That's just a lot of fingerpointing and maybes. What happened is that someone of them found an easily exploitable site, possibly an sql injection or a known vulnerability in an off the shelf software. They then made up a silly excuse about how it is righteous for them to hack said site and did so. Previously they have exploited a message boards softwares failure to strip html tags to post flashing images on a board for epileptics, blaming any seizures caused by said images on the webmasters failure to secure his software. Dumped customer email and usernames to a porn site because uh.. people looking at porn are bad? Hacked a Finnish government site becasue uh... Finland is ruled by a brutal military regime suppressing freedom of expression?

In the United States.... In the rest of the world, different rules apply which is why it is imperative to have an explicit license.

That entirely depends on how you measure how right or left a country is. If you measure it by how much of a countrys economy is controlled or owned by the government, then the US is fairly moderate. For example, in North Korea and China the state ownership would be close to 100% so they would be to the extreme left. Then you have classical welfare states like the Scandinavian countries in which about 50% of the commerce is state-owned or France and Japan where the percentage is about 60%. They are all "leftist" states. In the US, it is about 25%, far lower than most Western European countries but above most third world countries such as Iran, Brazil, Nigeria etc.

At first, it may seem strange to call those countries fiscally far-right because, well they are poor and conservaties doesn't want poor countries, do they? But they all have very weak and powerless governments in comparison, which is one of the major goals of the right-wingers. It ties in with the saying that Socialism doesn't work because it was tried in the Soviet Union and they failed. But Capitalism is also being tried all over the world and it doesn't work so well for most of us.

The article claims that drivers are hitting the brakes instead of running the red light when they notice there is a camera. Reasonably those people would adjust and slow down when approaching a red light if the probability of it being camera monitored was high enough. Having to abruptly brake is uncomfortable for the driver (which running a red light is not, unless you get caught) so it makes sense that the driver would try to avoid that situation in the future.

The whole fucking article is clickbait. Read this one instead. They are basically debating what influence depicting armed conflicts witout adherence to international law can have on what people think about warfare. It's only the retarded journalists trying to make an upsetting story of something that absolutely isn't one just to drive traffic to their sorry excuses for news sites.

That's bull. The deciding factor isn't whether they have degrees or not, it is if they come from a wealthy family that determines their likely career. Dropping out of college isn't that bad if you're well-off because you can always do something else or try again. If you study some successful businessmen one common theme among them is that they all had to go through lots of failures before they finally stroke big. If you're poor, you have only one shot at it, and if you fail the debts of it will likely be with you the rest of your life.

Well, it's better than nothing. Also remember that /. was the first site to employ it on a large scale (long before wikipedia and similar sites appeared) and proved it to roughly work. It is far from perfect though. My personal pet peeve is that long, well thought out posts aren't getting upmodded. Especially if they don't take a stance in a controversial issue but is ambivalent about it. Maybe because most moderators does not have the patience to read through long comments so they do not stick. One-liners which at first glance may sound insightful, but really are just pointing out the obvious have a much higher probability of getting upmodded.

A simple fix, which stackoverflow uses, is to order posts in reverse chronological order. That would greatly reduce the effect moderation has on the discussion and the need to type fast so that your post wont be placed to far down on the page.

Yes, the estimates seem exceedingly high. 98bn for 520 miles of high speed rail turns out to be about $117m/km. Other completed high speed rail projects of similar size have been much cheaper. Such as Madrid-Albacete €9.6m/km or $13m/km, Haikou-Sanya in China also for about $13m/km. Construction costs for TGV in France between €10m to €25m/km ($13m to $34m). $117m/km would be a reasonable estimate if the rail was to be drawn through a densely populated area and requiring lots of tunnels and so on. But it isn't, most of the area between Los Angels and San Francisco is desolate or farmland.

It's a distortion to suggest that the model doesn't work when clearly it does. It sort of works (see all the issues mentoined already) -- that doesn't mean that it can't be improved upon, nor that this partiuclar idea is a bad one.

It sort of does not work. All the greybeards tool stop working, or require arcane workarounds, as soon as you have a single fucking whitespace in the filename. The only reason why people does not find it excruciatingly annoying to write shell scripts is because such issues are ignored and only show up in subtle bugs years down the road when the original programmers already left.

I guess that happens if you have no experience with Nvidia's and ATI's horrible kernel drivers. Or those winmodem drivers that could make a Linux users day a living hell way back then.

Please mod parent down - it is a copy paste troll. While the story is mildly funny, it has already been posted about a million times to any store remotely related to cloud computing.

Sorry, but that is not the attitude of the FOSS community - just some random commentator setting up a false dilemma. He does not represent the view of "the community". Neither does I ofcourse, but I think it is awesome that Adobe will finally open source Flex.

Their market is everyone that is using drugs and you can't reduce it by 80% just by waving a magic wand. You're hoping, without anything to back you up, that drugs will be significantly cheaper once they are being legalized.

Come on, that's fucking obvious objections. Do you really think those researchers are so bloody stupid that they haven't already thought of all that? Maybe they should just hire you as their personal advisor so you can tell them about all the whatcouldpossiblygowrong scenarios they otherwise would not think of?

That's what Zynga is counting on. Of the people who are asked to give back their shares, maybe say 5% have the legal recourse and saved capital to go through legal action. But most of them won't because they don't have the resources for it. So, 5% will get what they were promised, maybe even more in statuatory damages, but 95% of them wont so it so it will still be a huge net win for Zynga.