Slashdot Mirror

Yes, but the first result is this post!!!

The answer to your question would be: 6.31 zettawatt hours. Over the lifespan of our solar system.[1]

[1] Post assumes reader is a member of Earth's solar system. Apologies to any alien forms or supernatural deities.

That's what I did when an app came out with an insulting pricetag.

Bad analogy, and not really funny.

Linux on the desktop doesn't cost $$ anything except my time and even then as long as you have reasonable expectations it just works.

At least you don't have to worry about bricking your system like PS3 4.45
https://www.google.com/search?q=ps3+system+update+brick

I installed a nice parking app -- really neat. (Forgot which one it was, sorry.) Then I noticed it was running in the background. Not inactive, running. I might accept that after I've launched the app and set a timer (timer alerts, anyone?) but it was running All The Time

Emailed the developer about it, and goodbye. Hell, Google's "My Tracks" and tracks me when I want to, and Google Maps + Location History tracks me as well. (At least that's disable-able and delete-able -- as much as Google deletes anything. And here I thought *I* was a data hoarder.)

What's the difference between "apps" and "Real software"? Is it the fact that RealPlayer for Android is unavailable in the United States?

You are one overly uptight asshole if you really think that.

you are nihilistic and self centered if you think it's okay to make people handle disgusting stinking cat poop because you are too lazy to provide an environment for your own pet in your own yard.

i challenge you to ask 5 of your non-pet owning friends how they feel about stepping in shit from other people's pets in their own yard. to the rest of humans, this is common sense but i think you might be surprised at the answers.

You call the cops on them because the damn birds broke the law?

i guess you are trying to use some absurd logic here? birds and squirrels are a natural part of the environment. your pet is not. my yard is not your cat's ecosystem. you want to have a cat, good for you. take care of it in your house and your yard. you smell the poop in the little box or in your flower bed.

i'll also peg cats that hang out stalking under my bird feeder. poor kitty? do your research.
https://www.google.com/search?q=cats+invasive+species&oq=cats+invas&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0l5.2955j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=91&ie=UTF-8

This is one of my favorite automated animal deterrents, also works well on teenage boys who come to peek into my daughter's window at night. Easy to find via Google.

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Cisco+Lawful+Enforcement%22.&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=rcs

For example:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/lawful/intercept/65LIch1.html

Religion about tools is just silly.

Smite him, minions!

You are suggesting that airport security is an easy problem to solve. I suspect this is very wrong.

I'm no fan of the TSA, but let's not be stupid here - you have to process millions of almost-all-innocent people in the search of a few actual suspects, who will have taken great steps to evade detection, and who did so in the full knowledge of all your techniques. It's not an "A couple of X should be able to take care of that" problem.

There were no cars with Air Bags being sold in the US before 1973, and the only reason that Ford & GM (And I's suspect other) were developing Airbags in 1970 were to meed the federal requirements that every car sold to the federal government had to have air bags. the following news article alludes to that fact.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2199&dat=19700602&id=tcQxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EOYFAAAAIBAJ&pg=7132,4036595

If you cannot see this link, that the reason Ford and GM were developing Airbags in 1970 was for because the government required it. There were no other cars, there was no competition on airbags.

According to Mercedes, it wasn't until 1980 that they felt they were ready to introduce airbags, 7 years after the federally mandated requirement that Ford and GM were trying to meet in 1970 and introduced in 1973.

> All of these things were already working and being sold in Japanese and German made cars.

There were no cars with airbags before 1973. GM & Ford introduced cars in 1973 to sell to the federal government that had air bags. Seven years later Mercedes thought they were ready, and introduced it. To my mind 1973 comes before 1980.

I strongly recommend Cloud-to-butt Chrome extension. You won't see "cloud" anymore and your browsing experience will be massively improved (and funnier).

WTF is that garbage? DO NOT WANT.

GWT has been open sourced. I am hopeful that this can only be a good thing. There is still at least as much activity on the project as when it was not open source. The 2.6.0 RC1 release notes look great. Just recently a Google employee was working on a bug I was tracking. And there's the GWT Create conference coming up.

I was worried about GWT when I saw Dart coming up and getting attention, because I've enjoyed writing apps in GWT, and would like it to continue to be an option when we're scoping new projects. So far what I'm seeing from the new status of the project is helping to keep my confidence.

> I vehemently deny that the Government did anything that improved the technology or shortened development time. That was happening at Mercedes, BMW, Volvo, etc.. so the US had to compete.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2199&dat=19700602&id=tcQxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EOYFAAAAIBAJ&pg=7132,4036595 [google.com]

You may disagree, but the news story above shows that you are wrong. The federal government made it a requirement that in 1973 that all cars it buys must have an airbag, which pushed the US car makers to develop it. It would not have happened without the Governments involvement, ie the car makers would not have voluntarily have made any cars in 1973 that had airbags.

I usually get 3 to 5 a-holes a day who are on their phone, texting while driving or as you indicate looking down while they swerve into my lane. It's an epidemic and either the FCC needs to ban this kind of communication use in the car or the carriers need to only allow voice calls only while in motion. Even then people yakking on the phone is a big killer. It's also worse during rush hour because people think it's safer since they're in stop/start traffic.

I put my phone into "I'm driving and will get back to you later mode" with Drive Agent.

Makerbot also launched a call for open models of math manipulatives on Thingiverse (you might remember them from elementary school) so that teachers have something useful to print immediately.

Why are we encouraging schools to buy thousands of dollars in equipment (the 3D printer, the computer to drive it, the materials, etc - nevermind the teacher getting sent off to training seminars and whatnot) when we don't have enough textbooks for students, teachers for decades have been paying out-of-pocket for school supplies, and students are not performing well because they're hungry?

We don't need 3D printers. We need paper, chalk, textbooks, and sandwiches.

Makerbot also launched a call for open models of math manipulatives on Thingiverse (you might remember them from elementary school) so that teachers have something useful to print immediately.

Why are we encouraging schools to buy thousands of dollars in equipment (the 3D printer, the computer to drive it, the materials, etc - nevermind the teacher getting sent off to training seminars and whatnot) when we don't have enough textbooks for students, teachers for decades have been paying out-of-pocket for school supplies, and students are not performing well because they're hungry?

We don't need 3D printers. We need paper, chalk, textbooks, and sandwiches.

Makerbot also launched a call for open models of math manipulatives on Thingiverse (you might remember them from elementary school) so that teachers have something useful to print immediately.

Why are we encouraging schools to buy thousands of dollars in equipment (the 3D printer, the computer to drive it, the materials, etc - nevermind the teacher getting sent off to training seminars and whatnot) when we don't have enough textbooks for students, teachers for decades have been paying out-of-pocket for school supplies, and students are not performing well because they're hungry?

We don't need 3D printers. We need paper, chalk, textbooks, and sandwiches.

OJ has about a 1.8:1.1:1.0 ratio of sucrose:fructose:glucose. Pretty similar to a lot of other sources of sugars, including some common blends of HFCS, once the sucrose has broken down.

How they maintain security with C and C++ applets?

-- hendrik

NaCl (in its standard, non-Portable flavor) is essentially a bytecode that happens to be directly executable as machine code (either x86-64 or ARM). The bytecode can be statically verified to mathematically prove that the instructions obey certain rules (e.g. exactly one interpretation for any bytecode, execution only leaves the verified bytecode by calling trusted functions, can only read/write memory in the sandbox, cannot write to bytecode, etc.). As I understand it, PNaCl is similar to classic x86/ARM NaCl but trades fake bytecode for real bytecode (LLVM's intermediate representation, last I heard) and statically compiles it to native machine code after the bytecode verification step. Basically, in this scheme the verified C code can run at near-native speed, but it can only communicate with the world outside the sandbox by calling trusted functions that the enclosing app chooses to expose.

Theoretically, Java ought to be just as strongly sandboxed as NaCl: Java code in a JVM sandbox can only call trusted functions that the JVM chooses to expose, too. But in practice the Java standard library exposes a ridiculously broad attack surface, giving sandboxed apps plenty of chances to exploit bugs and escape the sandbox. (For instance, java.lang.String is a final class today because folks discovered that you could subclass it to make it mutable, pass a sandbox-approved value to e.g. a file I/O function, then modify the value to a sandbox-forbidden value after the security check but before the OS system call.) Basically, Java's attack surface is broad and leaky because Java was designed for running embedded devices and servers, not for sandboxed applets downloaded from hostile sites on the Internet. Applets were a distant afterthought compared to Java's "let's write an OS for set-top cable boxes" origin.

In contrast with Java, Chrome's implementation of [P]NaCl only exposes the Pepper API, and the Pepper API was designed from the ground up to be called by sandboxed code fetched from a malicious website. Looking at the Pepper C API site, the attack surface seems... bigger... than I would have expected. But most of the functionality I see there is also exposed to JavaScript, where the code is every bit as hostile. Almost any "attack surface, WTF" argument would also argue against JavaScript and all modern web design. And if they're smart, one API is hopefully built on top of the other (plus a thunk layer made of machine-generated code), so that there's only one pool of security bugs to fix.

It is native code but still running in a sandbox.
https://developers.google.com/native-client/dev/overview#security
The only interaction between this process and the outside world is through sanctioned browser interfaces.

They've got a sandbox that works. It's BSD-licensed, it's been public for years, it's drop-dead simple.

I'm going to guess it was faster to type your last post than:

https://www.google.com/search?q=terminator+nibble+magazine

But here's the first result, which explains how it came from Nibble magazine:

http://www.pagetable.com/?p=64

My C++ compiler does not compile signal: or slot: tokens. Qt is not C++ in the same way as Microsoft COM is not C++, even though its mostly built with C++ and MIDL generator spits out C++ boilerplate as an option.

My C++ compiler doesn't compile "#include" either. Because it doesn't have to. You need to run the file through a preprocessor. That's part of the standard, and is unavoidable at this time.

If don't like the use of the C preprocessor, fine. But don't lie saying that is not "standard". It might not be the part of the standard that you like the most, but is standard. And using a tool for generating code is perfectly normal. Or is protobuf no longer a "standard C++" tool?

There is a proof of concept clang plugin that would provide the QObject features without MOC. That doesn't make it better in all use cases, since that would be tied to a compiler.

No, seriosly, one might not like one solution to a problem. But having no solution is worse. If one day there is a better solution, the Qt project will adopt it. But right now there isn't one that fills all the features provided by Qt with the current implementation.

Could the US use improvements in this area? Absolutely, and I want to be clear on that point. But what I consistently notice is that people, particularly those who have either never left the US to experience other parts of the world, or else those from smaller countries who have never traveled across a single country as large as the US, have no appreciation for just how difficult of a problem the US faces as compared to many other developed nations, simply due to its massive size.

It would be one thing if the argument were solely that people living in Story, Indiana or Nothing, Arizona couldn't get broadband speeds.

While that is an issue, it's not what causes much of the complaint about the state of internet services in the US.

I live in Seattle, within the city limits. I can't get better than 4.5mbps down on a good day, and certainly not in the evening when everyone's watching Netflix, short of ponying up for a business line to the tune of substantially more expense. Five years ago, I lived within spitting distance of the Google campus, and couldn't get better than 1.5mbps down. These are major cities, densely populated, with all the infrastructure right there.

By comparison, when I left Japan in 2005, my bare-bones residential service -- the cheapest, slowest, least-of-everything-and-still-be-online package gave me 18 mbps for around $30 a month. And it was scheduled for an upgrade, at no cost to the subscriber, to 24 mbps two months later.

The key difference? Competition. For all the malarkey about free markets and rainbows, the US market sucks for internet services. A handful of companies have effective geographic monopolies (or at least very small cartels), giving them leverage to jack prices and keep services at the bare minimum. In Japan, the kind of lockdowns that are the status quo in the US aren't possible due to an effective regulatory regime, necessitating that companies actually compete for consumers' business on the basis of service and price. The differences are amazing. Or depressing, depending on where you live.

Could the US use improvements in this area? Absolutely, and I want to be clear on that point. But what I consistently notice is that people, particularly those who have either never left the US to experience other parts of the world, or else those from smaller countries who have never traveled across a single country as large as the US, have no appreciation for just how difficult of a problem the US faces as compared to many other developed nations, simply due to its massive size.

It would be one thing if the argument were solely that people living in Story, Indiana or Nothing, Arizona couldn't get broadband speeds.

While that is an issue, it's not what causes much of the complaint about the state of internet services in the US.

I live in Seattle, within the city limits. I can't get better than 4.5mbps down on a good day, and certainly not in the evening when everyone's watching Netflix, short of ponying up for a business line to the tune of substantially more expense. Five years ago, I lived within spitting distance of the Google campus, and couldn't get better than 1.5mbps down. These are major cities, densely populated, with all the infrastructure right there.

By comparison, when I left Japan in 2005, my bare-bones residential service -- the cheapest, slowest, least-of-everything-and-still-be-online package gave me 18 mbps for around $30 a month. And it was scheduled for an upgrade, at no cost to the subscriber, to 24 mbps two months later.

The key difference? Competition. For all the malarkey about free markets and rainbows, the US market sucks for internet services. A handful of companies have effective geographic monopolies (or at least very small cartels), giving them leverage to jack prices and keep services at the bare minimum. In Japan, the kind of lockdowns that are the status quo in the US aren't possible due to an effective regulatory regime, necessitating that companies actually compete for consumers' business on the basis of service and price. The differences are amazing. Or depressing, depending on where you live.

Yeah, I understand that Hurd is going to be big and professional, unlike Linux.

You must be a genius. just rattling off that without reading any studies or understanding the affects of lead on the brain.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=study+lead+crime&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ei=L12CUtzwHceRiALr0oGQAw&ved=0CCwQgQMwAA

http://www.ricknevin.com/uploads/Nevin_2000_Env_Res_Author_Manuscript.pdf

Can't find the documentary, but a useful snippet

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2199&dat=19700602&id=tcQxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EOYFAAAAIBAJ&pg=7132,4036595

Also, http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2199&dat=19700602&id=tcQxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EOYFAAAAIBAJ&pg=7132,4036595 shows that air bags in 1970 were being prepared to meet the government deadline for federally bought cars.

> As to the auto makers wanting to have people pay for air-bags, I agree with your point to an extent. However, you continue to present > the argument as though air-bags didn't exist before Government regulation. That is factually incorrect!

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2199&dat=19700602&id=tcQxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EOYFAAAAIBAJ&pg=7132,4036595

From 1970, there was a requirement for them to be available in 1973. In 1970 they were still being tested to meet that deadline.

I think to state that air bags didn't really exist in cars before government regulation isn't that far from a factually correct statement.

Oh it wasn't happening

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2199&dat=19700602&id=tcQxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EOYFAAAAIBAJ&pg=7132,4036595

I find the new alcohol-free Weizen beers to be quite good, as a designated driver drink for example.
Erdinger Alkoholfrei suits my taste well. I really like the normal Erdinger so that was a safe bet.
Bavaria 0.0 wit (Google translated version) is a daily "relaxing drink" for me.
There are many alcohol free weizen beers nowadays: Paulaner, Schneider, Franziskaner (German) and many others.
Google for alkoholfrei weizenbier, although that would demand some experience in the German language (as this is where all Weizen beers come from).

Maybe they should start prosecuting all of the immigrant child rapists instead of letting them get away with it. Oh no, can't do that because it would be deemed "racist."

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.friatider.se%2F11-aring-gruppvaldtogs-pa-badhus&act=url

85% of reported rapes in Sweden are perpetrated by Muslim immigrants.

http://www.newsmax.com/jameswalsh/europe-immigration-muslim-obama/2013/05/29/id/506837

Why on earth would you get that picture?

Image search for "bikie gangs": https://www.google.com/search?q=bikie+gangs&espv=210&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=pqqBUuvbDsj22AWRkIDYBA&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ

Motorcycle outlaw gangs - I do believe you have them in the US as well (though they aren't quite as notorious as the Australian ones perhaps?)

See above comments. FTFA: "to commercialize the unproven technology of floating offshore wind power" Keyword: floating.

Yup. Now if only there were some books, engineering societies, companies, or institutes that one could consult that specialize in the construction of offshore structures....

Looks like you're right.

I didn't know that.

This may be surprising to you, samzenpus, but there is an entire field of study called "human-computer interaction", and it has been around for about as long as computers have. And one of the most valuable methods for gathering data has ALWAYS BEEN the observation of users.

Now you and I are aware and always do a good job usability of course, but crappy design is still with us far too often, no matter how many times stories like this appear. And there are plenty of designers and programmers and engineers who still blame "stupid users" for not being able to use their systems. And plenty of those chime in every time this sort of article appears here.

At least the software world can take some comfort that everyone else sucks at this too. Ever seen a door with a labels on it that say "Push" and "Pull"? We can't even reliably design doors that can be operated without a user manual*. Door designers (and everybody else) can watch people push on a pull handle and vice-versa, and still insist that their design is too beautiful, elegant, symmetrical, etc. and that users should simply adapt. Unless designers of doors, software and everything else watch users use stuff and then do something with that data -- other than concluding that users suck -- nothing gets better.

*Yes, yes, I know about building codes and doors leading in and out of buildings, thanks Slashdot pedants, know-it-alls, and pedantic know-it-alls.

"Control" here means that youtube comments don't wind up being posted anywhere but in youtube.

Well, until someone decides to copy them, anyway. Trying to control stuff you post on the public Internet is... optimistic.

If someone wants to copy something that I post, that's fine. I'm talking about my own actions.

In any case, I think you're under some misapprehension that Google+ is somehow distinct from YouTube. YouTube comments aren't "being posted" on Google+. It's the same system.

Whatever that means, YouTube and Google+ are two different websites in the most basic literal sense; they have different urls. By default, if I post a comment on YouTube once, it will now appear twice, at two different addresses, One address begins with www.youtube.com. The other begins with https://plus.google.com./ It's just a default, but it pissed me off.

"My pants tore at the seam. It was very embarrassing. It seems I am doomed to never live it down."

Seam != Seem

Seam
Seem
__________

"If I shoot every clay pigeon, I will be proud of myself. Last time I only shot half of them."

Shoot, pronounced: shoe-t
Shot, past tense, pronounced: sh-awe-t
__________

[P]etro cars having small electric fires or oil fires are more common, but usually limited damage that a single fire extinguisher will put out.

How about:

"Petro cars more commonly have small electric fires or oil fires, but these are usually limited to damage that a single fire extinguisher will put out."

It's still not great, but it is as close to your original sentence as I could come without breaking the language. Also, several of your sentences need additional commas. If you pause while reading a sentence, you probably need a comma there.
__________

Also the problem that it, as a exotic performance car, has very little ground clearance making smaller objects, that wouldn't be touched by 90% of cars on the road, to nearly total the car.

This is so badly mangled that I'm not certain what you meant. Perhaps something like this:

"Also the problem that, as an exotic performance car, it has very little ground clearance makes smaller objects (that wouldn't be touched by 90% of cars on the road) nearly total the car."

It's still not good, for a number of reasons. It's a bit of a run-on, and the tenses don't agree very well. "The car", here, must refer to the model in a general sense in order to remain factually correct, whereas the story properly involves a single, literal car. This lends itself to ambiguity, and makes it harder to read. (Note also that "exotic" begins with a vowel, meaning you can't precede it with "a", but rather with "an") Let's try again:

"Being an exotic performance car is also a problem. It has very little ground clearance. Smaller objects, that wouldn't be touched by 90% of cars on the road, can total a Tesla."

or:

"Being an exotic performance car is also a problem. It has very little ground clearance. A smaller object, that wouldn't be touched by 90% of cars on the road, nearly totaled this car." (This is not what happened, but it's no longer ambiguous.)
__________

This message brought to you by the Internet Fluency Foundation.

"My pants tore at the seam. It was very embarrassing. It seems I am doomed to never live it down."

Seam != Seem

Seam
Seem
__________

"If I shoot every clay pigeon, I will be proud of myself. Last time I only shot half of them."

Shoot, pronounced: shoe-t
Shot, past tense, pronounced: sh-awe-t
__________

[P]etro cars having small electric fires or oil fires are more common, but usually limited damage that a single fire extinguisher will put out.

How about:

"Petro cars more commonly have small electric fires or oil fires, but these are usually limited to damage that a single fire extinguisher will put out."

It's still not great, but it is as close to your original sentence as I could come without breaking the language. Also, several of your sentences need additional commas. If you pause while reading a sentence, you probably need a comma there.
__________

Also the problem that it, as a exotic performance car, has very little ground clearance making smaller objects, that wouldn't be touched by 90% of cars on the road, to nearly total the car.

This is so badly mangled that I'm not certain what you meant. Perhaps something like this:

"Also the problem that, as an exotic performance car, it has very little ground clearance makes smaller objects (that wouldn't be touched by 90% of cars on the road) nearly total the car."

It's still not good, for a number of reasons. It's a bit of a run-on, and the tenses don't agree very well. "The car", here, must refer to the model in a general sense in order to remain factually correct, whereas the story properly involves a single, literal car. This lends itself to ambiguity, and makes it harder to read. (Note also that "exotic" begins with a vowel, meaning you can't precede it with "a", but rather with "an") Let's try again:

"Being an exotic performance car is also a problem. It has very little ground clearance. Smaller objects, that wouldn't be touched by 90% of cars on the road, can total a Tesla."

or:

"Being an exotic performance car is also a problem. It has very little ground clearance. A smaller object, that wouldn't be touched by 90% of cars on the road, nearly totaled this car." (This is not what happened, but it's no longer ambiguous.)
__________

This message brought to you by the Internet Fluency Foundation.

Just look at all the failures that show up in a google search https://www.google.com/search?q=trailer+hitch+ball+weld+failure&client=firefox-a&hs=OeR&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=RHWAUoGBPcasigLp9YDADw&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1344&bih=776

Never heard of this guy.

He actually is a celebrity, known amongst geeks for his character on Star Trek: The Next Generation.

Asking his opinion on Google Glass is completely intentional, as his character on the series was a blind man who viewed the word through a device that sat at eye-level on his head [link to pics] and interfaced directly with the visual cortex. The device allowed him to see the world in an unnatural but heightened way far outside the normal visible light-spectrum, closer to electromagnetic spectrum (someone will reply to this and give exact spectrum/wavelengths I'm sure).

So some marketoid is trying to draw a parallel between the character's visor and Google Glass.

krs440 noted:

Attribution can be tricky. You seem pretty sure that the original statement should be attributed to Paul Mellon, and mention it's from January, 1942. What about this? http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1144&dat=19380705&id=ZysbAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BE0EAAAAIBAJ&pg=1516,6094461 It's the July 5th, 1938 edition of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, specifically, a story entitled "Economics in Eight Words". The last line is "There ain't no such thing as free lunch". I assume that the difference of "There aint" vs "There's" and the missing "a" aren't terribly important. I have no idea if this is the first occurrence of it either.

If you read the reference I cited (pause for derisive laughter from the peanut gallery), you'll note that IT draws a distinction between the two formulations. Like Friedman with the more formal phraseology, Robert A. Heinlein is frequently credited with "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch." In fact, he DID come up with the acronym TANSTAAFL (in his 1966 novel The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress), which is now widely used, but, as you point out, he certainly didn't coin the parent observation.

So, yes, proper attribution can be obscure. But I still say that's NO excuse for obvious mis-attribution, and no excuse whatsoever for leaving out attribution of living authors' _bon mots_ altogether - especially when the source of those IS indisputable.

Attribution can be tricky. You seem pretty sure that the original statement should be attributed to Paul Mellon, and mention it's from January, 1942. What about this? http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1144&dat=19380705&id=ZysbAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BE0EAAAAIBAJ&pg=1516,6094461 It's the July 5th, 1938 edition of the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, specifically, a story entitled "Economics in Eight Words". The last line is "There ain't no such thing as free lunch". I assume that the difference of "There aint" vs "There's" and the missing "a" aren't terribly important. I have no idea if this is the first occurrence of it either.

It is mind boggling that people are evidently buying this stock without having looked at their finances, easily available from Google. Surely they would have noticed that Twitter has negative net income of -$64M. Worse, it looks like have had net losses in each of the last three years and their losses appear to be accelerating downward (see graph on top of the page) even with increasing revenue. I have no idea how anybody came up with a $20 market cap value. To me they look like an overpriced loser on their way to bankruptcy.

Build a tool to help Slashdot editors find dupes... Oh wait, they did.

There _are_ some rather worrying reports floating around on Steve's agenda.

http://www.droid-life.com/2013/07/29/cyanogenmod-founder-contemplating-abolishing-root-requirements-for-custom-roms/
https://plus.google.com/106978520009932034644/posts/L8FJkrcahPs
http://www.landofdroid.com/2013/more-on-whats-going-on-at-cyanogenmod/

We'll see.

lrn2html, dumbass.

http://www.droid-life.com/2013/07/29/cyanogenmod-founder-contemplating-abolishing-root-requirements-for-custom-roms/
https://plus.google.com/106978520009932034644/posts/L8FJkrcahPs
http://www.landofdroid.com/2013/more-on-whats-going-on-at-cyanogenmod/