IPv6, IPv7, and IPv9 (not the April Fool's variant) were competing post-IPv4 standards. Something like this suggestion here was considered for IPv7.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/d...

That's not was certified software means.

You know hw software is issued "without warranty for any fitness or purpose, whether stated or implied" (or something like that)? Thats the key differentiator. There are OS's certified to that level. You know that line from Fight Club about when a recall is / isn't issued? that holds the same for OS develpers that provide a product warranted for fitness and purpose. These OS's do exist, for those situations that require it.

You see them in car computers, for example, and I'm confident the Falcon9 OS is certified to that level. It's not that it's bug free - it's that the developer has done a higher level of regression testing, and continues to evaluate the OS to identify problems that could (or did) arise, and with that agree to share in the risk. (Here, "risk" is defined as effects that happen to the company when the product causes a kick in the teeth... like killing a person.)

Certifying anything as 100% bug-free is a waste of time, since it's nearly impossible. TeX isn't even there, despite 40yr of offering bug bounties. Noone claims 100% bug-free, but there are OS vendors that accept a certain level of risk.

weylin

I'm not sure it's "only symlinks." I have a complete local copy of everything in GDrive. I regularly demonstrate it's actually a local copy, as I travel a lot for work through areas that have no cell coverage, and I can still open, edit, and save changes.
weylin

I wish I had moderator points to give you "+1 insightful." The passing of someone with a degree of importance to millions, is absolutely "stuff that matters."
weylin

Or, I dunno, patch the code to remove the offending language.

That's how the courts are supposed to work. The purpose of the president as a singular authority is to be able to work quickly as needed. Congress is intentionally structured as a committee (albeit a large one) to foster discussion, knowing that anything that happens in Congress will take longer.

The preferred method to fix anything is through Congress, or through Executive Action if there's a crisis requiring speedy action. The courts should only act when the other two are not correcting something, and then only after extensive analysis.

weylin

This is what I have. I went from a $250 bill to the power company (average per month), to a $100 bill to the solar company (average per month), for no financial investment on my part.

I give the solar company my roof to use to install their "power plant." They then charge me 10 cents per kWh generated. This is far better than the 25 cents per kWh I pay the utility company. So although I don't "own" the panels, at the same time it was free installation and maintenance and I have lower bills, and I still have street power for nights, clouds, full eclipses....

My average usage approximately equals my average generation so it's not worth cashing out my $10 credit - but I haven't paid a utility bill in 5 years.

weylin

Exactly. Like how they handled the issue of Hillary's health problems.

During the last presidential campaign, Hillary had some eye issues. But there was no way in hell Snopes was going to confirm Hillary had health problems. Not when she was running against literally Hitler.

So what they did is set up a false question so they could knock it down and paste a big fat FALSE on it. They framed the issue in the form of a question nobody was asking, namely:

> CLAIM: Hillary Clinton cancelled a campaign event because of "bizarre eye movements." (http://www.snopes.com/clinton-bizarre-eye-movements/)

But that's not what people were talking about. People were talking about her eye, and her health, IN GENERAL. People are saying she has serious, unspecified issues IN GENERAL and that it's completely obvious! But they have to get SPECIFIC with a fucking strawman in order to call it "FALSE".

PLUS, they had NO EVIDENCE it is FALSE. Just that they can't prove it.

> We found **no evidence** that Clinton suddenly cancelled her North Carolina campaign event over strange eye movements, nor did we find any evidence of anything wrong with her eyes in September 2016. While Clinton suffered a concussion in 2012, **there is no evidence** that she has been diagnosed with strabismus or any long-term eye anomaly as a result of it. Even if she did have strabismus, presence of the condition does not automatically imply poor health overall.

That does not make it FALSE! THat makes it 'INDETERMINED' which is a rating they actually use quite often.

Except when it comes to Hillary. They were SO in Hillary's corner, it was stomach churning. The site is completely worthless, and by this time has about the same level of credibility as Media Matters (namely, zero)

Well, yeah. Companies are created by and run by people, and as such, they reflect the tendencies of their creators.

Who do you know that never lies? That never has cheated at anything. Being outraged that companies reflect the people who created them is kind of silly. Homo sapiens is a flawed species in many ways, and his creations, as products of his mind, are going to reflect those flaws.

This was written by James McHenry; he recorded it in the notes he took when he was the Maryland delegate to the 1787 Constitutional Convention. It's unclear the specific date, but Dr. McHenry clearly attributed the quote directly to Franklin.
Source: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/...
weylin

This story is misleading. Is the concentration of nutrients going down? Yes. Is that a problem?

Well...

As it turns out, what's really happening is the carbon dioxide is promoting bulk growth, which is making more food (particularly, more carbohydrates) in the same amount of time. However, the nutrients are getting stocked into the food at the same rate.

So, the total carbohydrate loading is increasing, making food bulkier. But the total nutrient loading in the food is the same. Since the bulk is larger with the same nutrient loading, the concentration (nutrients per unit bulk) goes down.

Clearly by my verbiage, I'm not a botanist. And I'll say I'm not a climate change denier. But it's not clear to me why this specifically is a "problem" per se.

weylin

Why does it need to be a Great Circle route? A Great Circle route is a route that follows an arc of a circle whose origin is the center of the Earth. But if I plot a course to follow a line of Longitude such that I drive around Antarctica, I've followed a straight path but just not a Great Circle route. There's other non-Great Circle routes that go at an angle, the only key is where the origin is of the circle. On top of that, limiting to just Great Circle routes make the additional fallacious assumption that the Earth is a sphere, when it's actually an oblate spheroid: it bulges at the Equator, so the Great Circle that is the Equator is actually larger than a Great Circle that passes through the poles. (For clarity: it's really really close to a sphere, but they're looking for extremes so it matters.)

Not saying the solution won't be a Great Circle route - It likely will be, since that's the theoretical biggest possible straight line. But there's no reason is *has* to be.

weylin

Concur. The question is "why is Einstein famous." The adult answer is that he was an inflection point in scientific progression, more than most other really famous scientists; the adolescent answer is that he single-handedly changed science.

Basically:
1. Aristotle invented science.
2. Newton called shenanigans on Aristotle's work, and invented both correct science and the math to support it.
3. Einstein changed the gears of the scientific community in ways we're still trying to figure out the details of. Einstein demonstrated that Newton was only correct in special cases (that happen to be our everyday experience), and that the Universe is really really weird once you get outside the special cases.

weylin

The only thing that screams "I'm from New England!" louder than that?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

You remember reading that? So, you were old enough to read. I remember watching Wiley E Coyote get an anvil dropped on his head when I was... younger than Kindergarten. I definitely didn't realize that wasn't real; I vividly remember trying to figure out how Mr. Coyote's body could bend like that from the anvil, and thinking the 12-inch lump is what really happened when you get a big hunk of metal dropped on your head. I definitely had some level of "grok" regarding death, but for comedy- and cartoon-vs-reality, especially 40s-era slapstick, that conceptualization happened somewhere around 1st grade.

Maybe I'm just dumb like you suggest? Perhaps. But the point isn't about intelligence, it's about the mental capability to process a YouTube video, and the resulting impacts against happiness. If you remember "the good old days" as actually being good old days, then you're memory of them is much rosier than how it actually was.