But that is because there are enough C libraries out there to justify doing the work to make a C interface for Lisp, so I guess I would have been better off saying something about that being a feature of popularity, not anything intrinsic to C (except maybe that it is mature and reasonably compact, which helps keep things simple).
Well, no, I've never done business in another country. Sorry about that. But I would consider strong encryption to be protection (depending on the value of the data, the user might have to take care to ensure that the ram was reset before leaving the laptop).
That isn't terribly true, Jython can use reflection to access any Java class, no messing about with shims or an FFI, and I think the situation on the.net CLR is about the same.
The entire point of encrypting personal passwords is to keep Larry-the-thug from casually reading them, he doesn't have the resources (or even the inclination!) to brute force them. If someone interested in brute forcing AES has your laptop, it is likely that you also have some bigger problems than worrying about whether they can actually do it.
The espionage in your last paragraph only happens to that thin sliver of humanity that is smart enough to have data worth stealing and dumb enough to leave it sitting unprotected in their hotel room.
Even 10 years from now, the U.S. will still have a relatively well educated work force, and as lenders get sick of holding dollars, U.S. labor will become more and more attractive (because it will become more cost effective on the global market).
It probably won't ever again be the case that the U.S. has an enormous lead in education and industrial capacity like we did in the 1950s, but this notion that the U.S. is going to collapse as soon as China stops lending us money is just silly, it is actually far more likely that the Chinese government will collapse (because we provide the copious consumption they need to fuel the economic growth they are using to keep their people happy), and people in the U.S. will have to deal with shrinking buying power for a while (but the collapse of China as a resource market might mitigate that quite a bit).
Virgin Mobile is wholly owned by Sprint at this point (Sprint had already owned part of the company and bought out Virgin earlier this year, part of the sale was the right to use the name).
My understanding may be off, and certainly it would be a simple matter to construct a more interesting case, but I'm pretty sure that the situation you describe is 'dull' in optimization circles, not 'damned smart'.
I wasn't trying to attack the fact that you had the surgery, I was trying to point out that your circumstances are still a bit extraordinary (and many people with mild vision issues are going to use contacts lenses to address those issues).
I much prefer flimsy plastic to invasive surgery (and I don't require correction to function, I just benefit from it), so bring them on. Just because your eye blew up doesn't mean there aren't millions of people that benefit from contact lenses, and the ability to put information there (or choose not to) would be 100% feature.
The idea with a touchscreen is not to eliminate buttons, it is to enable input using the screen. That buttons can be implemented as input to the screen is a happy side effect.
The assembly of something with 15 buttons using the linked idea would probably be quite a lot cheaper than the assembly of 15 separate buttons, and the electronics to drive it would probably be simpler.
You don't even know what you are quoting, for all you know, the guy made it up!
I looked, Wikipedia does not have a 'Obviously famous people' page, and if you are using their 'notability' guidelines to establish fame, I don't need to call you an idiot. I can't find any page that is conducive to sorting the obviously famous into people that are porn stars and the not porn stars, and so on.
I'm not trolling, you simply don't understand that it isn't obvious.
Dude, context. What I was getting at was, what makes you think (or assume, or whatever) that is the criteria that the original poster applied? What definition of 'large' did he use. And so on.
Slashdot Mirror
Tell that to the King.
But that is because there are enough C libraries out there to justify doing the work to make a C interface for Lisp, so I guess I would have been better off saying something about that being a feature of popularity, not anything intrinsic to C (except maybe that it is mature and reasonably compact, which helps keep things simple).
Well, no, I've never done business in another country. Sorry about that. But I would consider strong encryption to be protection (depending on the value of the data, the user might have to take care to ensure that the ram was reset before leaving the laptop).
That isn't terribly true, Jython can use reflection to access any Java class, no messing about with shims or an FFI, and I think the situation on the .net CLR is about the same.
The entire point of encrypting personal passwords is to keep Larry-the-thug from casually reading them, he doesn't have the resources (or even the inclination!) to brute force them. If someone interested in brute forcing AES has your laptop, it is likely that you also have some bigger problems than worrying about whether they can actually do it.
The espionage in your last paragraph only happens to that thin sliver of humanity that is smart enough to have data worth stealing and dumb enough to leave it sitting unprotected in their hotel room.
Even 10 years from now, the U.S. will still have a relatively well educated work force, and as lenders get sick of holding dollars, U.S. labor will become more and more attractive (because it will become more cost effective on the global market).
It probably won't ever again be the case that the U.S. has an enormous lead in education and industrial capacity like we did in the 1950s, but this notion that the U.S. is going to collapse as soon as China stops lending us money is just silly, it is actually far more likely that the Chinese government will collapse (because we provide the copious consumption they need to fuel the economic growth they are using to keep their people happy), and people in the U.S. will have to deal with shrinking buying power for a while (but the collapse of China as a resource market might mitigate that quite a bit).
Man, at that rate, I wish I coulda been born poor a thousand years ago.
Virgin Mobile is wholly owned by Sprint at this point (Sprint had already owned part of the company and bought out Virgin earlier this year, part of the sale was the right to use the name).
A lawyer isn't going to burn the company and debt collectors to the ground though.
Call an arsonist.
They likely throw them out faster than that anyway.
My understanding may be off, and certainly it would be a simple matter to construct a more interesting case, but I'm pretty sure that the situation you describe is 'dull' in optimization circles, not 'damned smart'.
You mean he was not damaged any further.
I wasn't trying to attack the fact that you had the surgery, I was trying to point out that your circumstances are still a bit extraordinary (and many people with mild vision issues are going to use contacts lenses to address those issues).
I much prefer flimsy plastic to invasive surgery (and I don't require correction to function, I just benefit from it), so bring them on. Just because your eye blew up doesn't mean there aren't millions of people that benefit from contact lenses, and the ability to put information there (or choose not to) would be 100% feature.
Are you sure it is the same people, or are you just making that assertion because it helps you make a point?
The idea with a touchscreen is not to eliminate buttons, it is to enable input using the screen. That buttons can be implemented as input to the screen is a happy side effect.
Hey look, the everyone's-a-troll mods got some points today.
The assembly of something with 15 buttons using the linked idea would probably be quite a lot cheaper than the assembly of 15 separate buttons, and the electronics to drive it would probably be simpler.
I don't know, I think people might do something more with a netbook than just sticking it on a shelf somewhere.
I thought all you Linux types like to make fun of Windows for having names like "My Documents" and what not?
You don't even know what you are quoting, for all you know, the guy made it up!
I looked, Wikipedia does not have a 'Obviously famous people' page, and if you are using their 'notability' guidelines to establish fame, I don't need to call you an idiot. I can't find any page that is conducive to sorting the obviously famous into people that are porn stars and the not porn stars, and so on.
I'm not trolling, you simply don't understand that it isn't obvious.
Dude, context. What I was getting at was, what makes you think (or assume, or whatever) that is the criteria that the original poster applied? What definition of 'large' did he use. And so on.
Where are you getting "simple recognition by large groups of people"?
When men were men and women cooked dinner!