science." It's really become that infantile. Maybe I'm just looking back with rose-colored glasses, but I do not remember it being like this 5 - 10 years ago. Every fucking article about a new find concerning some ancient hominid species or some new find on human evolution does not need to include, "Of course, since the earth has only really been around for 6,000 this must be crap, hur, hur, hur..."

"contrary to opinions from the anti-science crowd..."

What is the point of this statement? I mean seriously, what's the point? I've been reading this site for years and it just seems to be getting more and more like this—which is not a good thing.

Who cares what the "anti-science" crowd thinks? Why even bother mentioning them? Why acknowledge their existence, particularly when NOT responding to one directly?

Just report the fucking story. What some other childishly labeled crowd thinks about it is irrelevant. I can't even get through a remotely interesting story about geology without some asshole making a "the earth is only 6000-years-old" joke. Who... fucking... cares? It's not. We know. We get it. The joke is old and tiresome. I really wish I was coming here to read interesting discussions about the science at hand. Instead, I'm constantly deluged with this kind of childish bullshit.

Haha.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJ0bZaMaNvk

No choice? I'm sorry, was someone forced to take the job at gun point?

I understand that we've all got food to eat and bills to pay, but in my lifetime I've had to do plenty of things I don't want to do to work. I'm not getting screwed, I'm dealing with real life. If you're not willing to quit smoking because you NEED a job and not smoking is a requirement to have said job, that's your problem. (And a big one at that if smoking trumps a job.)

Screwed? For lying? That's not really screwed anymore than a cheater getting caught is "screwed."

I should have just linked this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_liability_(criminal)

It's linked from the Mens Rea page in the first paragraph: "The exception is strict liability crimes."

The intent to have sex, particularly if you have every reason to believe the other party is of legal age is in no way criminal intent. If you specifically intended to have sex with someone you knew was underage, that would be criminal intent. For some crimes, like statutory rape, the intent doesn't matter—only the act. If a girl shows you a fake ID and you believe her to be of legal age and have sex with her and she's not, you can still be prosecuted in a lot of jurisdictions.

Not true. Statutory rape, for instance, does not.

Redhat (from a CD that came with a book) -> Slackware -> Linux from Scratch -> Gentoo -> Debian

For servers I used to used Debian but run CentOS these days.

"My daughter is showing a strong interest in math science. Why should she have to dig through dumb juvenile jokes to learn about something like programming?"

The problem with this entire discussion is the idea that "dumb juvenile jokes" are somehow MORE offensive to women than they are to men. If you believe that, YOU are the sexist. 0xB15B00B5 is juvenile but it makes absolutely, positively NO derogatory statement about anyone. The real bullshit about this is that if it had been 0xB15BA115 no one would have mentioned the word "sexist."

I have a daughter too. If she finds 0xB15B00B5 offensive, the only thing I'll be able to conclude is that I'm an utter failure as a parent.

What I find depressing is that it is so commonplace to to mark a "harmless joke" as "offensive." That's the most offensive thing about this entire situation.

0xB15B00B5 does not do any of the following:

1. Specifically identify any individual or group.

2. Say anything negative about any individual or group.

"I'd try to find the guy who did it and fire him. Some might argue this is an overreaction..."

Yes, it's joke comments like "0xB15B00B5" that are the real problem. However, in a shit economy taking away a person's livelihood over something completely harmless, that's fine. That's really better for society.

"I'm a male, but to me, it's just a matter of respect for other people."

And I'd argue that being a humorless twat is far more disrespectful on average than "0xB15B00B5".

There is nothing sexist about being crude. Whether it's a fart joke, a dick joke, a sex joke or a shit joke it's not sexist. It my offend someone's personal sensibilities but so what? That doesn't make it SEXIST. The idea that bathroom humor or juvenile behavior in and of itself is specifically offensive is sexist. Are you saying that a female is more likely to have more delicate sensibilities and is therefore more likely to be offended by me talking about how huge a co-worker's dump was? If so, guess who's the sexist.

And it would also be hilarious.

And exactly who the fuck is 0xB16B00B5 "discriminating" against? Being crude and juvenile aren't inherently discriminatory.

Complaining about something that IS discriminatory is certainly something you should do. Complaining about something as innocuous as 0xB16B00B5 (and it is in this context, it's not like you left it as a post-it on some-broad-with-big-tits' monitor) just makes you a humorless twat that virtually no one wants to work with on any level.

Haha. I wish I had mod points. "Go back to the fucking kitchen." FTW

You make a really broken assumption here: if a woman feels uncomfortable with something men are doing, she's automatically "uptight" or "frigid."

If I worked on a team where ANYONE felt "uncomfortable" by something like 0xB16B00B5, they'd be on my shit list. That's not sexist. I guess I'm a humorist because I cannot stand people without a sense of humor.

There's is nothing sexist about being juvenile or crude. Implying a female programmer isn't qualified because she's a female is.

Fart jokes are crude, not sexist. 0xB16B00B5 is juvenile (and hilarious), not sexist. If this code could have been something like 0x5MA11P3N15 (which I know is not hex) and the programmer doing it was a female no guy out there would have been like, "Woah shit, that's sexist. I feel uncomfortable." (And seriously, fuck him if he does. Wuss.) At the very least there would be no "debate."

If a "professional" environment means working somewhere that people are so on edge about being funny that something as innocuous 0xB16B00B5 might be "offensive" then please, leave it. Give me an office with jeans, t-shirts and fart jokes. Oh yeah, and boob jokes and dick jokes.