Do you honestly see any other alternative? If you think a media blackout can keep explosions and gunfire, tens of deaths, hundreds of injured and huge heavily armed manhunts in the middle of major cities and occupying vast areas in the middle east a secret you must have missed the invention of cell phones and the Internet. Particularly in anything resembling a free and open democracy. And once you start losing faith that the mainstream media is telling you what's actually happening, the crazies start being right. If you don't want an escalation of the conflict, you certainly don't want to create recruitment for those who'd like to fight fire with fire.
As for ISIS they're doing a pretty good job of marketing themselves as evil incarnate, so I don't see how you could or should balance out the coverage. Yes, it's propaganda but it's also the proof of why they need to be fought. Nobody can hide behind ignorance, if they were hiding it we'd call it exposing them. But now we know, so we're supposed to pretend we don't? The fucked up part is that this is apparently good propaganda to some, they're showing a total disregard for human life and dignity and so people join them. I hope every one of them meet a bullet with their name on it.
And I think you're vastly underestimating them, sure there are many backwards goatherders but also many highly educated, radicalized muslims who organize them. You don't cook up volatile high explosives and make bombs without blowing yourself up without a decent amount of skill. Don't confuse fanatics with being ignorant, like how you in the US have many otherwise highly functional people who believe in young earth creationism. Except where it directly conflicts with their beliefs some of these people could easily be engineers, doctors and lawyers.
"censor any domain names not registered within China"
So what, only 99% of the internet then?
Well even the most generous estimates is that 75% don't speak English and that includes learners, the more conservative estimate is around 90%. And the Chinese government's attitude to western values varies from lukewarm to frozen solid, they probably don't mind if the Chinese stick to local sites that are under Chinese jurisdiction. They have a billion users, they're big enough to do pretty much anything on their own. The rest of the world is trending heavily towards English as the de facto global language though, so what they do ultimately won't matter.
Well, maybe. If 4K comes under the jurisdiction of UltraViolet, then hopefully the licensing will be pushed up through them. That's as close to a "permanent" cross-entity license as one can get these days. In most cases, you're purchasing a license even when you have a physical copy. That's why you're not allowed to use it to show the movie for profit.
(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly
There's nothing wrong with plain old copyright law which means we need to substitute a sale for a license.
I'm with you in terms of preferring to own a physical copy so that I can continue to watch it when my internet is down and I don't have to rely on a dozen different entities to still exist when I do, but I thought we were past the point where people thought they had a "right" to a movie on their own terms. If you don't want to agree to the copyright holder's terms for the movie, don't retrieve/store/watch it.
Obviously the consumer shouldn't be able to set their own terms. But I think the liberal idealism that as long as nobody puts a gun to your head it's voluntary and they can put whatever they want in their terms is flawed. We're constantly hit with lengthy boilerplate legalese that nobody reads, nobody understands and if they did they couldn't change them anyway and that nobody takes seriously until they're being fucked over. And sometimes it's just consumer anti-features you're never asked to agree to like that we'll disable the fast forward button when we feel like and not let you play movies from other regions even though they get to shop all over the world for the cheapest labor.
There's a little bit of what I'm asking for with regard to unconscionable contracts, but really consumers should have far more protection than that from big business. Particularly when they're agreeing on "industry terms" that smells like a cartel dictating terms for all the consumers, since it's not unconscionable if it's common knowledge you'll be fucked over. To use a car analogy, just because you sold me a car doesn't mean you should be able to dictate maintenance and repair, parts, after-market alterations, fuel, where I drive and so on. It's necessary to cut those cords, you built it but it's now my car. And it was your movie, but now I bought a copy.
Of course they don't want to cut the cord, they don't ever want to really let go just give you a crippled license to use it on their terms, like if your living room was is the same as going to the cinema. Well sorry, they don't get to collect a per seat royalty or add mark-up to any snacks you might be eating in your own home watching their movie. But they would if they could and even if it was technically possible it shouldn't be legally possible. They should be forced at some point to either not sell it at all or really sell it, not more getting to have your cake and eat it too. But that would involve consumers winning against a lobbying industry, so most people will just give the law the finger instead.
Isn't that further confused by the Jews allegedly being decendents of Abraham and God's "chosen people"? Sure you can start to believe in judaism, but you can't become a decendant if you're not and according to the book there were a lot of other decendants of Noah and his family. You have people of jewish origin finding and losing their faith, but you don't really see any attempt to convert the rest of the world.
"Feel free to use our products for free but if you get successful we will sue you to get a piece of the cake."
Maybe your analogy would work better if Google didn't replace Sun/Oracle's product with their own instead of writing Java applications. If someone took AOSP, reimplemented a ton of the Google Play APIs and shipped a non-Google "Android" phone I wouldn't expect Google to be very happy about that either.
Was the market simply so tiny that the few people who wanted one are already saturated and everybody is having issues moving product?
I think maybe yes, because it's still so battery-unfriendly compared to regular watches. I'm wondering why nobody's done a simple small digital watch strip top or bottom just to say HH:MM with the rest as tap-to-activate/short alarms or notifications. Because I'm rather curious to know how long they'd last without the overhead of the screen...
Well...yes manufacturing is slowly coming back...but the jobs really aren't. It's mostly new automated factories with few workers. I wish that weren't the case though. It's not nothing, but it sure isn't everything.
Because the era of production lines with lots of factory workers is ending all over the world. Smarter, cheaper, more flexible robots are taking over just like the huge, simple industrial robots did some decades ago. Nobody's going to turn the clock back on that one, besides that's progress - making much more with fewer people. And to all that think we're running short of jobs, remember that most of the first world is struggling with a rapidly aging population, we need to support a larger population with a smaller workforce for the next ~30 years or so. Particularly in healthcare and care for the elderly there's a huge project increase in demand that can't easily be replaced by robots.
If you believe that that primary intention of acts of terror is to cause harm, then yes, that sounds reasonable. However, as far as I understand it, the main point of acts of terror is usually to make people irrationally afraid (cars, dogs, and swimming pools are more dangerous). For that purpose, dirty bombs and the way they've been hyped in movies and the media, as you've stated, are perfect for terror attacks.
Afraid and uncertain, if they were able to give a large number of people an increased cancer risk that could be a nagging fear for years. Not to mention leaving permanent scars, what do you think a warded off area with nuclear hazard signs will do, even if it won't harm anyone? And there's a reason the Geneva convention banned arms that are specifically designed to maim rather than kill, which terrorists obviously won't follow. It's about making it so messy and ugly as possible.
Because victims never contribute to their state of being a victim? Saying victim blaming is wrong is saying that if you become a victim you instantly become infallible, could not have contributed to the problem in anyway and are a completely innocent party.
There's two fundamentally different but overlapping meanings of blame. One is the perp's blame - the thief, the murderer, the rapist who is obviously the ultimate cause of everything. But we also used it in the meaning "failed to protect", like if the President got shot many people would blame the Secret Service even though they didn't have any part in it. They just failed to prevent it. The first one isn't really a subject of debate. The second? Well you can implicate almost anyone and everyone if you want to, like take the terror attacks in Brussels. Some will blame the police for not being able to stop it. Some will blame the politicans, the mosques and so on. Who could have done something? Who should have done something differently?
The latter often ends up in some conflict of idealism versus reality. Nobody has any more right to steal from me because I forget to lock the door. But I obviously made it a lot easier for them. Or the mere absence, does the fact that I don't have a home alarm mean I'm more to blame if burglars loot my apartment? This is where victim blaming comes in, you shouldn't do that, be there, get that drunk, wear that skirt, walk those streets. Idealistically, the answer is of course hell no you shouldn't let that control your life. Practically, it's a mixed bag. I lock my door, I don't live in a prepper's bunker. But if bad shit happen, I'd be pretty pissed if you blamed me for not doing enough because it's still not my fault.
Men are bigger risk takers. It's the same reason men make up almost all of the Darwin Awards.
Pretty much this, it's the tail end pulling the average up because the $100k+ positions are dominated by males. I suspect if you took median pay instead of mean pay, the difference would be significantly less than 5%. Also they're usually the kind of jobs women don't take because they're hard to combine with having a family (travel, on call, people expecting you to show up 24x7 in an emergency etc.) so the more factors you correct for, usually the gap narrows until you realize that for really equal jobs the pay difference is not that big at all.
You're a little late in helping decide the driver model for Linux. Open source drivers go in the kernel, wanted or not.
The driver model and source control are pretty unrelated anyway. Even if you make a microkernel with a fixed ABI you'd normally want to ship the latest version of the most commonly used drivers with the kernel. If you know your hardware you can compile with those flags from source or just not ship the blobs you don't need. I'm sure you could create a system where they're dynamically fetched from a repository, not just dynamically loaded too if that'd make any sense. Really the only time it makes a difference is if you want to ship a closed source blob, since otherwise you can always go from source to binary easily enough.
rack your own server in the DC then and you have full control over the software running on it.
Long story short, if the military wouldn't put Top Secret information on it you probably don't have "full control". I'm sure Apple is fending off many casual hackers, but if you have to start worrying about hardware backdoors, targeted zero-day exploits, tampering during transport or in the data center, covert surveillance equipment, inside jobs and so on it takes an awful lot more than a dedicated server in a DC.
Ultimately it shouldn't be surprising to anyone though, which is why I think calling it awkward instead of outrageous is accurate. Anyone who is paying attention knows there is a huge chasm between the upper middle class / wealthy and the working class / poor. I grew up in a working class home and now that I am in my 30's with a $200k+ household income I find it hard to remember how I ever lived on $40k. (...) I now have similar awkward moments sometimes when I talk with an old friend who has kids the same age as mine, but is raising them on a $50k household income. If I accidentally bring up how our maid is a lifesaver or how "hard" it is to afford $3200 in monthly daycare costs it could certainly come off as elitist.
Actually I find the smaller things to be worse, very often I spend a bit of extra money on conveniences just because I can afford to. So if they talk about something that's kinda a big deal to them it's easy to slip up and essentially say "So? Just replace it or call someone to get it fixed" because well that's what I'd do. And then you realize that's probably what they'd like to do too, but they can't afford it and it ends as a "thanks for rubbing in how easy it'd be for you with your money" kind of comment. Also splitting costs is awkward, like if you want to go on a trip together and you'd really like a nicer location / place / ride / food / entertainment and either they'll have to plain out say they can't afford it, overspend to save face or you pay extra for them all of which get awkward in some way. Or you end up doing things on their budget, wasting time on penny-pinching and sub-standard experiences. I can see how rich people sometimes find it a lot easier to hang out with other rich people.
Actually it's just Moore's law breaking down, the difficulty is in producing smaller transistors, the technology can't keep up. We know Intel had to delay the 14nm launch because of bad yields, now on 10nm it's probably a lot worse. And to go beyond that you need extreme ultraviolet lithography (EUV) which is still heavily in the R&D phase. I'm guessing that what Intel really knows at this point is that with a lot of tweaking they can probably do 10nm with acceptable yields using mostly known technology. What the world really looks like after three generations of 10nm? I don't think anybody knows. Intel once had a roadmap where they were tick-tocking all the way down to 5nm. This new roadmap is also just wishful thinking on where they'd like to be.
The original code from NPM is more readable. Given the choice between compact code and readable code, I prefer readable code. Especially when it comes to my own code and I have to figure out what I wrote months or years later.
Yeah... and the older I get, the more I care about the variable/function name accurately describing the scope. Like if a function is called "getInputData()" that might involve various steps/hacks/fixes/legacy format compatibility functions but if it's called "readDataFromFile()" then I expect it to do exactly that and nothing more. Fortunately any sane IDE will do auto-complete.
A styrofoam cup is as good a beer vessel as a ceramic stein or a pub glass but which one feels nicer in your hand and do you enjoy more. Since enjoyment is what you seek, sometime luxury goods are not about optimizing cheapness.
By definition "luxury" pretty much excludes cheapness. What luxury relies on is the assumption that you can't do more than one at a time, you can't live in more than one house, drive more than one car, sleep in one bed, wear more than one set of clothes or eat one man's worth of food. Nobody would die if you got your clothes from charity and ate from soup kitchens, it's not survival that's that stake. You want it and because you can afford it you'll do it, I know I make many "stupid" choices. They got nothing more to give than a few temporary creature comforts. Yet at the same time, what am I here for? What's my bank account here for?
My parents are what I would call frugal. They don't just disapprove of spending money in excess, they get more or less unwell by splurging. I feel it myself, like if I could drink a beer at home or at a pub the difference the cost is like a noticeable con, but I still do it for the social factor. YOLO is an easy thing to say, but it's hard to not give a shit in practice. I'm sure a lot of people would call me sensible, rational, forward-looking. I just wish that sometimes I'd say fuck that, live today - without the burden of what shit it creates in the future lays on me.
You talk as if terrorists were some kind of fixed number, like that some tiny fraction of the population will mentally snap and kill someone. That if we just don't draw attention to it, it won't really be much of an issue. And if they were so mostly lurking in the corners, extremists sharing their views with other extremists or lone wolves with twisted perceptions of reality I might be inclined to agree. But they've long since stepped out of the shadows, raised their flags and ceased vast areas with fucking armies. They recently stopped a shipment with 20000 uniforms for IS and terrorists are their "special forces".
At the risk of invoking Godwin, Nazi Germany didn't start out that way. It took years of radicalization, indoctrination, shaping a society around der Führer whose authority shall not be questioned. What Germany did in the 1930s is what IS is doing right now, in fact Hiterjugend was never this militant. Do you realize that IS controls Mosul, that originally had 1.8 million inhabitants and would be bigger than Philadelphia? Currently estimates are uncertain but it's probably roughly a million left which would put it around top 10 biggest cities in the US. They'll find collaborators and sympathizers, stomp out rebellion and dissent. People will hear propaganda, more propaganda and it will work.
The Nazis hid their torture and death camps, IS puts it on YouTube. And despite that, people keep joining their cause. If you don't find that freaking scary, you should. Sure it's far, far away on the other side of the globe right now. But if someone threatens to set the world on fire maybe it's not so good an idea to let them pour the gasoline? I'm sure it seemed Hitler was far away too, but do you really need another Pearl Harbor to see that it's not going to stay that way? Yes, it will get messy as they fight as dirty as they can but the alternatives are going to be even messier in the long run. Pretending there is no problem isn't going to solve it.
As long as you're participating in this digital marketplace in which items, once purchased, have absolutely no resale value, I'd say that 'selling' them back to Microsoft for 10% of the purchase price is better than the nothing that you could otherwise get. I'm sure there are people out there who could recoup hundreds of dollars by shutting off their access to old games that they don't play anymore. I assume this would be in the form of store credit, and they could then buy access to new games with it.
Ask yourself, what's Microsoft getting from a "return" on digital goods? Nothing. Do you think Microsoft will effectively lower prices by 10%? Nah, this is just a hook to make you feel like you got a unused discount coupon except you'll never zero out the balance, like when freemium games send you freebies to get you re-hooked. If before you paid $50, soon you'll pay $55 minus your $5 "discount". And the you have another $5 discount on your next purchase, and your next, and your next.... marketing psychology 101.
And comparing an iPhone with an Android phone on specs is pointless. We all know that you can get more for cheaper with Android, but you won't get an iPhone.
Well I'd say Apple gave itself a pretty damn huge bump here. It's hard to find benchmarks with the 5s, 6s and Sony Xperia Z5 compact (the only other mini-flagship, really) on one page but here and here and here combined gives some:
Considering the 5se will have the same CPU, same GPU and hopefully same RAM as the 6s the 5se should be pretty close and that seems like an awful lot of power in a really small phone. Maybe even overkill to drive a 1136x640 display, but it should give applications a lot of leg room to work with and hopefully keep it performing well even on iOS 10-11-12 and unlike my low-end Android phone it'll actually get updates. Now there's rumors of a Samsung Galaxy S7 mini, but right now I'd say the iPhone 5SE looks to become the undisputed champion - if only in a particular niche. And for giving up the screen real estate a 5se is $150 cheaper than a 6s for the same storage, it's not cheap but it fits the lineup. Pretty sure this is my next phone...
But BSD isn't quite there yet: most importantly, it has a monolithic kernel, written in C. This means that a single buggy driver can crash, hang, or cause damage to the system.
They're in for a rude awakening when they realize that the wrong bits sent to a piece of hardware can in theory kill it no matter if the OS keeps running.... so you got a desktop with no working graphics, a server with no working NIC and so on. Without an IOMMU you can't even keep any DMA-enabled device from writing stuff all over system memory, unless of course you disable DMA and run all memory access over the CPU which will make performance glacial. Oh and Linux isn't quite monolithic, for example all USB devices have user mode drivers. Just the basic read/write functions are in the kernel.
Thanks for answering the question "What's UbuntuBSD?" seeing as this is Slashdot it would have been more useful to explain "What's a human being?". You insensitive clod.
It would, but all we got is an undocumented blob written in quad-bits (ACGT) and the original developer can't be reached. Not that it'd do much good, the code is constantly morphing through forking off new child processes while old ones come to a halt so there's probably little of the original left. There was an instruction manual too, but it's equally cryptic like "Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground". Source control seems completely absent so there's billions of versions in production. While we're making some progress on reverse engineering to fix the most critical bugs it's mostly a black box project full of unexplained and absurd behaviors. Like making dry jokes on a nerd website.
Space Station era space solar panels had a power output of 55W/kg, so a square meter has a mass of about 4.5 kg. Kinetic energy of escape from the Moon is 2.83 MJ/kg, so launching the materials for the solar panel require 12.75 MJ/m^2. The panel in orbit can make back that energy in 14.5 hours, so the extra energy to launch the materials is small compared to the 7.5 years of extra output you get.
Only if you can shoot it out of a railgun with zero construction/maintenance costs and 100% efficiency. You don't have atmosphere on the moon but a rocket has hundreds of kilometers to accelerate, we have experimental railguns like that but they accelerate at 40000 g. To get it down to manageable levels you probably need a rail hundreds of meter or even kilometers deep in the moon's surface. Or you could use rockets but by the time you've manufactured and spend the fuel, hull and engines you're probably deep in the red on energy balance.
yeah.. no. WiFi sucks balls for for anything you actually want to be reliably connected even in the home.
Partially that's because you often use WiFi to avoid running cables in the first place. If you were wiring it for wireless access points the same time you did the electricity you might do it quite differently than if you just put one big router near the cable intake and hope it'll cover the whole house. But yeah, if I was planning to remote in and fixing anything I'd go with cabled.
Sounds like a form of digital marxism, it's the workers (users) really creating the value not the owners of the means of production (website) and they're being exploited. Can't really say I agree though, if you want to create a non-profit cooperative Twitter clone by the members, for the members there's very few barriers to entry. If users in generally are happy to "donate" their speech in return for the service they get I'd call that a fair and voluntary exchange.
Actually I'm a bit surprised that such coops aren't more common on the Internet, like instead of dealing with commercial companies like Google (YouTube) and Spotify you could upload your music/videos to a website that'd offer it to the public with transparent terms and open books. You'd think for the people who actually want to make money and not just get a free service that'd be a better deal, but I guess it's hard to get the momentum going.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you honestly see any other alternative? If you think a media blackout can keep explosions and gunfire, tens of deaths, hundreds of injured and huge heavily armed manhunts in the middle of major cities and occupying vast areas in the middle east a secret you must have missed the invention of cell phones and the Internet. Particularly in anything resembling a free and open democracy. And once you start losing faith that the mainstream media is telling you what's actually happening, the crazies start being right. If you don't want an escalation of the conflict, you certainly don't want to create recruitment for those who'd like to fight fire with fire.
As for ISIS they're doing a pretty good job of marketing themselves as evil incarnate, so I don't see how you could or should balance out the coverage. Yes, it's propaganda but it's also the proof of why they need to be fought. Nobody can hide behind ignorance, if they were hiding it we'd call it exposing them. But now we know, so we're supposed to pretend we don't? The fucked up part is that this is apparently good propaganda to some, they're showing a total disregard for human life and dignity and so people join them. I hope every one of them meet a bullet with their name on it.
And I think you're vastly underestimating them, sure there are many backwards goatherders but also many highly educated, radicalized muslims who organize them. You don't cook up volatile high explosives and make bombs without blowing yourself up without a decent amount of skill. Don't confuse fanatics with being ignorant, like how you in the US have many otherwise highly functional people who believe in young earth creationism. Except where it directly conflicts with their beliefs some of these people could easily be engineers, doctors and lawyers.
"censor any domain names not registered within China"
So what, only 99% of the internet then?
Well even the most generous estimates is that 75% don't speak English and that includes learners, the more conservative estimate is around 90%. And the Chinese government's attitude to western values varies from lukewarm to frozen solid, they probably don't mind if the Chinese stick to local sites that are under Chinese jurisdiction. They have a billion users, they're big enough to do pretty much anything on their own. The rest of the world is trending heavily towards English as the de facto global language though, so what they do ultimately won't matter.
Well, maybe. If 4K comes under the jurisdiction of UltraViolet, then hopefully the licensing will be pushed up through them. That's as close to a "permanent" cross-entity license as one can get these days. In most cases, you're purchasing a license even when you have a physical copy. That's why you're not allowed to use it to show the movie for profit.
You're wrong off the bat, that's because it's in copyright law under Exclusive rights in copyrighted works:
(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly
There's nothing wrong with plain old copyright law which means we need to substitute a sale for a license.
I'm with you in terms of preferring to own a physical copy so that I can continue to watch it when my internet is down and I don't have to rely on a dozen different entities to still exist when I do, but I thought we were past the point where people thought they had a "right" to a movie on their own terms. If you don't want to agree to the copyright holder's terms for the movie, don't retrieve/store/watch it.
Obviously the consumer shouldn't be able to set their own terms. But I think the liberal idealism that as long as nobody puts a gun to your head it's voluntary and they can put whatever they want in their terms is flawed. We're constantly hit with lengthy boilerplate legalese that nobody reads, nobody understands and if they did they couldn't change them anyway and that nobody takes seriously until they're being fucked over. And sometimes it's just consumer anti-features you're never asked to agree to like that we'll disable the fast forward button when we feel like and not let you play movies from other regions even though they get to shop all over the world for the cheapest labor.
There's a little bit of what I'm asking for with regard to unconscionable contracts, but really consumers should have far more protection than that from big business. Particularly when they're agreeing on "industry terms" that smells like a cartel dictating terms for all the consumers, since it's not unconscionable if it's common knowledge you'll be fucked over. To use a car analogy, just because you sold me a car doesn't mean you should be able to dictate maintenance and repair, parts, after-market alterations, fuel, where I drive and so on. It's necessary to cut those cords, you built it but it's now my car. And it was your movie, but now I bought a copy.
Of course they don't want to cut the cord, they don't ever want to really let go just give you a crippled license to use it on their terms, like if your living room was is the same as going to the cinema. Well sorry, they don't get to collect a per seat royalty or add mark-up to any snacks you might be eating in your own home watching their movie. But they would if they could and even if it was technically possible it shouldn't be legally possible. They should be forced at some point to either not sell it at all or really sell it, not more getting to have your cake and eat it too. But that would involve consumers winning against a lobbying industry, so most people will just give the law the finger instead.
Isn't that further confused by the Jews allegedly being decendents of Abraham and God's "chosen people"? Sure you can start to believe in judaism, but you can't become a decendant if you're not and according to the book there were a lot of other decendants of Noah and his family. You have people of jewish origin finding and losing their faith, but you don't really see any attempt to convert the rest of the world.
"Feel free to use our products for free but if you get successful we will sue you to get a piece of the cake."
Maybe your analogy would work better if Google didn't replace Sun/Oracle's product with their own instead of writing Java applications. If someone took AOSP, reimplemented a ton of the Google Play APIs and shipped a non-Google "Android" phone I wouldn't expect Google to be very happy about that either.
Was the market simply so tiny that the few people who wanted one are already saturated and everybody is having issues moving product?
I think maybe yes, because it's still so battery-unfriendly compared to regular watches. I'm wondering why nobody's done a simple small digital watch strip top or bottom just to say HH:MM with the rest as tap-to-activate/short alarms or notifications. Because I'm rather curious to know how long they'd last without the overhead of the screen...
Well...yes manufacturing is slowly coming back...but the jobs really aren't. It's mostly new automated factories with few workers. I wish that weren't the case though. It's not nothing, but it sure isn't everything.
Because the era of production lines with lots of factory workers is ending all over the world. Smarter, cheaper, more flexible robots are taking over just like the huge, simple industrial robots did some decades ago. Nobody's going to turn the clock back on that one, besides that's progress - making much more with fewer people. And to all that think we're running short of jobs, remember that most of the first world is struggling with a rapidly aging population, we need to support a larger population with a smaller workforce for the next ~30 years or so. Particularly in healthcare and care for the elderly there's a huge project increase in demand that can't easily be replaced by robots.
If you believe that that primary intention of acts of terror is to cause harm, then yes, that sounds reasonable. However, as far as I understand it, the main point of acts of terror is usually to make people irrationally afraid (cars, dogs, and swimming pools are more dangerous). For that purpose, dirty bombs and the way they've been hyped in movies and the media, as you've stated, are perfect for terror attacks.
Afraid and uncertain, if they were able to give a large number of people an increased cancer risk that could be a nagging fear for years. Not to mention leaving permanent scars, what do you think a warded off area with nuclear hazard signs will do, even if it won't harm anyone? And there's a reason the Geneva convention banned arms that are specifically designed to maim rather than kill, which terrorists obviously won't follow. It's about making it so messy and ugly as possible.
Because victims never contribute to their state of being a victim? Saying victim blaming is wrong is saying that if you become a victim you instantly become infallible, could not have contributed to the problem in anyway and are a completely innocent party.
There's two fundamentally different but overlapping meanings of blame. One is the perp's blame - the thief, the murderer, the rapist who is obviously the ultimate cause of everything. But we also used it in the meaning "failed to protect", like if the President got shot many people would blame the Secret Service even though they didn't have any part in it. They just failed to prevent it. The first one isn't really a subject of debate. The second? Well you can implicate almost anyone and everyone if you want to, like take the terror attacks in Brussels. Some will blame the police for not being able to stop it. Some will blame the politicans, the mosques and so on. Who could have done something? Who should have done something differently?
The latter often ends up in some conflict of idealism versus reality. Nobody has any more right to steal from me because I forget to lock the door. But I obviously made it a lot easier for them. Or the mere absence, does the fact that I don't have a home alarm mean I'm more to blame if burglars loot my apartment? This is where victim blaming comes in, you shouldn't do that, be there, get that drunk, wear that skirt, walk those streets. Idealistically, the answer is of course hell no you shouldn't let that control your life. Practically, it's a mixed bag. I lock my door, I don't live in a prepper's bunker. But if bad shit happen, I'd be pretty pissed if you blamed me for not doing enough because it's still not my fault.
Men are bigger risk takers. It's the same reason men make up almost all of the Darwin Awards.
Pretty much this, it's the tail end pulling the average up because the $100k+ positions are dominated by males. I suspect if you took median pay instead of mean pay, the difference would be significantly less than 5%. Also they're usually the kind of jobs women don't take because they're hard to combine with having a family (travel, on call, people expecting you to show up 24x7 in an emergency etc.) so the more factors you correct for, usually the gap narrows until you realize that for really equal jobs the pay difference is not that big at all.
You're a little late in helping decide the driver model for Linux. Open source drivers go in the kernel, wanted or not.
The driver model and source control are pretty unrelated anyway. Even if you make a microkernel with a fixed ABI you'd normally want to ship the latest version of the most commonly used drivers with the kernel. If you know your hardware you can compile with those flags from source or just not ship the blobs you don't need. I'm sure you could create a system where they're dynamically fetched from a repository, not just dynamically loaded too if that'd make any sense. Really the only time it makes a difference is if you want to ship a closed source blob, since otherwise you can always go from source to binary easily enough.
rack your own server in the DC then and you have full control over the software running on it.
Long story short, if the military wouldn't put Top Secret information on it you probably don't have "full control". I'm sure Apple is fending off many casual hackers, but if you have to start worrying about hardware backdoors, targeted zero-day exploits, tampering during transport or in the data center, covert surveillance equipment, inside jobs and so on it takes an awful lot more than a dedicated server in a DC.
Ultimately it shouldn't be surprising to anyone though, which is why I think calling it awkward instead of outrageous is accurate. Anyone who is paying attention knows there is a huge chasm between the upper middle class / wealthy and the working class / poor. I grew up in a working class home and now that I am in my 30's with a $200k+ household income I find it hard to remember how I ever lived on $40k. (...) I now have similar awkward moments sometimes when I talk with an old friend who has kids the same age as mine, but is raising them on a $50k household income. If I accidentally bring up how our maid is a lifesaver or how "hard" it is to afford $3200 in monthly daycare costs it could certainly come off as elitist.
Actually I find the smaller things to be worse, very often I spend a bit of extra money on conveniences just because I can afford to. So if they talk about something that's kinda a big deal to them it's easy to slip up and essentially say "So? Just replace it or call someone to get it fixed" because well that's what I'd do. And then you realize that's probably what they'd like to do too, but they can't afford it and it ends as a "thanks for rubbing in how easy it'd be for you with your money" kind of comment. Also splitting costs is awkward, like if you want to go on a trip together and you'd really like a nicer location / place / ride / food / entertainment and either they'll have to plain out say they can't afford it, overspend to save face or you pay extra for them all of which get awkward in some way. Or you end up doing things on their budget, wasting time on penny-pinching and sub-standard experiences. I can see how rich people sometimes find it a lot easier to hang out with other rich people.
Actually it's just Moore's law breaking down, the difficulty is in producing smaller transistors, the technology can't keep up. We know Intel had to delay the 14nm launch because of bad yields, now on 10nm it's probably a lot worse. And to go beyond that you need extreme ultraviolet lithography (EUV) which is still heavily in the R&D phase. I'm guessing that what Intel really knows at this point is that with a lot of tweaking they can probably do 10nm with acceptable yields using mostly known technology. What the world really looks like after three generations of 10nm? I don't think anybody knows. Intel once had a roadmap where they were tick-tocking all the way down to 5nm. This new roadmap is also just wishful thinking on where they'd like to be.
The original code from NPM is more readable. Given the choice between compact code and readable code, I prefer readable code. Especially when it comes to my own code and I have to figure out what I wrote months or years later.
Yeah... and the older I get, the more I care about the variable/function name accurately describing the scope. Like if a function is called "getInputData()" that might involve various steps/hacks/fixes/legacy format compatibility functions but if it's called "readDataFromFile()" then I expect it to do exactly that and nothing more. Fortunately any sane IDE will do auto-complete.
A styrofoam cup is as good a beer vessel as a ceramic stein or a pub glass but which one feels nicer in your hand and do you enjoy more. Since enjoyment is what you seek, sometime luxury goods are not about optimizing cheapness.
By definition "luxury" pretty much excludes cheapness. What luxury relies on is the assumption that you can't do more than one at a time, you can't live in more than one house, drive more than one car, sleep in one bed, wear more than one set of clothes or eat one man's worth of food. Nobody would die if you got your clothes from charity and ate from soup kitchens, it's not survival that's that stake. You want it and because you can afford it you'll do it, I know I make many "stupid" choices. They got nothing more to give than a few temporary creature comforts. Yet at the same time, what am I here for? What's my bank account here for?
My parents are what I would call frugal. They don't just disapprove of spending money in excess, they get more or less unwell by splurging. I feel it myself, like if I could drink a beer at home or at a pub the difference the cost is like a noticeable con, but I still do it for the social factor. YOLO is an easy thing to say, but it's hard to not give a shit in practice. I'm sure a lot of people would call me sensible, rational, forward-looking. I just wish that sometimes I'd say fuck that, live today - without the burden of what shit it creates in the future lays on me.
Death by snu-snu!
You talk as if terrorists were some kind of fixed number, like that some tiny fraction of the population will mentally snap and kill someone. That if we just don't draw attention to it, it won't really be much of an issue. And if they were so mostly lurking in the corners, extremists sharing their views with other extremists or lone wolves with twisted perceptions of reality I might be inclined to agree. But they've long since stepped out of the shadows, raised their flags and ceased vast areas with fucking armies. They recently stopped a shipment with 20000 uniforms for IS and terrorists are their "special forces".
At the risk of invoking Godwin, Nazi Germany didn't start out that way. It took years of radicalization, indoctrination, shaping a society around der Führer whose authority shall not be questioned. What Germany did in the 1930s is what IS is doing right now, in fact Hiterjugend was never this militant. Do you realize that IS controls Mosul, that originally had 1.8 million inhabitants and would be bigger than Philadelphia? Currently estimates are uncertain but it's probably roughly a million left which would put it around top 10 biggest cities in the US. They'll find collaborators and sympathizers, stomp out rebellion and dissent. People will hear propaganda, more propaganda and it will work.
The Nazis hid their torture and death camps, IS puts it on YouTube. And despite that, people keep joining their cause. If you don't find that freaking scary, you should. Sure it's far, far away on the other side of the globe right now. But if someone threatens to set the world on fire maybe it's not so good an idea to let them pour the gasoline? I'm sure it seemed Hitler was far away too, but do you really need another Pearl Harbor to see that it's not going to stay that way? Yes, it will get messy as they fight as dirty as they can but the alternatives are going to be even messier in the long run. Pretending there is no problem isn't going to solve it.
As long as you're participating in this digital marketplace in which items, once purchased, have absolutely no resale value, I'd say that 'selling' them back to Microsoft for 10% of the purchase price is better than the nothing that you could otherwise get. I'm sure there are people out there who could recoup hundreds of dollars by shutting off their access to old games that they don't play anymore. I assume this would be in the form of store credit, and they could then buy access to new games with it.
Ask yourself, what's Microsoft getting from a "return" on digital goods? Nothing. Do you think Microsoft will effectively lower prices by 10%? Nah, this is just a hook to make you feel like you got a unused discount coupon except you'll never zero out the balance, like when freemium games send you freebies to get you re-hooked. If before you paid $50, soon you'll pay $55 minus your $5 "discount". And the you have another $5 discount on your next purchase, and your next, and your next.... marketing psychology 101.
And comparing an iPhone with an Android phone on specs is pointless. We all know that you can get more for cheaper with Android, but you won't get an iPhone.
Well I'd say Apple gave itself a pretty damn huge bump here. It's hard to find benchmarks with the 5s, 6s and Sony Xperia Z5 compact (the only other mini-flagship, really) on one page but here and here and here combined gives some:
Basemark OS II:
iPhone 5s: 1180
Z5 compact: 1350
iPhone 6s: 2619
T-rex HD (offscreen):
iPhone 5s: 28.7
Z5 compact: ~55 (approximated from graph)
iPhone 6s: 80.3
Manhattan (offscreen):
iPhone 5s: 13.1
Z5 compact: ~25 (approximated from graph)
iPhone 6s: 40.1
Considering the 5se will have the same CPU, same GPU and hopefully same RAM as the 6s the 5se should be pretty close and that seems like an awful lot of power in a really small phone. Maybe even overkill to drive a 1136x640 display, but it should give applications a lot of leg room to work with and hopefully keep it performing well even on iOS 10-11-12 and unlike my low-end Android phone it'll actually get updates. Now there's rumors of a Samsung Galaxy S7 mini, but right now I'd say the iPhone 5SE looks to become the undisputed champion - if only in a particular niche. And for giving up the screen real estate a 5se is $150 cheaper than a 6s for the same storage, it's not cheap but it fits the lineup. Pretty sure this is my next phone...
But BSD isn't quite there yet: most importantly, it has a monolithic kernel, written in C. This means that a single buggy driver can crash, hang, or cause damage to the system.
They're in for a rude awakening when they realize that the wrong bits sent to a piece of hardware can in theory kill it no matter if the OS keeps running.... so you got a desktop with no working graphics, a server with no working NIC and so on. Without an IOMMU you can't even keep any DMA-enabled device from writing stuff all over system memory, unless of course you disable DMA and run all memory access over the CPU which will make performance glacial. Oh and Linux isn't quite monolithic, for example all USB devices have user mode drivers. Just the basic read/write functions are in the kernel.
Thanks for answering the question "What's UbuntuBSD?" seeing as this is Slashdot it would have been more useful to explain "What's a human being?". You insensitive clod.
It would, but all we got is an undocumented blob written in quad-bits (ACGT) and the original developer can't be reached. Not that it'd do much good, the code is constantly morphing through forking off new child processes while old ones come to a halt so there's probably little of the original left. There was an instruction manual too, but it's equally cryptic like "Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground". Source control seems completely absent so there's billions of versions in production. While we're making some progress on reverse engineering to fix the most critical bugs it's mostly a black box project full of unexplained and absurd behaviors. Like making dry jokes on a nerd website.
Space Station era space solar panels had a power output of 55W/kg, so a square meter has a mass of about 4.5 kg. Kinetic energy of escape from the Moon is 2.83 MJ/kg, so launching the materials for the solar panel require 12.75 MJ/m^2. The panel in orbit can make back that energy in 14.5 hours, so the extra energy to launch the materials is small compared to the 7.5 years of extra output you get.
Only if you can shoot it out of a railgun with zero construction/maintenance costs and 100% efficiency. You don't have atmosphere on the moon but a rocket has hundreds of kilometers to accelerate, we have experimental railguns like that but they accelerate at 40000 g. To get it down to manageable levels you probably need a rail hundreds of meter or even kilometers deep in the moon's surface. Or you could use rockets but by the time you've manufactured and spend the fuel, hull and engines you're probably deep in the red on energy balance.
yeah.. no. WiFi sucks balls for for anything you actually want to be reliably connected even in the home.
Partially that's because you often use WiFi to avoid running cables in the first place. If you were wiring it for wireless access points the same time you did the electricity you might do it quite differently than if you just put one big router near the cable intake and hope it'll cover the whole house. But yeah, if I was planning to remote in and fixing anything I'd go with cabled.
Sounds like a form of digital marxism, it's the workers (users) really creating the value not the owners of the means of production (website) and they're being exploited. Can't really say I agree though, if you want to create a non-profit cooperative Twitter clone by the members, for the members there's very few barriers to entry. If users in generally are happy to "donate" their speech in return for the service they get I'd call that a fair and voluntary exchange.
Actually I'm a bit surprised that such coops aren't more common on the Internet, like instead of dealing with commercial companies like Google (YouTube) and Spotify you could upload your music/videos to a website that'd offer it to the public with transparent terms and open books. You'd think for the people who actually want to make money and not just get a free service that'd be a better deal, but I guess it's hard to get the momentum going.