Rule of thumb:

- If it’s a company doing an NC license, probably best to be careful because they can make your life hell with lawyers.

- If it’s a random joe doing an NC license, feel free to ignore it because they don’t have the money to defend it anyway. Especially so if it’s CC-BY-NC-ND, people that pick that one are especially likely to be in the all-bark-no-bite category.

At least that’s how one of the companies I worked for treated CC licenses… I don’t work there anymore.

A combination of key samplers and going with the first acceptable switch rather than trying all of them and going with the best.

You may consider yourself that, but given that you won’t even offer someone the pleasure of addressing them the way they want to be, you aren’t.

Perhaps, but it’s a good starting point, especially nowadays.

It’s just a word. People is fine too. Folks just sounds better.

If that were true then they would have written:

"Young folks, folks of color, queer folks". This is not the case.

How very astute of you. I was of course talking about folks sounding better combined with queer. This is subjective of course, but the writers agreed.

What does it matter to you anyway?

Bryan did not hold him at gunpoint and forced him to click reject, he did that himself. Empathy is a core value of engineering.

Fantasizing about having someone fired, making no effort to try and understand the viewpoint of the object of one's contempt, does not seem empathetic to me.

As a side note, I found it ironic, that Keith's email that Bryan linked to making the argument that "Empathy is a core engineering value", uses the word "retarded", which by 2013 was already something you could get "cancelled"(or at least chastised) for, because it's not empathetic to the mentally disabled.

I've always wondered, in cases like this where 8%+2% (for example) can either mean 10% or 8.16%, why doesn't the contract just give a fictional example of how the maths would work out?

Bitcoins aren't money.

18 U.S.C. § 2311 defines "money" in the context of stolen property as:

> the legal tender of the United States or of any foreign country, or any counterfeit thereof

Bitcoin has, at times, met this standard by being the legal tender of a foreign country.

Wait, does that mean that counterfeit money is legally money in the US?

For the purpose of charging someone with a crime under 18 U.S.C. Chapter 113, yes.

They're property which is also illegal to steal.

Good luck convincing the government that you aren’t guilty of money laundering because you used bitcoins.

It’d be money laundering because money went in on one end, and money came out at the other end. Bitcoin would’ve been the vehicle yes. Still not money though.

Something doesn’t have to be money to be involved in money laundering, obviously.

Your legal analysis is very much incorrect. The U.S. will prosecute you for money laundering if you e.g. provide an illegal service, receive payment for that illegal service in bitcoins, then use a bitcoin mixing service, and then finally exchange your post-mixed bitcoins for goods. This is money laundering, despite there being no other money (like dollars) involved any step along the way.

In fact, the U.S. has prosecuted and convicted people for money laundering simply for operating the bitcoin mixing service, which is clearly just bitcoins in and bitcoins out.