That is why the guilty parties exposed could not claim they were fabricated without facing legal actions and sanctions from numerous parties.
Yah. The truly remarkable thing about this whole sad story is that, in all of Hillary Clinton's illegally revealed emails, nothing actionable was ever found. Yet the right wing propaganda machine was still able to successfully manipulate the election with it. Says more about the stupidity of the average American than anything else. Perhaps America deserves the result it got.
As far as I am concerned the only thing that is important was were the e-mails faked.
No, the important question is, would Trump's chance of election have been damaged if all his emails had been leaked? Or perhaps an even more important question is, does Donald Trump even know how to send an email?
It's may be logical to say if you are a HRC supporter you are not a Trump supporter.
You appear to have interpreted "sounds like" in a way that the OP did not intend. "Sounds like a Trump supporter" could mean "seems to be a Trump supporter" or it could mean "uses rhetoric similar to that of a Trump supporter". I am reasonable confident that the latter was the intended meaning: uses the trailer trash rhetoric of a typical deplorable Trump supporter. Of course, not all Trump supporters are deplorable, or at least, not all of them are completely deplorable, but the ones who say things like "why don't you shut the fuck up" certainly are.
Good thing the Linux foundation has roughly zero to do with stewardship of Linux development, other than paying Linus's salary, which he doesn't really need.
I have several friends at Microsoft who say the motto of the company is cloud cloud cloud. I've also spoken to people in the finance industry (e.g., big banks) who are much more receptive to putting their products on Microsoft rather than Google or AWS.
Only a big bank with locked in income streams could survive that. For any competitive player, it would be certain death. No shortage of examples to illustrate. There were at one time a few high volume financial transaction platforms running on Windows. After a string of embarrassing and costly failures, they're gone.
Do you even think Microsoft is even able to help? By example, the current situation with SMB is, when Microsoft needs to know something particularly subtle about SMB, they go ask the Samba guys. See, Microsoft never cares much about clean and transparent design, or keeping accurate historical records. Whatever they happen to cobble together by RC date is the definition of the "standard". If undocumented or partially documented APIs shifted a little, so what? You can see how this design culture might create issues with trying to run random Windows binaries from any point in that 20 year reign of chaos. To sort all that out requires real dedication to the art of fecal archaeology. Not something you're going to find a lot of in Microsoft's backbiting engineering culture, and if it does exist, it will be managed out soon.
Posing as an IDC surveyor is the perfect platform for industrial espionage, no? Especially if you don't need to pose because you actually are conducting an IDC survey.
HFT relies heavily on the positive feedback loops it starts, and rides like a surfboard, to deal hundreds or thousands of incremental trades to a new price
No. If it did work that way it would quickly be shut down as illegal.
HFT peaked in roughly 2009, and has fallen to less than 50% of trading volume in the last few years. Revenue from it has also dropped profoundly in the last 5 years.
You seem to be confusing high frequency trading with hedge funds. And if revenue dropped so profoundly, then what are you worried about?
Really, you come across as a dangerously overconfident newb. Sorry if that seems like an attack on your self esteem, but you should think about it. You've got a few assorted complexity reduction techniques under your belt but you've barely begun to discover the issues.
In the distant past, Tizen used to be Maemo, based on QT and apt. Now I agree that the pustulent thing it became is hardly worthy of life. But it is alive and the plug won't be pulled any time soon. No matter how awful the source code is, it would be better if it was public. And they should think hard about going back to QT/apt.
Q: When did Tizen nee Maemo first turn into a huge steaming pile? A: When Intel got involved.
Illegal or not, it's the basis of high frequency trading. The instantaneous sales, _themselves_, cause direct feedback and tip the market in various directions...
This is no different than snail trading, if it is even a problem, which is far from clear.
which the high frequency traders pre-analyze and step out at _precisely_ the moment to maximize their own profits. It's built into the system.
Ahem. There is nothing wrong with maximizing profits, provided it does not involve market manipulation or other illegal activity. BTW, now that pretty much 100% of traders are on a "high frequency" platform now, it's a level playing field again. Everything just happens faster. How scary is that? Does a jet aircraft scare you compared to a horse?
99.999999999% of the Earth's population has never heard of them.
The small fraction of the world's population who has heard of them happens to include nearly all the engineers they might hope to employ. (BTW, you are challenged with counting decimal points.)
I do a lot of realtime embedded programming, and the way to actually achieve realtime results is mostly by not having zillions of things, and reducing interaction between what things you do have.
That's a good guiding principle but there are limits to what you can do when your real world actually has zillions of asynchronous thingies in it, as most real worlds do.
Threads is a good way to be using a "realtime OS" or something, but with code that doesn't get realtime results. I'm not saying you can't do it, but it adds overhead and makes it less likely.
Threads are often the right thing to do for less resource intensive tasks because its easier to see and verify the control flow than an event driven design. Obviously, you need a real time scheduler, but that isn't hard to come by.
For realtime you basically want to give up all the things that make life easy for the programmer in regular systems...
No you don't, you only want to give up those creature comforts where there would be a significant benefit.
and then give up whatever you replaced those things with, and finally just use what resources are locally available in hardware.
Hah! You are only talking about very simple systems, where you are ok with delivering a steaming pile of write-only code.
And depending on the hardware, that may or may not even be enough.
I really don't like pat answers to questions that are deep and subtle. Thanks at least for the weasel words:)
You're making up your own private definition of what "the year of" means. In my universe, "the year of" means "the year something happened", and what happened was, Linux got a viable community of desktop users. 40 to 80 million users are more than enough for viability in the universe I live in. Only a fool would venture to deny that Linux arrived on the desktop some years ago.
But somebody needs Linux to completely dominate Microsoft in the desktop space? It might happen. That would be "The Year of Absolute Linux Domination of Everything".
Then again, nobody serious uses RedHat. It has been babylinux from its very inception...
Red hat owns the top 500 supercomputers, and supercomputers in general, for no good reason. Otherwise, true that. Still a some dumbasses using Fedora in business, but otherwise rpm-based distros are fading fast. Not fast enough for my taste though. RPM: just say no.
Executive summary of Red hat: everything they touch ends up as complete crap.
Slashdot Mirror
That is why the guilty parties exposed could not claim they were fabricated without facing legal actions and sanctions from numerous parties.
Yah. The truly remarkable thing about this whole sad story is that, in all of Hillary Clinton's illegally revealed emails, nothing actionable was ever found. Yet the right wing propaganda machine was still able to successfully manipulate the election with it. Says more about the stupidity of the average American than anything else. Perhaps America deserves the result it got.
As far as I am concerned the only thing that is important was were the e-mails faked.
No, the important question is, would Trump's chance of election have been damaged if all his emails had been leaked? Or perhaps an even more important question is, does Donald Trump even know how to send an email?
Hillary absolutely did not lose because of WikiLeaks. Only right-leaning news sites covered WikiLeaks-leaks.
Complete rubbish as any fool can see
Hillary didn't lose due to Wikileaks. She lost because she promised absolutely nothing other than to be not Donald Trump.
And because of Wikileaks.
If you need evidence, check out the comments to any Youtube video involving Trump, for one thing.
As I said, you have remarkably selective hearing, in addition to being an ass.
The bulk of the attacks I've heard about have been done to Trump supporters.
You have remarkably selective hearing.
It's may be logical to say if you are a HRC supporter you are not a Trump supporter.
You appear to have interpreted "sounds like" in a way that the OP did not intend. "Sounds like a Trump supporter" could mean "seems to be a Trump supporter" or it could mean "uses rhetoric similar to that of a Trump supporter". I am reasonable confident that the latter was the intended meaning: uses the trailer trash rhetoric of a typical deplorable Trump supporter. Of course, not all Trump supporters are deplorable, or at least, not all of them are completely deplorable, but the ones who say things like "why don't you shut the fuck up" certainly are.
Sure, maybe the traditional MS server stack did not pan out, but I don't think they've totally "burned their reputation."
Toasted it. Fried it. Up in smoke. That parrot is dead... burned to a crisp, whatever you think.
What part of "Microsoft has permanently burned their reputation with big banks to a crip" is tough for you to parse?
Good thing the Linux foundation has roughly zero to do with stewardship of Linux development, other than paying Linus's salary, which he doesn't really need.
I have several friends at Microsoft who say the motto of the company is cloud cloud cloud. I've also spoken to people in the finance industry (e.g., big banks) who are much more receptive to putting their products on Microsoft rather than Google or AWS.
Only a big bank with locked in income streams could survive that. For any competitive player, it would be certain death. No shortage of examples to illustrate. There were at one time a few high volume financial transaction platforms running on Windows. After a string of embarrassing and costly failures, they're gone.
Do you even think Microsoft is even able to help? By example, the current situation with SMB is, when Microsoft needs to know something particularly subtle about SMB, they go ask the Samba guys. See, Microsoft never cares much about clean and transparent design, or keeping accurate historical records. Whatever they happen to cobble together by RC date is the definition of the "standard". If undocumented or partially documented APIs shifted a little, so what? You can see how this design culture might create issues with trying to run random Windows binaries from any point in that 20 year reign of chaos. To sort all that out requires real dedication to the art of fecal archaeology. Not something you're going to find a lot of in Microsoft's backbiting engineering culture, and if it does exist, it will be managed out soon.
Nice knowing ya.
Posing as an IDC surveyor is the perfect platform for industrial espionage, no? Especially if you don't need to pose because you actually are conducting an IDC survey.
So now you're flipping from market manipulation to trading on inside information. It's all rigged, right?
HFT relies heavily on the positive feedback loops it starts, and rides like a surfboard, to deal hundreds or thousands of incremental trades to a new price
No. If it did work that way it would quickly be shut down as illegal.
HFT peaked in roughly 2009, and has fallen to less than 50% of trading volume in the last few years. Revenue from it has also dropped profoundly in the last 5 years.
You seem to be confusing high frequency trading with hedge funds. And if revenue dropped so profoundly, then what are you worried about?
Really, you come across as a dangerously overconfident newb. Sorry if that seems like an attack on your self esteem, but you should think about it. You've got a few assorted complexity reduction techniques under your belt but you've barely begun to discover the issues.
In the distant past, Tizen used to be Maemo, based on QT and apt. Now I agree that the pustulent thing it became is hardly worthy of life. But it is alive and the plug won't be pulled any time soon. No matter how awful the source code is, it would be better if it was public. And they should think hard about going back to QT/apt.
Q: When did Tizen nee Maemo first turn into a huge steaming pile?
A: When Intel got involved.
If Samsung really wants that, how about making Tizen actual open source instead of pretend open source?
Illegal or not, it's the basis of high frequency trading. The instantaneous sales, _themselves_, cause direct feedback and tip the market in various directions...
This is no different than snail trading, if it is even a problem, which is far from clear.
which the high frequency traders pre-analyze and step out at _precisely_ the moment to maximize their own profits. It's built into the system.
Ahem. There is nothing wrong with maximizing profits, provided it does not involve market manipulation or other illegal activity. BTW, now that pretty much 100% of traders are on a "high frequency" platform now, it's a level playing field again. Everything just happens faster. How scary is that? Does a jet aircraft scare you compared to a horse?
99.999999999% of the Earth's population has never heard of them.
The small fraction of the world's population who has heard of them happens to include nearly all the engineers they might hope to employ. (BTW, you are challenged with counting decimal points.)
I do a lot of realtime embedded programming, and the way to actually achieve realtime results is mostly by not having zillions of things, and reducing interaction between what things you do have.
That's a good guiding principle but there are limits to what you can do when your real world actually has zillions of asynchronous thingies in it, as most real worlds do.
Threads is a good way to be using a "realtime OS" or something, but with code that doesn't get realtime results. I'm not saying you can't do it, but it adds overhead and makes it less likely.
Threads are often the right thing to do for less resource intensive tasks because its easier to see and verify the control flow than an event driven design. Obviously, you need a real time scheduler, but that isn't hard to come by.
For realtime you basically want to give up all the things that make life easy for the programmer in regular systems...
No you don't, you only want to give up those creature comforts where there would be a significant benefit.
and then give up whatever you replaced those things with, and finally just use what resources are locally available in hardware.
Hah! You are only talking about very simple systems, where you are ok with delivering a steaming pile of write-only code.
And depending on the hardware, that may or may not even be enough.
I really don't like pat answers to questions that are deep and subtle. Thanks at least for the weasel words :)
You're making up your own private definition of what "the year of" means. In my universe, "the year of" means "the year something happened", and what happened was, Linux got a viable community of desktop users. 40 to 80 million users are more than enough for viability in the universe I live in. Only a fool would venture to deny that Linux arrived on the desktop some years ago.
But somebody needs Linux to completely dominate Microsoft in the desktop space? It might happen. That would be "The Year of Absolute Linux Domination of Everything".
It's "an illustration of a basic issue in computer science" that never seems to come up.
You can't be serious.
Then again, nobody serious uses RedHat. It has been babylinux from its very inception...
Red hat owns the top 500 supercomputers, and supercomputers in general, for no good reason. Otherwise, true that. Still a some dumbasses using Fedora in business, but otherwise rpm-based distros are fading fast. Not fast enough for my taste though. RPM: just say no.
Executive summary of Red hat: everything they touch ends up as complete crap.