Well Ouya is about 2 years old now. And used a processor that came out 3 years ago (Tegra 3). Tegra 3 is only a Cortex-A9 and a very old GPU architecture (related to the old nForce series, about 10 years old).

The Tegra X1 is 3 generations later (skipping over Tegra 4 and Tegra K1). And uses the Maxwell architecture copied from the desktop graphics, obviously scaled down to fit in the thermal limits and performance requirements of a mobile chip.

The performance difference between Tegra 3 and Tegra X1 is massive. Part of that is just having die shrinks and adding more transistors, and part of that is the improvements in architecture on the memory controller, internal buses and GPU.

Remember, Ouya is another company, not related to NVIDIA. And Ouya does not included TegraZone, which offers some games that hard-core gamers would appreciate more than the typical Android fair. And there is of course GRID streaming, which is popular among hard core gamers to be able to practice away from their desktop PC.

Depends on the part of CA, but yes. While most of the US would pay around $70k/yr for a SW engineer job (about equivalent to 4500 euros/month, if I did the exchange correctly), Silicon Valley would typically run around $100k/yr for essentially the same position. On the other hand, my company pays my colleagues in Finland more than they are paying in the Bay Area. (aside: I suspect Americans get to keep more of their paycheck, because the taxes are lower, but spend more of it because there are fewer services in their communities.)

So regional variations in salary are not surprising, but salary is not the only staffing cost for a business. There are the liabilities involved in jurisdictions with strong labor or litigation for discrimination. There are mandatory accounts (like PTO, unemployment insurance, etc) and costs for healthcare.

At least his summaries are shorter than Bennett's.

I know exactly what it means. And the authors are clear that having a well regulated militia is necessary. Are you foggy about that, somehow?

They're also very clear, having stipulated that, just like with their British overlords had one, they're going to have a continually armed and well regulated military ... that they're not (UNLIKE their previous British overlords) going to let the necessary existence of that entity be an excuse to deprive the rest of the people from keeping and bearing arms.

What? They authors themselves, in a huge parade of letters, recorded debates, and supporting documents, explain exactly what they were thinking when it comes to the constitution and every one of its amendments. Those amendments didn't just cryptically appear and get signed, they were talked to death in congress and documented personal discussions, mused about in journals and letters, and openly debated. It was very clear they considered the personal right to own firearms to be paramount, and distinctly separate from the collective need to keep a well-regulated militia ready to go. Despite their allergy to a standing army of some flavor (having seen what they'd seen), they knew it was necessary to have that capacity always in place.

The existence of it being necessary, they knew that the temptation was going to be there for someone in military or civilian executive/legislative power to skew towards making that militia/military the only holders of armed power. Remember that the constitution is all about minimizing government power, and the amendments are there to remind everyone that even though they should know well enough from the structure of that charter that personal liberties are a hands-off affair, there are some areas (like political expression, assembly, arms, the sanctity of one's home, etc) that it was worth explicitly laying out as beyond the reach of government control. The linguistic construction of the second amendment may fall oddly on modern earns, but it really is simpler than most people seem to think: "The existence of an armed organization is necessary, but don't assume that the government's power to form and run such an organization gives the government the power to deny the people the right to themselves be armed."

Yes, "militia" had a very specific meaning at the time. Their urge to use that word was a reflection of how distasteful they found the notion of a large standing federal military (that being too close to their experience with British power). And it's precisely BECAUSE the assumed that the states and even more granular local powers would be taking on the responsibility to have armed groups under their control that they made the individual's right to be personally armed a fundamental, nationally protected right - to prevent a local government from becoming locally tyrannical (and likewise federally).

Do you foresee a situation where the right to free expression or the right to assemble perhaps should be considered just a little too dangerous, and we should consider taking that away?

If so, you can start the process of putting a new amendment in place, one that kills of the First. While you're at it, you can try the same with the protections proclaimed by the Second (or the Fourth, if you think that's also a "living" amendment that's worth scrapping), but you're not going to get the supermajority and ratification needed to make any of that happen.

Indeed, one would know the laws in advance before going into business there. If you can't make it work there, then don't start a business in France, or at all really.

But that said, the psychological aspect of not worrying about your security doesn't really translate into workers who are more "focused". Here in silicon valley, I have many coworkers who obsess about their jobs, while at the same time they could be let go without notice and without further pay. Every year we get some token raise, roughly equal to inflation, while at the same time the company modifies our health care plan to make it cheaper for them, increases our premiums and reduces the stock grants. (There have been pretty significant cuts in stock grants this year across the tech industry, which translates to a pay cut for most of us)

It really does seem to be the CEO's fault for starting a business in France instead of California. I know from personal experience that layoffs in CA can occur without any severance. It's not nice, but if I were trying to run a business that basic fact would have to enter into the equation.

The Proton rocket has gone through a number of redesigns over its long life. The latest version, the Proton-M, first flew in 2001, and they kept flying the Proton-K for many years (for reasons I actually don't know). They've only done 90 flights of the Proton-M, and half of them were in that post-2010 period of "repeated failures" (although they had about as many failures for pretty much all of the 2000s as well).

I would highly expect the faulty pump to have been redesigned with the Proton-M modifications, based simply on that analysis.

You're looking at the language and purpose of the amendment incorrectly. To translate its essence into more modern parlance, if would go something like: "Because it's always going to be necessary to have a trained and equipped military organization ready to defend the country, the government - in the interests of not allowing the government to have a monopoly on the tools of defense - shall not prevent citizens who are not in the military from having arms."

The people who wrote that amendment still had a very bad taste in their mouths from living under a monarchy that DID reserve the power to capriciously allow only the military to keep and bear arms. Knowing that a military/militia is necessary, they used the second amendment to be VERY clear that they considered the fundamental right to keep and bear arms to be NOT exclusive to the military. Just like the considered the freedom to speak to be not under the control of the government.

If development took only a few more years, we wouldn't have paper money to counterfeit.

Done & done.

https://www.clintonfoundation....

Unfortunately, HRC's private email servers she hosted at her home while SoS are temporarily down due to a security issue. Authorities wanted to see the contents.

Strat

What? How do you think that coupons actually work, anyway?

1) You present a coupon, and you pay less cash at the point of sale than you otherwise would have. This is not a mystery. It's the whole point. If it's the retailer's own coupon, then they are basically putting the item on sale in exchange for having a trackable form of marketing. If it's a manufacturer's coupon, then the retailer is participating in a mechanism wherein the manufacturer and retailer have worked out a back-channel compensation scheme for the retailer having collected less cash during the transaction. This is also not a mystery.

2) When you present the retailer with a bogus retailer coupon, you're getting a discount that's disconnected from one of the key reasons they issued the coupon in the first place: to understand which marketing methods are the most constructive. When you present the retailer with a bogus manufacturer's coupon, one of two things happens: the retailer eats the loss, or the manufacturer does. Again, why are you acting like this is some strange unknown? Or, are you just hoping that someone there's a third magical possibility that makes it just fine to rip off businesses with fake coupons? Yeah, I thought so.

What you mean is that you have no idea how retail operations and promotional marketing work, but you vaguely want it to be true that ripping off stuff through the use of bogus discount coupons is a "victimless crime" blah blah blah, so you're going to pretend that basic information is unknowable, as moral cover. Hint: you're not as clever as you think you are.

No, kernel developer.

Like programming, I try to address on issue at a time instead of writing one giant spaghetti function that does it all.

Which wouldn't matter a bit if the machine is flying waypoints using its own internal flight controller. That's how mine work: you inform the machine of the flight plan using a ground station, and then it does off and does its thing, whether or not you can talk to it along the way. Loss of, say, Verizon's signal wouldn't make a bit of difference.