The whole model relies on the userbases illiteracy
Totally agree, and now they grew bold enough to troll a nerd site to sway opinion about this shit to look like a legitimate business model.
The author of that article,
"Ben Cousins has spent his 15 years in the games industry at companies like DeNA, [b]DICE[/b], Sony and Lionhead. Since 2006 he's worked on a total of 10 separate free-to-play games across five different platforms, reaching approximately 50 million users. Follow him on Twitter @benjamincousins."
Intelligence is what you know and also behavior - critical thinking, and how you deal with information.
You're wrong. That is just 1 or two manifestations of intelligence. There are lots of different intelligence types. How about you open a psychology 101 book and find out about what else there is?
And for the stupid people out there - I hate you all so much.
While we're at it, how about you take some acid and find out how petty you are yourself for believing what you wrote in that paragraph.
effectively forcing XMPP server admins to lower their security if they want to federate with Google
Just for the Google server, if you use a proper XMPP server (like Prosody, for example).
Beware that many servers on the XMPP network use self-signed or invalid certificates, or even don't support TLS at all (such as gmail.com and all Google-hosted domains). It is possible to make exceptions like this:
-- These hosts are allowed to authenticate via weaker mechanisms, such as dialback:
s2s_insecure_domains = { "gmail.com" }
XMPP server operators are pushing for a wholly encrypted XMPP network with several test-days, where they'll be flipping the switch to allow only encrypted communication, and the final switch to disallow unencrypted communication on May 19, 2014.
It's going to include SSLv3, unfortunately, but we'll get there.
But Stalin, [yadda yadda] is a national hero in Russia today
Look, asshole, if you don't know what you're talking about, how about you just take a nice cup of shut the fuck up?!
There are idiots everywhere, there are people who consider Hitler a fucking hero, and Snowden a traitor, can you believe that? So what do you wanna do now? Blanket-judge everyone? You don't have a fucking clue about Russia or the Ukraine and proved that by saying:
"Contrary to Russia's repeated assertions, Bandera was neither a "fascist" in general, nor a "nazi" in particular [...]"
Go fuck yourself.
"Even de Gaulle" EVEN? What are you, some kind of bad joke? Seriously, go troll somewhere else.
I have a doubt that mobile displays and keyboards are anything more than a transition [...] the screen size limitation is probably going to go away
You're right about that. The future is multi-modal.
There's no one "display" or interface. It's ubiquitous computing and ambient intelligence all the way. You walk into another room, your interface roams with you. The computing power comes from the grid next to you, in your house, the bus stop, datacenter, in the mesh network of little devices all around you... I'm not sure about the role of the phone, or whether it will at all exist. What I do know, is that natural (also, multi-modal) interfaces will take over the keyboard sooner, rather than later.
A "list of gaps we need to fill" would definitely a good feature to add to the OpenFL site, though.
'tis called gap analysis (between an as-is and the desired to-be state) and enterprise architects use tools for that. A Free (GPL) tool can be found here. The downside is that this takes a shitload of time.
So would it be more correct to say that we're back in the exponential game on single chips (using Moore's law only by inference), as opposed to horizontal scaling by adding cores?
We can observe clear evidence that Moore’s Law is ending, because we can point to a pattern that precedes the end of exploiting any kind of resource. But there’s no reason to panic, because Moore’s Law limits only one kind of scaling, and we have already started another kind.
I'm growing tired of this argument, so I'll just pick on some things.
When the parliament removed him from office he had no authority to authorize foreign troops on Ukrainian soil. Viktor Yanukovych was democratically elected and democratically removed.
The snipers who shot at protesters and police in Kiev were allegedly hired by Maidan leaders, according to a leaked phone conversation between the EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign affairs minister
Care to explain why the west prefers to deal with people that do these things? Oh right, the west doesn't care who to deal with as long as their interests are fulfilled.
Hiding something?
Leaving out the irrelevant information. It's a democratically elected PM of a region with predominantly Russian-speaking population. Doesn't fit your narrative? Tough.
Yeltsen
The puppet Yeltsin can go and fuck himself. That document was not ratified. The RF has aparliament, you know? Amongst its duties are:
[...] the ratification of international treaties [...]
In case you're wondering about stationing the troops only on the bases,
- the *democratically elected* president of Ukraine asked Russia to use military force.
[Putin] added that deposed Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych had no political future but asserted he was legally still head of state. "I think that he has no political future. And I told him this," Mr Putin said [...] (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10669670/Ukraine-Russia-crisis-live.html)
Sergei Aksenov, the [...] prime minister of the Crimea region, has declared that he is in control of all military, police and other security services in the region. But he appealed to Russia's president for help in keeping peace there.(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10670827/Ukraine-live-Crimea-leader-appeals-to-Putin-to-help-as-Obama-warns-of-costs-to-Moscow.html)
You seem to think that identifying as Russian means they want to stay in Russia. 55% of those who identified as Russian voter for the referendum. The vote showed that the majority wanted to stay with the Ukraine.
They were not in Russia, how could they have voted to stay in it? They supported the independency of Ukraine from the USSR, not from the RSFSR. So we're talking about two different things here. RF != RSFSR != USSR.
All we know is that the majority voted to stay with the Ukraine.
Not quite. All we know is that the majority voted to be part of an independent Ukraine vs. being a Soviet republic.
But both votes were still over 50% which means that the majority who voted decided to leave Russia and join teh Ukraine.
They decided to vote on the constitution. The question was not posed as "Would you like to be part of Ukraine, or part of Russia?" the question was "Do you want to be independent, or part of the USSR (not part of RSFSR)?" which is a completely different thing.
Trivia: RSFSR signed it's declaration of independence on the 12 June 1990, while the Ukrainian SSR followed on 16th of July. It's a complicated topic, but effectively, there was no USSR in 1991, even though it dissolved officially only in december.
If you don't vote you don't count.
Not in Germany. Here non-voters are distributed along each participating party. Besides these semantics, I wonder how many people at that time 1. knew what it meant to vote, 2. knew what exactly they were voting for (ok, that's a problem everywhere), and 3. understood the effect of not voting.
From the gut I'd say that on matters of importance, a majority of 2/3 is required. Maybe the other 40% thought, that not voting is a sign of protest?
Slashdot Mirror
Totally agree, and now they grew bold enough to troll a nerd site to sway opinion about this shit to look like a legitimate business model.
The author of that article,
"Ben Cousins has spent his 15 years in the games industry at companies like DeNA, [b]DICE[/b], Sony and Lionhead. Since 2006 he's worked on a total of 10 separate free-to-play games across five different platforms, reaching approximately 50 million users. Follow him on Twitter @benjamincousins."
IMHO, he should be ashamed of himself.
They also added the source at the end. Visualize yourself.
I need to test this on both Ubuntu 12.04-LTS and FreeBSD 9.0
That's not how containers work. You're bound to using the kernel of your host.
Besides being completely off-topic, this is actually an interesting project.
No, 18 is when they get appropriated by the community, who they belong to.
OMG, WHAT THE FUCK is THIS? I'm sincerely hoping that by the time my kids get to school, this bunkum will have vanished from the respective curricula.
Intelligence is what you know and also behavior - critical thinking, and how you deal with information.
You're wrong. That is just 1 or two manifestations of intelligence. There are lots of different intelligence types. How about you open a psychology 101 book and find out about what else there is?
And for the stupid people out there - I hate you all so much.
While we're at it, how about you take some acid and find out how petty you are yourself for believing what you wrote in that paragraph.
Good that you clarified that. Because, if it's not DDS, it's not really (hard) realtime.
I wonder, if mixing it with weed, and/or LSD will enhance my creativity (subjectively, of course), while letting me get a years' work done in a day...
Just for the Google server, if you use a proper XMPP server (like Prosody, for example).
XMPP server operators are pushing for a wholly encrypted XMPP network with several test-days, where they'll be flipping the switch to allow only encrypted communication, and the final switch to disallow unencrypted communication on May 19, 2014.
It's going to include SSLv3, unfortunately, but we'll get there.
FTFY.
Look, asshole, if you don't know what you're talking about, how about you just take a nice cup of shut the fuck up?!
There are idiots everywhere, there are people who consider Hitler a fucking hero, and Snowden a traitor, can you believe that? So what do you wanna do now? Blanket-judge everyone? You don't have a fucking clue about Russia or the Ukraine and proved that by saying:
"Contrary to Russia's repeated assertions, Bandera was neither a "fascist" in general, nor a "nazi" in particular [...]"
Go fuck yourself. "Even de Gaulle" EVEN? What are you, some kind of bad joke? Seriously, go troll somewhere else.
That was a fun read, thank you!
The chosen problem is easily solved by throwing an exception, or using a return these days, though.
You're right about that. The future is multi-modal.
There's no one "display" or interface. It's ubiquitous computing and ambient intelligence all the way.
You walk into another room, your interface roams with you. The computing power comes from the grid next to you, in your house, the bus stop, datacenter, in the mesh network of little devices all around you...
I'm not sure about the role of the phone, or whether it will at all exist. What I do know, is that natural (also, multi-modal) interfaces will take over the keyboard sooner, rather than later.
The system bathes the driver in infrared light
Anyone else feels like this is going to be a strain on our eyes?
A "list of gaps we need to fill" would definitely a good feature to add to the OpenFL site, though.
'tis called gap analysis (between an as-is and the desired to-be state) and enterprise architects use tools for that. A Free (GPL) tool can be found here. The downside is that this takes a shitload of time.
So would it be more correct to say that we're back in the exponential game on single chips (using Moore's law only by inference), as opposed to horizontal scaling by adding cores?
Oops, URL missing: http://herbsutter.com/welcome-...
We can observe clear evidence that Moore’s Law is ending, because we can point to a pattern that precedes the end of exploiting any kind of resource. But there’s no reason to panic, because Moore’s Law limits only one kind of scaling, and we have already started another kind.
Now Russia says it will continue to extend asylum protections to Snowden and won't send him back home.
(http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/24/world/europe/russia-snowden/ - of all sources...)
When the parliament removed him from office he had no authority to authorize foreign troops on Ukrainian soil. Viktor Yanukovych was democratically elected and democratically removed.
Please read this: http://rt.com/news/ukraine-wes...
You mean the president who attempted to go against the wishes of the people in signing the trade deal with Russia instead of the one with the EU.
Oh YEAH, it's MUCH better to sign a deal with the fucking IMF over loans than to get 16b right away!
The president that was unconstitutionally removed from power by the democratically elected parliament?
FTFY.
The president who used troops to kill 83 Ukrainians.
Please read this: http://rt.com/news/estonia-con...
The snipers who shot at protesters and police in Kiev were allegedly hired by Maidan leaders, according to a leaked phone conversation between the EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign affairs minister
Care to explain why the west prefers to deal with people that do these things? Oh right, the west doesn't care who to deal with as long as their interests are fulfilled.
Hiding something?
Leaving out the irrelevant information. It's a democratically elected PM of a region with predominantly Russian-speaking population. Doesn't fit your narrative? Tough.
Yeltsen
The puppet Yeltsin can go and fuck himself. That document was not ratified. The RF has a parliament, you know? Amongst its duties are:
[...] the ratification of international treaties [...]
.
altered twisted reality
You mean, actual *literal* reality.
it can also puts your mind on a train of thought such that you can not break out of it unless someone is monitoring you[...]
That's why you're supposed to *always* have enough weed on you to calm down when tripping. Especially if you're alone.
Being a Soviet republic be the first step in joining the Russian Federation?
Huh? What do you mean? How are those two things related?
4. The Russian Federation guaranteed the territorial integrity [wikipedia.org] of the Ukraine.
Please Joe, there's a difference between "assurance" and "guarantee", besides it being an unratified agreement.
5. The Russian Federation has now invaded the Crimea.
Repeat after me: this is not an invasion.
In case you're wondering about stationing the troops only on the bases,
- the *democratically elected* president of Ukraine asked Russia to use military force.
[Putin] added that deposed Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych had no political future but asserted he was legally still head of state. "I think that he has no political future. And I told him this," Mr Putin said [...] (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10669670/Ukraine-Russia-crisis-live.html)
- Russia was asked by the Autonomous Republic of Crimea to aid them:
Sergei Aksenov, the [...] prime minister of the Crimea region, has declared that he is in control of all military, police and other security services in the region. But he appealed to Russia's president for help in keeping peace there.(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10670827/Ukraine-live-Crimea-leader-appeals-to-Putin-to-help-as-Obama-warns-of-costs-to-Moscow.html)
You seem to think that identifying as Russian means they want to stay in Russia. 55% of those who identified as Russian voter for the referendum. The vote showed that the majority wanted to stay with the Ukraine.
They were not in Russia, how could they have voted to stay in it? They supported the independency of Ukraine from the USSR, not from the RSFSR. So we're talking about two different things here. RF != RSFSR != USSR.
All we know is that the majority voted to stay with the Ukraine.
Not quite. All we know is that the majority voted to be part of an independent Ukraine vs. being a Soviet republic.
But both votes were still over 50% which means that the majority who voted decided to leave Russia and join teh Ukraine.
They decided to vote on the constitution. The question was not posed as "Would you like to be part of Ukraine, or part of Russia?" the question was "Do you want to be independent, or part of the USSR (not part of RSFSR)?" which is a completely different thing.
Trivia: RSFSR signed it's declaration of independence on the 12 June 1990, while the Ukrainian SSR followed on 16th of July. It's a complicated topic, but effectively, there was no USSR in 1991, even though it dissolved officially only in december.
If you don't vote you don't count.
Not in Germany. Here non-voters are distributed along each participating party. Besides these semantics, I wonder how many people at that time 1. knew what it meant to vote, 2. knew what exactly they were voting for (ok, that's a problem everywhere), and 3. understood the effect of not voting.
From the gut I'd say that on matters of importance, a majority of 2/3 is required. Maybe the other 40% thought, that not voting is a sign of protest?