Why are you surprised? Middle-to-low income men are not represented by any powerful lobby or movement (because that would be branded misogynistic and/or racist).
Want more surprises? Compare what US companies are allowed to put into food to their EU counterparts.
> Middle-to-low income men are not represented by any powerful lobby or movement (because that would be branded misogynistic and/or racist).
Lots of things that would be (and are!) labeled misogynistic and/or racist are represented by powerful lobbies and movements, so the logic there doesn't follow. It may be that middle-to-low income men are not represented by any powerful lobby or movement, but if so, the reason you offer is not the reason why.
(The reason why is probably that middle-to-low income men don't, as a class, necessarily have lots of free money to devote to political causes, and, to extent that people in that class do devote money to such causes, they don't do so around their identity as "middle-to-low income men".)
Single mothers are a growing group, they now represent 1 in 4 households. They are a very important group to win elections. For example, single mothers were the single largest voting bloc for Obama. A lot of campaign strategies are designed around winning the single mother votes, "the war on women" rhetoric for example. It's not surprising to see laws designed to coddle them and cater to them.
As this article points out, this is very shortsighted since for one single mother who gets "free child support" it's a whole family who has to suffer, but people are slow to make the connection.
Depends on application type and device.
I wouldn't hold my breath, e.g. in games - one of the most performance-critical apps - the best idea so far is to spin one thread for physics, one thread per AI, one thread per game logic etc.
Here is a good blog post describing how sad the things is: http://bitsquid.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/multithreaded-gamepla...
IMHO, part of that is that you don't want more threads than processor cores (unless they're IO bound). If we had lots lots more cores, then I would expect to see physics, AI, game logic etc use more than one thread. There is little reason to pay for the additional complexity, when most mainstream computers don't have more than maybe 4-8 cores. Obviously not everything parallelises well, so the full extent that this is possible remains to be seen.
I would rather give each type of computation a chance to use all cores: parallelism rather than concurrency. But there is a lot of legacy code out there.
I agree: one thread pool for all tasks (I'm personally a fan of Intel's Threading Building Blocks, so...)
However, if you only target, say, 4 cores and you have 4 subsystems (physics, AI, rendering and gameplay lets say) and all four constantly use the CPU (ie you don't have too much downtime) then the extra complexity and overhead (moving data between cores, shared data, locking) may not be worth it over just pinning each subsystem to its own core.
I am glad it's about class inequality for a change. On topic: how naive do you need to be to think that any of current civilizations are meritocratic? Especially given the recent positive discrimination trends.
Don't you love it when everyone is competing on a level ground?