How will this encourage racism?

It not only encourages racism. It is racism. This is holding people to different standards depending solely upon their race. That is the very definition of racism.

It also encourages racism by telling these students that Asians and whites are expected to perform better.

Are we to think all races learn all subjects equally in school?

In the absence of any research indicating otherwise, yes. How about (here's an astonishing idea), we teach individual students according to their learning strengths and weaknesses, but in grade them all the same.

Passing students based on the color of their skin isn't helping anyone.

we need to stop yelling "it's racism" and instead look at how we're different

Yes, we need to look at how individual students learn and apply different teaching and learning strategies depending on the student. And when there is blatant racism occurring, we should loudly yell "it's racism".

Not doing so isn't helping anyone, and is harming a significant portion of the American population.

Actually it's more anti-Asian than anything else. You are forcing Asian students to work far harder than any of their peers to achieve the same results.

Funny, I see this move as being more anti-black, anti-disabled than anything. It depends on what you see the objective of the schools to be.

If the objective is to educate students, then this move encourages Asians & whites to learn more of the material in order to pass. It encourages blacks and Latinos to learn less of the material.

The basic problem is that graduates won't have remotely the same understanding of the material provided. And you can bet universities and industry aren't going to cut them the same slack.

So Virginia will likely end up with numerous high school "graduates" who are unable to find jobs or continue on to post-secondary education as they lack the knowledge that was supposed to be provided in high school. This is not doing Latinos or Blacks any favors.

Because a single UI written once and run anywhere is a success by default.

This.

Is exactly wrong.

A single UI that is write once and run anywhere is not a success by default. The same way a programming language that is write once and run anywhere is not a success by default (sorry Java). What is missing is the app must run well.

If the OS is confusing or difficult to navigate, it is not by any means a success.

IMHO, tablets and smartphones provide a significantly different interaction when compared to desktops/laptops. As such, they should have a significantly different UI.

And how the heck is Microsoft "the last one to enter the station hall" in respect to unifying UI's between devices. Apple doesn't have a unified OS between iOS and Mac devices. Google tries to maintain similar OS's on it's branded devices, but third-parties still sell new Android devices ranging from version 2.3 to 4.2.

Apple might be "stovepiped," but until recently they weren't trying to be everything to everybody. They also tend to care about their customers a hair more than M.S. ever has.

Yes, Apple loves you so much, they come up with proprietary connectors every few years just so customers can experience the joy of spending more time at the apple store rather than use any of the dozens of standardized cables they have lying around.

Then they add authentication chips so nasty third party manufacturers can't supply cheap cables to you without the holy blessing of Apple. After all, they wouldn't want to deny you those precious hours with the Apple "Genius".

And of course they patent the whole mess, just to make customers super satisfied to know that no other company will ever use this connectivity technology in their products. No, your Apple cables are extra-super-fun-special now!

Then they decide to scrap the whole thing, and come out with an entirely new connector when every other portable device manufacturer on the planet has settled on mini or micro-USB. But of course, they gave the new tech a cool new name....just for you, the happy consumer!

Of course, there is also the obvious:
- If your phone doesn't work, you must be holding it wrong. Stupid customer!
- Way to buy our latest product! We'll be releasing a new version which will make it completely outdated in about 3 weeks.
- We're going to try and push legislation to make it illegal to jailbreak your phone. Don't you realize, dear customer, you have no right to tinker with your apple devices?
- Apple Maps.

I'm really happy more companies don't "care about their customers" the way apple does.

"and then if you want it from a "green source" cause youre "environmentally conscious", you can pay extra for electricy that comes from a green source...cause it's somehow different from normal electricity."

And the kicker is they dont change anything other than your bill. You CANT buy only "green" energy unless you go off grid and set up your own solar/wind farm.

I would assume what the power company would do is compare the total revenue in "green" dollars to the total overall revenue and ensure that % of electricity was obtained from green sources. Of course this could not be done live, but it should be possible to do over an annual basis....

I know. They were going to have no gas because it was too cheap and supply was low. Or they can have some gas because it is really expensive. Either way, most people aren't getting gas.

Huh?

If the gas was cheap, many would buy it. So they would have gas. With the price gouging the prices are exorbitantly high, so few can obtain it.

These people increased the scarcity of these items (buy buying large quantities for themselves) to try to extort money from people who needed them. Regardless of what your hero Ayn might think, a completely free enterprise doesn't always work.

If you are going to violate the license why not just pirate windows?

OEM versions are for you to build a PC that you sell, not one for your own use.

That depends. For Windows 8, OEM versions can be used for personal use.

From: Microsoft

Q. I am not a system builder, but I am building my own PC for personal use. Can I purchase OEM System Builder software?

A. Yes. Anyone who is building a PC for personal use with Windows 8 or Windows 8 Pro software can use the Personal Use License.

Citing a few counter-examples doesn't disprove claims about a general trend.

They do when no proof is offered for the opposing position.

I've seen no evidence that this "general trend" or even the "agism" apparently so prevalent in IT even exists.

So you are claiming that the mere existence of connectivity code increases the chance of bugs in the infusion code?

How so?

Even better, Disney may choose to follow the current Hollywood fad of re-imagining recent films, and reboot Episodes 1-3.

The only thing George got right about the prequels is the idea that there should be an interesting story there.

Heck, anything would be more interested that those 3 movies.

The compiler/runtime in C# will optimize your example away if it can prove the property isn't calling a webservice or generating side-effects, which is true 99.9% of the time.

No.
for (i=0;i<SayNo();i++) {
}
private int SayNo() {
Console.WriteLine("No");
return 1000;
}

The C# JIT compiler DOES optimize bounds-checking on for loops, but only when checking the length of an array, and only when using the length directly (i.e. not someArray.Length + 5).

It does not automagically check if your code is calling a web service or generating "side effects" (how the heck would it do so anyways)?

WTF? I don't see how this post could have been more wrong.

in C#, if Count was a method it would look like:
for int j=0;j<Count();j++) {
}
If it's a property, it looks like:
for int j=0;j<Count;j++) {
}
Java is actually slightly worse in this case, as I have no way to tell whether getCount() is a true method, or just a property getter/setter. This can lead to unnecessarily cumbersome code as I must always assume the worst-case. Providing properties at the language level provides a very convenient mechanism to indicate to other coders whether the code being executed can introduce side-effects or not.

Yes, you can in theory write side-effect code inside properties in C#, but (a) I'd smack anyone who does so upside the head (b) it's fairly trivial in VS2010 to configure a compiler error for properties that contain code blocks.

Also, yield has nothing to do with property access. It's used to provide for lazy return of IEnumerables...

It's a simple question as to whether it's better to have a single dictator determining some policy, or having unanimous support for a policy from near 200 people

This entirely misses the point being argued. There is no single dictator currently determining policy. There is a decentralized system with no central oversight over policy.

The argument is not "should the US or the ITU control the internet?" (although the summary implies this). The argument is "should the UN be granted regulatory power over the internet". These are additional regulations that would be formed by the UN which would then be enforced by member nations.

I see no reason to enforce a top-down bureaucracy on what has been a largely successful decentralized system.

I heard the other day, about a lady who's kids were riding scooters in a neighborhood cul-de-sac, in front of their house, with fucking HELMETS on...the Mom got arrested because she was reported by neighbors (who had an ax to grind) that she had them out there unsupervised.

I'd do the same and hope that the Mom went to jail

But thats because you're a jerk....

Us non-jerk's might go and actually talk to their neighbors before wasting tax money on getting the authorities involved. Though given your attitude, I wouldn't be surprised if your neighbors have restraining orders preventing you from talking to them.

Also, the legality of motorized scooters really depends on the municipality you are talking about. They are completely legal in many places in North America...

see: Here
or
Here

Damnit, why is there NO F'ING UNDO MODERATION BUTTON!!!! I slipped and hit "Overrrated" rather than "Funny"

Posting to undo...