It was mostly European scientists who won WWII for the Americans, thanks to their development of nuclear technology.
Oppenheimer was an American born in New York City. Einstein took the oath to achieve American citizenship in 1940.
The Korean War was basically a draw. In many ways, it was an outright loss for the Americans, since they've had to keep troops stationed there for decades now, and this is quite costly.
By that logic, the Cypriots must have the most powerful military in the world.
The Cold War was initially thought to be an American "win", but it was more due to problems within the USSR, rather than anything America did.
Not really. The problems within the USSR were largely caused by pressures due to their participation within the Cold War. In a sense, the U.S. won the Cold War by out-producing the Soviets.
The First Gulf War can barely be considered a war, given that their enemy was almost non-existent, and had itself been subject to a decade of devastating war just before.
The First Gulf War was nothing but a display of muscle to show Saddam Hussein that he didn't know who he was messing with.
The Second Gulf War was a complete failure.
It depends on how you define success. If by "success" you mean did the U.S. achieve regime change? No failure there. If by "success" do you mean did the U.S. achieve peace in Iraq? If so, I'm fairly sure that was never a goal of the U.S. military.
The War in Afghanistan has been nothing but a disaster, as well.
Again, no. The goals in Afghanistan were: 1) overthrow the Taliban (check) 2) bring various members of Al Qaeda to justice (check) 3) capture Osama Bin Laden. The status of the 3rd item is, at best, inconclusive, but the other 2 goals have been largely achieved.
There's an old Chinese proverb that goes something like this: "A secret one person knows is a secret; a secret two people know is no secret; a secret three people know is information shouted to the world."
You can add a corollary to that: "Anything posted to the Internet counts as three people."
As others have pointed out, the Internet is just like real life. If you're suing someone for injury and then tell your friends that you aren't really injured, the defense attorney, if they find that out, can subpoena the people you told and the court can and will compel them to testify.
You hereby grant Facebook an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to (a) use, copy, publish, stream, store, retain, publicly perform or display, transmit, scan, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works and distribute (through multiple tiers), any User Content you (i) Post on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof subject only to your privacy settings or (ii) enable a user to Post, including by offering a Share Link on your website and (b) to use your name, likeness and image for any purpose, including commercial or advertising, each of (a) and (b) on or in connection with the Facebook Service or the promotion thereof.
Does that look like Facebook gives a damn about your rights or your privacy?
Well, the exploit uses JavaScript. This means that any browser that supports JavaScript does not provide some sort of NoScript facility that's installed and turned on by default would be vulnerable to the exploit.
Which means pretty much all of them.
But you can't even blame the browser; the security of Twitter's site belongs solely to Twitter and their crack website development staff.
Psystar was also ordered to pay Apple's legal fees. Furthermore, the exact penalty for infringement was likely lower because Apple did not register their copyright on OS X with the Copyright Office. By law, a plaintiff that does not have a registered copyright is limited to collecting actual damages, while those who register their copyrights can collect punitive damages. (I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice)
I think that the tablet is basically just a specialized form of smartphone. These gadgets have been predicted to replace the personal computer, and things are moving in that direction with smartphone GPUs, wireless graphics, etc.
The writing's on the wall: laptops and PCs will be replaced by smartphones (and tablets) as everyday computing devices for most of the public.
Not their flagship database offering. But, you're right, since they acquired Sun, we now have Oracle OpenOffice.org, Oracle VirtualBox, Oracle MySQL, etc., much like before when they acquired SleepyCat so we have Oracle Berkeley DB.
Maybe Oracle should acquire Embarcadero, so we could have Oracle Delphi! *drum fill*
And where do you suppose that corporations get their money? Do you suppose that you just file a corporate charter and (with apologies to Emril) -- bam! -- money starts flowing in? Of course you don't think that.
Microsoft and Amazon each began as small startups. In order to start those businesses, their founders had to get investment from (drum roll) -- private individuals! Jeff Bezos, in particular, is well renknowned for his funding of new startups.
You didn't purchase the media, you purchased a license for the media.
Really? This is true with DVD movies? Funny, but when I purchased my last DVD, I don't remember seeing any license agreement. I gave the store money, they gave me a DVD.
And if Google's privacy policies are inadequate for your needs, then you shouldn't use them.
However, for those thousands of contracts, Google's privacy policies are perfectly acceptable.
Everything is a tradeoff; with the cloud you get less direct control, but you save costs by not having to administer the applications yourself. With the locally-stored data, you get lots of direct control, but your costs are exponentially higher.
One more thing: if you are storing data locally for that greater control, more than 60% of your data is going to wind up being saved on users' local desktops, which in most organizations will be neither secure nor backed up and in all cases will be much less secure with greater data integrity problems than with centralized control on a server. That's something else you have to take into consideration when evaluating such tradeoffs.
The only kind of "private" e-mail that exists is the kind that you encrypt. Once a plaintext e-mail leaves your client, there is no guarantee that some third party won't read it.
Security through obscurity is the same as no security at all.
As a first step to fixing the mess of criminal scams and fraud and mutual bribes and lobbying that the legal system is devolving into, I'd be happy for actual _property_ to be treated as property again! This business of selling people stuff like DVD players then calling them criminals for modifying it is insane.. where have the rights of property owners gone?
Agreed. If I buy a DVD player, then it is mine. If I wish to modify it to perform whatever task I require it to perform, then that is my business. So long as I am not violating a copyright holder's rights under copyright (i.e., passing out copies, unlawful performance, etc.) then the government has no business telling me I can't defeat my DVD players DRM scheme.
And, no, the copyright holder does not have the right to restrict playback of the media I lawfully purchase. It's called First Sale Doctrine. Look it up.
Google has a vested interest in ensuring that their paying customers' data breaches stay private. That's number one. If they can't ensure number one, then your statement takes priority.
You could say the exact same thing for a sysadmin that you pay yourself, however, which was the whole point of the parent of the post I replied to.
It does when your chances of discovering such unauthorized access fall drastically if that admin isn't employed by the same company you work for.
Not really. In the case of Google Apps, the problem of admin abuse becomes Google's. Google, in turn, has a vested interest in ensuring that their paying customers' data stays private. And if you're not one of Google's paying customers, well, I suppose you get what you pay for, eh?
Or is this "GPS" actually much more than a GPS -- something more like an aircraft tracking computer?
Probably they were using something like that. Something along the lines of an inertial measurement unit (IMU) or similar navigational computer. These things usually combine GPS tracking with a precision gyroscope. They can pretty much fly a plane all by themselves, and the military uses them in land-based vehicles, such as autonomous or semi-autonomous tanks. That they could be used to drive a car is not surprising.
Given, but even supposing that adverse conditions were the cause of the crash, shouldn't the helicopter pilot have known better than to fly at that altitude?
Most anti-trust laws like the Sherman Anti-trust act apply to trusts like monopolies and cartels.
Operative word: most. The owners of various professional sports teams got in trouble for exactly this sort of collusion to keep salaries of players low.
Slashdot Mirror
Oppenheimer was an American born in New York City. Einstein took the oath to achieve American citizenship in 1940.
By that logic, the Cypriots must have the most powerful military in the world.
Not really. The problems within the USSR were largely caused by pressures due to their participation within the Cold War. In a sense, the U.S. won the Cold War by out-producing the Soviets.
The First Gulf War was nothing but a display of muscle to show Saddam Hussein that he didn't know who he was messing with.
It depends on how you define success. If by "success" you mean did the U.S. achieve regime change? No failure there. If by "success" do you mean did the U.S. achieve peace in Iraq? If so, I'm fairly sure that was never a goal of the U.S. military.
Again, no. The goals in Afghanistan were: 1) overthrow the Taliban (check) 2) bring various members of Al Qaeda to justice (check) 3) capture Osama Bin Laden. The status of the 3rd item is, at best, inconclusive, but the other 2 goals have been largely achieved.
On the public Internet?
There's an old Chinese proverb that goes something like this: "A secret one person knows is a secret; a secret two people know is no secret; a secret three people know is information shouted to the world."
You can add a corollary to that: "Anything posted to the Internet counts as three people."
As others have pointed out, the Internet is just like real life. If you're suing someone for injury and then tell your friends that you aren't really injured, the defense attorney, if they find that out, can subpoena the people you told and the court can and will compel them to testify.
You have to be kidding. From Facebook's TOS:
Does that look like Facebook gives a damn about your rights or your privacy?
Video from this guy on YouTube.
Well, the exploit uses JavaScript. This means that any browser that supports JavaScript does not provide some sort of NoScript facility that's installed and turned on by default would be vulnerable to the exploit.
Which means pretty much all of them.
But you can't even blame the browser; the security of Twitter's site belongs solely to Twitter and their crack website development staff.
Psystar was also ordered to pay Apple's legal fees. Furthermore, the exact penalty for infringement was likely lower because Apple did not register their copyright on OS X with the Copyright Office. By law, a plaintiff that does not have a registered copyright is limited to collecting actual damages, while those who register their copyrights can collect punitive damages. (I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice)
And here I thought it was the RIAA who was vexatious.
I think that the tablet is basically just a specialized form of smartphone. These gadgets have been predicted to replace the personal computer, and things are moving in that direction with smartphone GPUs, wireless graphics, etc.
The writing's on the wall: laptops and PCs will be replaced by smartphones (and tablets) as everyday computing devices for most of the public.
Where do you think all those programmers that were working for Claria went?
Really? Rich people can't be customers?
Quick! Someone tell Land Rover to stop production!
Step 4. Profit!!!!
Not their flagship database offering. But, you're right, since they acquired Sun, we now have Oracle OpenOffice.org, Oracle VirtualBox, Oracle MySQL, etc., much like before when they acquired SleepyCat so we have Oracle Berkeley DB.
Maybe Oracle should acquire Embarcadero, so we could have Oracle Delphi! *drum fill*
Thank you, thank you. I'm here all week!
Try Gentoo. It's a clone of Directory Opus for *nix using GTK2. Very nice tool, extremely configurable.
And where do you suppose that corporations get their money? Do you suppose that you just file a corporate charter and (with apologies to Emril) -- bam! -- money starts flowing in? Of course you don't think that.
Microsoft and Amazon each began as small startups. In order to start those businesses, their founders had to get investment from (drum roll) -- private individuals! Jeff Bezos, in particular, is well renknowned for his funding of new startups.
New companies == more jobs.
'
Total Commander.
Really? This is true with DVD movies? Funny, but when I purchased my last DVD, I don't remember seeing any license agreement. I gave the store money, they gave me a DVD.
And if Google's privacy policies are inadequate for your needs, then you shouldn't use them.
However, for those thousands of contracts, Google's privacy policies are perfectly acceptable.
Everything is a tradeoff; with the cloud you get less direct control, but you save costs by not having to administer the applications yourself. With the locally-stored data, you get lots of direct control, but your costs are exponentially higher.
One more thing: if you are storing data locally for that greater control, more than 60% of your data is going to wind up being saved on users' local desktops, which in most organizations will be neither secure nor backed up and in all cases will be much less secure with greater data integrity problems than with centralized control on a server. That's something else you have to take into consideration when evaluating such tradeoffs.
The only kind of "private" e-mail that exists is the kind that you encrypt. Once a plaintext e-mail leaves your client, there is no guarantee that some third party won't read it.
Security through obscurity is the same as no security at all.
Yeah? Well good luck breaking my 1-bit encryption scheme!
Agreed. If I buy a DVD player, then it is mine. If I wish to modify it to perform whatever task I require it to perform, then that is my business. So long as I am not violating a copyright holder's rights under copyright (i.e., passing out copies, unlawful performance, etc.) then the government has no business telling me I can't defeat my DVD players DRM scheme.
And, no, the copyright holder does not have the right to restrict playback of the media I lawfully purchase. It's called First Sale Doctrine. Look it up.
You could say the exact same thing for a sysadmin that you pay yourself, however, which was the whole point of the parent of the post I replied to.
Not really. In the case of Google Apps, the problem of admin abuse becomes Google's. Google, in turn, has a vested interest in ensuring that their paying customers' data stays private. And if you're not one of Google's paying customers, well, I suppose you get what you pay for, eh?
Probably they were using something like that. Something along the lines of an inertial measurement unit (IMU) or similar navigational computer. These things usually combine GPS tracking with a precision gyroscope. They can pretty much fly a plane all by themselves, and the military uses them in land-based vehicles, such as autonomous or semi-autonomous tanks. That they could be used to drive a car is not surprising.
Given, but even supposing that adverse conditions were the cause of the crash, shouldn't the helicopter pilot have known better than to fly at that altitude?
Operative word: most. The owners of various professional sports teams got in trouble for exactly this sort of collusion to keep salaries of players low.