No, I think you misunderstand: Men in STEM fields make $18.900 more per year than wome in STEM fields.

Yes, well... I suppose if Job A makes $100,000 a year and Job B makes $20,000 a year, if 50 people from Group A are in Job A, and 50 people from Group B are in Job B, then we have no reason to suggest that something could be amiss here.

I wasn't aware that the law was the only way someone could be discriminated against. Thanks for reminding me of that. I retract all previous statements. We licked that whole racist problem the day we made it illegal. Nothing to see here, move along.

Yes, I can understand how judging people on the basis of the abilities, instead of their sex organs, could be a confusing concept to some.

When we judge people only by the strength of their contributions, and give them equal opportunity to pursue the fields of their choice, then we have met our social obligation. But until our expectations of others are truly equal, any answer to this question will simply reflect our own prejudices.

The statistics are that women make up nearly 52% of the general population. They make up 53% of all college graduates. Yet they make up an average of just 15% in STEM fields. On average, they make just $58,000 a year compared to $85,000 for men. And while on average, women have been improving their numbers in STEM fields, it's gone the other way in IT; Women received 29.6 percent of computer science B.A.â(TM)s in 1991, compared with 18.2 percent in 2010. Up here in Minnesota where I live, women make up less than 5% of senior IT positions.

You say "Who cares" and that gets you a big +5, and that should be a big +500 indicator of why the problem is so huge. It's precisely because of attitudes like this. You should care. Right now, some black person out there might have the cure for cancer, but society will never get it because he didn't have the money to finish college. Right now, some woman out there has a solution in her head that'll take CPU performance to the next level because of a radical new way of thinking about the problem, but she went into nursing instead.

Every time you create an inequality in society, we all lose out. You should care because putting the most qualified person in a position where they can do the most good, benefits all of us more than the unequal way things are done today.

Do women deserve special consideration? No. Do women deserve equal consideration? Yes! Your post makes it plain exactly what's wrong with our industry: You've confused one for the other, and you don't even see it in your own comments. It's easy for a woman to see, but for a man, if this little microcosm on an internet forum is any indication, it's quite difficult. Nobody until now even pointed out the incongruency.

And in the first sentence, you completely lost all your credibility. Did anyone say it wasn't true? Did I say those things were less harmful than alcohol? No. Nothing like that was said. What I was saying was the drugs that are equally or less harmful than already legal drugs should not be illegal. That's it. That's all. I never said which drugs.

Learn to read, bud.

They can just plant a pirated movie. Stiffer fine. Point is, the arguments for criminalization are based on a lie: Properly regulated, there wouldn't be any more harm from most of these drugs than what you can do getting piss drunk.... which is legal. Until they ban alcohol, anything less dangerous than that is a disengenuous argument; It's hypocricy.

I think the takeaway here is this man is neither terribly detail-oriented nor well-suited for his line of work. Things like date of manufacture, make and model, I/O amount, number of power cycles, environment, etc., are all obvious things to record to an experienced IT person. He appears to have done very little of that. He is a bean counter pretending to be an engineer.

There's a small difference: When you fuck up in a game, nobody trusts you anymore. This guy has a lot to answer for, and chances are good he won't be in a leadership position much longer. Those losses are just gone, and only the people who followed him pay for it, nobody else.

In real life, you can fuck up a lot and everyone else but you pays for it. Nobody's gonna pay this guy billions as a bonus for screwing up.

Suddenly, a wild lawyer appeared and that poster was never heard from again. Well, anyway. Tarantino hasn't thought things through... or rather, he's stubbornly short sighted and cares only about item 8 on your list. But here's the problem: The moment you take away fair use like this, published or not, copyrighted or not, you pretty much make an end of democracy. What a bold claim! Surely you must be trolling! Except I'm not: How do you think a democracy can exist if the population is illiterate and doesn't know anything about anything because it's suddenly illegal to talk about? Because that's what copyright will do if it's left unchecked: Everything can be copyright, and if you eliminate fair use, then what's left is a tax on all communication, thought, ideas, and exchanges. There is no more public domain, and people may not even be entitled to speak their own words in public because those can be copyrighted too. Now it becomes a case of only those with money can speak, write, etc.

No work of art is worth losing your entire cultural identity for.

Yes, the "slanderous" claim... that word, I do not think it means what you think it means. Firstly, for it to be slander, it would have to be untrue. Alas... as you just said, it is totally, completely, and utterly true. Oops!

They don't "interfere with the game's economy"? A month's worth of game time costs $9.95... a plex costs about $15 and does the same thing in game. And since Sir You Obviously Weren't There has forgotten... players protested en masse in a place in game called "Jita" over this "pay to win" model, many quit, and the server crashed several times as they tried (and succeeded) to overload the blade the busiest system in game. So yeah, please stop drinking the koolaid... Eve is a very interesting game, but CCP can and does make mistakes. Big ones. Stackless Python for the backend comes to mind... necessitating this "time dilation" they speak of... which is really code for "The server's so fucking overloaded everything's running like shit."

Depends. Most serious eve players have multiple accounts. Some have them backed by credit card, some don't. It isn't strictly necessary thanks to PLEX to actually pay to use the game... some do, some don't.

I understand that you have poor luck with thinking, but don't take out your inadequacies on someone else hoping if you yell loudly enough, they won't notice your own stupidity. A rather trivial case of a database entry not updating correctly is what's at the heart of this massive blow-up. But consider that they tweak things all the time, and major, super huge, universe-affecting things just stop working for days on end. Now, how likely is it that if super epic failures like that happen... that the minor stuff is less likely to occur.

Sorry, not a lie, you're just too stupid to brain today.

Everything in that story just about is wrong. Firstly, "Over 70 of the game's biggest and most expensive ships, the Titans, were destroyed. Individual Titans can be worth upwards of 200 billion ISK, which is worth around $5,000." ... They aren't actually worth that. Because the game offers the ability to exchange realworld money for a "plex" -- this valuation is almost twice what you'd pay for game time if you bought it straight up. In other words, it's the highest valuation possible. Realistically, it'd be worth less than half that.

Secondly, the guy responsible, a 29 year old banker who was literally asleep when it all went down, insists that the virtual money was in the account and it was set to autopay. People close to this suggest the word for this is "bullshit", but it has been "petitioned" -- a claim by a player that the server screwed up. This isn't without precident, as the game is currently limping about with it standings system broken. Standings is basically Eve's IFF system. Right now, nobody in the game can tell friend from foe. Needless to say, it's a massive issue. So it's possible they farked up, but unlikely.

There are allegations as well that CCP intentionally did this to drive up the price of PLEX (and in fact, just about every resource in the game)... which has happened. And CCP has colluded with players before to give valuable assets out -- and admitted to this.

In short, while the cover story smells of stupidity, greed could also be in play.

Your quote from Futurama is amusing, but there's something even more amusing, or sad, depending on how you look at it. It's that one dude's car died, and somehow this is a reflection on the entire model line? I live in Minnesota, in the coldest major city by average temperature and up here, every cold snap results in thousands of dead batteries. The number one call out for tow truck companies out here isn't a flat tire but a dead battery. And simple physics provide plenty of explanation for why this is; Yet somehow, out of the thousands of cars that wouldn't start (to the point that it's a running joke: "Come for the low unemployment rate and good schools, stay because your car won't start")... one dude got selected and they say his electric car is somehow defective because of this?

Dude... if ONE car dies during a cold snap out of the entire model line, that's not a problem, that's an engineering success up here of epic proportions when it comes to cars. Maybe you've heard about our roads? We only have two seaons: Winter and road construction. Believe me... if a line of cars can survive up here and only one of them goes tits up in the cold, then someone's doing it right.

If you ask me, the OP hasn't learned anything. He used the phrase "need-free future" which pretty much put him somewhere on the intelligence scale between below average and creationist. Humans will always need yummy nitrogen-oxygen mixtures, food, fresh water, and social contact. Run out of any of those four basic things and what you get is either death, or something close to it. There's more things people would probably put into the 'needs' category, but the point here is that there is no such thing as a "need free" future, and whether it's utopia or dystopia you believe in, the question we all face is not whether or not we have a future, but rather what kind it will be as numbers increase and resources diminish.

If our previous 20,000 years of history is any indication, there's only one way it ends: With a lot of death. Whether it's due to plague, starvation, or war, eventually a large portion of the human race is going to die. Recycling is a good idea, but humanity's survival doesn't depend on it... it's a quality of life issue, not one of survival of the species. We can use up our whole planet and render it into a wasteland and there will still be humans on it.. they just won't be very happy.