In a "fair" world it would be "GNU/Linux" - "Linux" is the kernel, GNU provides other necessary "operating system" functions.

I've taught an "intro to Linux class" a couple times and can say that most textbooks only mention the GNU project in passing (if at all - in the beginning "history" type chapter) - so from that perspective everyone knows when you say "Linux" you are referring to an operating system (if they know what an OS is)

my personal preference is to talk about "distributions" (Ubuntu/Red Hat/whatever) but don't mention GNU unless I'm in a classroom setting (and then more to drive home the technical difference between "kernel" and "operating system").

I used "Revolution OS" to fill up some class time - if you are curious (and didn't live through it). In the documentary Bill Gates is the "bad guy", Stallman the crusader/fanatic, and Linus the practical applier of knowledge.

with all of that said - my official answer to the question is "no one cares"

to point out the obvious. Whatever the problem was, it wasn't because of "Net Neutrality" legislation. Or if Comcast weighs more than a duck - then Net Neutrality matters!

... so the smaller and quicker are eating the bigger and slower ...

I'll point out that Benjamin Franklin (the guy on the $100 bill) made a very good living as a publisher back in the day. The point? As a writer/publisher looking to make a living he needed to know his audience and publish what people wanted to read/were willing to pay for (e.g. people loved almanac's so he created/published "poor richard's almanac"). I'll also point out that he never got much bigger than a 1 man operation

the problem's facing local news today aren't much different than in Franklin's time. You still need to find an audience and publish material in which they are interested. It is safe to say, that people are always interested in a couple things - 1.) themselves, 2.) their neighbors - so if you are a local news outlet you should focus on what large national publications can't cover - i.e. local people/government and their stories (lots of pictures, spell their names correctly)

for what it is worth (I live in southwestern Ohio) - close to half of our "big" local paper is syndicated news (stories from the NY Times and the WSJ a day later, the USA Today). but there are still numerous "community" papers, with close to 100% local content

"For works made for hire and anonymous and pseudonymous works, the duration of copyright is 95 years from first publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter (unless the author's identity is later revealed in Copyright Office records, in which case the term becomes the author's life plus 70 years)."

from copyright.gov

The U.S. Constitution specifically gives the federal government the power to establish a patent office, and copyright law. (Article I Section 8. Clause 8 ) -"To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."

so from a conceptual standpoint, if you write something and never publish it (at least in the United States) it is still covered by copyright during your lifetime no matter what you do. It is not possible for an individual to place something in the public domain - but you can give away your work if you like (conceptually the difference between "free as in beer" and "free as in speech" - maybe?)

It is important to remember that there are no "copyright police" enforcing copyright law en masse. If you create something (e.g. novel, song, software) and it is covered by copyright - it is your responsibility to protect your copyright. A very good way of proving that you created something is to register a copyright (for example in the United States) - then if someone steals your work, you can whip out your registration and prove you created it

while I'm bloviating - from an academic standpoint there is an obvious difference between "plagiarism" and "copyright infringement." If I take a play by William Shakespeare, change the title and slap my name on it, then present it as my own original work - I have committed plagiarism, but not copyright infringement (since Willie's been dead for 400 years and all of his works are in the public domain)

of course the organization against legalizing sports gambling nationwide (in the United States) tends to come from casino's and other gambling institutions - so obviously just because people are in favor of something doesn't mean it is going to happen ...

the catch 22 problem Microsoft faced after they missed/messed up mobile was the "Apps gap"

e.g. no one wanted to write apps for Microsoft's mobile OS because there wasn't a big enough user base to make it worthwhile, no users wanted a Microsoft mobile device because there weren't any apps ...

which really illustrates the fact that users want to do "something" with their device (you know "use" the hardware), and the vast majority don't feel strongly about the Operating System

so the long held tradition of questions in the post title being obvious - "yes" the world needs additional mobile operating systems. then the question is "can they get a sizable market share from Android and/or Apple?" probably not.

eventually something will replace the smart phone type device and disrupt the computing industry. Of course I have no idea what that will be ...

if you are old enough to remember the 1990's - the same type question back then was some version of "does the world need operating systems other than Windows" - 20+ years later the question is "can Windows stay relevant"

if you haven't seen that episode of "the SImpsons" - (Season 4 Episode 12) here you go

My work here is done

the short answer is that for some being first to have a new product is important, and worth the additional cost. Add in the "Apple" brand and I'm sure the $1,000 iPhone will sell just fine.

the problem is that "value" is almost always subjective. Is $1,000 "too much" for a cell phone? maybe. then the question becomes who decides whether it is or isn't (e.g. free markets vs price caps)

a lot of research has been done on "behavioral economics" which is one direction this conversation could take.

the shorter version is to just say "De gustibus non est disputandum"

my initial reaction too the "Equifax hack" news was that the company will be gone in a year. They are going to be liable for huge penalties under the existing laws, and will simply not be able to stay in business.

MOST important is the fact that their business was "privacy"/security of personally identifiable information . While they probably weren't any worse at protecting their I.T. infrastructure than any other large company (looking at you Sony), the expectations are higher. Equifax's future is probably closer to DigiNotar than Sony

ltheir stock price looks like a dead cat bounce - if you play the market I'd be thinking about shorting (insert massive disclaimers - but if you are taking financial advice from /. --)

... the act of planning has value

in the long tradition of "if there is a question in the /. title - the answer is yes" - yes "accurate" software development time predictions are myths

of course "accurate time predictions" are going to be "myths" for any massive project (a google search for "defense project over budget" produces interesting results - like this)

the fact that people tend to get better at "estimating" anything the more experience they get at "estimating" is a big part of the reason why "lead software engineers" make more money than "junior software developers" ...

price caps result in rationing or shortages (Venezuela being the latest example of price controls not working)

so remove the price caps, then help the school systems get internet access somehow (school funding/technology is a completely different subject ...)

What the "business people"will tell you is that ideas are cheap, implementations are important, and elegant implementations are useless if no one needs/wants your product.

If you are writing software to solve a problem you have, and then hope that other people will find your software useful - that isn't a business

If you know that (* large number of people, who are willing/able to pay for your software *) have a problem and your software will help them with that problem - that is the beginning of a business ....

1. 1. who is the customer (if you answer "everyone" you are missing the point, start again)
2. 2. what can we do that is better/cheaper/different than is already out there
3. 3. profit!

for more (and better) advice - Guy Kawasaki has written several useful books - "The Art of the Start 2.0" is very good ...

all we have to do is get rid of electricity

no more will those pesky automated machines take away human jobs! Everyone will be able to work 16 hour days (or longer) just surviving

Every nation will be blessed just like large parts of Africa

I, for one welcome our new X overlords ...

.... and just as relevant, Eli Whitney didn't become wealthy from the cotton gin (patent infringement issues)

BTW - slavery is expensive and never economical (you have to feed and house those slaves, not to mention employ people to make them work). What if we could get robots to do those jobs ....

Microsoft greatly improved the smb protocol between Server 2008r2 and Server 2012. Increased performance of smb and encryption are also selling points Microsoft hammers to encourage upgrading from Windows 7 to Windows 10.

BUT now that I've shown my "Microsoft certified professional" bias, I actually read the article: this was within a web browser, and most damning = "But when you change the user-agent string of your browser on Linux to match IE or Edge, suddenly OneDrive's web code runs fine. "

So this really is as bad as it sounds - ...