and? Let me highlight a bit of fact here, that you did not find out in actual research discussing it with military people who would have clarified. Believe it or not, but the unguided small missiles are a hell of a lot harder to intercept than ICBM's. Smaller and more frequent. ICBM's have more risk, but the unguided ones were basically impossible to intercept prior to Iron Dome. The issue with ICBM's is not that they can be intercepted (that part's easy), but the risk of fallout that increases by the second as the missiles head back towards the earth and/or the risk to other countries if they are detonated in upper atmosphere.
If you recall the missile system russia was panicking about when countries near it's borders wanted to install it, it was this same project working successfully. Russia is probably shitting itself right now, as this is effectively a successful demonstration.
It's not about the flight path at all - I doubt they predict based on flight path, or the intercept process would fail routinely just due to wind variations.
The reality of hegemonous computing is that failure is almost of no concern. If you have 1/1000 nodes fail, you lose 1/1000th of your capability. Everything doesn't just instantly crash down. That's literally the purpose of basic cluster technology from probably 10 years ago.
How do they act like this is a new, or magic issue? It doesn't exist if HPC people know what they're doing. Hell, usually they keep a known quantity of extra hardware out of use so that they can switch something on if things fail as necessary.
It's not liberalism, it's society at large being afraid to even stomach the idea that some things may be uncomfortable but are for society's own benefit. Not any different than the MAFIAA, honestly.
Guess what? that's what governments tend to do in these types of cases, actually.
They're saying it's some kind of DNA match with a *lighter*, but I don't know how that correlates to "he must have murdered her". That is indeed a giant leap of logic if there aren't additional details.
Also, it's a playboy lighter, not a vagina. If you think you can get DNA from a vagina later than a few days you're mistaken. That's why those rape kit things exist - they're not for "later on down the road". 6 months, years? Hint: no.
I don't think anyone will follow the case. Given that the article says
The decision to launch the dna appeal came after De Vries in May broadcast information about a Playboy cigarette lighter found in Vaatstra's bag which contains dna traces that match the traces found on the schoolgirl's body.
and that this is a tiny area (identified by only having 6600 people involved in the first place - where does 8k even come from?), this is why I want to know if this is a situation of:
"he was in the area at any random time prior" or "he was directly responsible", as those are very different things. I'm not going to speculate but instead say that there is very little information at the moment.
I personally think that if someone murdered someone and was trying to stay free they would avoid volunteering their DNA at any costs. However, if you knew you were innocent and asked to submit your DNA in a country where gov't can ask for it, would you be as unwilling to donate DNA? I would assume the argument could go either way.
actually, no - it's interesting to see what actual happens, because the question is - how/why does this DNA match actually matter?
It's nearly as impossible to associate DNA at a crime scene with an individual being actually involved without further proof - otherwise this is in the same category as trying to assign an IP address to an individual.
I'm disappointed with the article headline: acting like you can't say something? Chick Fil-gay can and absolutely did say what they said. Freedom of speech is still alive and well, even if people don't like it (add NYT to that list for willingly censoring at the behest of the government). They simply deserved what they got in response as the market correctly responded. It's one thing to be against rights (which is repulsive to many, but still free speech), but it's another entirely to do what Apple does and willingly censor. Why do people start with bullshit headlines when the article is also crap?
and yet you still fail to acknowledge that MS's proposition is not a solution either.
Yes, everyone should follow standards. But they don't. So complaining about those who are at least following them better than MS is at least an improvement.
yes. please drop vendor specific tags and follow microsoft's non-standard tags? so webkit-CSS is worse than doCSSlikeIE, which is only documented in a doc that MS doesn't even offer for free ? How does that work? Hint: it doesn't. MS's answer is explicitly not standards compliant.
I'd have developers spend 8 seconds to script the answer put in the comments on the original article's link. For webkit script turn HTML5 command into webkit-HTML5. Done in one. I'm not even a programmer and I can figure that shit out just from the comment alone. If you can't, you're below even a script kiddie as far as programming is concerned and should be unemployed if you're a "developer".
The reality is webkit is using standard extensions and simply adding their own prefix to identify them, and Microsoft is not. Microsoft breaks the naming conventions entirely. The way IE handles naming conventions is so broken no other browser does so - and it's consistently not well documented. That's not a good thing. So microsoft is accusing them of not following standard extensions? That's beyond hilarious. That's not a pot meet kettle scenario, it's IE complaining that they can't subvert web standards like they have been and continue to attempt to do for years. AKA this is basically them complaining about silverlight not being able to fuck the web more than it has already.
wah wah the world functions without IE, wah wah. That's what this is.
If IE was going to focus on actual standards compliance you'd see their HTML5 compliance higher than webkit browsers offer, and it's not.
I'm definitely someone who prefers android devices over the competition but even I fail to understand why rooting a device that basically allows rooting is significant in any fashion whatsoever, and why it even should be in the news stream for slashdot.
Then again, slashdot always has the "google is in trouble" articles submitted by MS/apple fanboys, so I suppose this is another layer of trash on top of those trash articles as well. In short, as usual slashdot is a mixed bag of 15% relevant articles and 85% complete garbage.
The reality is that in your 50:1 implied scenario you miss the fact that in reality it might be a 3:1 with apple: android profits, while android is easily selling far more than 3:1.
Simply having giant margins doesn't mean giant profits, but it does mean that you're far more susceptible to a drop in demand.
you really think HTC's issues have anything to do with android? how tunnel vision asinine are you? HTC is having a goddamn great time right now as far as volume, they just had a bad quarter for reasons unrelated to android.
How is this a proxy war at all? Microsoft, apple, oracle and SEO competitors have been suing companies working with google in conjunction - that's a proxy war. This, however, is a process that should *NEVER* be in court in the first place. The only reason it is, is because Microsoft sued Motorola , not the other way around.
The question is: why is Microsoft trying to avoid paying for FRAND patents and trying to use the court as a sledgehammer to do so in the exact same way as apple, when there is a process already defined?
the answer already exists by the way: they want to stop android/google from competing.
Copying is what our society does. Anyone who has a problem with it simply doesn't respect that that's how our society exists.
So why, if Apple merely copies, do they sell so well, and so thoroughly bash the competition?
They bash the competition because they don't know how to compete and are petty as fuck. See: situation in the UK which they were shamed for as well as creating collusion via lawsuits with Oracle, MS, Apple and SEO against Google That's how they "differentiate". It's not even competition. That and spending the highest amount of their money on marketing. Not R&D (which has dropped), not even lawsuits (which has risen), but marketing. You don't hear about google spending billions on marketing, and you never will - they don't have to. Legitimately good and competitive products market themselves.
Has it backfired? Yes. Is that continuing? Might be an understatement.
You might want to look at what happens. Because it's not a one-sided affair. The only thing I'm surprised about is people still actually think apple invents or comes up with *anything*, because they don't, never have, and guess what? They don't have to. There's absolutely no reason they need to be the originator. They just need to stop suing the people whose stuff they can copy and incorporate into their own products.
The ignorance is actually in blaming the economy in the first place. VC investments are not down due exclusively due to fiscal uncertainty.
VC's will happily invest if they don't become at risk due to patent trolling. Which at the moment is at an alltime high, along with laws that are explicitly hostile to VC's. What do you expect? VC's are not like the average citizen - they can read the hostility tea leaves sewn by the government.
probably 50-75% of the reason for this is the focus on DRM and security. Other OS's outside of windows do not experience this type of bloat shit. It is marked as a regression and fixed.
It's an overgeneralization to say that apple never had any innovations, but it's not a stretch to say apple doesn't create very much, they just refine things.
Slashdot Mirror
and?
Let me highlight a bit of fact here, that you did not find out in actual research discussing it with military people who would have clarified.
Believe it or not, but the unguided small missiles are a hell of a lot harder to intercept than ICBM's. Smaller and more frequent. ICBM's have more risk, but the unguided ones were basically impossible to intercept prior to Iron Dome. The issue with ICBM's is not that they can be intercepted (that part's easy), but the risk of fallout that increases by the second as the missiles head back towards the earth and/or the risk to other countries if they are detonated in upper atmosphere.
If you recall the missile system russia was panicking about when countries near it's borders wanted to install it, it was this same project working successfully. Russia is probably shitting itself right now, as this is effectively a successful demonstration.
It's not about the flight path at all - I doubt they predict based on flight path, or the intercept process would fail routinely just due to wind variations.
The reality of hegemonous computing is that failure is almost of no concern. If you have 1/1000 nodes fail, you lose 1/1000th of your capability. Everything doesn't just instantly crash down. That's literally the purpose of basic cluster technology from probably 10 years ago.
How do they act like this is a new, or magic issue? It doesn't exist if HPC people know what they're doing. Hell, usually they keep a known quantity of extra hardware out of use so that they can switch something on if things fail as necessary.
It's not liberalism, it's society at large being afraid to even stomach the idea that some things may be uncomfortable but are for society's own benefit. Not any different than the MAFIAA, honestly.
Guess what? that's what governments tend to do in these types of cases, actually.
They're saying it's some kind of DNA match with a *lighter*, but I don't know how that correlates to "he must have murdered her". That is indeed a giant leap of logic if there aren't additional details.
Also, it's a playboy lighter, not a vagina. If you think you can get DNA from a vagina later than a few days you're mistaken. That's why those rape kit things exist - they're not for "later on down the road". 6 months, years? Hint: no.
I don't think anyone will follow the case. Given that the article says
and that this is a tiny area (identified by only having 6600 people involved in the first place - where does 8k even come from?), this is why I want to know if this is a situation of:
"he was in the area at any random time prior"
or "he was directly responsible", as those are very different things. I'm not going to speculate but instead say that there is very little information at the moment.
I personally think that if someone murdered someone and was trying to stay free they would avoid volunteering their DNA at any costs. However, if you knew you were innocent and asked to submit your DNA in a country where gov't can ask for it, would you be as unwilling to donate DNA? I would assume the argument could go either way.
actually, no - it's interesting to see what actual happens, because the question is - how/why does this DNA match actually matter?
It's nearly as impossible to associate DNA at a crime scene with an individual being actually involved without further proof - otherwise this is in the same category as trying to assign an IP address to an individual.
I'm disappointed with the article headline: acting like you can't say something?
Chick Fil-gay can and absolutely did say what they said. Freedom of speech is still alive and well, even if people don't like it (add NYT to that list for willingly censoring at the behest of the government). They simply deserved what they got in response as the market correctly responded. It's one thing to be against rights (which is repulsive to many, but still free speech), but it's another entirely to do what Apple does and willingly censor.
Why do people start with bullshit headlines when the article is also crap?
and yet you still fail to acknowledge that MS's proposition is not a solution either.
Yes, everyone should follow standards. But they don't. So complaining about those who are at least following them better than MS is at least an improvement.
yes. please drop vendor specific tags and follow microsoft's non-standard tags?
so webkit-CSS is worse than doCSSlikeIE, which is only documented in a doc that MS doesn't even offer for free ? How does that work? Hint: it doesn't. MS's answer is explicitly not standards compliant.
I'd have developers spend 8 seconds to script the answer put in the comments on the original article's link. For webkit script turn HTML5 command into webkit-HTML5. Done in one. I'm not even a programmer and I can figure that shit out just from the comment alone. If you can't, you're below even a script kiddie as far as programming is concerned and should be unemployed if you're a "developer".
Did I say Acid3? no, I didn't. I said HTML5. If any browser doesn't head towards ACID3 compliance they're years behind now.
hahahaha "googlefan1". Nice name.
The reality is webkit is using standard extensions and simply adding their own prefix to identify them, and Microsoft is not. Microsoft breaks the naming conventions entirely. The way IE handles naming conventions is so broken no other browser does so - and it's consistently not well documented. That's not a good thing. So microsoft is accusing them of not following standard extensions? That's beyond hilarious. That's not a pot meet kettle scenario, it's IE complaining that they can't subvert web standards like they have been and continue to attempt to do for years. AKA this is basically them complaining about silverlight not being able to fuck the web more than it has already.
wah wah the world functions without IE, wah wah. That's what this is.
If IE was going to focus on actual standards compliance you'd see their HTML5 compliance higher than webkit browsers offer, and it's not.
Also, why the fuck is this article linking to the comment sections? Slashdot has their own, but usually you'd link to the full article: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/11/microsoft-begs-web-devs-not-to-make-webkit-the-new-ie6/
Yeah, I don't even understand.
I'm definitely someone who prefers android devices over the competition but even I fail to understand why rooting a device that basically allows rooting is significant in any fashion whatsoever, and why it even should be in the news stream for slashdot.
Then again, slashdot always has the "google is in trouble" articles submitted by MS/apple fanboys, so I suppose this is another layer of trash on top of those trash articles as well. In short, as usual slashdot is a mixed bag of 15% relevant articles and 85% complete garbage.
except that your scale is incredibly off.
The reality is that in your 50:1 implied scenario you miss the fact that in reality it might be a 3:1 with apple: android profits, while android is easily selling far more than 3:1.
Simply having giant margins doesn't mean giant profits, but it does mean that you're far more susceptible to a drop in demand.
you really think HTC's issues have anything to do with android? how tunnel vision asinine are you? HTC is having a goddamn great time right now as far as volume, they just had a bad quarter for reasons unrelated to android.
"Why did Samsung not come out with a decent phone prior to the iPhone"?
because they did? So did lots of manufacturers. Original motorola razr, LG chocolate, samsung had an equivalent as well.
Samsung has been making phones for years before apple. Nice um, slacker attempt though.
Really?
Apple's profits have been dropping like a stone, they've been suing android for that reason - and you assume that android growth doesn't = profit?
might want to go back to economics 101 - he who sells the most is going to find a way to profit more.
Look at how google's revenue has been, and how every smartphone manufacturer's revenue has been. Record revenue over the last 5 years? check.
How is this a proxy war at all? Microsoft, apple, oracle and SEO competitors have been suing companies working with google in conjunction - that's a proxy war. This, however, is a process that should *NEVER* be in court in the first place. The only reason it is, is because Microsoft sued Motorola , not the other way around.
The question is: why is Microsoft trying to avoid paying for FRAND patents and trying to use the court as a sledgehammer to do so in the exact same way as apple, when there is a process already defined?
the answer already exists by the way: they want to stop android/google from competing.
It doesn't fucking matter.
Copying is what our society does. Anyone who has a problem with it simply doesn't respect that that's how our society exists.
They bash the competition because they don't know how to compete and are petty as fuck. See: situation in the UK which they were shamed for as well as creating collusion via lawsuits with Oracle, MS, Apple and SEO against Google That's how they "differentiate". It's not even competition. That and spending the highest amount of their money on marketing. Not R&D (which has dropped), not even lawsuits (which has risen), but marketing. You don't hear about google spending billions on marketing, and you never will - they don't have to. Legitimately good and competitive products market themselves.
Has it backfired? Yes. Is that continuing? Might be an understatement.
Google copied apple?
hahahahahaha *takes breath* hahahhahahaha.
You might want to look at what happens. Because it's not a one-sided affair. The only thing I'm surprised about is people still actually think apple invents or comes up with *anything*, because they don't, never have, and guess what? They don't have to. There's absolutely no reason they need to be the originator. They just need to stop suing the people whose stuff they can copy and incorporate into their own products.
one word answer:
mercantilism.
you mean like apple trying to sue android, for instance?
The ignorance is actually in blaming the economy in the first place. VC investments are not down due exclusively due to fiscal uncertainty.
VC's will happily invest if they don't become at risk due to patent trolling. Which at the moment is at an alltime high, along with laws that are explicitly hostile to VC's. What do you expect? VC's are not like the average citizen - they can read the hostility tea leaves sewn by the government.
Huh? That's what the windows OS defines. They didn't have to say it in conjunction to a surface tablet - by buying one, you're already doing it wrong.
probably 50-75% of the reason for this is the focus on DRM and security. Other OS's outside of windows do not experience this type of bloat shit. It is marked as a regression and fixed.
It's an overgeneralization to say that apple never had any innovations, but it's not a stretch to say apple doesn't create very much, they just refine things.