In that case, it is the wrong question. Humanity could build such a thing, but probably won't. Technically, it was already possible during the second world war (if you can build an intercontinental ballistic missile, you can build a spacecraft).
We did, but that was then. In the Netherlands, for example, a minister recently proposed a law that granted the police the right to hack any computer (with a court order, but that does not make it any less dangerous, given the fact that this tiny country already has the most phone taps in the world in place) and install spyware to monitor all communications.
Yup. I learned the hard way as well. Had an Aspire One, which came with BIOS problems built-in. Countless BIOS upgrades later, the problems (hanging machine) are still not fixed and Acer has given up any interest, so there is a guarantee it will never be fixed. I will never buy anything from Acer again.
It does not spell the end of a global network, just like spam did not end the popularity of e-mail. More programs that are capable of storing things in the cloud will feature encryption from now on, and more people will use it.
Err... no. In the U$A, you get subsidized for growing "commodity crops" (it takes an American to invent that word): soy, wheat, cotton or maize. Even if the land is no longer used for growing those crops! So your landlord may receive money because in the past the land was a cotton filed. But as soon as you grow something else (and the government finds out), like strawberries in your garden, the subsidy stops and if you are unlucky your landlord will sue you for "damages".
US companies are expected to follow the laws of the country they work in. So if they work in the US, even with data from the EU, they are expected to offload anything to any government organisation without asking questions. "for citizens of the EU" is meaningless. Data is data. People are just resources.
It is the full responsibility of the NHS to make sure patient data isn't leaked. This means it is almost criminal to outsource it, and if they do outsource it, it must be audited. But if they are even too stupid to wipe the hard drives before handing the machines over, they are just incapable of working with sensitive data.
Maybe they want to hide that they were against usury (the term was later rebranded to "interest" to make it sound less evil) and they officially stated that "their opinion about it has not changed"?
True. I may be a geek, so I read "free software" as in speech. The French government probably reads it as in "lunch". Even then, I can imagine that commercial software would be offered free of charge, but with the condition that the company gets tax benefits or other financial "stimuli" to get paid behind the back. Like getting a "free" mobile phone with your subscription.
The Dutch government has put all kinds of open-source-friendly laws into place as well, but does not even abide their own laws, especially when it comes to open source software. So I am waiting for the news that the French actually DO switch to open source software instead of just saying they will.
Go work in the IT sector, or just apply for a job and run away screaming. One company I applied at had a problem with the fact that I had hobbies. That would mean that I was maybe not available when the did a software release and all hell broke loose. When I told them that appropriate testing on all levels (from unit tests to integration tests) would have prevented the hell to break loose, their reaction was that they did not have the time for that.
So I told them I thought I applied to a job as a professional programmer, but apparently there was no room for professionals there. Alas, companies like that make up the vast majority.
But there is no need to tax in dollars. In the past taxes were collected in goods. Farmers had to hand over a part of their crops, for example. Our money system is broken "by design" (the design evolved into failure) and there is no need to keep using it, other than make the self-announced financial overlords happy. The world would be a by far better place without interest bearing fiat currencies that have to be lent into existence by some private organization.
In fact, if the government (as representative to the society) would create money, that money would have its in-build tax. For example, if the government would pay for a bridge with its own created money, it would mean that is would reward the construction workers for a job essentially done for society. This money could then circulate and the only reason to pay taxes would be to keep the amount of money and its availability in balance. Right now, we are essentially paying taxes to the financial elite and even governments suffer.
If I am a developer, I am responsible for the code. Period. My IDE can throw stupid comments at me all it wants, but that does not change the fact that the code is MY responsibility, not the tool's. The tool cannot take responsibility.
Slashdot Mirror
In that case, it is the wrong question. Humanity could build such a thing, but probably won't. Technically, it was already possible during the second world war (if you can build an intercontinental ballistic missile, you can build a spacecraft).
We did, but that was then. In the Netherlands, for example, a minister recently proposed a law that granted the police the right to hack any computer (with a court order, but that does not make it any less dangerous, given the fact that this tiny country already has the most phone taps in the world in place) and install spyware to monitor all communications.
Yup. I learned the hard way as well. Had an Aspire One, which came with BIOS problems built-in. Countless BIOS upgrades later, the problems (hanging machine) are still not fixed and Acer has given up any interest, so there is a guarantee it will never be fixed. I will never buy anything from Acer again.
Are there really any people who write lengthy documents on their glossy, greasy tablet touch screens?
Probably not that many. However, there may be more people who edit an existing lengthy document on a portable device.
And then he cycled away on his pennyfarthing?
They probably have some parts made of wub fur. Those machines are more advanced than I thought!
It does not spell the end of a global network, just like spam did not end the popularity of e-mail. More programs that are capable of storing things in the cloud will feature encryption from now on, and more people will use it.
Be honest. You subsidized their software just as much as everyone else ;)
There, fixed that for you.
If it being broken... grab the popcorn.
Err... no. In the U$A, you get subsidized for growing "commodity crops" (it takes an American to invent that word): soy, wheat, cotton or maize. Even if the land is no longer used for growing those crops! So your landlord may receive money because in the past the land was a cotton filed. But as soon as you grow something else (and the government finds out), like strawberries in your garden, the subsidy stops and if you are unlucky your landlord will sue you for "damages".
US companies are expected to follow the laws of the country they work in. So if they work in the US, even with data from the EU, they are expected to offload anything to any government organisation without asking questions. "for citizens of the EU" is meaningless. Data is data. People are just resources.
Well, sort of. At such low Reynolds numbers it is more like swimming.
It is the full responsibility of the NHS to make sure patient data isn't leaked. This means it is almost criminal to outsource it, and if they do outsource it, it must be audited. But if they are even too stupid to wipe the hard drives before handing the machines over, they are just incapable of working with sensitive data.
Maybe they want to hide that they were against usury (the term was later rebranded to "interest" to make it sound less evil) and they officially stated that "their opinion about it has not changed"?
Trop long, pas lu. I just read that the original text says "libre".
True. I may be a geek, so I read "free software" as in speech. The French government probably reads it as in "lunch". Even then, I can imagine that commercial software would be offered free of charge, but with the condition that the company gets tax benefits or other financial "stimuli" to get paid behind the back. Like getting a "free" mobile phone with your subscription.
The Dutch government has put all kinds of open-source-friendly laws into place as well, but does not even abide their own laws, especially when it comes to open source software. So I am waiting for the news that the French actually DO switch to open source software instead of just saying they will.
The main problem with gmarr/\/\/\/\/ grammar checking is that the error is already written if the pen vibrates.
Will that infect my lawnmower? I'd better destroy it then before it gets dangerous...
about the UK throwing away it's engineering legacy.
So the kids learn to build 3D printers with 15 times the number of parts that are necessary?
Go work in the IT sector, or just apply for a job and run away screaming. One company I applied at had a problem with the fact that I had hobbies. That would mean that I was maybe not available when the did a software release and all hell broke loose. When I told them that appropriate testing on all levels (from unit tests to integration tests) would have prevented the hell to break loose, their reaction was that they did not have the time for that.
So I told them I thought I applied to a job as a professional programmer, but apparently there was no room for professionals there. Alas, companies like that make up the vast majority.
But there is no need to tax in dollars. In the past taxes were collected in goods. Farmers had to hand over a part of their crops, for example. Our money system is broken "by design" (the design evolved into failure) and there is no need to keep using it, other than make the self-announced financial overlords happy. The world would be a by far better place without interest bearing fiat currencies that have to be lent into existence by some private organization.
In fact, if the government (as representative to the society) would create money, that money would have its in-build tax. For example, if the government would pay for a bridge with its own created money, it would mean that is would reward the construction workers for a job essentially done for society. This money could then circulate and the only reason to pay taxes would be to keep the amount of money and its availability in balance. Right now, we are essentially paying taxes to the financial elite and even governments suffer.
No, I was thinking exactly that. Enclosure 2.0.
But there is a universal standard. It is called "Human Readable".
If I am a developer, I am responsible for the code. Period. My IDE can throw stupid comments at me all it wants, but that does not change the fact that the code is MY responsibility, not the tool's. The tool cannot take responsibility.