The first documented instance of the Vulgaris Aerae (Vulgar Era, meaning “Common Era”) being used interchangeably with Anno Domini was featured in Latin works by Johannes Kepler in 1615, 1616, and 1617. The English version of phrase later appeared in 1635 in an English translation of Kepler’s 1615 work. (In the mid-seventeenth century the English “vulgar” took on a new definition of “coarse,” but it wouldn’t be until this “coarse/unrefined” definition would become more common in the 20th century that referring to the Vulgar Era would cease.) 
It's not like this is a new thing. And it really doesn't matter in ordinary conversation, at least for most of us. But when publishing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, it makes sense to use the terminology of science, which does not recognize Jesus as "Christ" with all of the associated baggage.
In 1977, the median income for a 30-year-old man was about $10,000, or $41,500 adjusted for inflation . Today, the median income for a 30-year-old man is about $35,000 . The median home sale price in 1977 was about $49,000, or $203,000 inflation-adjusted . The median home sale price today is about $325,000 . In 1977, a 4-year college degree at an in-state, public institution cost less than $4,000, or about $16,000 inflation-adjusted for tuition and fees . Today, that's $38,600.
These are only a few rough indicators, but the point is this: a millennial or gen-xer today makes 84% in real terms of what his counterpart did in 1977; his education costs more than twice as much and has gone from something he could pay for completely with a summer job to more than a full year's salary; the house he's looking at has gone from 4 years' salary to nearly 10 years', and a 20% down payment has gone from about 3 months' salary to about two years'.
These, for example, are reasons that millennials have it tougher than previous generations.
I am a scientist who has done some work on climate change issues. I usually completely ignore Slashdot stories about climate because I know that the whole comment thread will be people repeating the same arguments to each other about whether or not climate change exists, or is anthropogenic, or is a bad thing, or whatever. What value is there in repeating these stale talking points to each other over and over again? How many of the deniers are just trolls who don't care one way or another, but enjoy baiting others with long-debunked claims and other alternative facts?
At any rate, that may be one reason you see so many deniers here. Many of us who are persuaded by the evidence are already so far past the Slashdot-level conversation, there's practically no point in participating.
Is there really a use case for having data while in a phone call?
I often tether my laptop to my phone while traveling. While tethered, and using data on my laptop, I'd still like to be able to make and receive phone calls.
I think it'll be a super hard sell to get them to do a hard reboot on their whole system. But why not begin introducing a service oriented architecture that could be gradually rolled out and replace systems incrementally? Start with the most fragile systems and linkages and rebuild the whole system in situ?
I mean, I know it'll be more complicated than that simple statement, but at least it's a better plan than trying to install better and better windproofing to prevent the house of cards from toppling.
In fact, to enhance upon my reply from a few minutes ago, it appears that in 2006, Delta outsourced its IT operations to IBM . It was a seven year agreement, so I don't know who does it now. But I doubt it's Delta.
Assuming this is still the situation: I don't know on what continent Delta's IT people are stationed at this point, but that's hardly the issue. The issue is, wherever they are, they aren't competently managing Delta's IT infrastructure. They had a similarly airline-grounding outage in August, about six months ago.
If management were able to recognize the value of investment in IT, they could have taken steps over the years to develop a system that isn't this fragile. Presumably, back in 2006, when they went into bankruptcy, someone convinced them that IT wasn't a "core competency" because it would save the airline a bunch of money to outsource it. Since then, they've been accumulating tech debt because nobody at HQ actually owns IT anymore... they think it's just a service that they pay for. It doesn't appear to be working out for them.
Why does everyone assume that Delta outsourced this work abroad?
I said nothing about abroad.
How long can the airlines go on like this? Somewhere in office buildings around the country, there are MBAs and accountants working for various airlines who have compared the cost of in-house IT with the cost of outsourcing, and they all once decided that outsourcing was best. Somehow, I doubt they've included in their calculations the true frequency (and therefore cost) of IT failures that ground the entire airline for days. As these events stack up, these guys are going to have to re-evaluate their models for predicting the frequency and severity of failures, and at some point it's going to look like a good idea to have a real IT staff on-hand to keep systems working in the first place, and to deal with it when shit hits the fan.
We keep the benefit of that product forever.
What about products that have no benefit? I was standing in the supermarket checkout line last night, and there was a display of giant foam fingers (more elaborate and sculpted than the ones I've seen before--called Ultimate Hands, apparently). The whole lot of it is completely landfill-ready. There is no conceivable benefit to our society from this junk. How much money do we send to China (and other places) every year in exchange for plastic and other non-recyclable trash that from the moment it's created is destined for a municipal waste transfer station, where we'll mash it up with the rest of our trash and ship it back overseas? What was the point?
Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.