Slashdot Mirror

No one declares anti-semitism, but anti-zionism.
Zionism is the political movement to re-establish the Jewish State, contradicting the scriptures about staying away... (Why keep Sabbath then?).

In any case, the Zionists waged war and won the land by force, then proceed to get rid of locals, who naturally resisted the invasion in any way they could. Lots of slaughtering and struggle in the process; oh yes, the Zionists did started with terrorism when the land was controlled by the UK... Were you not told about King David Hotel bombing?

The methods the Israeli forces use are simply mass murdering people trapped and sieged in ghettos. Sounds familiar doesn't it? Yes, ethnic cleansing it is; and all sorts of air bombardment and land and even sea warfare against civilians, mostly armed with just rocks and pitiful glorified firecrackers. No NATO bombing, or no fly zones there... Thousands of innocent people die in Gaza, the UN doesn't care, even after Israel destroys UN facilities there.

Say what you like about Iran, they haven't dropped white phosphor cluster bombs against civilians, Israel has; everyone watched "Cast Lead". Israel once bombed a Nuclear power plant in Irak, but nothing of the sort has occurred to Israel from Irak. And before there were incidents like the Sabra and Shatilla massacre, guess who was involved? The current Prime Minister... Reality surpasses intentions.

Things like executions occur when you let religious extremists in power. It would be the same if you followed your traditions to the letter. Do not forget both religions have the same root, and Christianity as well. And all of them have committed atrocities in the past, and in that very same patch of land even.

The Islam scripture actually treat Jews (and Christians) with respect, and before the Zionists invaded, local Jews and Christians did live there just like they live in other countries.

You say Israel is "surrounded", No s*** Sherlock, Zionists invaded the land and waged war against all its neighbors (defeating them). Thats when a violent future for Israel was sealed; and you have fanatics killing their own leaders, when daring to reach peace after decades of bloodshed.

Zionists don't care about anything and anyone, they want their conquered land clean of Palestinians and anti-zionists and they don't care about the UN or even if the whole world declared war against them, they have the nukes ready should they ever lose.

"Anti-semitism" is Zionist propaganda against anyone who dares think different.

No one declares anti-semitism, but anti-zionism.
Zionism is the political movement to re-establish the Jewish State, contradicting the scriptures about staying away... (Why keep Sabbath then?).

In any case, the Zionists waged war and won the land by force, then proceed to get rid of locals, who naturally resisted the invasion in any way they could. Lots of slaughtering and struggle in the process; oh yes, the Zionists did started with terrorism when the land was controlled by the UK... Were you not told about King David Hotel bombing?

The methods the Israeli forces use are simply mass murdering people trapped and sieged in ghettos. Sounds familiar doesn't it? Yes, ethnic cleansing it is; and all sorts of air bombardment and land and even sea warfare against civilians, mostly armed with just rocks and pitiful glorified firecrackers. No NATO bombing, or no fly zones there... Thousands of innocent people die in Gaza, the UN doesn't care, even after Israel destroys UN facilities there.

Say what you like about Iran, they haven't dropped white phosphor cluster bombs against civilians, Israel has; everyone watched "Cast Lead". Israel once bombed a Nuclear power plant in Irak, but nothing of the sort has occurred to Israel from Irak. And before there were incidents like the Sabra and Shatilla massacre, guess who was involved? The current Prime Minister... Reality surpasses intentions.

Things like executions occur when you let religious extremists in power. It would be the same if you followed your traditions to the letter. Do not forget both religions have the same root, and Christianity as well. And all of them have committed atrocities in the past, and in that very same patch of land even.

The Islam scripture actually treat Jews (and Christians) with respect, and before the Zionists invaded, local Jews and Christians did live there just like they live in other countries.

You say Israel is "surrounded", No s*** Sherlock, Zionists invaded the land and waged war against all its neighbors (defeating them). Thats when a violent future for Israel was sealed; and you have fanatics killing their own leaders, when daring to reach peace after decades of bloodshed.

Zionists don't care about anything and anyone, they want their conquered land clean of Palestinians and anti-zionists and they don't care about the UN or even if the whole world declared war against them, they have the nukes ready should they ever lose.

"Anti-semitism" is Zionist propaganda against anyone who dares think different.

No one declares anti-semitism, but anti-zionism.
Zionism is the political movement to re-establish the Jewish State, contradicting the scriptures about staying away... (Why keep Sabbath then?).

In any case, the Zionists waged war and won the land by force, then proceed to get rid of locals, who naturally resisted the invasion in any way they could. Lots of slaughtering and struggle in the process; oh yes, the Zionists did started with terrorism when the land was controlled by the UK... Were you not told about King David Hotel bombing?

The methods the Israeli forces use are simply mass murdering people trapped and sieged in ghettos. Sounds familiar doesn't it? Yes, ethnic cleansing it is; and all sorts of air bombardment and land and even sea warfare against civilians, mostly armed with just rocks and pitiful glorified firecrackers. No NATO bombing, or no fly zones there... Thousands of innocent people die in Gaza, the UN doesn't care, even after Israel destroys UN facilities there.

Say what you like about Iran, they haven't dropped white phosphor cluster bombs against civilians, Israel has; everyone watched "Cast Lead". Israel once bombed a Nuclear power plant in Irak, but nothing of the sort has occurred to Israel from Irak. And before there were incidents like the Sabra and Shatilla massacre, guess who was involved? The current Prime Minister... Reality surpasses intentions.

Things like executions occur when you let religious extremists in power. It would be the same if you followed your traditions to the letter. Do not forget both religions have the same root, and Christianity as well. And all of them have committed atrocities in the past, and in that very same patch of land even.

The Islam scripture actually treat Jews (and Christians) with respect, and before the Zionists invaded, local Jews and Christians did live there just like they live in other countries.

You say Israel is "surrounded", No s*** Sherlock, Zionists invaded the land and waged war against all its neighbors (defeating them). Thats when a violent future for Israel was sealed; and you have fanatics killing their own leaders, when daring to reach peace after decades of bloodshed.

Zionists don't care about anything and anyone, they want their conquered land clean of Palestinians and anti-zionists and they don't care about the UN or even if the whole world declared war against them, they have the nukes ready should they ever lose.

"Anti-semitism" is Zionist propaganda against anyone who dares think different.

It would be very easy to take down the server, but it's much harder to take down a distributed tracker. Also, you don't need to buy large quantities of traffic.

So answer me this-- if you break a legally enforceable, legally binding agreement, in what manner are you not doing illegal activity?

The law can be used to enforce a contract, but there's no prohibition against breaching a contract; it is perfectly legal to disregard contracts.

Now, if a contract is breached, a court may impose various remedies -- which is what enforcement amounts to -- such as the payment of money damages, or in some cases an injunction or specific performance (though these are less common). It's not a punishment, though; the amount of money damages is simply meant to 'heal' the damaged party to some appropriate amount, and there are no punitive damages, and certainly no criminal penalties for mere breach.

In fact, there's actually a theory in the law called efficient breach to the effect that, if a person would be economically better off by breaching a contract, even taking into account damages that would be paid to the other party, etc., then he should breach the contract, since it would be worse to abide by it.

I think defaulting is retarded, but I voted for Obama because democrats are more fiscally responsible than republicans.

They claim to be, thats for sure. But the evidence suggests otherwise, and I am not just talking about the last few years.

See, the Democrats tell you all about the President even though it is the House and Senate that spend money. I am sure you have heard the regaling for President Clinton and his balanced budget by the Democrats. The people actually in control were the Republican majorities in both House and Senate. So those good years you heard about weren't to the Democrats credit, even though they will continue to claim it is.

The problem is that the Democrats continually say one thing (something you want to hear) while actually doing something completely different. I am sure you heard that it was those damn Republicans that ruined ObamaCare (another deception.. it was PelosiCare) but the reality is that combined in both House and Senate, only 1 Republican voted for it. They never needed Republican votes, even though they constantly claimed that they needed them and thats why they were making all those "concessions." They said one thing but reality was starkly different.. they sold everyone out to the insurance companies all by themselves.

The Democrats controlled both House and Senate for 12 of the past 30 years. Whenever they were in control, they never raised taxes on the rich. They however constantly claim that taxes need to be raised on the rich but on more than one occasion they lowered them. They say one thing but do something completely different. For 10 years they had split/joint control with Republicans, and only 8 years were the Republicans in exclusive control.

7.9 trillion of our debt was run up in those 12 years of Democrats control. 3.6 trillion was run up while control was split for 10 years. Only 1.7 trillion of our debt was run up while Republicans had control for 8 years.

You claim that the Democrats are fiscally responsible, but the facts say different. Democrats certainly claim that they are, and if all you do is listen to them (instead of watching what they actually do) then I guess your excuse is that you have been lied to but are too fucking lazy to do anything other than "feel" their words.

Open your eyes. Its not like the truth is hidden.

If your retort to this relies on an appeal to who was President, then you are just lying to yourself in order to justify all these years of believing the other lies. The President doesnt draft the budget, the House does. The President doesnt raise or lower taxes, the House does. From House to Senate to The President. Thats the order of operations on these matters. If things are going really well, then the House gets most of the credit, the senate gets some (but less) credit, and the President gets almost no credit at all (oh.. he didn't veto it.. what an accomplishment.) The same is true when things go badly.. and thats to the tune of 7.9 trillion dollars in deficit spending exclusively owned by the Democrats.

The Democrats will never fix the budget. They are absolutely not fiscally responsible by any measure when you actually look at what they do, rather than listen to what they say.

"At will" for any reason not related to Race, Color, religion, national origin, age, sex, family status, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, veteran status

Which is why, if you are terminated, you will almost never learn the real reason. In fact, most companies don't actually fire anymore except under extreme circumstances (i.e. you were perp-walked out of the building in cuffs by the men in suits and sunglasses). If someone is fired then they were "laid off" and the company will do nothing other than to confirm dates of employment to anyone who inquires after the fact. So, one could argue that all of the stringent laws, lawsuits and lawyers have made any actual discrimination both more sophisticated and more entrenched. As long as plausible deniablity is maintained and nobody in management is dumb enough to write anything down related to these policies; the "at will" provisions make any discrimination lawsuit difficult at best and mostly impossible in practice. Indeed, the recent outcome in the Walmart discrimination case serves to reinforce and legitimize these practices.

You mention Wikipedia as an information source you would like to "rip" and keep. One, that's illegal. Wikipedia is still copyrighted material.

No, it's perfectly legal to download Wikipedia.

Obviously they did not plan for as much or as fast growth as they saw, but adding another computer to a database is actually a pretty simple operation with Google's technologies. The problem is probably more in the bureaucracy of getting another computer for their cluster: having unused computers around costs money, so Google probably minimizes their spare capacity. Adding a computer to BigTable/GFS can definitely be done online (both are designed to expect computers to fail and be replaced as part of normal operation). If you are interested in such thing, I recommend reading the papers on them: they are some pretty impressive feats of engineering.

Obviously they did not plan for as much or as fast growth as they saw, but adding another computer to a database is actually a pretty simple operation with Google's technologies. The problem is probably more in the bureaucracy of getting another computer for their cluster: having unused computers around costs money, so Google probably minimizes their spare capacity. Adding a computer to BigTable/GFS can definitely be done online (both are designed to expect computers to fail and be replaced as part of normal operation). If you are interested in such thing, I recommend reading the papers on them: they are some pretty impressive feats of engineering.

The Republicans are wrong to assume that cutting spending alone will produce a surplus. Take a lot at this graph.

link

US tax revenue is about $2tn. You aren't going to be able to cut $1.3tn without dipping into mandatory expenditures (social security, healthcare, etc). Defense is big, but not big enough to cover the difference, and there's no realistic way to do massive cuts to defense without resulting in massive unemployment (industries related to the DoD are enormous.) Long-term, the various healthcare programs do need cuts taken out of them, and real tax increases are going to be needed to produce a surplus. Even then, it won't be easy, and I'm unconvinced that either party is willing to take the necessary steps.

WTF? If you gut the military and discretionary spending you could easily have 50% of the cuts you need.

Since 1981, the debt ceiling has been raised by 13.2 trillion dollars.

7.9 trillion was under Democrat controlled House and Senate.
1.7 trillion was under Republican controlled House and Senate.
3.6 trillion was under a split of House and Senate.

My source is the New York Times

Yes. Clearly the Democrats see no problem at all with raising the debt ceiling, but those damn tea-baggers refuse to do it without serious spending cuts.

(that period where we nearly balanced the budget? The one you give major gushing credit to Clinton for? Republican's controlled both House and Senate and accomplished it as part of their Contract With America.)

"Shoemakers should be run by shoe guys and software firms by software guys." That's called workers' self-management. It is best implemented through industrial unionism, anarcho-syndicalism, or a network of co-operatives.

The problem with corporate capitalism is twofold. One is that management (the so criticized MBAs) have a class interest separate from both owners and workers. There are cases where management will act to retain their own wealth and power even at the expense of overall efficiency. They are also not necessarily the most knowledgeable about the core work of the businesses they run; much of business school is unscientific trendy buzzword compliant model building and improperly contextualized case studies. The business world chants the mantra, "a manager is a manager". The assumption is they can run any firm regardless of actual knowledge of the technical and social aspects of a particular market. Workers end up with clueless destructive bosses.

The other main problem with corporations, from the perspective of the worker, is the market itself. The short term interests of shareholders often drastically differ from the long-term interests of workers, consumers, and society at large. Investors ignore systemic risk that can destroy whole economies, sell off valuable assets and cut R&D for short term gains at the expense of long term viability, move production to whichever nation can do the work with the lowest human rights and environmental protections at tremendous social cost, etc. This system is clearly sub-optimal, to put it mildly.

"Shoemakers should be run by shoe guys and software firms by software guys." That's called workers' self-management. It is best implemented through industrial unionism, anarcho-syndicalism, or a network of co-operatives.

The problem with corporate capitalism is twofold. One is that management (the so criticized MBAs) have a class interest separate from both owners and workers. There are cases where management will act to retain their own wealth and power even at the expense of overall efficiency. They are also not necessarily the most knowledgeable about the core work of the businesses they run; much of business school is unscientific trendy buzzword compliant model building and improperly contextualized case studies. The business world chants the mantra, "a manager is a manager". The assumption is they can run any firm regardless of actual knowledge of the technical and social aspects of a particular market. Workers end up with clueless destructive bosses.

The other main problem with corporations, from the perspective of the worker, is the market itself. The short term interests of shareholders often drastically differ from the long-term interests of workers, consumers, and society at large. Investors ignore systemic risk that can destroy whole economies, sell off valuable assets and cut R&D for short term gains at the expense of long term viability, move production to whichever nation can do the work with the lowest human rights and environmental protections at tremendous social cost, etc. This system is clearly sub-optimal, to put it mildly.

The Republicans are wrong to assume that cutting spending alone will produce a surplus. Take a lot at this graph.

link

US tax revenue is about $2tn. You aren't going to be able to cut $1.3tn without dipping into mandatory expenditures (social security, healthcare, etc). Defense is big, but not big enough to cover the difference, and there's no realistic way to do massive cuts to defense without resulting in massive unemployment (industries related to the DoD are enormous.) Long-term, the various healthcare programs do need cuts taken out of them, and real tax increases are going to be needed to produce a surplus. Even then, it won't be easy, and I'm unconvinced that either party is willing to take the necessary steps.

And we're also *this close* to winning the war on drugs...

Unless you want to try and make a case for terrorist groups having strength from drug sales, that's an irrelevant conclusion.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Logical_fallacy

*ahem*

And we're also *this close* to winning the war on drugs...

Unless you want to try and make a case for terrorist groups having strength from drug sales, that's an irrelevant conclusion.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Logical_fallacy

Yeah in fact I wonder about carbon dioxide in the coldest parts of Antarctica too. Wiki says it melts at -78 degrees C. I recall a weather station I was involved with managing reported -75 one day. I wonder if you get CO2 frost in conditions like that?

Disclaimer: I've worked in Antarctica at -78C !

You won't get to see CO2 snow for the simple reason that it forms a perfect mix with air. For the same reason that if you mix water and pure alcohol you won't end up with cubes of water-ice floating (or rather, sinking) in alcohol if you put i in a mild freezer.

The Shimane Nuclear Power Plant is a Boiling water reactor. This means it has two water loops in it. One is boiled by the reactor and turns a turbine. A second (probably from the sea in this case) is used to condense that steam and recycle it through the reactor. For any heat based power generation you need a final heat sink, usually the atmosphere (cooling towers) or a body of water for nuclear power plants; coal plants usually have an entirely open system and just go water source to air.

Most of Japan uses BWRs. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Boiling_Water_Reactor

(I am a Nuclear Engineering Student)

The flash memory format known as SD might as well be. Just make sure a reader/writter is installed everywhere, like most netbooks have. Multicard readers are very cheap and come in 3 1/2" size to use floppy slots.

Actually, even if it's a separate physical network as you described, there is no benefit. The size will be its downfall. Every node where encryption/decryption happens — that is, at least every terminal — has to be physically secure all the time, or it's all for nothing. How many users do we want it to have? A million? Out of the million, a thousand will have their password posted on their monitor.

IMHO, the critical infrastructure should be isolated. In order to authenticate and enter, one has to be present on site. The building or whatever has to be designed that way. Literally, no wires exposed. To transfer data in/out of the system, one has to go into a room with closed-circuit TV and authenticate in person.

So do I want a completely-deanonymized Internet? Hell no.

You are in luck! It's just a legislative fiction. In the real world, impersonating someone else on the Internet is very cheap and 100% effective. One only needs to steal credentials, which is VERY hard to detect, since nothing goes missing. The size really matters here. Anything with a million members will be breached within weeks and will remain breached for the rest of its existence. A much smaller network with carefully selected participants may be able to remain secure. This just seems like a trivial hurdle for criminals to overcome.

You don't opt out of paying for the music in your establishment, you stop playing theirs and don't pay. They'll come inspect regularly, but if you are clean, you're clean. Hard part is collecting enough music not gobbled up by ASCAP and similar organisations (the RIAA actually doesn't do this).

- The MafiAA control the booking for 99% of the performance venues that seat more than 50 people. Get yourself to a large enough following, and you'll have problems. Piss off the MafiAA by being independent too long and they'll have you blackballed from performance venues.

Indeed. This is why artists such as Dispatch were never able to play venues such as Madison Square Garden, and were unable to get more than a few people at their show at the Hatch Memorial Shell.

Oh. Maybe not...

- The MafiAA control the booking for 99% of the performance venues that seat more than 50 people. Get yourself to a large enough following, and you'll have problems. Piss off the MafiAA by being independent too long and they'll have you blackballed from performance venues.

Indeed. This is why artists such as Dispatch were never able to play venues such as Madison Square Garden, and were unable to get more than a few people at their show at the Hatch Memorial Shell.

Oh. Maybe not...

It could be a general Gnostic reference. Abraxas is also a Marvel Comics character.

It could be a general Gnostic reference. Abraxas is also a Marvel Comics character.

I personally know three westerners, neither born nor raised in China, who are completely fluent in Chinese (could pass a spoken or written Turing test), and another five who are fluent except for a foreign accent. It's absurd to claim "fewer than 50" when I personally can think of eight firsthand without even trying.

Having visited foreign consulates in China, a quick estimate indicates that there are likely at least 500 westerners with total fluency in Chinese in the embassies and consulates alone.

Trademark != Copyright

Please get it right or stop using the words. If it is used to identify a company or product, it's a trademark.

Trademark != Copyright

Please get it right or stop using the words. If it is used to identify a company or product, it's a trademark.

He appeared to have a small plastic box in his hand and after fiddling with the container he bent down and hid it under a flower box standing on the pavement. He then walked off, talking to somebody on his phone.'"

Why attack a flower box?

Because people are even more suspicious when you hide your bomb in a public waste container? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/Rubbish_bin_in_Dublin.jpg

You need a decent amount of knowledge to set that up secure and reliably.

My VPS host provides a few stock installs (I got a custom FreeBSD install, because it wasn't one of their defaults, although NetBSD is). The list includes a load of TurnKey Linux installs. If you just want email, you can buy a cheap account, pick their webmail appliance from the list, and it's up and running almost immediately. You just need to point your DNS at it (most VPS hosts will also sell you a domain and do that bit for you).

Why does that remind me of The Arsenal of Freedom

The Cessna might actually break some windows, these things are probably closer to the DA20 in weight, so they may scratch the glass a bit if you fly them into a building,

1. Stop being xenophobic gits and get back to the melting-pot culture that made this the best fucking country on Earth in the first place.

I recently spent some time exploring how the US became, "the best fucking country on Earth in the first place." It all basically boils down to the World Wars. The US was very fortunate that neither of the World Wars were fought on it's soil. It spent quite a bit of money investing in industry and manufacturing for the war effort, and with the competition (Europe, Japan, China, parts of Russia) in ruin, the US was able firmly establish itself as a net exporter of goods. The US used this opportunity effectively to pay down the massive debt it incurred during WWII, and emerge as a world power.

As Americans, we like to believe it's some unique quality within all of us that caused us to emerge as a world power. In reality, geography and isolationism were the primary causes.

There are no new materials (not really possible anyways, unless the Table of Elements is continued on the reverse?),

Fullerene is a new materials from the last couple of decades that looks very promising.

Correct. The field in question is micropayments. Hi-Media and Rentabiliweb are both companies that handle micropayments. The French Wikipedia page for Micropayments used to list both companies. Someone from Hi-Media edited the page, and deleted the name of Rentabiliweb. Court found in favour of Rentabiliweb for 25,000 euros (roughly $36,000). Edit logs from Wikipedia and reverse DNS was the main evidence.

Illegal since 1940.

As to if the money spent by NASA over the past 30 years has been wisely spent, that is a whole separate discussion.

The Shuttle appears to make more sense if you look at it as a geopolitical engineering project (more like over the past 40 years, BTW), to provoke the ignorant Soviet generals[1] into pushing for a rampant spending of their counterpart, to have a parity for (non-existent) "strategic advantage" of the STS. Of course, then one has to ask why was it allowed to continue sucking NASA dry for the past two decades?... there even was a good opportunity to terminate the program post-Challenger (of course, that in turn could be also a "revenge of the Buran" of sorts - it was essentially being prepped on its launchpad at the time, and of course the Soviets couldn't be allowed to be the only ones with a shuttle[2])

1. Their engineers very much didn't want to go there, preferring Spiral approach. With the vehicle being just a payload ...ultimately, when forced, also doing it with STS-class vehicle (Energia was a more sensible Ares V-like approach from the start) - but it bled them dry, killed what they really wanted (Zarya "super Soyuz")

2. Who knows, the history might judge the last laugh was even more on Buran - in its only flight, it demonstared the whole main "point" behind a shuttle (its flight profile) to a much fuller degree than any of STS vehicles ever did. With the secondary point (LEO space station) being essentially, for STS fleet, in the form of maintenance and expansion of two space stations meant for Buran...

as compared to the Apollo program in terms of how beneficial it has been

Apollo might be not the best counterexample (vs. the dick-waving reasons alluded to in the posts above); at its core it was a crazy unsustainable crash project, with scientific benefits demonstrably more or less equalled by unmanned probes of the time (especially considering that of the twelve people, only one was a geologist, during the last mission - how the hell did we manage that / one of the saddest testimonies about the mindset of humanity IMHO). "Structural" / educational / etc. benefits revving up already after Sputnik.

I'm really not convinced that the current programs, particularly the SLS, is going to be of any benefit to the country especially as they are doing a retread program to "boldly go where hundreds have gone before" and do so on gilded spacecraft on top of that.

It's debatable if "retreat" fits more to current programs or to... the Shuttle (heck, the ISS can be soon raised a bit, to its intended orbit, finally unconstrained by STS limitations) - everybody at first expected "aerodynamic" or "spaceplane-ish" shapes from reentry vehicles, and worked towards it hard. They proved pretty much unworkable. Blunt shape entry capsule was a relatively late innovation, an improvement; and a bit of a surprise. There's nothing wrong with capsules; physics, rocket equation, are a bitch.

It's simply how dreams about expected modes of space travel turned out to be wrong; dreams extrapolating (not understanding, generally) rates and directions of observed progress. Look at those airplanes from "our" times (imagined during rapid advances of marine tech; and we can even build them - take a Harrier, remove wings and canopy... still a horrible idea vs. "boring" reality).

Consider how the "spaceplanes" came to dominate scifi... around the 40s, during rapid advances of airplane tech (I can see a pattern...); how the designers and decision-makers of the Shuttle were undoubtedly raised on those works of fiction. And how they gave us an analogue of Catalina, at best (Spruce Goose, at worst); but something which looked very soothing and "inspiring"

you might want to edit this:

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wiktionary/en/wiki/for_all_intensive_purposes

PalmOS was much closer. I can't find a decent picture in 10 seconds of searching, but this should look familiar to anyone who has used an iOS or Android device...

I find it sad that an audience who ran away from MS a decade ago is willing to embrace something so easily from an arguably much more sinister source.

Care to follow up with information on more sinister stuff than the Halloween documents, patent trolling and the numerous anti-competitive practices to lock out alternatives, as I am unable to find them in search.

I look forward to reading your sources.

I find it sad that an audience who ran away from MS a decade ago is willing to embrace something so easily from an arguably much more sinister source.

Care to follow up with information on more sinister stuff than the Halloween documents, patent trolling and the numerous anti-competitive practices to lock out alternatives, as I am unable to find them in search.

I look forward to reading your sources.

Wikimedia browser share gives Chrome at 15.6%.

(This is just one site, of course. But (a) Wikimedia has no interest in pushing the numbers (analysts' business model is selling out) (b) it's a top-10 general interest site used by normal people, not just geeks (c) this is worldwide.)

As soon as they realized that dogs don't have wings, did they consider fitting them with jet packs?

this was tried before but unfortunately the dog was dead before she could locate any corpses

What scarce resource? Uranium? Thorium? These supposed scarce resources will long outlast coal and hydrocarbons even if we replace all the worlds current power production with nuclear.

Dangerous technology? Nuclear is the safest form of technology in the world completely irregardless of what kind of measurement you want to apply to it. You're just scared because on the rare occasion that something does go wrong it stays in the news for a month of scaremongering. Fukushima had what ... 1 death? Or how about closer to home:

The death rate for the entire lifecycle of the nuclear power industry in the USA has been .... 0 per year. As far as I know it's 0 per EVER. That includes mining, haulage, etc as well as radiation related cancer cases.
The death rate for the lifecycle of the coal power industry in the USA is 34 deaths per year.

If you say one industry is bigger than the other then just look at in terms of Deaths per TWh of generation Coal in the USA alone is 15 deaths / TWh, Nuclear world wide is 0.04 deaths / TWh.

Clearly due to safety concerns we must ban all forms of power except for Nuclear.

My comment about the Greenpeace propaganda still stands. The best place to learn about Nuclear power is neither www.greenpeace.com nor www.iaea.org. Find something without bias. It may open your eyes a bit.

The classic photo demonstrating the impressive photoshopping skills of Soviet journalists(50 years before Photoshop appeared is the one with Stalin and Yezhov: before and after.

The classic photo demonstrating the impressive photoshopping skills of Soviet journalists(50 years before Photoshop appeared is the one with Stalin and Yezhov: before and after.

The Therac-25 had some "Dangerous Programming Mistakes".

I wonder if the nudie scanners have any similar mistakes.

The Therac-25 had two fundamental flaws, not one. One was a programming mistake. The other was lack of a hardware safety interlock to prevent electron beams from being emitted at dangerously high levels. That was a design mistake: leaving it to software to ensure that no lethal beams were directed at patients. I consider the latter mistake to be the more serious.

The Therac-25 had some "Dangerous Programming Mistakes".

I wonder if the nudie scanners have any similar mistakes.

The Therac-25 had two fundamental flaws, not one. One was a programming mistake. The other was lack of a hardware safety interlock to prevent electron beams from being emitted at dangerously high levels. That was a design mistake: leaving it to software to ensure that no lethal beams were directed at patients. I consider the latter mistake to be the more serious.