Well, not really. It’s pretty tough to find an exchange that will let you move $100M in one lifetime. Many limit the number of BTC that can be involved in a transaction. BTC is not very liquid at the scale you’re talking about.

I tend to agree about the “low-fat” relationship with obesity, at least observationally.

The ketogenic diets intentionally restrict all carbs, though; the purpose is to cause your body to switch from running on sugars to running on ketones, which are produced when stored fat is broken down. When you lose weight, you…

... crickets ...

At least some disagree: http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-respond/

By that argument you can put folks in jail as long as you let them talk *first* right? As long as what they’re saying gets out, then you’ve fulfilled the ideal of free speech and can do whatever you please?

Inb4 pitchforks and torches.

Thanks for posting this.

Except that’s not what he did. He sent his email about diversity to a list about diversity. Then the other members of that email list blasted it out to the world.

Wait - AFAICT, he didn’t blast it out to everyone. He sent it to a list, and the members of that list then blasted it out to everyone, including the media.

Is your advice really never to take any risks?

Eh, the HR department is doing what they think they have to for PR reasons. Minus the torches and pitchforks of the mob, the outcome is different, I suspect.

That was my point, exactly. We apply these standards in a fairly arbitrary manner, and more hinges on who, and how many are offended than on any objective claims.

You realize that this isn’t reasoned discourse? I know it’s popular to believe that derision is meaningful, but it’s really just playground name-calling with a slightly better vocabulary.

Fair enough. Show me where this dude did that? His arguments, however disagreeable some are, were fully qualified with “doesn’t apply to every individual” and the like.

Perhaps you’d quote the bit in this dude’s post that said someone wasn’t qualified. Or are you just assuming that it does say that?

This guy didn’t send out a company wide email, either.

You really don’t seem to get the concept “I understand but disagree”. Your view is not privileged; you don’t get a pass because you believe you are “righteous”. Snarky comments are not reasoned discourse.

See, J. Steve White, it just goes to show you haven’t thought through all the ramifications of this guy shoving his manifesto down the throats of his coworkers.

When that one out of three Muslims writes a manifesto decrying women in the workplace, he will be fired.

In the case of both Muslims and Baptists in my workplaces at at least three companies there have been many occasions where such views were expressed in public forums and no one was fired. And they weren’t saying shit like “perhaps we should change the way we do certain things so person X can participate”; they were…

Go find a top-tier job at a tech company where you don’t work with Muslims. If there are three working with you, at least one of them likely holds the views I expressed. But ultimately, we all do our jobs and get along just fine. Sure, some folks don’t like some other folks, but we are professionals and adults.

Uh, no, nowhere did I assert this. However...as to your second question, society does. Social norms.