i have fios. it is coax cable on the street. then on the post near my house it is split into fiber. the fiber goes to my place into a very big box, with two Verizon emblazoned power supplies! and become cable again to a cable modem...

the only explanation i have for this insanity is that if they advertised it as cable, i, who only pay for internet, would be allowed by law to have access to basic cable channels unencrypted. so they do this turnduckey of cables just to avoid it, and force me to pay $20/mo for basic cable.

and the only explanation i have for them dropping it is either that nobody pays that 20, like me. or that they finally got rid of the laws that force them to provide free unencrypted basic cable for cable internet customers.

He may well have been as smart as he thought (I'm not saying that is the case for sure, mind) but turns out others were smart enough, and more knowledgeable in the ways that mattered.

Hans Reiser is a good example. Man is unquestionably very smart. However, he had the geek hubris that I call SMFU, Smartest Motherfucker in the Universe syndrome. He figured he was so much smarter than everyone else, he could easily get away with his crime. Turns out that the police have some smart people too, and those people know a lot more about criminal investigation than he did.

Right in that yes, they already have a lot of evidence, and are just working to seal the deal. They like to have everything in a row and an overwhelming amount of evidence before going to trial.

Wrong about the contempt thing. If you look it up in the US you find out that the courts have decided the 5th amendment applies to passwords. So you can keep your mouth shut and they can't compel you to hand over a password. If it is locked with something physical like a key fob or fingerprint, that you have to hand over. Basically if something is solely in your mind, they can't compel you to hand that over if it can be used against you.

Like they dumped CE
As well NT for the PowerPC and NT for the Alpha.

In short Windows isn't successful unless it is compatible with the decades of legacy stuff.

The reason why we are not all on 64bit windows is because we still may have some 16bit windows 3.1 apps that we cannot replace.

When Microsoft dominated they pushed developers towards non-cross platform development... So now they are forced to deal with back-assward compatibility.

The issue with a lot of these companies, they operate on the borders of legal and illegal. Like the guy selling Sorney, Magnetbox and the genuine Penaphonics.

Um yea...
I didn't see Microsoft file as a Not for Profit organization yet.

Right now Microsoft is just making sure existing customers don't jump ship, or worry about upgrading now, because the next OS will be out soon.

The (Desktop/Laptop) PC is no longer the sexy device (The area where Microsoft is king). However it is a big market and you don't want them to go off your platform soon, as they are your main bread and butter.
The (Tablet/Phones) Mobile Devices are the new trend however Microsoft is managing a far third place. With Google and Apple really giving them good competition. Right now for those who betted on Microsoft Mobile devices and many of them actually really do like their device, Microsoft needs to make sure they have a reason to stay.

The FBI may not be all up to date on the latest technologies and they aren't great at dealing with things purely in the digital world. However they are one of, if not the best investigative organizations in the world. They have a lot of experience investigating crimes of all kinds, often committed by experienced criminal organizations that are quite clever.

So there's a good chance if they are interested in getting you, they will. They are quite literally professionals at it, and they institutionally learn from their experience. You very well may know a lot more about computers than they do, but they almost certainly know way more about criminal investigations than you do.

Yes a USB Flash Drive is more complex than a Cartridge, being that it is going threw a Universal Bus and is Read/Write (However Zelda use to be able to save data).
But compared to other forms of storage after cartridges downfall after the Nintendo 64. The USB Flash brings up many of the core Ideas of the Cartridge. A device that has no moving parts that is made to be constantly inserted and removed.

The Ford Model T is also very quite different than a Ford Mustang. But still they are classified as cars.

The problem falls the fact that someones internet connection was cut.

Back in the old days before the late 1990's when such technology such as Internet Access, Cell Phones, Using a Computer. Where domain of the geeks. Today everyone is using it, however a lot of the old school geeks didn't get the memo.

If back in school if I were to walk around with a PDA and/or a Cell phone, Laptop of a Pager. I would been labeled even more of an outcast. Today having such technology is trendy.

Well the person who you think is using "Right to Free Speech" to Vandalize someone's infrastructure that they too use to deploy free speech. So who is censoring who?

Free Speech doesn't mean every freaking action you do, because you want to send a message falls under free speech.

In that case those gangsters who shoot down those other gangsters to explain that this is their territory are in the right as well.
 

I am a big fan of Cross Platform Application Development.
However these are for applications that do not really take the advantage of the platform.
Having made web apps for Blackberry then for iPhone and Android... things such as different screen dimensions, different input methods, additional features also come into play.

Even the fact that each System has a different sets of interface standards, that can come in to make your app look good or crappy

USB Flash Drives are Cartridges reborn.

What I am presuming the GP is going for as an analogy is that there was a real Saint Nicholas, but that there is also a false legend surrounding the real man that is far grander and more common.

Not perhaps the best analogy.

"I believe that the Earth is getting warmer, however I do not find sufficient evidence to show that this will be a net bad thing for humanity. Further I do not believe that the proposed measures are the wisest course of action, and we should be investigating alternatives such as geoengineering. In any case we should not act yet, as we do not have a solid enough model of what will happen and the net impact on humanity."

They can easily find a way to say "I support science, but think that this issue isn't clear cut."

Goes double if the people who are doing the vote try and make it a black and white issue. If they try to make it an issue where you either have to support everything they say, or you are an evil denier of all science, it'll be much easier for people to abstain and have a good argument.

Science is just a process for knowing about the natural universe. It never gives us guidance on what we should do, it only tells us what is, and lets us predict what will be. What to do is always policy and politics. You can have a matter in which there is complete agreement on facts and theory, yet a disagreement on what we should do about it. While a solid scientific theory backed by good facts could tell us what is likely to happen if we take a certain action (or if we do not take an action) we then have to judge that result and how we value it. We have to look at the benefits and costs (everything has costs) and decide if we believe it is the best course of action, and on that point people may disagree.

That is, I think, a flaw many people make in talking about the AGW argument. They believe that since the facts (things like temperature and CO2 measurements) and the theory (the causal explanation of the relation of the facts) is solid in their estimation, that the course of action they believe should be taken is therefore scientific. That because there is a scientific theory at the core of what is happening, that means the conclusion they have reached is also scientific.

That's just not the case. Policy and politics aren't science. They can, and should, use science heavily to have good information as to the policy that is decided upon, but that policy is always a human construction, always a value judgement.