Doesn't matter who signed it, I actually think it was a good bill, until the individual mandate entered into it. And I don't care which political party you say you are, no one gets to tell me I have to buy anyone's product by force. And I'm sorry, it's by force. If I don't I get fined. If I don't pay or agree to pay it, it's prison. If I resist prison, I get killed by police.
I'm not telling you to support it, I'm saying if your argument is based on who is making a case or arguing a point, then I don't give a rats ass what your cnn-brainwashed idiot head thinks. It's soaked with "I'm an angel and my values are better than this persons" bleach.
I'm saying, give me substance. What do you not like? Which policy direction? What law? Which executive order. A president does dozens of things every day. This "dumpster fire" is rearranging global supply chains. He is changing the way American business is taxed to bring it more in line with European business tax rates (I disagreed with the personal tax rate changes, but I suspect they need one to get the other). He gave a tax holiday for foreign income repatriation. EVERYONE can agree that was a good thing? If you can't, then you are clearly a partisan sctick, and I don't give a rats ass what you say.
Oh, and insulting the commenter for suggesting something he didn't (I never said we should support Trump, I said we should call each move like it is: balls and strikes), just shows how much identity politics you play.
I think the Alert was good. I wonder if anyone in the DC plane would have taken it down on 9/11 if they knew what happened to the two planes in New York, like the guys in Pennsylvania did. Alerts are good, and anyone who doesn't think so, just hates the guy at the top, and not what he is doing.
Through our collective consent, this is the leadership we ended up with. Now, I prefer to balls and strikes the guy. If he does something I like, I cheer. If he does something I don't, I cry foul.
What bothers me is most people can't name three things he did that they like, or at least agree with.
He supports changing the repliblican platform to support abortion for women in three circumstances (from 0 today).
He supports the use of medical marijuana (a first for republican president).
He struck back at an air base in Syria responsible for a chemical attack on a village with children.
If you can't say anything he did that you are for, you're too closed minded to have a conversation with.
Oh my goodness. No. I live in Los Angeles. Jokes on you.
Besides. I didn't say I supported Trump, I said I don't support the vitriol and obstructionism. I'm sorry, but Obama never was sued for issuing alerts. This is just pure bullshit.
Because he is using the federal emergency system to test.... the federal emergency system?
This is why I fucking hate the Democrats. It's not a "good thing" or "bad thing" with them. It's a bad person, and EVERY SINGLE THING HE DOES is resisted and casted in the worst possible light, every time. It gets old.
Besides, you can't sue the president for something the law essentially requires him to do.
I'd understand if people hated some of the things he says or does, and I've been a supporter of democratic candidates, but such unbridled hatred towards him has made me so fed up, I hope he just crushes them in the mid terms, gets his judge appointed, and is re-elected in 2020. Not because I am a fan or care, but because I think it's not as bad as the democratic behavior which is purely obstructionism and hatred at this point. I want to see them lose just because of the vitriol they spew.
Ultimately, he won the election. No matter who does, I want them to succeed, because success is success for my country.
Well, it's smart of him to automate his job, but stupid of hit to rest on his laurels. I am manager I used to have said something along the lines of: "if you want a promotion, make your existing job seem effortless." He was in legal, but the point remains.
If I hired a guy who automated himself out of his job, great! Let's pay you more, and put you somewhere that costs us a bunch since we don't do it efficiently.
Now, maybe they fired him out of ethical concerns for pretending to work. That could be grounds for dismissal in my book, but I'd have to weigh the workplace politics he was facing vs. the benefit of having a good coder automate more of my business.
Anecdotal evidence is a poor indication of a trend. If you want to prove your point, show us lemon law'd return rates of these cars vs their categories.
But they are profitable this quarter. As they get better and learn more, and have stronger economies of scale, they will increase margin, just like what happens to most businesses after the initial spending to build segment is over.
Shorting such an innovative company is lunacy. They are years ahead on battery tech, years ahead on drivetrain, years ahead on driving assistants, and years ahead on infrastructure (power wall, solar panels, superchargers) as any other competitor. News and articles and tweets and this crap is fine for shorting in the immediate term, but over the long ark of time, financial performance is what will govern the stock price, and I don't think there are any worries there. They have a product, people want to buy it, and they are learning how to build that product profitably. Everything else is noise.
It was one of the primary changes to "Mojave", the latest iteration of OS X (Mac OS). Every feature listed up there is present in Mac OS.
I for one do not mind when they copy each other, Android and iOS have been copying features of each other for a decade, and that's been a good thing. Seeing what works elsewhere gives platforms the best of both, and everyone wins. What sucks here is there doesn't seem to be any truly unique features released in Win10 that were not already on Mac OS, so it seems this release is purely a "copy what the other guy is doing" update. That sucks because there are no features Mac OS guys will gain.
No, he surely didn't, and it was no where near as fast or powerful as the watch. But, that doesn't matter. The interesting thing has nothing to do with the Apple Watch 4 being a 64bit wide architecture.
The interesting thing in this story (for all the non-programmers out there), is the IDE handling natively the cross-compilation difficulties of moving between 32 and 64 bits. That means it is allocating memory and changing data types of objects at compile-time.
He must have evidence that he discussed the price ($420) with someone who agreed to buy the exiting stock at that price. My guess is he shows a letter of intent, memorandum of understanding, or at least a confirmation email from them to the SEC (and the public), and he gets a slap on the wrist because the SEC will say "funding secured must mean it's in an escrow account", or something like that. If he's got nothing, he should have taken the deal.
I do wonder if they are trying to bar him from taking SpaceX public (since he would be restricted in his seat at public companies).
Your accounts security for all those applications is equal to the weakest security of any of those apps. If any of them are compromised, have reversible encryption or worse, store their user passwords in plain text, you will get owned. Do not do this.
The real issue is that Microsoft doesn't see these things as bloatware for the Windows 10 intended audience. If you want a professional or enterprise OS, buy Windows 10 Enterprise. You will find that all the Microsoft crap is gone. Of course, it costs more, but has more support and capabilities (like VPN just works). If you run around buying home and SOHO versions, its intended for highschoolers who use candy crush and spotify.
No doubt the likes of Weibo or Baidu are concocting a "me too" rip off of the Twitch platform, and in order to ensure its success the govt there helps local services by blocking competition. Welcome to a Communist regime, one step beyond socialism.
This is kind of a half-true story though. The movies are yours when you buy them from Apple, and you can download them and have them forever. They will not delete from your devices. What Apple also gives you is the ability to redownload them onto other devices and at a later time, but it has to retain the right to do so. When the movie companies change their contracts on Apple, this is what happens.
I doubt Apple wanted to lose the rights to redistribute purchased content for reasons exactly like this story, they get painted as the bad guy. This was just poor negotiations for perpetual purchases and the guy lost out since he didn't maintain his purchased copy.
What I do fault Apple for is not notifying the gentleman that his movie would be gone from online distribution a week prior to its removal so he could facilitate getting a copy offline for himself. That's what sucks about this, and is a place I think Apple could improve its process pretty easily with a simple push notification
It doesn't mean WhatsApp is destroying these things, but rather the uneducated mob. WhatsApp is just their communication mechanism. This story is the equivalent of saying Radio caused a genocide because some African warlord used a radio station to direct a militia to massacre a race of people. It's not Radio that did it.
I'm so sick and tired of the stories trying to paint the tech companies as bad actors because of how people use their medium. The bad actors are the users, not the medium inventors. Do we really want to live in a world where the walled gardens are patrolled for content too? It's bad enough as it is. For Pete's sake, leave the mediums alone, and prosecute those that actually commit the vile acts.
They are. Not that you'd know given you probably use a phone with (insert not-the-fastest-mobile-processor-on-earth here).
Since you are too busy brand-hating, you'd be the definition of not an expert in the field to which you espouse your biased unfounded views. Why don't you read the tech press and the articles of all the journalists who consistently rate the iPhone as the best consumer product of the century? Ass hat.
No, but still. We don't like it when companies set or influence social policy in the US, why would we expect the Chinese be any different? If Google operated search in China, they should absolutely conform to the laws the Chinese legislative body implemented, whatever they may be, however they were implemented.
Companies are not vectors for social change, populations are. If the Chinese take issue with their internal laws, they would change them either through revolt, political expression, or whatever means their system allows for such a change.
It is not our job to enforce our ideals and laws on everyone else. Google is stupid for not putting search in China, because Baidu won't hesitate to enter the US market. When it does, we would absolutely demand they conform to our laws.
If you have an issue with Chinese sensorship, go to China and campaign.
But, he is wrong. So many other products work just like software.
It costs a mine a millions to produce the first result, and only less than the result's market price to produce the next one.
It cost Henry Ford.. maybe 500x to develop the first model T than the next ones. Great.
It costs movies a few hundred million to develop the premier, and only a few hundred to a few thousand to show it in the next movie theatre.
It costs Genentec a few billion times more to develop the first pill, than it does the next pill.
It costs Microsoft tens of billions to develop software, and only pennies to distribute it. I get his point. There is a disparity between the first one and the second in almost all industries, but software is probably the most extreme. There are however, constant development needs. It's not like you develop software, call it fully baked, and are done. A project with no maintainers, is a dead project, and will soon be abandoned in most cases (save maybe for some industrial software or some other rare-cases).
The economic models work, because it costs a fortune to maintain and further advance software, and the more people buy it, the more it justifies maintaining it. The free market tells software developers which projects need more attention by sales.
You are talking about minifying and obfuscating, all of which do not prevent decompiling. I was under the impression some code could be used to crash decompiler or something. What you are talking about is making the code hard to access (encryption) or difficult to understand (obfuscation), not preventing it from decompiling.
What malarky is this? Americans have the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure in the 4th amendment, from the US Govt. It says so right there, and there are no clauses based on locality.
If a foreign government seeks to search toy in their country, that is between you, them, and maybe the State Dept.
But, our rights are our rights and our government can not breach them, just because we are somewhere abroad.
The electoral college is a reminder that slavery existed. It was the fix for accounting for the persons who could not vote, by weighting up the votes of the people in the state who could. If your state has 3 million people, but only 2 million could vote, the one million who could not vote were supposed to be weighted into the other two million.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't matter who signed it, I actually think it was a good bill, until the individual mandate entered into it. And I don't care which political party you say you are, no one gets to tell me I have to buy anyone's product by force. And I'm sorry, it's by force. If I don't I get fined. If I don't pay or agree to pay it, it's prison. If I resist prison, I get killed by police.
I'm not telling you to support it, I'm saying if your argument is based on who is making a case or arguing a point, then I don't give a rats ass what your cnn-brainwashed idiot head thinks. It's soaked with "I'm an angel and my values are better than this persons" bleach.
I'm saying, give me substance. What do you not like? Which policy direction? What law? Which executive order. A president does dozens of things every day. This "dumpster fire" is rearranging global supply chains. He is changing the way American business is taxed to bring it more in line with European business tax rates (I disagreed with the personal tax rate changes, but I suspect they need one to get the other). He gave a tax holiday for foreign income repatriation. EVERYONE can agree that was a good thing? If you can't, then you are clearly a partisan sctick, and I don't give a rats ass what you say.
Oh, and insulting the commenter for suggesting something he didn't (I never said we should support Trump, I said we should call each move like it is: balls and strikes), just shows how much identity politics you play.
I think the Alert was good. I wonder if anyone in the DC plane would have taken it down on 9/11 if they knew what happened to the two planes in New York, like the guys in Pennsylvania did. Alerts are good, and anyone who doesn't think so, just hates the guy at the top, and not what he is doing.
Through our collective consent, this is the leadership we ended up with. Now, I prefer to balls and strikes the guy. If he does something I like, I cheer. If he does something I don't, I cry foul.
What bothers me is most people can't name three things he did that they like, or at least agree with.
He supports changing the repliblican platform to support abortion for women in three circumstances (from 0 today).
He supports the use of medical marijuana (a first for republican president).
He struck back at an air base in Syria responsible for a chemical attack on a village with children.
If you can't say anything he did that you are for, you're too closed minded to have a conversation with.
Oh my goodness. No. I live in Los Angeles. Jokes on you.
Besides. I didn't say I supported Trump, I said I don't support the vitriol and obstructionism. I'm sorry, but Obama never was sued for issuing alerts. This is just pure bullshit.
Because he is using the federal emergency system to test.... the federal emergency system?
This is why I fucking hate the Democrats. It's not a "good thing" or "bad thing" with them. It's a bad person, and EVERY SINGLE THING HE DOES is resisted and casted in the worst possible light, every time. It gets old.
Besides, you can't sue the president for something the law essentially requires him to do.
I'd understand if people hated some of the things he says or does, and I've been a supporter of democratic candidates, but such unbridled hatred towards him has made me so fed up, I hope he just crushes them in the mid terms, gets his judge appointed, and is re-elected in 2020. Not because I am a fan or care, but because I think it's not as bad as the democratic behavior which is purely obstructionism and hatred at this point. I want to see them lose just because of the vitriol they spew.
Ultimately, he won the election. No matter who does, I want them to succeed, because success is success for my country.
Well, it's smart of him to automate his job, but stupid of hit to rest on his laurels. I am manager I used to have said something along the lines of: "if you want a promotion, make your existing job seem effortless." He was in legal, but the point remains.
If I hired a guy who automated himself out of his job, great! Let's pay you more, and put you somewhere that costs us a bunch since we don't do it efficiently.
Now, maybe they fired him out of ethical concerns for pretending to work. That could be grounds for dismissal in my book, but I'd have to weigh the workplace politics he was facing vs. the benefit of having a good coder automate more of my business.
No, sorry. they don't.
Anecdotal evidence is a poor indication of a trend. If you want to prove your point, show us lemon law'd return rates of these cars vs their categories.
But they are profitable this quarter. As they get better and learn more, and have stronger economies of scale, they will increase margin, just like what happens to most businesses after the initial spending to build segment is over.
Shorting such an innovative company is lunacy. They are years ahead on battery tech, years ahead on drivetrain, years ahead on driving assistants, and years ahead on infrastructure (power wall, solar panels, superchargers) as any other competitor. News and articles and tweets and this crap is fine for shorting in the immediate term, but over the long ark of time, financial performance is what will govern the stock price, and I don't think there are any worries there. They have a product, people want to buy it, and they are learning how to build that product profitably. Everything else is noise.
It was one of the primary changes to "Mojave", the latest iteration of OS X (Mac OS). Every feature listed up there is present in Mac OS.
I for one do not mind when they copy each other, Android and iOS have been copying features of each other for a decade, and that's been a good thing. Seeing what works elsewhere gives platforms the best of both, and everyone wins. What sucks here is there doesn't seem to be any truly unique features released in Win10 that were not already on Mac OS, so it seems this release is purely a "copy what the other guy is doing" update. That sucks because there are no features Mac OS guys will gain.
No, he surely didn't, and it was no where near as fast or powerful as the watch. But, that doesn't matter. The interesting thing has nothing to do with the Apple Watch 4 being a 64bit wide architecture.
The interesting thing in this story (for all the non-programmers out there), is the IDE handling natively the cross-compilation difficulties of moving between 32 and 64 bits. That means it is allocating memory and changing data types of objects at compile-time.
Pretty cool stuff.
Safari also runs on iOS. There are like literally a billion of the most highly prized users on earth on that platform.
He must have evidence that he discussed the price ($420) with someone who agreed to buy the exiting stock at that price. My guess is he shows a letter of intent, memorandum of understanding, or at least a confirmation email from them to the SEC (and the public), and he gets a slap on the wrist because the SEC will say "funding secured must mean it's in an escrow account", or something like that. If he's got nothing, he should have taken the deal.
I do wonder if they are trying to bar him from taking SpaceX public (since he would be restricted in his seat at public companies).
Your accounts security for all those applications is equal to the weakest security of any of those apps. If any of them are compromised, have reversible encryption or worse, store their user passwords in plain text, you will get owned. Do not do this.
The real issue is that Microsoft doesn't see these things as bloatware for the Windows 10 intended audience. If you want a professional or enterprise OS, buy Windows 10 Enterprise. You will find that all the Microsoft crap is gone. Of course, it costs more, but has more support and capabilities (like VPN just works). If you run around buying home and SOHO versions, its intended for highschoolers who use candy crush and spotify.
No doubt the likes of Weibo or Baidu are concocting a "me too" rip off of the Twitch platform, and in order to ensure its success the govt there helps local services by blocking competition. Welcome to a Communist regime, one step beyond socialism.
This is kind of a half-true story though. The movies are yours when you buy them from Apple, and you can download them and have them forever. They will not delete from your devices. What Apple also gives you is the ability to redownload them onto other devices and at a later time, but it has to retain the right to do so. When the movie companies change their contracts on Apple, this is what happens.
I doubt Apple wanted to lose the rights to redistribute purchased content for reasons exactly like this story, they get painted as the bad guy. This was just poor negotiations for perpetual purchases and the guy lost out since he didn't maintain his purchased copy.
What I do fault Apple for is not notifying the gentleman that his movie would be gone from online distribution a week prior to its removal so he could facilitate getting a copy offline for himself. That's what sucks about this, and is a place I think Apple could improve its process pretty easily with a simple push notification
It doesn't mean WhatsApp is destroying these things, but rather the uneducated mob. WhatsApp is just their communication mechanism. This story is the equivalent of saying Radio caused a genocide because some African warlord used a radio station to direct a militia to massacre a race of people. It's not Radio that did it.
I'm so sick and tired of the stories trying to paint the tech companies as bad actors because of how people use their medium. The bad actors are the users, not the medium inventors. Do we really want to live in a world where the walled gardens are patrolled for content too? It's bad enough as it is. For Pete's sake, leave the mediums alone, and prosecute those that actually commit the vile acts.
They are. Not that you'd know given you probably use a phone with (insert not-the-fastest-mobile-processor-on-earth here).
Since you are too busy brand-hating, you'd be the definition of not an expert in the field to which you espouse your biased unfounded views. Why don't you read the tech press and the articles of all the journalists who consistently rate the iPhone as the best consumer product of the century? Ass hat.
No, but still. We don't like it when companies set or influence social policy in the US, why would we expect the Chinese be any different? If Google operated search in China, they should absolutely conform to the laws the Chinese legislative body implemented, whatever they may be, however they were implemented.
Companies are not vectors for social change, populations are. If the Chinese take issue with their internal laws, they would change them either through revolt, political expression, or whatever means their system allows for such a change.
It is not our job to enforce our ideals and laws on everyone else. Google is stupid for not putting search in China, because Baidu won't hesitate to enter the US market. When it does, we would absolutely demand they conform to our laws.
If you have an issue with Chinese sensorship, go to China and campaign.
But, he is wrong. So many other products work just like software.
It costs a mine a millions to produce the first result, and only less than the result's market price to produce the next one.
It cost Henry Ford.. maybe 500x to develop the first model T than the next ones. Great.
It costs movies a few hundred million to develop the premier, and only a few hundred to a few thousand to show it in the next movie theatre.
It costs Genentec a few billion times more to develop the first pill, than it does the next pill.
It costs Microsoft tens of billions to develop software, and only pennies to distribute it. I get his point. There is a disparity between the first one and the second in almost all industries, but software is probably the most extreme. There are however, constant development needs. It's not like you develop software, call it fully baked, and are done. A project with no maintainers, is a dead project, and will soon be abandoned in most cases (save maybe for some industrial software or some other rare-cases).
The economic models work, because it costs a fortune to maintain and further advance software, and the more people buy it, the more it justifies maintaining it. The free market tells software developers which projects need more attention by sales.
You are talking about minifying and obfuscating, all of which do not prevent decompiling. I was under the impression some code could be used to crash decompiler or something. What you are talking about is making the code hard to access (encryption) or difficult to understand (obfuscation), not preventing it from decompiling.
Gotcha
We prefer free markets as opposed to central control. Nice try NYC, kindly piss off.
What malarky is this? Americans have the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure in the 4th amendment, from the US Govt. It says so right there, and there are no clauses based on locality.
If a foreign government seeks to search toy in their country, that is between you, them, and maybe the State Dept.
But, our rights are our rights and our government can not breach them, just because we are somewhere abroad.
The electoral college is a reminder that slavery existed. It was the fix for accounting for the persons who could not vote, by weighting up the votes of the people in the state who could. If your state has 3 million people, but only 2 million could vote, the one million who could not vote were supposed to be weighted into the other two million.