In order to simulate a human brain at the atomic level, first we would have to know exactly which chemicals are in a real brain, and we don't even know that much yet.
This is not a hard problem to solve. You just put a brain in a blender and send the resulting goo through a mass spectrometer.
Way to put words into my mouth.
Not "therefore bad". Nevertheless it IS bad. Their rationales don't make sense (see 'Tabs on top' UX video where they don't list all the cons, and then conclude that because there are more pros than cons the change is therefore good, never mind that the single con by itself outweighs the 3 pros [some of which don't make any sense anyway]) Note also how they promised that tabs on the bottom weren't going away, they just wouldn't be the default. Surprise, now they are gone.
If Mozilla wants to maintain popularity, then fire all your UX people.
ALL of them.
Stop sacrificing your current users on the UX altar, for the mythical other users "improved" UX promises you.
If by "mostly doesn't work" you mean that the engine turns off buy you can't remove the key until you put the car in park, then I guess you're right.
But that's a warped definition of not working.
You're kneejerking. Just because the whole FISA system is bogus doesn't mean that you have to invent facts that don't exist. The FISA order explicitly stated that in the absence of any court ordered retention, the records could not be retained longer than authorized. That is the FISA court ordered the NSA to follow the (bogus) law and not try to bend the rules any further than already (bogusly) allowed.
The fact that there is now a court order requiring some preservation of records is explicitly not in conflict with the FISA order as written. Or did you not read it?
There is no conflict at all.
One court told the NSA that they could not keep the records beyond the law's specified 5 years "just in case" they were sued, i.e. they can't keep it longer merely because they feel that they should.
The other court involves the NSA being sued, and ordering them to keep material for the lawsuit.
Can't you see the difference?
You put words in my mouth. I said nothing about English and the Olympics at all.
You argued about a position you imagined for me. In fact a complete ad hominem attack on an imaginary me and my family. A me that happens to be of French Canadian descent, raised by a French speaking Canadian citizen.
What kind of blinders do you have on? Your head must be inside a cave like area, or perhaps you just like living in areas where the straw is piled high to make straw men out of.
Did I not say that Chinese has a better reason to be included? The topic of conversation was why french culture / society is always pushing for required french language inclusion. It was not about English, or the merits of it.
They only pretend not to know English when you ask them: "You speaka da English?!"
I always find it amusing that somehow it is described as the French "defending" their culture against the English "cultural imperialism" when it is the French who use the strong arm tactics to force people to use French who otherwise don't want to.
My son was bemused when the Russian Olympics featured French announcements. Why not Spanish or Chinese which have each have more speakers than French?
On the flip side, works coming into the public domain after a limited time of exclusivity, as the law was originally envisaged, isn't happening either.
Copyright wasn't intended to grant corporations an infinite lock on culture (literature, music, art). Copyright isn't working, there's no quid pro quo, so why shouldn't the public just walk away and say "screw this"?
Sure, and apparently Toronto also has trouble with snow and ice and traffic and commuter rail being shutdown.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2...
...and what kind of road congestion does Canada have?
The whole nation of Canada has 35m people. Metro Boston has around 5m. Metro NYC has 20m.
In Boston on a good day the roads are jam packed and your commute takes way longer than it should. Throw in an accident along the way and your commute can be a major pain.
Now consider dramatically slower travel speeds, a mere handful of fender benders. That commute is just not worth it. What's the point of having your 1hour commute turn into 2 or 3? each way.
overdraft protection is another loan sharking thing here in the US, outrageously expensive, and why should you incur that expense over a fraudulent transaction?
Debit and Credit are not the same vis-a-vis consumer protection.
Someone racks up a $10K fraudulent charge on your credit card? You call the card company and they can't make any attempt to collect it, it's as if it doesn't exist, until they investigate it.
Someone makes a $10K fraudulent debit on your bank account? Maybe you've been charged for overdrafts (incurring a fee), maybe you've had transactions fail (incurring a fee), sure the bank will investigate. Meanwhile you're out $10K and even if they eventually reverse the transaction, they don't have to do anything about any fees you've incurred while the money was missing.
Consumer risk and cost for debit fraud is much higher than for credit fraud. Which is why all the banks want their customers to use debit. It's better for them, not for you.
Even if you don't use checks, you can't pay an electronic debit / transfer without having a positive balance.
I think its a sad commentary that some of the posters on my comment have basically admitted that they have a debit card / account (that might get cleared out fraudulently) and another different (more secure) account that they keep cash in for their important payments that need to be made.
Might as well have one of those prepaid credit cards if you're going keep your money segregated like that into money you can be defraud of, and money you plan on keeping.
A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson
