The big secret(I don't know why it's a secret) is that melting ice has never been the biggest source of sea level change from climate change. Never. Contrary to what most people learn in middle school science classes, temperature does affect slightly the volume of liquids, and the increasing temperature of the deep ocean drive changes in volume. Tiny fraction decreases in the density of water might not seem like much, but it adds up to a lot more than a little melting sea ice when the average depth of the ocean is 2.4 kilometers.
About as well as investing in AIG turned out for some people. Risk/reward continues to be a thing people have to evaluate. I'm not defending the status quo evaluation as being correct, just that 100% risk aversion isn't necessarily a reasonable approach.
Yeah, this is a reasonable approach(unlike some other more fallacious arguments). Some of us are even bound by law to maintain the integrity of certain classes of information(personal, medical, financial). Yielding physical control to another organization, no matter what their reputation, removes your ability to perform due diligence.
"Isn't the electrical grid just a bunch of generators? Should nobody be hugging THOSE generators either?" --A terrible argument for running your own on-site diesel generator
This is because, as a developer, you're a user who understands and knows what you want. Microsoft is writing software for the kind of people who'd type google into the google search bar to get to google.
Which is why many species evolved collaboration. Evolution doesn't always mean killing competitors. Some species(particularly humans) do extremely well by turning competitors into collaborators and developing mutually beneficial relationships.
No, it's that you think the US is responsible for Russian soldiers appearing out of nowhere in Ukraine. I don't doubt that the state department and CIA love to meddle, just not in ways that are purely crazy.
Which raises the question: Why does the legal system allow settling class action suits? When is that ever a desirable result for the government's interest(stability, rule of law)?
Slashdot Mirror
The big secret(I don't know why it's a secret) is that melting ice has never been the biggest source of sea level change from climate change. Never. Contrary to what most people learn in middle school science classes, temperature does affect slightly the volume of liquids, and the increasing temperature of the deep ocean drive changes in volume. Tiny fraction decreases in the density of water might not seem like much, but it adds up to a lot more than a little melting sea ice when the average depth of the ocean is 2.4 kilometers.
The natural reason it can't be both is that there is only so much invest-able time and capital on the CEO's part.
Thanks. Context always helps with these things.
Is this: "crappy company delivers badly on contracts" or "company specializes in class of components that have a relatively high failure rate"?
Software these days works fucking awesome without particular hardware. Virtually every language is multiplatform.
You're talking about the physical components versus the software components.
I wasn't saying it was never necessary. Just that "Someone needs to" is a far cry from "I need to"
And the vast majority of companies don't have those hyper-specialized needs. Hospitals: yes. Lawyers' offices: no.
How's 'the cloud' working out for them?
About as well as investing in AIG turned out for some people. Risk/reward continues to be a thing people have to evaluate. I'm not defending the status quo evaluation as being correct, just that 100% risk aversion isn't necessarily a reasonable approach.
Yeah, this is a reasonable approach(unlike some other more fallacious arguments). Some of us are even bound by law to maintain the integrity of certain classes of information(personal, medical, financial). Yielding physical control to another organization, no matter what their reputation, removes your ability to perform due diligence.
"Isn't the electrical grid just a bunch of generators? Should nobody be hugging THOSE generators either?"
--A terrible argument for running your own on-site diesel generator
This rule does not apply when you just want to search the internet anyways.
This is because, as a developer, you're a user who understands and knows what you want. Microsoft is writing software for the kind of people who'd type google into the google search bar to get to google.
Which is why many species evolved collaboration. Evolution doesn't always mean killing competitors. Some species(particularly humans) do extremely well by turning competitors into collaborators and developing mutually beneficial relationships.
This naive approach to evolution is pathetic.
No, it's that you think the US is responsible for Russian soldiers appearing out of nowhere in Ukraine. I don't doubt that the state department and CIA love to meddle, just not in ways that are purely crazy.
Wait until your girlfriend starts getting crib advertisements.
That sure is some crazy you got in that pot, there.
Thank you. Sorry for the mistake.
In space, everyone can hear your moment of silence.
I suspect Geiger can appreciate one more morbid, vaguely phallic shape as he's laid to rest.
Except this latest spat is specifically about Crimea.
That's the reason they run courts at all. A government can rule by fiat, and for most of human history they had exactly that sort of government.
Which raises the question: Why does the legal system allow settling class action suits? When is that ever a desirable result for the government's interest(stability, rule of law)?
Mono is a thing you know. A thing not being sued by Microsoft.
Yep, I can safely say that there is now literally no reason to use Java over, say, Microsoft's offerings. The pretense of openness is long-gone.