Well, she agrees she is autistic but was never his slave. He was just someone that helped her. According the her anyway. I am beginning to suspect people who make lurid up that are contrary to all evidence.
I do not think you read through your own references without a predetermined conclusion in mind. Your own references (even those quoted) do not support your contentions.
False. Larry does not follow any such creed. He plays at it. Play, fantasy.
He does say that it is his contention that some women enjoy this some of the time. He would appear to be correct as he has a number of active feminist ex-lovers supporting him. Reports of his general behaviour with and to women have been described by women and men (how would they know!) as exemplary.
There are also Gorean groups where gender is reversed. So what?
There is a difference between fantasy and real life. Accept that.
If he treated people as you claim you would have a point but he does not do so and you do not have a point.
Google should have cheated on the sort algorithm and put in their own add in top place: "A slab of muscle tissue from an immature castrated bull between two lumps of overheated grains stripped of their nutritional components, accompanied by...."
I don't think you can call yourself a C++ expert and be "totally unable to deal with" a C++ codebase that uses a different subset of C++ than what you would have used.
I totally agree. However that just tends to suggest that there are no expert C++ users. Just experts with a particular codebase. Which makes interviewing problematic.
Maybe there are more experts in the C language, because it is a simpler language and therefore an easier language to become an expert at. I would be totally in favor of using a simpler language for a project if there were no benefit to any of the more advanced features provided in C++, but that is rarely the case.
You toss that off lightly but I ponder its truth. It is problems and solutions that determine complexity. The question is not whether a language is simple or complex it is whether the language is appropriate to the solution. If it is then it will be simple. If it is not then the result will be complex. Complexity is seldom needed and never when simplicity will do. Human brains do not handle complexity well and the few that do do not handle it constantly or continuously. There is a lot to be said for keeping things simple.
You did not read what I said, and are inverting the logic.
Well I did the first time (but not this time) and I agreed with you pretty well. But you got formal and I pointed out a formal error.
As for the rest, I am not arguing.
If you take the assertion that the Universe is a simulation seriously, then rocks ARE designed objects, even though there is absolutely nothing about rocks to suggest that they actually are designed.
Non Sequiteur. That does not follow. The Universe could be designed to obey a few simple rules and evolve from that. Thusly the Universe can be a simulation and still require no design for rocks (or human beings).
Locally I had heard otherwise and it may differ here. A private vehicle and a car for hire are different registration requirements. One is private and one is commercial. And never the twain shall meet. The cost of registration and the cost (and terms) of the mandatory third party insurance differ. In law. I don't think Uber can change that.
They do not give two shits about their passengers either. I do not think their driver requirements are anything like stringent enough.
That will not continue. They are attempting monopoly. When they achieve it they will exploit it.
For me being in a taxi means that if there is an accident I am covered every way from Sunday. Regardless of who is at fault, regardless of medical insurance status, irregardless I will be covered and compensated for losses. If I travel in a Uber car, a paying fare, I am not covered at all, not even by the local mandatory third party insurance. A potential disaster.
Calling and using a cab provides limited information to the cab company. Using Uber reports my location (and god knows what else) to Uber 24/7 and I am even paying for the electricity and hardware to do it. While the cops may get such records form the phone company, Uber just demanding, taking them is an insult. Why would anyone sane accept those terms of service?
The intent of Uber is a world wide (or as wide as they can get) monopoly. Its business model is a losing proposition at its current pricing rates. When other alternatives (some better, some worse) have been wiped out it will exploit that monopoly and not only price wise. It will have the capacity to make areas popular or unpopular and all the influence that comes with that.
They are not even subtle about it. You know what "uber" means don't you? Google übermensch and uber alles.
In order to dial out, it is necessary to broaden one's dimension.