Slashdot Mirror

You just proved there's no moron like an old moron.

Barbara, I am withoug doubt the bigest moron on the planet. It's no insult when I accept the charge.

Then again......

http://www.pamf.org/teen/abc/s...

This really clearly supports my incorrect notions.

I have noticed the my cites are often not read so I'll quote a little from the article.

"For instance, if someone is drunk or high on drugs, then that person cannot give consent. This means that even if someone seems eager to engage in sexual behavior, doing so can legally be considered sexual assault or rape if he or she is intoxicated.

http://everydayfeminism.com/20... Here one from: http://teenadvice.about.com/od...

"Another area of confusion on the date rape topic is intoxication. Bottom line, if a girl is intoxicated she cannot consent to sex and you could be charged with rape. It does not matter whether you knew she was intoxicated, it doesn’t matter if you were intoxicated too, all that matters is that she was not in a state of mind to consent and therefore it is rape. If you get a girl drunk or high and then “get together” with her you have committed a sexual assault.

Again, it doesn’t matter if you are drunk or high as well. Your diminished abilities do not negate your responsibilities. A good rule to follow; if you are under the influence do not have sex. Now say you really had no idea a girl was intoxicated and that she truly appeared to be a willing partner, what then?

A drunk woman cannot give consent, and if she appears to but she is drunk, it is rape. If the male is drunk as well, he miraculously is still raping her. Damn white male privilege straike again.

I know, I know, you do not have the time to read it.

So yes, it's moronic, Yes I am pathetically stupid.

Your name calling is indicitive of bubblethink. I thought better of you, and sad to see that once again I am wrong.

...that someone still needs to invent

You could have also just said it was probably soap.

And pretend was all it was.

If you're on the public stage, it's all pretend. I've always find it interesting that people expect a politician to be the same in public as they are at home. I'm a different person on Slashdot than I am at the office than I am at home. To quote Shakespeare: "The entire world is a stage."

Democrat Senator Reid is the same way (but he is bat-shit crazy so I almost want to give him a pass.)

Reid had a valid point about Obama being biracial. If Obama's skin tone was jet black, it's very unlikely that he would have gotten elected POTUS. It's called colorism.

http://racerelations.about.com/od/understandingrac1/a/What-Is-Colorism.htm

Slave-owners were partial to light-skinned slaves because they were often family members. Slave-owners frequently forced slave women into sexual intercourse, and light-skinned offspring were the telltale signs of these sexual assaults. While slave-owners did not officially recognize their mixed-race children as blood, they gave them privileges that dark-skinned slaves did not enjoy. Accordingly, light skin came to be viewed as an asset among the slave community.

AMOUNT or degree of climate change is not capable of establishing that a cause of a change is due to humans. You think that CO2 is the only thing released into the atmosphere, and Humans are the only things affecting the composition of the atmosphere and dissipation of sunlight/energy?

Really? On one had we have mountains of theories and studies filled with facts & figures, tables & graphs, predictions & observations; all of which are summarised in the IPCC reports. On the other hand, we have an unverified claim based on.... what, your gut feeling??

Large volcanic eruptions are completely natural and can have a huge impact for centuries.

What makes you think that scientists haven't thought of the influence of volcanoes? Oh wait, they have:

Volcanoes produce abrupt climate responses on short time scales. The surface cooling effect of the stratospheric aerosols, the main climatic forcing factor, decays in one to three years after an eruption due to the lifetime of the aerosols in the stratosphere. It is possible for one large volcano or a series of large volcanic eruptions to produce climate responses on longer time scales, especially in the subsurface region of the ocean (Delworth et al., 2005; Gleckler et al., 2006b).

As you see, the main climatic forcing factor of volcanoes is to cool the surface, and it usually dissipates relatively quickly. That is because it prevents the heat from the sun hitting the surface, which is the opposite of the greenhouse effect. Of course, volcanoes also release greenhouse gases like CO2, but human emissions dwarf those of volcanoes. A few years ago when that volcano in Iceland erupted and shut down airline flights across Europe, it actually have a positive effect on the climate because the amount of greenhouse gases emitted were offset by the savings caused by shutting down all the airlines. Also, from the link above:

Scientists tracking the effects of the major 1991 eruption of the Philippines' Mt. Pinatubo found that the overall effect of the blast was to cool the surface of the Earth globally by some 0.5 degrees Celsius a year later, even though rising human greenhouse gas emissions and an El Nino event caused some surface warming during the 1991-1993 study period.

First of all by default the assumption should not be No man-made factor at all; the assumption should be No major new man-made factor, or No conclusively man-made major influence.

That is a good assumption, and it was one that the scientists had when the idea that our emissions could enhance the natural greenhouse effect was first proposed 120 years ago. It was either dismissed or assumed that this would be a benefit. As the decades went by, the accumulation of evidence and our understanding of the scientific principles have convinced those experts that not only is this happening, but it will not be an overall benefit. If you want to come in now and assume that it isn't happening, then you are 120 years late.

Over that period, our technology has progressed so that much of our lives is dependent on using power that generates greenhouse gases. Over that period, the human race has nearly quadrupled in size. We went from just under 2 billion to 7.5 billion people. Is it really so hard to believe that all those people using all that power would be unable to affect the environment in which we live?

Skepticism against some theory which has been inadequately proposed does not require proof.

When that skepticism goes against established scientific understanding then yes, it does require proof. You might think that the theory has been inadequately pr

They also want you to use javascript because that is the only reasonable way to make all the fancy bells and whistles people expect a website to do these days run.

Graceful degradation is what these web monkeys should be introduced to.

1. Write valid, standards-compliant HTML

2. Use external style sheets for your designs and layout

3. Use externally linked scripts for interactivity

4. Make sure the content is accessible even to low-level browsers without CSS or JavaScript

According to the Treasury, the largest foreign holder of U.S. debt is China, which owns more than $1.24 trillion in bills, notes, and bonds or about 30% of the over $4 trillion in Treasury bills, notes, and bonds held by foreign countries. In total, China owns about 10% of publicly held U.S. debt.

Trump isn't going to collapse that and China isn't either, you know that.

She's considered one of the most influential First Ladies.

http://americanhistory.about.c...

And let's not ignore being a Senator or Secretary of State.

Overview: http://web.stanford.edu/dept/n...

The conclusion - men are pigs. From the article, the first and foremost reason : Overt sexism, unwanted attention and sexual harassment create hostile working conditions.

The biggest problem in our workplace between men and women was the men were concerned that by saying the wrong thing, they were going to be fired. So communications with women were very guarded. That certainly isn't a friendly situation, but completely understandable. If you don't have a reason to talk to someone who can have you fired, you probably won't.

A lack of role models for women in technical fields is discouraging. "When faculty members are looking for the next person to win a Turing Award, which is computer science's Nobel Prize, they tend to look for people like the last ones who won such awards. This usually involves looking in the mirror,” Roberts said.

Seriously? a lack of women in technical role models? Here's 90 of them http://womenshistory.about.com... Here's 90 of them http://discovermagazine.com/20...

http://www.mnn.com/leaderboard... Some random ted talks, all by female scientists: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

And if you want yound ladies to have especially physically attractive role models there's always : https://science.jpl.nasa.gov/p... a physicist/Astronomer who manages to not look like the stereotype egghead.

So all I have to say, if Herr Professor hasn't found female role models to present to his students, well - that is his fault not menarepigs

His study is the typical "women are weak" model, where any negativity causes tehm to seek other careers, which presumably have no sexism and all men are perfect gentlemen. He can rail on about his women's school model for a million years, but it won't cure the problem.

Study on one aspect: https://depts.washington.edu/s...

So the problem appears that if a female encounters any stereotype that she disagrees with, it completely destroys her interest.

Movie: http://www.bigdreammovement.co...

I should come up with a list of links to copy/paste, that lot was just a quick Google search.

So - does this mean that there was something wrong with any woman who did not allow herself to be intimidated out of a science career that she was passionate about, but the passion was killed by anyone that didn't give her positivity?

I don't know specifically

Can't wait for this to cross over to the Venus Flytraps or other endearing little pretties. Or twisted proteins having unexpected results. Despite the rigorous and extended testing that was tirelessly carried out before being approved by top financial CEOs.

For generic email, who cares all that much but you still must punish the naughtiest providers so, http://email.about.com/od/free..., I decide to go with Yandex, with all the, oh, ahh, Russian hacking coming out if the US/UK government (so lame) I decided to save the Russians the trouble and at the same time tweak the sensibilities of various five eyes alphabet agencies (other advantage different language gives you opportunity to use already taken English speaking mail serves user names giving you the chance to use your old user name).

The Wikipedia article you cite seems to be semi confused about whether 300GHz-3THz is "Tremendously High Frequency" radiation (1mm - 100um) or "Terahertz" radiation.

It's both. Like many things, that band has more than just one name.

And 3THz to 300THz most certainly does include near ultraviolet...

I said 300 GIGAhertz, not 300 TERAhertz.

Your confusion is understandable, given the unfortunate etymology of the phrase "terahertz radiation". But, etymology is often misleading.

Ultimately, the only way to be sure about the meaning of a term of art like this, is to look it up. While not every source I have found agree with the precise frequency range specified by the article I linked, all agree that the upper end of the band in question is somewhere in the infrared, and that it does not include visible light (let alone ultraviolet).

since you're mister snarky today

There is nothing sarcastic or mocking (the definition of "snark") in either of my comments in this thread. I simply pointed out your error. The fact that you automatically perceive that as "snarky" comes across either as proud or insecure (I will not speculate as to which).

Got a 5 when they first came out. When is the crippling update supposed to happen?

Next week, isn't it? If history is anything to go by.

Pro-tips for China: ... 3. You think you're a big tough new superpower now but America would kick your ass. You have no idea how the US is at war.

You do realize that the Korean war was a proxy fight between the US and China, right?

I'm sure you'll still be able to use Bluetooth headphones with your new iPhone, but I've also heard that Apple's upcoming "AirPods" use a new proprietary standard (big surprise there).

Of course, Apple doesn't have to create a new & incompatible standard just to get better wireless audio than A2DP. They could happily support aptX over Bluetooth (or even AAC or MP3). But I expect the prospect of a whole new field of Made for iPhone peripheral licencing just proved too tempting, so I expect we'll hear plenty about how this glorious new standard is well worth the extra cost you'll be paying.

Ermm, no. The earth being not flat and geocentrism being wrong were NOT ever basic natural laws. If you don't know what such laws entail, see http://www.iep.utm.edu/lawofna... , if you want examples, see http://physics.about.com/od/ph...

You'll note that flat Earth and geocentrism is not among them.

As for your last sentence: I just gave you the equations in one of my former posts that prove NG is still valid *within its domain and a specific frame of reference*. The GR *incorporated* it as a special case, thus, but NG remains as correct, or incorrect, as it has before. Just as the GR itself is. If your stance is that because it's an approximation and thus 'incorrect', then all laws are incorrect, because all laws are approximations. Which makes any debate over what is broken and not meaningless. Since I don't engage in meaningless debates, what is meant when talking about something being a law, and it being valid: it pertains to being valid WITHIN itts own domain and within a frame of reference. That's why I explicitly mentioned it as such in my very first post in this thread, yet some people say I'm wrong and then give an argument which is *outside* the domain of that law. It's like saying 'that horse is the fastest living being on that horse-track' and then trying to counter it with 'But that car is much much faster on the road." that's inconsequential and irrelevant. No doubt an airplane flying in the air will still be faster, just like a GUT will still be 'more correct' in more domains than even GR.

What 'works' and what is 'broken' is merely dependent on what frame of reference you use, and if it has predictive power within that frame. And the NG has that. The GR has it more and better. But that is inconsequential and irrelevant to the question if NG still has predictive value in its own domain.

Tesla M 3 start at the average price of a sold car in America

No. The average price of a car sold in America is about $22,000, whereas the Tesla Model 3 starts at $35,000.

The average new car purchase costs $33,560. However, 69% of cars sold are used with an average price of $16,800, because most people can't really afford to buy new. Furthermore, those numbers are probably the arithmetic mean, whereas the geometric mean (surely a lower number) would probably be more useful.

Anecdotally, the geometric mean price of a car purchase among my own social circles (which encompass everything from the intermittently homeless up to the beginning of the upper class) is definitely MUCH less than $35,000, with a strong majority of the vehicles purchased being used. Anyone who thinks a $35,000 car is affordable to the average American adult is out-of-touch with the true economic condition of the general population.

Some used 2017 Teslas might reach affordability for regular people in five years or so - or they might not; nobody knows for sure what the maintenance requirements and depreciation rate for the Model 3 will be like, yet.

Curious that snopes already had THREE threads 'debunking' this before there was even a police report publicly released on the facts.

The DC police have been forthcoming with the facts as they have become known starting the day after the killing.

Not to mention, the Snopes article itself is suffused with as much conjecture, speculation, and 'implied guilt by association' as any anti-Clinton hack blog.

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the entire, "Hillary kilt a Seth Rich on this tree" story has been concocted by a far-right conspiracy blogger who's been pushing the (also debunked) "Clinton Body Bags" story which posits that every time Hillary Clinton is off-camera, she's committing at least two or three murders.

And it's not just Snopes that has debunked all this:

http://urbanlegends.about.com/...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

http://www.motherjones.com/pol...

You still ain't shown anything to backup your incredible claims.

https://support.office.com/en-...

Office for Mac doesn't run correctly within itself. https://support.microsoft.com/...

Some ways to help - but not a complete list. http://www.officeformachelp.co...

A bad answer, but more problems http://answers.microsoft.com/e... As they say "most likely" That will take care of some issues but not all.

http://www.walternelson.com/dr...

Here you are told to do exactly what an above link tells you not to do http://presentationsoft.about....

Just general things https://support.microsoft.com/...

This one is cute - directly from Microsoft and I quote> "However, high compatibility workbooks/projects can be achieved", as well as "There may well be a solution or workaround." Hozabout that? High compatibility is not compatibility, and workarounds are not compatibility. http://answers.microsoft.com/e...

And with Office 365 in particular http://answers.microsoft.com/e...

So anyhow there is about as much as I'm willing to do for you, coward. Any more, and do your own research Which of course is a non starter isn't it?

Right from Microsoft, they speak of it's issues. Take it up with them. Sparky.

Meantime, I'm using a suite that doesn't have those issues.

Or, of course, the US could overhaul it's ridiculous justice system. Start by eliminating the "War on Drugs". MJ should be legal. People addicted to hard drugs need help, not jail. If they could get their fixes under controlled conditions, you would the dealers and smugglers out of business, and the addicts themselves wouldn't need to steal to finance their habits. This would do more to eliminate crime than any thing else.

Second, stop trying to be "tough on crime". Mandatory, multi-year sentences for first-time offenders, for non-violent crimes. Everything is a felony, and far too many things are federal felonies. Just as an example: attempt to get some Marijuana across the Mexican border, any amount at all - even if it's your first offense, the minimum sentence is 10 years.

Then one could go after all of the other low-hanging fruit: other stuff that shouldn't be illegal. Lying to a federal officer (Martha Stewart).
Improperly packed lobster tails. Taking home an Indian arrowhead you find at a public camping ground. Picking up a feather you found on the ground. And on, and on...

Really, it's no wonder the jails are overcrowded.

To too many people in the US, it seems like all they care about (or know about) is the 2nd amendment. Just a quick look at the Bill of Rights (original 10 amendments)

Amendment 1 is pretty much toast.
3 is not really applicable any more.
4 is a joke now.
5, gone.
6, nope.
7 is very dated, not really applicable.
8 is up for interpretation
9 is a joke
10 is a blanket statement.

http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/a/bill_of_rights.htm

But dammit, let us keep our 2nd amendment!

I'm going to start telling the gun lovers they should have used their firearms to protect the rest of our rights.

In fact, Republicans stand for the status-quo. i.e., standing for big oil, big gas, big electricity or big (insert your favorite lobbying group here).

Is that why a Republican President (along with Republican-dominated Congress) allowed the fuck-ups like Enron, MCI, and Lehman Brothers to collapse, while a Democratic one bailed out GM, Chrysler (not the first one), and AIG?

every time Google farts the entire internet takes one big inhale to smell the methane burst

Except that methane is odorless.

There are several chemicals that contribute to the smell of farts:
- skatole (by-product of meat digestion)
- indole (by-product of meat digestion)
- methanethiol (a sulfur compound)
- dimethyl sulfide (a sulfur compound)
- hydrogen sulfide (rotten egg odor, flammable)
- volatile amines
- short chain fatty acids
- feces (if present in the rectum)
- bacteria
Source

No, it is not capitalist. Capitalist means that prices are governed by the forces of supply and demand. Socialism means that everything is decided centrally by the local governing authority, whether that's a dictator or "the community", which means that everybody effectively is a government employee, and the government also decides prices and supply. Just because it has an actual currency doesn't mean it's capitalist; that's a pretty elementary mistake.

Your definition about socialism is so strange. Which socialism? German Socialism or Marx's Socialism, or other socialism which you mentioned here? If this Marx's socialism, it is communism as Marx's definition, which has no government.
Also, the author, base on definition of Marx, which prove Soviet was actually capitalistic state, capitalism is organized around the concept of capital - the ownership and control of the means of production by those who employ workers to produce goods and services in exchange for wages. No mater individual or government, who control and own the means of production, who not produce goods - workers, are sights of capitalism.

Now about your definition about capitalism. Price is about cash. Cash was invented for trading, in which cash has no value itself. A Mexican worker on the border of Mexico-America earns - in peso, less than the immigrated Mexican worker on the American-Mexico border, who earns in dollar. Because cash's value is fixed in Mexico is different to USA, but the *REAL* price of the product these two workers produce are the same, but is different in peso and dollar. That is governments and their center banks *indirectly* or *directly* affect the 'price'.

US: 1-800-273-8255 is a 24/7 suicide prevention hotline, which also advises people dealing with a suicidal loved one or friend.

http://www.suicide.org/interna...

For US active duty military and veterans:
Veteran's Crisis Line:
1800-273-8255
Press 1
or text 838255

confidential chat available at: www.veteranscrisisline.net

Specifically for support of trans* people, http://www.translifeline.org/ has a US hotline number +18775658860 and a Canadian toll-free number +18773306366.

For LGBT teenagers and young adults, http://www.thetrevorproject.or.... They also have a hotline number, 866-488-7386.

If you're a friend or bystander, these are relevant.
Suicide threats on social media:
http://www.suicidepreventionli...
If you're in the US this is a guide to reaching emergency services outside your own area: http://firstaid.about.com/od/c...
Immediate steps you can take: http://www.helpguide.org/artic...

Microsoft effectively disabled the BSOD starting with Win 7 by causing the PC to reboot. This single change was a marketing strategy, and it worked, by ensuring that people would only see the BSOD if they were standing in front of the computer as it happened.

How to disable automatic restart.

This may well have contributed to why you do not "see" them any more. Doesn't mean they do not happen!

As I understand it, bill of attainder is a law that targets a person or group by declaring them guilty of a crime along with some punishment. It was abused by the British Monarchy prior to the Revolutionary War, and resulted in a Constitutional ban on all such laws. Article I, section 9, clause 3:

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

The last time I heard the term "bill of attander" in the news was the Palm Sunday Compromise ten years ago, when supposed state-rights Republicans rushed a bill through Congress to tear a case out of state court and move it into Federal court-- specifically to address a single individual (and simultaneously pander to the same base who today have largely become Trumpkins). This was about a fight between parents who wanted to pull the plug on their daughter in a coma (in accordance with her wishes) vs. rando evangelicals who wanted to keep her alive, because Jesus.

The big news at the time was that this amounted to a bill of attainder, which is when I was like "what the heck is that"...

Turns out you can't write laws to punish individuals or groups directly... which is why so many laws are written by lobbyists to narrowly describe situations/scenarios/qualities that happen to affect only one group.

I thought it was this one:

http://politicalhumor.about.co...

My comment was intended to point out a simple fact: an obligation, be it externally or internally imposed, to print the words of others will naturally come at the cost of other basic human rights. I never intended to suggest that meant printing the words of others was a bad thing, since I do agree that the right should extend beyond what the government permits. Even so, because of those costs, I also believe that the extent to which the right is extended should be left to the individual to decide. Otherwise, as we agree, it would result in the trampling of rights.

No, actually, we don't agree on that. At least not based on that argument alone. Analogy: I think it's morally wrong to refer to your girlfriend as a dumb bitch in public and private. There should not be any government regulation against it (short of high-threshold abuse), but there should most certainly be a social and internalized cost to it. Do you feel guilty if you flick your booger on the floor? Do you think that feeling of guilt tramples on your rights? Would you look down on someone who farts in the elevator? How about someone who refuses to teach their children any sex ed? Is it OK to be repulsed when someone has bad breath or dorito dust on their shirt? The old adage about your right to swing your fist ending where my nose begins is much too crude to capture the nuances of morality, ethics, and social norms outside of the law.

Remember, the law, basically, means one thing -- a rule which can and will be violently enforced. You won't be locked in a cage at gunpoint for farting in an elevator. Nor will you be locked in a cage at gunpoint for censoring speech on your massive online discussion platform. That's the only thing you and I definitely agree on.

TL;DR: this

They got around the Tor encryption by getting some JavaScript/Java/PHP code to run on the host PC and extract the IP address that way. Stack Overflow and a hundred other blogs will all explain how to do this within a standard webpage. No illegal downloading of executables, DLL's, shared object files or modification of kernel permissions. Just plain web page design:

http://javascript.about.com/li...

The whole Tor project would be a little bit pointless if deanonymizing the users was a simple matter of "plain web design".

All the server side reliant methods of accessing the user's IP address with JavaScript listed in your link are irrelevant to the discussion here: If the user's IP address is known on the server side and you control the server, why on earth would you bother with client side JavaScript when you could just look at server logs? Of course, in a situation where the user does not connect to the server directly the server side methods only give you the IP address of the last proxy in the proxy chain. Onion sites can only be accessed through Tor, no direct connections are possible.

This leaves the JavaScript and Java method. The problem here is that the Firefox based Tor Browser (used by almost every Tor user) does not, for obvious reasons, include the Java plugin.

So how did the FBI do it then? I'm not aware of the specifics of this case but in the past they have used zero day vulnerabilities in Firefox JavaScript handling to run malicious "phone home" shell code on the client machines. Most anonymous web surfing guides since the 90's have advised strong anonymity seeking users to always keep their JavaScript disabled, though as the advisory for the 2013 exploit notes, many big attack vectors besides JavaScript remain, such as css, svg, xml, the renderer etc...

It wasn't a honeypot trap. The site existed before the Fed's took over. They got around the Tor encryption by getting some JavaScript/Java/PHP code to run on the host PC and extract the IP address that way. Stack Overflow and a hundred other blogs will all explain how to do this within a standard webpage. No illegal downloading of executables, DLL's, shared object files or modification of kernel permissions. Just plain web page design:

http://javascript.about.com/li...

The amount of money involved as well as the implied exclusion of other, competing products makes it collusion in my book.

But again, working as intended.

Listen, moron: There is no "exclusion of other competing products" going on here. You can choose among several Search Providers in iOS' mobile Safari (including DuckDuckGo). Google is just the Default. And since most people (including me) don't bother to change the setting, you get Google...

Curiously, you can still be an alcoholic even if you no longer drink.

Or, you know, you could learn what "well regulated militia" meant in the 1700s and you could then buy a clue...

And you might want to learn what "gun" and "arms" meant in the 1700s. I would tell you to buy a clue, but I'm not sure you'd know what to do with it.

http://militaryhistory.about.c...

Native apps from "garage" developers: zero users on Wii U. Web apps from "garage" developers: greater than zero users on Wii U.

You're not genuinely trying to argue that the Wii U is a significant application platform, are you? It's a games platform for children, and the least successful console of the current generation by a mile. You'd be crazy to target it for applications, native or otherwise.

Even HTML5 game support is weak on the Wii. No support for sound? Does it even have WebGL support? Nope, guess not. And look at this weird non-standard stuff. Effortless support it ain't.

You haven't provided evidence for your claim that web development with all its current limitations, with all the vagaries of differences between browsers is more efficient or productive than native cross platform application development. Some me some real, measurable outcomes instead of making vague assertions.

First, there's the overhead of obtaining hardware on which to test the build for each platform. You essentially have to buy a Mac, buy a copy of Parallels, and buy a retail copy of Windows.

Welcome to professional development. And as you said yourself it's the same deal for web development. What, you got your Wii U for free in a box of cereal or something?

That's fine once your company is big enough to afford "the right development environment".

Many cross platform languages, libraries, and development environments are free. You can use GCC or Rust or Python or Free Pascal and their associated libraries, or use none of them and use something else. You want to do GUI applications? Look, here's an option. Here's another. Use what you want, I don't care.

There are more options available now than ever. Small companies can easily find the right development environment for them for native application development for as much or as little money as they want to spend.

http://sikhism.about.com/od/To...

they are a respectable warrior culture with fairly high integrity.

they are not engaged in a jihad against Western culture.

Neither are Muslims. Or Jews. Or the Amish. Outliers of them are. But the U.S. government, make no mistake, is wholly engaged in a jihad against Western culture. In particular, democracy, liberty, due process, public education, social justice. They want to have all that stamped out.

http://sikhism.about.com/od/To...

they are a respectable warrior culture with fairly high integrity.

they are not engaged in a jihad against Western culture.

IT WOULDN'T BE OKAY EVEN IF THEY WERE RASTAFARIAN.

http://sikhism.about.com/od/To...

they are a respectable warrior culture with fairly high integrity.

they are not engaged in a jihad against Western culture.

So now that women have their own safe space we can expect some amazing innovation to follow. But if we don't, I wonder what the next excuse will be?

Because women have never achieved amazing innovation? http://www.entrepreneur.com/ar...
http://www.investopedia.com/ar...
http://womenshistory.about.com...

If you haven't been as accomplished as these women...I have to ask...what's your bloody excuse?

Really? Let's search the web for "hunting incident". We get: http://abc30.com/news/16-year-...

Perhaps it's an aberration? Let's dig further: http://animalrights.about.com/... - 1000 people per year are shot in hunting incidents. Hmm...

Let's dig further. Do we have reliable statistics? Nope. NRA blocked them, so we must assume that the real number of gun victims is greater.

...or London in 1952?

http://history1900s.about.com/...

Graceful degradation, ever heard of it?

Why are Americans so hooked on credit cards?

Credit cards have different rules than debit cards. There are more consumer protections. It is like the difference between having to prove your innocence versus the accuser having to prove you are guilty. I would rather have the merchant carry the risk.

You're both wrong.

Social Security actually owns the most, with a $2.7T share. (2.7 teradollars is a lot, but torn dollars aren't worth much.)

Here's a nice article that breaks it down for you.

Face it, old people own you. You can either join them, or you can die trying.

Really? If you were caught advertently or inadvertently causing a security breach at your company, we could line you up along the wall as well?

You misunderstand who I hold responsible. I am not talking about us, the insufficient technical resources who have the impossible job of securing critical infrastructure using commercial products against enemies who wield military technology against us.

We are not at fault. We are doing what we can with the resources that we have available - in other words we are not sleeping at our posts in a time of 'cyber' war.

A soldier on guard duty who falls asleep at his post in a time of war may be punished by death:
“Any sentinel or look-out who is found drunk or sleeping upon his post, or leaves it before he is regularly relieved, shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death..."
http://usmilitary.about.com/li...

Why should politicians and other decision makers who fail to allocate the necessary resources to secure critical infrastructure not share the same fate?

It isn't like they tried their best and failed. They dicked around, knowing full well that we have been under (for lack of a better term) cyber attack for the last ten years and have done nothing substantial to stop it.

Now how many good people have their balls (metaphorically speaking) on the table because the decision makers fucked up?

10- seconds of googling.

http://politicalhumor.about.co...

She's a bit nutty.

The Chinese only owns $1.712T of the U.S. public debt. Social Security and other government retirement programs has $5.117T. While we do the Chinese some money, we owe our retires even more money.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/monetarypolicy/f/Who-Owns-US-National-Debt.htm

...the litter most hikers leave on the mountain (including garbage, human waste, etc. which especially befouls the most popular -- and now frequently crowded -- routes), etc.

You leave off my favorite human litter left on Mt. Everest dead bodies, some of them popular milestone markers used by climbers.

But this site assures us the "The number of climbers who have died on Everest is 6.5% of the 4,042 climbers who have reached the summit since it's 1953 first ascent is 6.5%, not necessarily an alarming number." Perhaps, but a one-in-15 chance of dying in a hobby jaunt, might well be an alarming number to most people.

Most trees in the US were chopped down in the 1800's. There are more trees now than there were 100 years ago. Not old growth, but younger, faster growing (with more co2 gobbling).