Putin is an idiot. He started playing games with Ukraine and never saw the long game.
I disagree. I think he sees the long game and is even perhaps winning at it. He's pushing for all he can get and doing a decent job of it. He may have lost all of the Ukraine, but East Ukraine is still up for grabs and at this point, even if he had to fold, he'd walk away with Crimea. This is probably all about EU sanctions as the US won't do anything without the EU, and as long as the EU isn't going to put up some serious sanctions, they certainly aren't going to flex their military muscles. So he'll probably push up to the serious threat of sanctions and then ease off just enough to keep them from happening.
By "advanced", I assume the summary meant "technologically advanced". How would any civilization reach a high level of technology without going through industrialization?
given a world that didn't have vast resources of stored energy in coal and oil! I imagine it would begin how ours began! with hydro power. Advancement would probably be slower. Wind and eventually solar added to the mix. Possibly even significant amounts of geothermal. Technology would probably advance in different routes as the ICE and even steam engines would play a minor role in things. They might even have their own ecological disasters by deforestation (or equivalent ) to fuel steam engines. The shift away from ICEs and natural gas based fertilizers would change the ag tech and affect the societies significantly.
One of my least-favorite sci-fi tropes is an alien race which is simultaneously technologically adept enough to build starships and aggressive enough to spread through the galaxy meets (much less technologically advanced) humans for the first time and sadly remarks on our lack of environmental consciousness and our propensity for violence.
It doesn't bother me much. After all, it's how most westerners look at the Middle East And even Asia now, and we're the same species. Even discounting physical and psychological diff fences, aliens will most likely find their culture vastly superior or they wouldn't be living like that. This could be because of racial preferences or because of the demands of future society or tech that we couldn't support with our current culture but will required to go beyond what we have now.
I haven't used it for Office 2000, but did have it deployed for years for Office 2003. In general it works, but those new features and changes that require a new year version have their toll. The newer files will open up in compatible versions and the original can't be edited and saved in the new format. Sometimes formatting might change or bigger problems. Typically if you are reading or dealing with occasional later version files , it will get you through in most cases. Sometimes, you might have to ask for a saved back version from the original sender to get all information. However between two groups collaborating, it would typically be a constant pain only resolved by upgrading or saving everything at a lower version.
DDoS attacks generally rely on multiplier effects, getting someone else to do most of the work for you. Botnets, service vulnerabilities like the NTP reflection attack, that sort of thing. Hamas don't appear to have any such advantage.
I mean, if they were laid off, then that tends to mean that they *can't* be hired back on... at least not immediately. My understanding is that "laid off" means that the person is being let go because there isn't enough work to justify paying them, so how could they even *think* of hiring back anyone?
At Microsft, it was most likely because of some re-org that cut your projects size if not delete it completely. That being said, Microsoft is huge and divided up into many fiefdoms, and because the Microsoft Bob department has just been axed doesn't mean that x-box or some other part of Windows OS doesn't need more people. So people laid off in the phone app project might not have skills needed anywhere else. The common MS layoff consists of being relieved of all duties (and probably access to everything but email) for a couple of months where your only job is to find another job someplace at Microsoft.
...the people who were laid off could not apply for 5 months.
Why would you apply to work for the same company that just kicked you to the curb? I'd tell 'em to go to hell.
This is Microsoft where such things are common. I was once there when two of my friends who worked for Microsoft first met. Once they found out they had both worked for Microsoft, one joked "How did your last re-org go?" Not sure I understood it but they both laughed and now friends. that being said, Microsoft is a huge place and if you've worked there for long, it's where all your contacts, references, and past coworkers work at. Getting laid off at Microsoft and then making the calls and putting out feelers to get hired I some other part is fairly common if not normal. Given that it seems like a nice place to work, and that you weren't really fired by your department you considered yourself working for ( who are probably smoothing over the hiring process in a new department), but some nameless management, there really isn't that sort of hatred for working for them again.
Except it doesn't, because Apple sold style, not superiority. What brought them back into fashion was the iPod, and there were competitors which were superior in every way other than style.
The competitors were superior in bullet points on paper, but failed in real world use and usability in the market they were intended. If "style" means being able to use it without wanting it to slam it against the wall on the third attempt, I'm all for style.
Myhrvold then turned to what he called “the truly personal computer—something which has the size and weight appropriate to be carried with you at all times.” This wireless “digital wallet,” as he called it, would allow anyone to communicate, untethered to a wire, by voice, video, fax, E-mail, or pager. The device would be a clock, an alarm, a schedule manager, a notepad, an archive of phone numbers and records, and a library of music and books.
Yeah, he was just encouraging MS to make their own Palm Pilot, which it was already out when he wrote this. He wasn't predicting the smartphone, he was just imitating the PDA.
It's like crediting someone in in 1900 for predicting the airplane because he wrote about "Skies full of great flying boats"--not realizing that he's talking about comtemporary dirigibles, not airplanes.
He does a damn good job of describing the smartphone, probably because he's couching it in the terms of what it is "a small personal computer" rather than a "phone". A better analogy would be somebody working at a shop making canvas and wood biplanes in 1910 predicting that they will eventually be monowing plane constructed out of metal used for war and transport and that the company should head in that direction. The direction is sort of obvious but the tech wasn't there yet, but there was great rewards for those that did it right first.
The "sexual" part of "sexual harassment" refers to gender, not the sex act.
Does it means that if a bisexual sexually-as-in-sex-act harass people of both genders, that's not sexual harassment ?
Depends on the laws involved. I remember reading one news article where a guy got off because he was bi-sexual and the state harassment laws he was being charged under were written as treating one gender differently than the other. Since there was testimony that he was treating both sexes with the same behavior, he got off and there was such a stink that the laws then got updated.
And on top of that, every other explaination that people have come up with to explain those data sets has failed.
MOND - the idea that gravity has some extra factor that kicks in on galactic scale has yet to provide even a hypothetical answer to be tested. Last I heard, it gets complicated so fast that they haven't even been able to produce a hypothetical gravitational equation that would explain orbital velocities of galaxies let alone the other observed data.
That the extra matter is out there in more mundane forms such as dim stars or jupiter like orphan planets has been tested since they first started seeing these obeservations, and all tests so far have shown that if that was the case, they should be able top detect it but haven't.
Somebody once made a comment on/. about just because we put out cat food and it is disappearing, it doesn't mean there is a cat in the house that nobody has seen. However, at this point, the cat food is being eaten, the litter box is being used, something is playing with the cat toys, and if you knock on the walls, you can hear something go "meow". It still may not be the case that there is a cat we've never seen living in the house, but if so, the new answer is much stranger and more complicated.
There are suits and then there are suits. I have a closet full of suits, but I doubt I could wear any of them to work or a wedding (except for the tuxes). I wouldn't say formal occasions as much as special occasions, and when you're wearing a suit, every occasion becomes a special occasion. Wearing a suit generally shows you have style, can groom yourself, and at least the impression of some wealth. There's a saying that suits are for women what lingerie are for men, and judging by the comments I get while out, I'd have to say there's something to that. It may not be your style or for everyone, but if your suits make you look like you just came from your job, you're not buying the right suits for wearing out.
The name 'Thor' is masculine too. If marvel wanted a new female character, why not create a new one?
Why bother? Their readers probably don't speak scandanavian languages and don't know that Thor is a masculine name. To Americans, it's just a name. It could be the Asgardian equivalent to Pat. They need a front ranked character to make female because there is an increasing number of readers who want a primary character that is female. Taking one who has stood the test of time not only shows their commitment to these readers, but decreases the chance of coming up with a character that will fail. (Look at all Marvel's attempts at creating a Superman counterpart, including a black one. Even after sticking them in the Avengers they don't amount to anything.) Plus, I bet if we look at sales, the Thor title isn't doing all that hot anyway.
Stop using your platforms to push marxist propaganda. It's so blatant when history is so blatantly contradicted for no good reason. The mythos always depicted thor as male. Why is it so terrible to have a dominant male in a protagonist role? It's not misogyny.
The Marvel Thor is whoever holds the hammer. In the past a woman, an alien, and even a frog have all become Thor. This has been established for several decades and back to the creation of Marvel Thor character in the 60's. It's not terrible to have a dominant male role, they've got plenty of them. Now they want a dominant female role to add in to sell things in a capitalistic desire to make money because half the population is lacking any dominant characters they can relate to. Somehow you make that Marxist? You are a little messed up by this it seems and have some biases when you start claiming a capitalist grab for money by supplying a product to demanding customers is Marxist. In addition to that, you don't know shit about comics. Some nerd you are.
Not the original poster, but I agree. I think it's great to have strong female main characters, on an equal footing with strong male main characters. But this ain't it. They're taking a character who is male, both in mythology and in their own storyline, and changing him into a woman. Why? Because they can't write female leads so they'll just take a male one and give him boobs? Because a female main character can't be successful without all the momentum gathered by that character being male for a thousand years?
Ridiculous seems like a reasonable summary.
In the comics, whoever holds the hammer and is worthy is Thor, or at least has the power of Thor. Storm has had it. Beta Ray Bill had it. Well within Marvell pre-defined canon to have a woman get it.
Thor is a male god.
Thor is an established character, based on the mythical Thor.
Making Thor female is just a publicity stunt.
Marvel can't create compelling original female characters, but that doesn't mean they should slap tits and a vagina onto existing male characters and hope they stick. What Marvel needs to do is realize that they can't create ANY compelling characters anymore, male or female, and fix that problem first.
Everyone knows that the real Thor will be back once this "arc" finishes - saying something is permanent in comics is an insult to anyone who reads them.
Thor's been many people in the Marvel universe. Thor's been female as well as alien. Once even a frog. Whoever picks up the hammer and is worthy is Thor is a pretty much standard bit of Marvel character and lore. There is certainly precedent for a female Thor in the Marvel universe. Personally, I think Marvel can do a lot better at making a decent female character than DC. Hell, DC isn't even trying and whenever they start to get a strong female fanbase, they try and ruin it as shown with several titles and stupid remarks lately. Will, the old Thor come back? Who knows. I'd probably side with you and say yes, but if they do pull off a comic with a strong female backing (and sales to go with it), I can see her staying.
It's a great security initiative! Everybody should do this. Considering it is impossible to electronically monitor what is typed on a manual type writer, and certainly it would be near impossible to copy the manually typed paper with today's technology.
I'm actually thinking these are more for internal discussions or notifications to superiors more than anything else. Don't want future administrations of your government that might not be so keen on your current policies and don't want to make things suspicious by deleting the email servers? Type a letter and pass it to somebody else who can type their own letter and send it back through a trusted courier. The people involved would be able to make their own copies if there was email, so it's not really less secure. All copies should be destroyed later and there is easy deniability.
Hrrm. Pretty much all only deal with what seems to be opportunistic growth after the fall of Borders since 2009, and based on the same American Booksellers Association data. Assuming these numbers reflect the reality and are a constant percentage of all total bookstores in the USA, it still only deals with a recent phenominon with obvious cause, and even then "The current total is less than half the 1990s peak of around 4,000." Although amounts vary, everything else I've seen says the same thing, the number of bookstores is going down.
Considering how bookshops have been obliterated by Amazon in the US
Borders and Barnes and Noble were obliterated by Amazon. But any book stores that survived Borders/B&N were not affected by Amazon at all. Amazon was late to the "cheap and easy" party, they just did it better than the big chains did, and hurt them most. Any small store that had a near by big store, was better off after Amazon, and the big store closed down again.
Not buying it without some sort of citation. I've seen too many small bookstores disappear in the past decade and none to replace them. Seattle may be an outlier because the general population has changes a lot in the last two decades also, but when I moved here there was at least a dozen book stores within walking distance of my apartment. Currently, there are four, including the Barnes & Noble.
I've had to do a lot of soul searching with buying music and books online, but in the end, that's what won. Stores pretty much competed against themselves on selection and price. They can't beat the online stores for that and only have instant gratification. In many cases, the used stores just don't have the selection of stuff I want to buy as they are mostly filled with stuff people didn't want. Add in eBay to Amazon and I can get pretty much get what I want, not what the brick and mortar store happens to have, for cheaper. I just have to wait a few days. Given that I have fringe tastes and brick and mortar stores usually don't have what I want anyway, it's even more not worth my time to go over racks of music or books to see if they do so I've had to stop really even considering brick and mortar stores and option, unless I'm just in the area and want to waste some time browsing.
How much work do you do on an iphone that would be a threat to national security?
I thought something like Windows makes more sense.
In general, anything without a removable battery and a camera or microphone is a threat to national security. The US declared this a long time ago. My cousin works as a civilian on an army base. Everybody, workers, soldiers, generals, etc, has been required to leave their phones in their car if they don't have a removable battery since cell phones were a thing, and IIRC, I think they just made that a no phone on base thing completely with the coming of smart phones.
IMO the worst is trying to drag up a fight that was silly 100 years ago. It's ok to think that both Edison and Tesla were great men.....because they were. You don't have to choose sides.
No, but it's fun to, because it's just some silly fight from 100 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Putin is an idiot. He started playing games with Ukraine and never saw the long game.
I disagree. I think he sees the long game and is even perhaps winning at it. He's pushing for all he can get and doing a decent job of it. He may have lost all of the Ukraine, but East Ukraine is still up for grabs and at this point, even if he had to fold, he'd walk away with Crimea. This is probably all about EU sanctions as the US won't do anything without the EU, and as long as the EU isn't going to put up some serious sanctions, they certainly aren't going to flex their military muscles. So he'll probably push up to the serious threat of sanctions and then ease off just enough to keep them from happening.
Nowadays with Wikipedia at our fingertips, "If I remember correctly" is an euphemism for "I'm too lazy to double-check".
It's often not so much as the poster being lazy as the readers on a time wasting site just not being worth the effort of doing the fact checking.
By "advanced", I assume the summary meant "technologically advanced". How would any civilization reach a high level of technology without going through industrialization?
given a world that didn't have vast resources of stored energy in coal and oil! I imagine it would begin how ours began! with hydro power. Advancement would probably be slower. Wind and eventually solar added to the mix. Possibly even significant amounts of geothermal. Technology would probably advance in different routes as the ICE and even steam engines would play a minor role in things. They might even have their own ecological disasters by deforestation (or equivalent ) to fuel steam engines. The shift away from ICEs and natural gas based fertilizers would change the ag tech and affect the societies significantly.
One of my least-favorite sci-fi tropes is an alien race which is simultaneously technologically adept enough to build starships and aggressive enough to spread through the galaxy meets (much less technologically advanced) humans for the first time and sadly remarks on our lack of environmental consciousness and our propensity for violence.
It doesn't bother me much. After all, it's how most westerners look at the Middle East And even Asia now, and we're the same species. Even discounting physical and psychological diff fences, aliens will most likely find their culture vastly superior or they wouldn't be living like that. This could be because of racial preferences or because of the demands of future society or tech that we couldn't support with our current culture but will required to go beyond what we have now.
They have this compatibility pack which proclaims it gives the ability to open newer format files in older versions of office; not sure as to its success level: Microsoft Office Compatibility Pack for Word, Excel, and PowerPoint File Formats.
I haven't used it for Office 2000, but did have it deployed for years for Office 2003. In general it works, but those new features and changes that require a new year version have their toll. The newer files will open up in compatible versions and the original can't be edited and saved in the new format. Sometimes formatting might change or bigger problems. Typically if you are reading or dealing with occasional later version files , it will get you through in most cases. Sometimes, you might have to ask for a saved back version from the original sender to get all information. However between two groups collaborating, it would typically be a constant pain only resolved by upgrading or saving everything at a lower version.
DDoS attacks generally rely on multiplier effects, getting someone else to do most of the work for you. Botnets, service vulnerabilities like the NTP reflection attack, that sort of thing. Hamas don't appear to have any such advantage.
Hamas is the "someone else" in this case.
I mean, if they were laid off, then that tends to mean that they *can't* be hired back on... at least not immediately. My understanding is that "laid off" means that the person is being let go because there isn't enough work to justify paying them, so how could they even *think* of hiring back anyone?
At Microsft, it was most likely because of some re-org that cut your projects size if not delete it completely. That being said, Microsoft is huge and divided up into many fiefdoms, and because the Microsoft Bob department has just been axed doesn't mean that x-box or some other part of Windows OS doesn't need more people. So people laid off in the phone app project might not have skills needed anywhere else. The common MS layoff consists of being relieved of all duties (and probably access to everything but email) for a couple of months where your only job is to find another job someplace at Microsoft.
...the people who were laid off could not apply for 5 months.
Why would you apply to work for the same company that just kicked you to the curb? I'd tell 'em to go to hell.
This is Microsoft where such things are common. I was once there when two of my friends who worked for Microsoft first met. Once they found out they had both worked for Microsoft, one joked "How did your last re-org go?" Not sure I understood it but they both laughed and now friends. that being said, Microsoft is a huge place and if you've worked there for long, it's where all your contacts, references, and past coworkers work at. Getting laid off at Microsoft and then making the calls and putting out feelers to get hired I some other part is fairly common if not normal. Given that it seems like a nice place to work, and that you weren't really fired by your department you considered yourself working for ( who are probably smoothing over the hiring process in a new department), but some nameless management, there really isn't that sort of hatred for working for them again.
Apparently it actually does.
Except it doesn't, because Apple sold style, not superiority. What brought them back into fashion was the iPod, and there were competitors which were superior in every way other than style.
The competitors were superior in bullet points on paper, but failed in real world use and usability in the market they were intended. If "style" means being able to use it without wanting it to slam it against the wall on the third attempt, I'm all for style.
Myhrvold then turned to what he called “the truly personal computer—something which has the size and weight appropriate to be carried with you at all times.” This wireless “digital wallet,” as he called it, would allow anyone to communicate, untethered to a wire, by voice, video, fax, E-mail, or pager. The device would be a clock, an alarm, a schedule manager, a notepad, an archive of phone numbers and records, and a library of music and books.
Yeah, he was just encouraging MS to make their own Palm Pilot, which it was already out when he wrote this. He wasn't predicting the smartphone, he was just imitating the PDA.
It's like crediting someone in in 1900 for predicting the airplane because he wrote about "Skies full of great flying boats"--not realizing that he's talking about comtemporary dirigibles, not airplanes.
He does a damn good job of describing the smartphone, probably because he's couching it in the terms of what it is "a small personal computer" rather than a "phone". A better analogy would be somebody working at a shop making canvas and wood biplanes in 1910 predicting that they will eventually be monowing plane constructed out of metal used for war and transport and that the company should head in that direction. The direction is sort of obvious but the tech wasn't there yet, but there was great rewards for those that did it right first.
The "sexual" part of "sexual harassment" refers to gender, not the sex act.
Does it means that if a bisexual sexually-as-in-sex-act harass people of both genders, that's not sexual harassment ?
Depends on the laws involved. I remember reading one news article where a guy got off because he was bi-sexual and the state harassment laws he was being charged under were written as treating one gender differently than the other. Since there was testimony that he was treating both sexes with the same behavior, he got off and there was such a stink that the laws then got updated.
And on top of that, every other explaination that people have come up with to explain those data sets has failed.
MOND - the idea that gravity has some extra factor that kicks in on galactic scale has yet to provide even a hypothetical answer to be tested. Last I heard, it gets complicated so fast that they haven't even been able to produce a hypothetical gravitational equation that would explain orbital velocities of galaxies let alone the other observed data.
That the extra matter is out there in more mundane forms such as dim stars or jupiter like orphan planets has been tested since they first started seeing these obeservations, and all tests so far have shown that if that was the case, they should be able top detect it but haven't.
Somebody once made a comment on /. about just because we put out cat food and it is disappearing, it doesn't mean there is a cat in the house that nobody has seen. However, at this point, the cat food is being eaten, the litter box is being used, something is playing with the cat toys, and if you knock on the walls, you can hear something go "meow". It still may not be the case that there is a cat we've never seen living in the house, but if so, the new answer is much stranger and more complicated.
Don't put a kill switch in my car.
We wouldn't have to put a kill switch in your car if you didn't keep loaning it to terrorists.
There are suits and then there are suits. I have a closet full of suits, but I doubt I could wear any of them to work or a wedding (except for the tuxes). I wouldn't say formal occasions as much as special occasions, and when you're wearing a suit, every occasion becomes a special occasion. Wearing a suit generally shows you have style, can groom yourself, and at least the impression of some wealth. There's a saying that suits are for women what lingerie are for men, and judging by the comments I get while out, I'd have to say there's something to that. It may not be your style or for everyone, but if your suits make you look like you just came from your job, you're not buying the right suits for wearing out.
The name 'Thor' is masculine too. If marvel wanted a new female character, why not create a new one?
Why bother? Their readers probably don't speak scandanavian languages and don't know that Thor is a masculine name. To Americans, it's just a name. It could be the Asgardian equivalent to Pat. They need a front ranked character to make female because there is an increasing number of readers who want a primary character that is female. Taking one who has stood the test of time not only shows their commitment to these readers, but decreases the chance of coming up with a character that will fail. (Look at all Marvel's attempts at creating a Superman counterpart, including a black one. Even after sticking them in the Avengers they don't amount to anything.) Plus, I bet if we look at sales, the Thor title isn't doing all that hot anyway.
Stop using your platforms to push marxist propaganda. It's so blatant when history is so blatantly contradicted for no good reason. The mythos always depicted thor as male. Why is it so terrible to have a dominant male in a protagonist role? It's not misogyny.
The Marvel Thor is whoever holds the hammer. In the past a woman, an alien, and even a frog have all become Thor. This has been established for several decades and back to the creation of Marvel Thor character in the 60's. It's not terrible to have a dominant male role, they've got plenty of them. Now they want a dominant female role to add in to sell things in a capitalistic desire to make money because half the population is lacking any dominant characters they can relate to. Somehow you make that Marxist? You are a little messed up by this it seems and have some biases when you start claiming a capitalist grab for money by supplying a product to demanding customers is Marxist. In addition to that, you don't know shit about comics. Some nerd you are.
But is she also going to be half-black/half-latino, transgendered and disabled?
You're thinking of Spider-Man.
Making Thor a woman is like making Jesus a woman
Well, if the bible said that anybody wearing the crown of thorns got the powers of Jesus, then yes.
Not the original poster, but I agree. I think it's great to have strong female main characters, on an equal footing with strong male main characters. But this ain't it. They're taking a character who is male, both in mythology and in their own storyline, and changing him into a woman. Why? Because they can't write female leads so they'll just take a male one and give him boobs? Because a female main character can't be successful without all the momentum gathered by that character being male for a thousand years?
Ridiculous seems like a reasonable summary.
In the comics, whoever holds the hammer and is worthy is Thor, or at least has the power of Thor. Storm has had it. Beta Ray Bill had it. Well within Marvell pre-defined canon to have a woman get it.
Thor is a male god. Thor is an established character, based on the mythical Thor. Making Thor female is just a publicity stunt. Marvel can't create compelling original female characters, but that doesn't mean they should slap tits and a vagina onto existing male characters and hope they stick. What Marvel needs to do is realize that they can't create ANY compelling characters anymore, male or female, and fix that problem first. Everyone knows that the real Thor will be back once this "arc" finishes - saying something is permanent in comics is an insult to anyone who reads them.
Thor's been many people in the Marvel universe. Thor's been female as well as alien. Once even a frog. Whoever picks up the hammer and is worthy is Thor is a pretty much standard bit of Marvel character and lore. There is certainly precedent for a female Thor in the Marvel universe. Personally, I think Marvel can do a lot better at making a decent female character than DC. Hell, DC isn't even trying and whenever they start to get a strong female fanbase, they try and ruin it as shown with several titles and stupid remarks lately. Will, the old Thor come back? Who knows. I'd probably side with you and say yes, but if they do pull off a comic with a strong female backing (and sales to go with it), I can see her staying.
It's a great security initiative! Everybody should do this. Considering it is impossible to electronically monitor what is typed on a manual type writer, and certainly it would be near impossible to copy the manually typed paper with today's technology.
I'm actually thinking these are more for internal discussions or notifications to superiors more than anything else. Don't want future administrations of your government that might not be so keen on your current policies and don't want to make things suspicious by deleting the email servers? Type a letter and pass it to somebody else who can type their own letter and send it back through a trusted courier. The people involved would be able to make their own copies if there was email, so it's not really less secure. All copies should be destroyed later and there is easy deniability.
Not buying it without some sort of citation.
http://www.salon.com/2014/04/0... http://qz.com/127861/its-time-... http://usatoday30.usatoday.com... http://fortune.com/2013/09/20/... http://www.mhpbooks.com/indepe... Those were just the first few results from a simple google search. Why is it that every time someone asks for a citation, the "proof" is the first hit from a simple google search? In this case: "number of bookstores in the USA".
Hrrm. Pretty much all only deal with what seems to be opportunistic growth after the fall of Borders since 2009, and based on the same American Booksellers Association data. Assuming these numbers reflect the reality and are a constant percentage of all total bookstores in the USA, it still only deals with a recent phenominon with obvious cause, and even then "The current total is less than half the 1990s peak of around 4,000." Although amounts vary, everything else I've seen says the same thing, the number of bookstores is going down.
Tesla! Ra! Ra! Ra!
Considering how bookshops have been obliterated by Amazon in the US
Borders and Barnes and Noble were obliterated by Amazon. But any book stores that survived Borders/B&N were not affected by Amazon at all. Amazon was late to the "cheap and easy" party, they just did it better than the big chains did, and hurt them most. Any small store that had a near by big store, was better off after Amazon, and the big store closed down again.
Not buying it without some sort of citation. I've seen too many small bookstores disappear in the past decade and none to replace them. Seattle may be an outlier because the general population has changes a lot in the last two decades also, but when I moved here there was at least a dozen book stores within walking distance of my apartment. Currently, there are four, including the Barnes & Noble.
I've had to do a lot of soul searching with buying music and books online, but in the end, that's what won. Stores pretty much competed against themselves on selection and price. They can't beat the online stores for that and only have instant gratification. In many cases, the used stores just don't have the selection of stuff I want to buy as they are mostly filled with stuff people didn't want. Add in eBay to Amazon and I can get pretty much get what I want, not what the brick and mortar store happens to have, for cheaper. I just have to wait a few days. Given that I have fringe tastes and brick and mortar stores usually don't have what I want anyway, it's even more not worth my time to go over racks of music or books to see if they do so I've had to stop really even considering brick and mortar stores and option, unless I'm just in the area and want to waste some time browsing.
How much work do you do on an iphone that would be a threat to national security? I thought something like Windows makes more sense.
In general, anything without a removable battery and a camera or microphone is a threat to national security. The US declared this a long time ago. My cousin works as a civilian on an army base. Everybody, workers, soldiers, generals, etc, has been required to leave their phones in their car if they don't have a removable battery since cell phones were a thing, and IIRC, I think they just made that a no phone on base thing completely with the coming of smart phones.
IMO the worst is trying to drag up a fight that was silly 100 years ago. It's ok to think that both Edison and Tesla were great men.....because they were. You don't have to choose sides.
No, but it's fun to, because it's just some silly fight from 100 years ago.