Ultimately economics wins though and the nation ends up bankrupt. Consider your demand side equation. You have just established people will pay 'anything' for certain things. Alright what is the real cost of producing that drug? Why does that single pill need to command a price of $1500? Simply because the market will bear it? Subsidies just enable supplies of inelastic services and goods to get an economic rent.
Sure you'd mortgage your house to pay for those drugs, trouble is you only probably have $100-$200K in equity so that won't even by you a years worth. Guess what in inelastic or not the suppler will have to price it lower. Unless you subsidize it than the entire nation gets to be raped to take care of your personal problem.
Personally I think it would be better for society as a whole if we left people to play the hand they are dealt. Even when that means a life being cut short. Sure you bet in the situations you describe I would do what anyone would do and look for any way I could to buy time and wish things were different, probably wish somebody would help but it would be beyond me. At the societal level however we need to consider the larger question of allocation efficiency.
If government has to 'do something' then we should probably address situations like medical care, basic food stuffs (native vegetables and grains), from the supply side. Set price controls on those things. Has to be done carefully though you have to allow prices high enough that suppliers still want to go into production.
The other reality is there just may be no market for certain kids of medical research. Consider the ALS hubbub recently. Does subsidizing research for something like that make any sense at all? Its a very rare condition. We could probably save or improve more lives investing in improving treatment for more common perhaps even already treatable conditions.
The other issue is triangulating kinda relies on either continuous or multiple transmission. It mostly boils down to you observer the transmission form multiple points, and measure the received energy at each. Next you do a bunch of math to figure out where the transmission likely originated from based on the different energy detected at the receiving stations. Doing that with accuracy to handful of meters as would be needed to quickly id a drone operator and respond is kinda hard when
1) the detection stations are far a part 2) there are structures or land forms that might absorb EM (you will need more than just the inverse square law) 3) you don't have a lot of receive station density. (cells can be quite large in rural areas) 4) you don't know what EM to tune to 5) dynamic conditions changes in atmosphere etc
The technology to auto pilot or simply execute on simple instruction is getting smaller lighter and cheaper. Already some consumer drones can proceed to a set GPS coordinates by themselves. If you don't need to be in constant or even frequent contact with the drone but only need to occasionally send a quick "GOTO $lat,$long,$altitude" it might be very hard to track you down.
Another standing based evasion of the 4th amendment. As long has you have to prove a negative you have personally been the victim of a clandestine program or any government program for that matter the Constitution might as well be toilette paper.
All they have to do is classify the records and its essentially game over.
What we need to do is push for legislation that lowers the bar for legal standing in cases against the government. It should be very low. Once the program is proven to exist it should be open to challenge on the complain it violates any other laws or violates anyone's Constitutional rights. The fact that its supposed to be a government by the people and for the people, means that we the people should have automatic standing anytime the government is violated laws or the Constitution we the people enacted. The grounds should be a failure to lawfully govern, the harm being undermining societies faith in law.
This is the only way we are going make any headway.
Every time I hear some lefty telling me we need more government in more regulation to prevent abuses by corporation I am reminded of this stuff and laugh out loud. So called democratic countries of Western Europe and North America already have governments that are more abusive than any corporate ever could be.
There offer is reasonable. Separation of duties is as important as all the things the original poster listed. The company is to big for the OP to be a cow boy, not saying he will but the surest way to make sure he does not go down that path is not to allow. The OP should realize that protection runs both ways. When something happens that was unauthorized he won't be on the list of suspects. I am assuming that the EA isn't also CIO.
Finally its the OP's job as EA to design a survivable architecture, that includes on that survives him leaving for any reason. Not having direct access means he will have to make sure teams working under him have the knowledge and skill sets to get the job done. That might mean training people (sending them boot camps etc), adding people, replacing people. All three of those options are sometimes hard to get done but they need to get done and they won't when the EA can just ride in on his or her white horse and do it themselves. Which by the way means you are taking your eye off the strategic objectives you are supposed to be working on and doing tactical.
EA isn't a tech job. Its a management/analyst role that demands a technical background. It will and should take your hands off the tech. Yes you still need to keep up on new tech, but in the what can it do, what is good for way not in the, this how you implement this type of abstract interface or here is how you install memory in a SAN controller way.
It looks like the SJ1.5 is 3g? Which frankly is plenty fast for any data I need to access on a 5" device, but the carries are not standing up the towers so.. I want my 4g.
And why do techbro libertarians really not take the time to think their statements through?
Its perfectly thought thru. Biggest problem with the free market is the imbalance of information. If everyone had perfect information than we would need almost no regulation of the market place at all. We could all make great decisions all the time.
So Yes as a "techbro libertarian" disclosure requirements are one of the few types of regulations I'd be willing to support.
isn't in the interests of any producer, so if none of them labeled, then would customers just choose to starve to death?
Your assertion is false and the market has already demonstrated this. Many producers consider it in their interest to label and to create labels customers understand. They do this to differentiate their product.
Hence you see all kinds of labels some that have fairly well established and specific meanings that you can go look up with an industry group like "organic", "gluten free", and "fat free" and others less so like 'GMO free" etc.
Some customers want labeling and will pay for that. Some manufacturers will go above and beyond legal labeling requirements because that way they can capture the customers that want that. Personally I don't look for most of those optional labels.
However if we did not have mandated food labeling, you bet I would be willing to pay a premium at the grocery store to those manufactures that are willing to disclose what is in the product. After all even if manufacturer A has to put contains upto %30 saw dust on their label and manufacturer B has no label I am going to either pass on the product category entirely or go with A because B absence of label leads me to conclude they probably have even more saw dust than A or they'd be making some effort to inform me that they don't.
not changing anything about how corporations have to secure data, or even (god forbid!) be punished for having sloppy security.
And why should it? For the sake of argument do you think the government should tell you that you MUST install a home security system, have dead bolts on every exterior door, require exterior doors be steel or solid wood, limit the side of windows to no more than 1" by 1" or require bars? If you violate any of these rules on your structure fine or punish you? Should we lighten up the sentences for "breaking and entering" or even burglary?
Personally I think with certain exceptions like public Utilities etc that already enjoy a special relationship with government and a captive market, that companies ought to be allowed to have whatever security posture they like. They should simply have to be honest about it with consumers. Government ought to do one of the few things its Constitutionally supposed to do and set some standards of measure.
Develop some NIST definitions for overall information security postures. If companies then want to claim they have a 'Double plus good can't hack me bro' rating there is a way to prove that. Then if one of these breaches happens and its done in a way that should not have been possible while in compliance like 'plain text data on laptop found on bus' we would all be able to go after them for contract fraud or false advertising etc.
Additionally we should have some disclosure laws, just like food labels there need to be some standardized categories and forms companies that maintain any information that is personally identifiable other than firstname, lastname, current address, billing address, and primary phone number, should be required to disclose that on a standardized and both electronically readable and human readable format. Maybe a nice TML or INI like file.
Hillary Clinton should know what a "server wipe" is because she was in charge of the people who were managing this
Personally I find it hard to accept Hillary as a former Secretary of State would not know a lot more than she lets on. Its difficult to imagine she could have done her job effectively otherwise. That said she does not need to know the details of what "wipe" means in terms vs say a simple delete.
The question could have plainly been understood as "did you or someone in your employ attempt erase the contents of the server before handing it over and how do you explain that as anything other than destruction of evidence."
You don't need to know anything about filesystems, databases, disk sectors, pointers, logical addressing, block sizes, etc to understand the important aspects of the question. She chose to evade the question and the best she could come up with to feign an embarrassing degree of ignorance in the form of bad joke. Honestly I would have better about her as the next POTUS if her answer had been "no comment".
No we don't know if she violated any laws yet, although it looks more and more like she probably did. We do know she at least violated some government practice documents, she was not obligated to comply with but should have.
The issue isn't if she broke the law or not. There are bunch of people that would enjoy seeing Clinton in the slam but it won't affect things much beyond that. What matters is she should be losing this election. She was the Secretary of State for the United States of America. She either could have and should have recognized that she was dealing with sensitive information classified or not and cared enough about operation security to do something about it.
So she knew or should have known the risks of E-mail its not 1998 anymore, everyone has heard the post card analogy with inter-domain mail. If she did not know she should have people around her to tell her that. If she did not listen or only select a bunch of yes men and women that is also a problem.
Even if all the operational security issues and risks of e-mail were a surprise to her, you'd think her behavior would have very suddenly improved when Bradly Manning and a few other events took place, again nope, so we are left with willful ignorance, or gross negligence. Crime or not, prosecutable or not, there isn't a good spin you can put on it. Even Her own justifications about carry multiple devices etc have been contradicted, she has been evasive about it and her story keeps changing so she is only compounding it with lies and bad ones. She isn't a good candidate to lead the country pure and simple.
The Highlander and all the other Immortals he comes into contact with seem to be able to do it. I guess it just takes practice, being immortal probably helps with that in terms of time investment.
That's right it does say arms, which could describe any weapon. Certainly at the time it was drafted that would have been understood to include things like sabers, other edged weapons, etc.
If the argument though that the 'being necessary... militia..." part of the clause is operative in that it requires weapons to have a military application to be covered under the amendment that might be interesting. Interesting in that it would undermine the arguments that support restrictions and prohibitions on fully automatic weapons and perhaps even some types of WMDs, after all a successful militia would need such things in modern warfare.
FF is a perfect example of a project going completely off the rails. I don't hear anyone saying good things about it anymore.
It started as an effort to be lighter and faster than the old Mozilla suite. I actually like the mail client, occasionally use composer to put something together quickly and Chatzilla is fine IRC client as often as I still want to use IRC. I stayed on the SeaMonkey side of the house on my personal systems this entire time.
It was funny as hell to watch FF get bigger and more bloated than SeaMonkey, and its performance plummet. SeaMonkey's UI in the mean time only got faster with fixes and improvements and the browser just got better with all the gekko and js improvements that came downstream from the Firefox project. SeaMonkey was always the better browser for my particular needs, but after perhaps FF3 and later it was the better browser over Firefox for pretty much all the reason FF was selected over it in the first place. Completely lost sight of what they'd been trying to do.
The other reality and I am not sure even Jeb! gets it is that Trump is the best thing that could have happened to him at least as far as the primaries go.
The whole "anchor baby" conversation the other day with him getting testy isn't good. What Jeb! needs to do if he wants to win is stay the hell out of the spot light. Let Trump continue to suck up all the oxygen.
Trump will flame out sooner or later, he has too. Trump is smart guy but the rules of the game are different in politics there is only one Trump, if one of hits bets does not pay off its over. Its not like the world he is accustom to where if one entity goes bankrupt he has ten more pull capital out of and try another new business. Outspoken as he is eventually he will say something people can't get passed in a careless moment.
As long as Trump stays front an center the votes won't hear jack about any of the other candidates. At some point after Trump craters the voters are going to be left with 14 other candidates they have hardly heard of and a name they know "Bush". That will be enough to win a primary. I don't like it but its true.
I agree the issue here isn't ditching C so much as having a self hosting language. Self hosting has all sorts of advantage the ones you point out are the biggest.
With a youthful language often new features and revision appear in the reference compiler first. If designing something like a new syntax or language construct a good hit you are doing something right is when its strait forward to express within the existing language. When it comes time to implement and you are working in the native language if you find you can't express the new construct easily it might mean the relationships and orthogonality are not as clean as you think.
I disagree that is bad new for maintainability and abstraction. There are plenty of very large very old C projects that are perfectly maintainable. Its a question of discipline mostly and selecting right abstractions. GTK is a mess because its an objected oriented library written in a procedural language. OO isn't the only possible design choice even though that is all many people are taught today. Had a procedural abstraction been chosen I am sure it would be fine.
A 50% drop in stock market valuation is not the same thing as a 50% drop in the value of dollar. For that you'd have to look either at buying power or compare it to other major world currencies.
At no time during the crisis did the dollar's real buying power decline by 50% Bernake was terrified the entire time the buying power of the dollar might increase and did everything he could to stop that actually. I an no fan of the feds measurements. I think the basket goods they use and the hedonic adjustments are little less dependable than voodoo. I can understand why they don't include gasoline for example but on the other hand that is such a huge portion of most house hold budgets to not include it makes the buying power unrepresentative at least where main street is concerned.
Point still stands the cost of food for a week did not double suddenly. If you looked at food prices denominated in bitcoin they done that and reversed themselves many times.
I think Ashely Madison was trying to paint their clientele with the brush of being the freethinkers; you know because they are not bound by silly ideas like fidelity in marriage. That was how I read it anyway. I think it really is a rather naked attempt to make them and their customers into sympathetic figures.
It fails to recognize the other person in the relationships they are helping to undermine. Their own logo and nature of the service offering betrays the fact that all of this has to happen in secret. There would be no need for that if the clients spouses were as "free thinking". In fact there are plenty of swinger groups and what not out there for people who want an open marriage where both partners agree to it or are at least aware. AM isn't about free thinking its about helping people lie, deceive, break agreements made with others then charging them for it.
I am not saying what the hackers did is right or even justified. That does not mean we owe AM or its clients any sympathy. They all had a hand in creating the situation they are now in. What the hackers did was a crime and nobody deserves to be victimized, but how much sympathy a victim is due does in my opinion turn on to what degree they knowingly placed themselves in jeopardy.
Its sorta like if you car gets stolen. Its shitty thing to happen to anyone, but do we really feel as bad about or as inclined to do anything about when the victim was known to be in the habit of leaving it unlocked with the engine running?
Which is why this "marry who you love" narrative is so dangerous. Should you marry without love, probably not after all its going to be hard to do the right things in more trying times if you are not committed to the cause of being with your spouse. That said love is not enough.
Marriage should deliver on those things you mention, - stability, a family, a home, security, companionship etc. It should be advantageous for both parties. To that end the partnership is a contract. Many of the benefits flow direct from the belief the other person will honor their commitments.
If society allows marriages to be entered into or exited from lightly the benefits get watered down. So to say "going behind your partner's back when you know it will hurt them is not right" is a understatement. Not only are dealing great harm to that person by depriving them of something they have potentially made an enormous investment in when you have been married along time, its even bigger than the two of you (or three of you as the case may be). It harming society as whole.
Honestly no-fault divorce should have never been a thing, and society should look down on adultery. Its really better for all of us. We need more shame and more shaming not less. If you don't want to commit don't get married its that simple.
So the painful obvious answer is just write some unique user id onto the doll like GUID. You could even store it in some field of the data structure used by the existing game (hopefully) so you don't break that. All other titles just use some web services to store data and the GUID as a key to identify the specific doll.
Pretty much all of these console are connected to the Internet now so I don't see this being a problem.
There are always a small minority that like things a certain way. So some people out there are sure to be fans of split screen. The truth is though for the most part. Split screen SUCKS!
The performance of the game usually goes way down.
If its an FPS or any kind of fast action type game the other players 'screen' plays hell with your peripheral vision and is a huge distraction.
If its not a co-op situation the temptation to cheat is really strong.
The amount of screen real estate gets to be terrible, it was IMHO nearly unplayable for most games at standard definition and while its better with high def its still not great.
The physical screen size is reduced destroying the immersive experience element of the game.
As far as I am concerned. Good riddance to a horrible mode of play that nobody ( that isn't crazy ) really liked. Much better way to go is multiple consoles or for social gatherings games where all the players can be on the 'same' screen.
Slashdot Mirror
Ultimately economics wins though and the nation ends up bankrupt. Consider your demand side equation. You have just established people will pay 'anything' for certain things. Alright what is the real cost of producing that drug? Why does that single pill need to command a price of $1500? Simply because the market will bear it? Subsidies just enable supplies of inelastic services and goods to get an economic rent.
Sure you'd mortgage your house to pay for those drugs, trouble is you only probably have $100-$200K in equity so that won't even by you a years worth. Guess what in inelastic or not the suppler will have to price it lower. Unless you subsidize it than the entire nation gets to be raped to take care of your personal problem.
Personally I think it would be better for society as a whole if we left people to play the hand they are dealt. Even when that means a life being cut short. Sure you bet in the situations you describe I would do what anyone would do and look for any way I could to buy time and wish things were different, probably wish somebody would help but it would be beyond me. At the societal level however we need to consider the larger question of allocation efficiency.
If government has to 'do something' then we should probably address situations like medical care, basic food stuffs (native vegetables and grains), from the supply side. Set price controls on those things. Has to be done carefully though you have to allow prices high enough that suppliers still want to go into production.
The other reality is there just may be no market for certain kids of medical research. Consider the ALS hubbub recently. Does subsidizing research for something like that make any sense at all? Its a very rare condition. We could probably save or improve more lives investing in improving treatment for more common perhaps even already treatable conditions.
The other issue is triangulating kinda relies on either continuous or multiple transmission. It mostly boils down to you observer the transmission form multiple points, and measure the received energy at each. Next you do a bunch of math to figure out where the transmission likely originated from based on the different energy detected at the receiving stations. Doing that with accuracy to handful of meters as would be needed to quickly id a drone operator and respond is kinda hard when
1) the detection stations are far a part
2) there are structures or land forms that might absorb EM (you will need more than just the inverse square law)
3) you don't have a lot of receive station density. (cells can be quite large in rural areas)
4) you don't know what EM to tune to
5) dynamic conditions changes in atmosphere etc
The technology to auto pilot or simply execute on simple instruction is getting smaller lighter and cheaper. Already some consumer drones can proceed to a set GPS coordinates by themselves. If you don't need to be in constant or even frequent contact with the drone but only need to occasionally send a quick "GOTO $lat,$long,$altitude" it might be very hard to track you down.
Another standing based evasion of the 4th amendment. As long has you have to prove a negative you have personally been the victim of a clandestine program or any government program for that matter the Constitution might as well be toilette paper.
All they have to do is classify the records and its essentially game over.
What we need to do is push for legislation that lowers the bar for legal standing in cases against the government. It should be very low. Once the program is proven to exist it should be open to challenge on the complain it violates any other laws or violates anyone's Constitutional rights. The fact that its supposed to be a government by the people and for the people, means that we the people should have automatic standing anytime the government is violated laws or the Constitution we the people enacted. The grounds should be a failure to lawfully govern, the harm being undermining societies faith in law.
This is the only way we are going make any headway.
Every time I hear some lefty telling me we need more government in more regulation to prevent abuses by corporation I am reminded of this stuff and laugh out loud. So called democratic countries of Western Europe and North America already have governments that are more abusive than any corporate ever could be.
There offer is reasonable. Separation of duties is as important as all the things the original poster listed. The company is to big for the OP to be a cow boy, not saying he will but the surest way to make sure he does not go down that path is not to allow. The OP should realize that protection runs both ways. When something happens that was unauthorized he won't be on the list of suspects. I am assuming that the EA isn't also CIO.
Finally its the OP's job as EA to design a survivable architecture, that includes on that survives him leaving for any reason. Not having direct access means he will have to make sure teams working under him have the knowledge and skill sets to get the job done. That might mean training people (sending them boot camps etc), adding people, replacing people. All three of those options are sometimes hard to get done but they need to get done and they won't when the EA can just ride in on his or her white horse and do it themselves. Which by the way means you are taking your eye off the strategic objectives you are supposed to be working on and doing tactical.
EA isn't a tech job. Its a management/analyst role that demands a technical background. It will and should take your hands off the tech. Yes you still need to keep up on new tech, but in the what can it do, what is good for way not in the, this how you implement this type of abstract interface or here is how you install memory in a SAN controller way.
It looks like the SJ1.5 is 3g? Which frankly is plenty fast for any data I need to access on a 5" device, but the carries are not standing up the towers so.. I want my 4g.
Except the cellular network can already do that. If anything stingray devices probably make that less accurate and less effective.
And why do techbro libertarians really not take the time to think their statements through?
Its perfectly thought thru. Biggest problem with the free market is the imbalance of information. If everyone had perfect information than we would need almost no regulation of the market place at all. We could all make great decisions all the time.
So Yes as a "techbro libertarian" disclosure requirements are one of the few types of regulations I'd be willing to support.
Your have just described "Target"
isn't in the interests of any producer, so if none of them labeled, then would customers just choose to starve to death?
Your assertion is false and the market has already demonstrated this. Many producers consider it in their interest to label and to create labels customers understand. They do this to differentiate their product.
Hence you see all kinds of labels some that have fairly well established and specific meanings that you can go look up with an industry group like "organic", "gluten free", and "fat free" and others less so like 'GMO free" etc.
Some customers want labeling and will pay for that. Some manufacturers will go above and beyond legal labeling requirements because that way they can capture the customers that want that. Personally I don't look for most of those optional labels.
However if we did not have mandated food labeling, you bet I would be willing to pay a premium at the grocery store to those manufactures that are willing to disclose what is in the product. After all even if manufacturer A has to put contains upto %30 saw dust on their label and manufacturer B has no label I am going to either pass on the product category entirely or go with A because B absence of label leads me to conclude they probably have even more saw dust than A or they'd be making some effort to inform me that they don't.
not changing anything about how corporations have to secure data, or even (god forbid!) be punished for having sloppy security.
And why should it? For the sake of argument do you think the government should tell you that you MUST install a home security system, have dead bolts on every exterior door, require exterior doors be steel or solid wood, limit the side of windows to no more than 1" by 1" or require bars? If you violate any of these rules on your structure fine or punish you? Should we lighten up the sentences for "breaking and entering" or even burglary?
Personally I think with certain exceptions like public Utilities etc that already enjoy a special relationship with government and a captive market, that companies ought to be allowed to have whatever security posture they like. They should simply have to be honest about it with consumers. Government ought to do one of the few things its Constitutionally supposed to do and set some standards of measure.
Develop some NIST definitions for overall information security postures. If companies then want to claim they have a 'Double plus good can't hack me bro' rating there is a way to prove that. Then if one of these breaches happens and its done in a way that should not have been possible while in compliance like 'plain text data on laptop found on bus' we would all be able to go after them for contract fraud or false advertising etc.
Additionally we should have some disclosure laws, just like food labels there need to be some standardized categories and forms companies that maintain any information that is personally identifiable other than firstname, lastname, current address, billing address, and primary phone number, should be required to disclose that on a standardized and both electronically readable and human readable format. Maybe a nice TML or INI like file.
Hillary Clinton should know what a "server wipe" is because she was in charge of the people who were managing this
Personally I find it hard to accept Hillary as a former Secretary of State would not know a lot more than she lets on. Its difficult to imagine she could have done her job effectively otherwise. That said she does not need to know the details of what "wipe" means in terms vs say a simple delete.
The question could have plainly been understood as "did you or someone in your employ attempt erase the contents of the server before handing it over and how do you explain that as anything other than destruction of evidence."
You don't need to know anything about filesystems, databases, disk sectors, pointers, logical addressing, block sizes, etc to understand the important aspects of the question. She chose to evade the question and the best she could come up with to feign an embarrassing degree of ignorance in the form of bad joke. Honestly I would have better about her as the next POTUS if her answer had been "no comment".
No we don't know if she violated any laws yet, although it looks more and more like she probably did. We do know she at least violated some government practice documents, she was not obligated to comply with but should have.
The issue isn't if she broke the law or not. There are bunch of people that would enjoy seeing Clinton in the slam but it won't affect things much beyond that. What matters is she should be losing this election. She was the Secretary of State for the United States of America. She either could have and should have recognized that she was dealing with sensitive information classified or not and cared enough about operation security to do something about it.
So she knew or should have known the risks of E-mail its not 1998 anymore, everyone has heard the post card analogy with inter-domain mail. If she did not know she should have people around her to tell her that. If she did not listen or only select a bunch of yes men and women that is also a problem.
Even if all the operational security issues and risks of e-mail were a surprise to her, you'd think her behavior would have very suddenly improved when Bradly Manning and a few other events took place, again nope, so we are left with willful ignorance, or gross negligence. Crime or not, prosecutable or not, there isn't a good spin you can put on it. Even Her own justifications about carry multiple devices etc have been contradicted, she has been evasive about it and her story keeps changing so she is only compounding it with lies and bad ones. She isn't a good candidate to lead the country pure and simple.
Than maybe someone her age who isn't a geek has no business being the President of the United States in the "Information Age"
I guess someone from the Ministry of Truth complained. Rewriting history is hard when all the old editions are laying around.
Its not stopping the common core people from trying though.
The Highlander and all the other Immortals he comes into contact with seem to be able to do it. I guess it just takes practice, being immortal probably helps with that in terms of time investment.
That's right it does say arms, which could describe any weapon. Certainly at the time it was drafted that would have been understood to include things like sabers, other edged weapons, etc.
If the argument though that the 'being necessary ... militia ..." part of the clause is operative in that it requires weapons to have a military application to be covered under the amendment that might be interesting. Interesting in that it would undermine the arguments that support restrictions and prohibitions on fully automatic weapons and perhaps even some types of WMDs, after all a successful militia would need such things in modern warfare.
FF is a perfect example of a project going completely off the rails. I don't hear anyone saying good things about it anymore.
It started as an effort to be lighter and faster than the old Mozilla suite. I actually like the mail client, occasionally use composer to put something together quickly and Chatzilla is fine IRC client as often as I still want to use IRC. I stayed on the SeaMonkey side of the house on my personal systems this entire time.
It was funny as hell to watch FF get bigger and more bloated than SeaMonkey, and its performance plummet. SeaMonkey's UI in the mean time only got faster with fixes and improvements and the browser just got better with all the gekko and js improvements that came downstream from the Firefox project. SeaMonkey was always the better browser for my particular needs, but after perhaps FF3 and later it was the better browser over Firefox for pretty much all the reason FF was selected over it in the first place. Completely lost sight of what they'd been trying to do.
The other reality and I am not sure even Jeb! gets it is that Trump is the best thing that could have happened to him at least as far as the primaries go.
The whole "anchor baby" conversation the other day with him getting testy isn't good. What Jeb! needs to do if he wants to win is stay the hell out of the spot light. Let Trump continue to suck up all the oxygen.
Trump will flame out sooner or later, he has too. Trump is smart guy but the rules of the game are different in politics there is only one Trump, if one of hits bets does not pay off its over. Its not like the world he is accustom to where if one entity goes bankrupt he has ten more pull capital out of and try another new business. Outspoken as he is eventually he will say something people can't get passed in a careless moment.
As long as Trump stays front an center the votes won't hear jack about any of the other candidates. At some point after Trump craters the voters are going to be left with 14 other candidates they have hardly heard of and a name they know "Bush". That will be enough to win a primary. I don't like it but its true.
I agree the issue here isn't ditching C so much as having a self hosting language. Self hosting has all sorts of advantage the ones you point out are the biggest.
With a youthful language often new features and revision appear in the reference compiler first. If designing something like a new syntax or language construct a good hit you are doing something right is when its strait forward to express within the existing language. When it comes time to implement and you are working in the native language if you find you can't express the new construct easily it might mean the relationships and orthogonality are not as clean as you think.
I disagree that is bad new for maintainability and abstraction. There are plenty of very large very old C projects that are perfectly maintainable. Its a question of discipline mostly and selecting right abstractions. GTK is a mess because its an objected oriented library written in a procedural language. OO isn't the only possible design choice even though that is all many people are taught today. Had a procedural abstraction been chosen I am sure it would be fine.
A 50% drop in stock market valuation is not the same thing as a 50% drop in the value of dollar. For that you'd have to look either at buying power or compare it to other major world currencies.
At no time during the crisis did the dollar's real buying power decline by 50% Bernake was terrified the entire time the buying power of the dollar might increase and did everything he could to stop that actually. I an no fan of the feds measurements. I think the basket goods they use and the hedonic adjustments are little less dependable than voodoo. I can understand why they don't include gasoline for example but on the other hand that is such a huge portion of most house hold budgets to not include it makes the buying power unrepresentative at least where main street is concerned.
Point still stands the cost of food for a week did not double suddenly. If you looked at food prices denominated in bitcoin they done that and reversed themselves many times.
I think Ashely Madison was trying to paint their clientele with the brush of being the freethinkers; you know because they are not bound by silly ideas like fidelity in marriage. That was how I read it anyway. I think it really is a rather naked attempt to make them and their customers into sympathetic figures.
It fails to recognize the other person in the relationships they are helping to undermine. Their own logo and nature of the service offering betrays the fact that all of this has to happen in secret. There would be no need for that if the clients spouses were as "free thinking". In fact there are plenty of swinger groups and what not out there for people who want an open marriage where both partners agree to it or are at least aware. AM isn't about free thinking its about helping people lie, deceive, break agreements made with others then charging them for it.
I am not saying what the hackers did is right or even justified. That does not mean we owe AM or its clients any sympathy. They all had a hand in creating the situation they are now in. What the hackers did was a crime and nobody deserves to be victimized, but how much sympathy a victim is due does in my opinion turn on to what degree they knowingly placed themselves in jeopardy.
Its sorta like if you car gets stolen. Its shitty thing to happen to anyone, but do we really feel as bad about or as inclined to do anything about when the victim was known to be in the habit of leaving it unlocked with the engine running?
Which is why this "marry who you love" narrative is so dangerous. Should you marry without love, probably not after all its going to be hard to do the right things in more trying times if you are not committed to the cause of being with your spouse. That said love is not enough.
Marriage should deliver on those things you mention, - stability, a family, a home, security, companionship etc. It should be advantageous for both parties. To that end the partnership is a contract. Many of the benefits flow direct from the belief the other person will honor their commitments.
If society allows marriages to be entered into or exited from lightly the benefits get watered down. So to say "going behind your partner's back when you know it will hurt them is not right" is a understatement. Not only are dealing great harm to that person by depriving them of something they have potentially made an enormous investment in when you have been married along time, its even bigger than the two of you (or three of you as the case may be). It harming society as whole.
Honestly no-fault divorce should have never been a thing, and society should look down on adultery. Its really better for all of us. We need more shame and more shaming not less. If you don't want to commit don't get married its that simple.
So the painful obvious answer is just write some unique user id onto the doll like GUID. You could even store it in some field of the data structure used by the existing game (hopefully) so you don't break that. All other titles just use some web services to store data and the GUID as a key to identify the specific doll.
Pretty much all of these console are connected to the Internet now so I don't see this being a problem.
There are always a small minority that like things a certain way. So some people out there are sure to be fans of split screen. The truth is though for the most part. Split screen SUCKS!
The performance of the game usually goes way down.
If its an FPS or any kind of fast action type game the other players 'screen' plays hell with your peripheral vision and is a huge distraction.
If its not a co-op situation the temptation to cheat is really strong.
The amount of screen real estate gets to be terrible, it was IMHO nearly unplayable for most games at standard definition and while its better with high def its still not great.
The physical screen size is reduced destroying the immersive experience element of the game.
As far as I am concerned. Good riddance to a horrible mode of play that nobody ( that isn't crazy ) really liked. Much better way to go is multiple consoles or for social gatherings games where all the players can be on the 'same' screen.