widespread

Beekeeping as it has been done since the widespread adoption of the Langstroth hive has been bad for bees. This is mostly because the hive design has movable frames and opens from the top.

There was widespread mockery of people earning 500k who regarded themselves as just making ends meet. In a very real sense, we are all a part of that laughably oblivious 1%.

How likely are you to see some twitter post about girls like this acting "not cool" even though it's a widespread problem? Feminist discourse is usually 1 dimensional.

Pumped that they did the right thing and open-sourced it so that it actually has a chance of becoming widespread, and more importantly, of sticking around for longer than a couple years. Good on you, Atom.

It's a big reason why it's been able to become so successful, so widespread, so flexible, and so powerful so quickly. But by the same token, it's filled with plenty of ugliness and inelegance and is quite easy to deride.

I'm not arguing that URL shorteners came first, but rather that their widespread use is what has enabled this kind of URL crapification to become so pervasive. [Disclosure: I hope your entire product category dies]

This type of thinking is unfortunately widespread among humans everywhere. It is never moral and often unwise to support a system you would not support if you did not have a favorable position within it.

Many people need something like MMJ and can neither afford it, nor can they keep their employment with it because of widespread drug testing. While the state I live in says that card holders can't be fired for holding a card, it is a state that has 'right-to-work' laws and you can fire someone for no specified reason at all.

Even more significant is the widespread societal belief that prison experience should be brutal punishment and torture, with no concern for justice, fairness, or humaneness. Prison rape is a punch-line, it's not even on the radar as a political issue.

Just made-up, widespread beliefs that cause lots of people to act as-if, and in so doing, make them "real". Again, there is a difference between merely realizing this philosophically, and being transported outside of the web of culturally-reinforced beliefs and observing it from the outside.

It includes widespread spying at the local, state, and federal level, as well as spying by corporations like Stratfor. It includes charging activists with laws intended for violent terrorists, so that arrest is no longer a minor inconvenience, but a life-altering event.

Owing to the widespread availability of information today, clients are much more savvy about how legal billing works and are not hesitant to ask for arrangements that make sense for the client even while being fair to the lawyers providing the services. Thus, scrutiny of legal billing is taken as a given and we have indeed come around 180 degrees from where it all used to be.

Com/ Edit: To clarify, my guess here is that they want to give people a taste of Mathematica on weak hardware in order to lure them to a subscription model on "the cloud" where much more processing power will be available, just like widespread university site-wide licenses and turning a blind eye to student piracy are great marketing strategies. Is there any evidence to support my wild theories?

In situations where accusations of widespread corruption, misconduct, unethical action, etc are made, a phrase that is often trotted out in defense of the accused is "just a few bad apples". It's not WhereEver Police Department that has an issue with racial bias and violent escalation, it's just a few bad apples. Our school district does not have a bullying problem, it's just a few bad apples. Etc. What is interesting about this cliched defense is that it is actually a malformed statement of the original cliche, "A few bad apples spoil the barrel." The original cliche refers to a phenomenon where overripe or rotten apples release ethylene gas, which is a ripening agent. This ethylene gas will accelerate the ripening/rot of nearby apples. If you are not vigilant in weeding out the bad apples, the rot will rapidly spread and soon there will be no good apples left to rescue. Human "bad apples" don't release ethylene gas, but they corrupt their peers nevertheless. When a good cop backs the cover story of his corrupt cop partner, he becomes a bad cop as well. When prosecutors take up arms in defense of their corrupt prosecutor peers, they become no better than the initially targeted. If school administrators allow a bully to have his way for too long, then everybody else sees that they can get away with it too and before long you have daily fistfights behind the school at the end of the day. Institutions that have had widespread unchallenged corruption for decades rarely need keyhole surgery, they need amputations.

Were CNN to want to cast him in a positive light they could have chosen to write it something like this: "The man who exposed widespread secret surveillance of American's electronic communications&;&." Instead CNN chose to emphasize the criminal aspect, rather than the civil liberties/anti-democratic aspect. Next: "... purportedly went online&;&." The use of the word "purportedly" here is interesting. Why is that questioned? To associate doubt with him. It's subtle, but nevertheless there it is. Next: "declare the truth would come out even if he is jailed or killed". Out of all the questions which were answered CNN focused on this one because it most easily supports the "egotistical" narrative they are attempting to paint him with. Implication: "He is setting himself up as some kind of martyr! How arrogant!" Next: "Obama did not fulfill his promises and expanded several 'abusive' national security initiatives." This one is, to me, the most blatant. The scare quotes around "abusive" are of course the most obvious. But look how the frame it: "national security initiatives". Not "domestic spying programs", or "electronic surveillance mechanisms", or something else. After all, no one who calls themselves reasonable can be opposed to national security! It's subtle, and of course debatable. But it's certainly present. CNN has their own slant, and it is obviously pro-NSA. Also note that nowhere to they actually link to the Q&A page. Let's rewrite it, communicate the same information, but make it skeptical towards the NSA: "Edward Snowden, the former NSA contractor who exposed widespread secret surveillance of American's electronic communications and online activities, did an online question-and-answer session today, making himself available to provide follow-up answers to questions raised by concerned citizens over the reach and power of the notoriously secretive intelligence agency."