Sweden's death rate is also quite high, so I wouldn't say that their policy worked out very well. Hundreds died who didn't need to die, and the country will still be nowhere near herd immunity anytime soon.

I don't think the loved ones of those who died will take much solace in the fact that their economy took a bit less of hit for a few weeks.

Mono isn't quite dead yet. It is still the basis of Xamarin, so existing mobile C# is still running on a mono platform. There are still a few things that run on Mono that don't run on .NET Core, but that list is rapidly shrinking as they work to converge everything for .NET 5. .NET 5 (based on .NET Core) is slated replace both the .NET Framework and Mono. Some of the code for .NET Core was taken directly from Mono, and other bits were ported from the Framework. Since it is almost all open source now, it is easy to take the missing pieces from the larger frameworks and move them into one place. Mono isn't so much going away as it is merging with a new mainline.

No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame.

Do you think that an app that Microsoft has been pushing hard and auto-installing on machines is somehow not gaining traction? So many organisations already use Office 365, so it is really easy to slide into using Teams.

I always questioned the usage numbers that Microsoft reports since Teams fires up on lots of machines where the person isn't using it, but this pandemic has definitely increased its usage. I know that people in our company are using it more and have starting install it on their phones as well, whereas before it was something that was on their desktop but only used sporadically.

It is sort of like how they managed to take over a huge chunk of the instant messaging market back in the day. MSN Messenger was already on every Windows machine, and a ton of people already had a hotmail account, so people just started using it. Now it is Slack playing the role of ICQ as the first mover that is being supplanted by the alternative that comes bundled with Windows.

In this case, they're attempting to create a fuel using a process that should add "zero buckets" of greenhouse gas to our boat/planet. If that hydrogen ends up being used to displace fossil fuels, they'll have actually reduced the amount of greenhouse gasses being released.

If they succeed, they can turn a massive deposit of oil into green energy (while also ensuring it will never be extracted as oil). If they fail, the worst case is adding two days worth of carbon emissions to the atmosphere. Not ideal, but on the risk/reward side of things that is a pretty good trade off is it not?

What really drives this experiment are the financial and infrastructure barriers that make developing these as oil sands resources extremely difficult. Even so, anything that allows energy to extracted without turning it into a massive oil sands mine is probably a win for the environment.

Canada has it right. Here is how they vote:

https://i.cbc.ca/1.5353867.157...

Mark an X with a pencil and put the ballot in the box. When voting is done, ballots are counted in a process that is open to scrutineers.

No voting machines. No apps. Simple and transparent. This is a great way to defend against both incompetence and corruption.

Canadian federal elections use a paper ballot and a pencil. Humans count them. The counting process is open to scrutineers. Here is what a typical ballot would look like:

https://i.cbc.ca/1.5353867.157...

Throwing more tech at a problem that was caused by tech isn't the solution. The prevalence of voting machines in America undermines democracy. Well that and many other things.

It is somewhat ironic that a nation that is so bad at democracy has billed itself as the world's defenders of it. American officials are often critical of election results elsewhere, all while their own system is sketchy as all heck. If the USA had foreign watchdogs monitoring its own elections, I'd hate to see what sort of conclusions would be draw about their legitimacy.

That and the fact that we don't want certain countries to have it at all. You can't solve a global crisis with technology that you want to keep out of the hands of much of the world.

To me that is an even more fundamental problem with nuclear power being a magic bullet to fix our emissions than its poor economics or waste problems are.

Unfortunately they've managed to spread that "debate" to Canada, and are working on exporting it to the rest of the world, partly through populist opposition to carbon taxes.

If map out where the denial is strongest in Canada, you'll find that it happens to coincide perfectly with the oil producing regions. Funny how opinions on factual matters can shift when there is an economic incentive for alternative facts.

The comments section of Slashdot is a sad shell of its former self.

This site has almost universally loathed Ajit Pai as FCC chairman, and for darned good reason. He's the clear antithesis of what Slashdot and open source values are all about.

However, all it takes is for Elisabeth Warren to be the one to state the obvious, and suddenly the political blinders come on. As someone who isn't American, it is disheartening to see so many Slashdot posters go out of the way to trash Warren or deflect the conversation because of the political party Warren is with, rather than looking at the issue she's discussing. Way to abandon your principles and indirectly support FCC corruption, just to cheer for your political team.

Ajit Pai's FCC is fricking horrible. Full stop.

I'd be surprised if the Liberals don't support it in the end, but it may depend what happens in other countries.

If the alternatives are to sign on and have a 12 partner TPP, or not sign on and be excluded from an 11 partner TPP, I think Canada will sign on. Now that the agreement is final, rather than still in negotiations, it is a take it or leave it situation. The argument of not wanting to be left out will likely be enough to sway the vote.

If it faces trouble in other nations, then the Liberals might be able to hedge their bets a bit longer.

Maybe they meant senior citizens.

If that is true, it is ironic that by trying to fix a malware issue for their customer, Microsoft has angered the person and driven them away from their product.

What good did Slashdot editors think it would do to post SourceForge's response in a story like this?

Nobody here is going to believe the corporate spin from Dice, so why bother posting it at all? I know that Slashdot likes to drive traffic and commentary to their stories by posting inflammatory articles or misleading summaries. However, when the topic actually involves Dice/DHI, getting the user base riled up about it is pretty self-defeating.

Also, rather than being from the "before-the-weekend" department, shouldn't this be from the "before-the-5-day-weekend-where-we-pretend-not-to-see-user-submissions-about-sourceforge" department?

Given the trajectory of the SourceForge site, do you really find the story suspicious?

SourceForge went from showing deceptive ads with a big Download button, then started bundling a malware installer with any projects that wished to opt-in to their revenue sharing scheme.

Is it really hard to believe that they'd start bundling that same installer with "abandoned" projects? Plenty of other news sites seemed quite able to post about the story without finding it super suspicious, or requiring so much research to verify the story.

Face it, the reason that the story didn't immediately come up on Slashdot is because the site is owned by Dice. That is the reason for the suspicion you have, and the need for the editors to be cautious about posting the story.

The caution by the editors in this case is understandable and expected; just as the anger of the user base is also understandable and expected. No point in anyone pretending otherwise.