Because maybe you need ordinance delivered to an area with contested airspace.

I agree that in a well-functioning review marketplace a single reviewer (good or bad) should become lost in the noise. That's not what the plaintiff in this case is alleging though -- they're alleging that one person conspired to place eight different negative and fraudulent reviews in an attempt to circumvent said well-functioning review marketplace. Without additional information, this suit may have been placed to avert new negative and fraudulent reviews from being placed.

Random aside: the suit mentions DOES 1 through 10 but contains only 8 allegations.

Wasn't the senate disbanded shortly before the attack?

I don't often comment. Colour me part of the silent somethingority on pretty much everything slashdot-related. Take that as you will.

But I'd like you to be clear: your position is that your 'representative sampling of smart people' (selection bias, much?) is a better judge than the 'crowd of Internet commenters' (who are also your desired readership), and thus if your 'smart' sample approves of your opinions, then you must believe your readership is just a bunch of club-swinging neanderthals who aren't erudite enough to appreciate your drivel and thus need your guiding light to navigate the darkness? Am I getting that right?

Don't confuse the issue by pretending it's all about collaboration and economics of software. It doesn't make sense to try to shoehorn my software idea into an existing framework exclusively due to price and availability. Just because there's a square peg available for free doesn't mean that it'll fit a round problem, even if a square solution may take longer.

I predominately work in computational analysis and have spent a significant portion of my career trying to figure out physical problems (first in video games and now in engineering analysis), particularly in the finite element/CFD domain. That makes OpenFOAM is a classic example for me -- it's the benchmark for open source CFD analysis. But I'm still employed at an engineering firm developing our own numerical analysis tools.

OpenFOAM is quite good at a very small subset of what it claims to do, but it doesn't do *everything* well. Unfortunately, the framework is sufficiently mature at this point that trying to fork it and address those flaws would be a colossal undertaking. This means that for many toolsets, starting from the ground up is simply a more attractive alternative. Could we reuse a few elements deep in the integrators? Maybe, but those would come with their own baggage.

Switching game engines halfway through development says more to me about a lack of proper requirements analysis and planning than it does about the benefits of one engine over another.

I would echo that the 'blind' bit people talk about isn't really "omg I've gone blind and can't see anything!" It's more of just a super blurry thing.

Announcements from executive leadership to ownership are made via boardroom table, not to reporters.

If you want to make an argument that Dell's 'announcement' was made to Dell customers or partners, you might be able to make a case. But the thought that they're 'announcing' this to rally support of shareholders is laughable.

NT

There's a wide gulf between what they could have reasonably expected and what they received once on set. In what universe do you reside that makes questions like "Do you think the teams with women on them are at a disadvantage?" acceptable? Even if it's to generate 'value for their investment.'

While I understand your sentiment, he wasn't arrested for refusing to provide consent for a search - that's still quite illegal. He was 'arrested in connection with the street robbery and taken away.'

The real issue as I see it with this ruling is that the hypothetical other occupant could be manipulated into providing consent. Eg, "Occupant A, if you don't let us search, we're going to arrest you on [insert something that an officer can dream up to get an arrest], but if you let us search your house for evidence against occupant B, then maybe we'll just forget about that for now."

The situation you're referring to is seasonal abuse of the EI system where employers pay salary during the season and then lay them off at the end of the season, after which the workers collect EI until the next season starts. This works largely because those workers work sufficient hours during that period to qualify for EI. "New" workers are seldom if ever hired to replace those laid off workers as there's simply no work to do.

As a side note, this abuse is in no way limited to the Maritimes. You see exactly the same sort of abuse in any seasonal industry in Canada (see: oilpatch).

EI reforms have been slow and have met with extreme resistance from both social and business groups. If you want to draw coarse circles around issues, then a big one is the blanket EI system that operates with so few parameters that allow this sort of abuse.

So you're saying that you're a security by obscurity advocate then.

Not running on an embedded Windows installation might seem like a safe bet, but as TFA mentions, this vector had to do with processing the payments in the clear -- simply running another OS doesn't necessarily give you that for free.

And of course that was the wrong quote. Epic :) Good job, me!

Way to generalize and automagically convict via the 'Think of the Children' Act anyone who suggests a cut to food programs.