Yes. Any law that makes the act of consuming any product or service illegal is a bad law. This includes drugs, prostitution, gambling, any kind of porn etc.
This is orthogonal to the act of producing the product or providing the service. E.g. in case of child porn, producing it should definitely be illegal.
While I agree that this is bullshit, the reason why Daily Mail want people to see this video is because it will make that much easier to get them riled up about evil Muslims and such, which is basically the Daily Mail business model.
who are you to claim immunity from the democratic will of society
A human being with natural rights.
A "democratic will of society" is not the end-all, be-all. The democratic will of society in Weimar Germany resulted in a totalitarian regime that opened the first concentration camp for political opponents less than two months after taking over the government. The democratic will of society in Rwanda resulted in a genocide of several hundred thousand people. The democratic will of society in Russia resulted in invasion of a sovereign country and annexation of part of its territory.
during the French revolution they found out, people could keep blinking after their head was cut, for various lengths, but most around 35 seconds or so. So you don't die instantly, and experience horror for at least 35 seconds.
It's a myth, and does not have any basis in the modern understanding of human anatomy and physiology. A drop in blood pressure so rapid will render the victim unconscious practically instantly.
What good is a strong nation if that strength doesn't benefit its citizens?
Russia? If so, why? Russia's interests do not clash with the UK's anywhere on earth - quite the contrary, it is in our best interests to live in peace with the Russians.
If only the reverse was true. UK is still seen as US' lap dog in many ways, and one of the most hostile NATO members in Europe. Then there's a very long history of conspiracy theories that basically blame Britain for every single bad thing that happened to Russia/USSR since like 17th century (from that perspective it's the reverse, and US is a puppet state for the UK). Google for "The Englishwoman shits" to see some examples.
Putin's model is a combination of both.
You don't know anyone with an Android phone or a wireless router?
Just because they are signed by Microsoft, doesn't mean that Microsoft wrote them. For Vista, and even more so for Win7, large number of drivers was included out of the box to cover a wide range of hardware without needing driver CDs as often as XP did. Most of those are third party drivers, but because they are redisted by MS, they have the MS signature on them.
Basically, if you see MS certificate on some binary, it means that someone at Microsoft has built that binary. It doesn't mean that they wrote the source code for it.
Note that only 65k are in "engineering". This is across the entire company, working on numerous products (many of which you probably don't even know exist), and also internal infrastructure like build systems, test automation, and internal dev tools.
Quite obviously, one third of that cannot be working on the drivers, and even one tenth is an unreasonably high estimate.
To be more specific, what they need to do with Android is what Microsoft is doing with the next version of Windows (for store apps): put a full-fledged multi-window desktop there, complete with a taskbar/dock, and allow it to run existing Android apps in resizable, closeable windows. They already have fairly decent mouse support in Android, in fact (and the browser even understands hover), and most apps aren't that bad with a mouse, either. They just need to make the core UI around the same, and make it an official Android platform, so that people writing apps keep it in mind when doing UX design.
C99 support there is still more like 50% (no VLAs, no "restrict", and no complex/imaginary).
It didn't make it for C++14, right? My understanding is that C++17 is where the "big things" are supposed to be happening - are you now aiming for that?
I believe this kind of polymorphism is already possible, between std::function and boost::any (and, of course, they're planning to add "any" as part of the standard in a future version).
C++ IDEs have also gotten much better, as well. In Visual Studio these days, you can hover over an identifier, and it'll tell you its actual type, regardless of how many levels of auto there are between it and the actual named type. And it works reliably on anything that is valid C++, no matter the complexity.
After the last of 16 mounting screws has been removed from an access cover, it will be discovered that the wrong access cover has been removed.
