If you don't want someone's Windows 10 passing on your password, Microsoft has two solutions; only share passwords using their Wi-Fi Sense service, or by adding "_optout" to your SSID.
Does adding this also prevent Microsoft from storing said WiFi password on their servers, or just instruct them to not share it out?
How many of those people will ever be in close enough physical proximity to your access point to actually need your WiFi password? Seriously? Unless I'm missing something, this has to win "Stupidest Idea of the Year".
The population of Slashdot hasn't aged that much. They're going to think Top Gun, where they used, you know, missiles.
Before, she worked as a Java developer for around two years doing mostly Java Enterprise stuff. However, she is not very eager to go back to coding. I think she has the right mental skills to be a developer, but she is just not very passionate about coding or IT in general.
So let me re-phrase things for you: I think you have the right mental skills to be a good partner/husband, but you keep saying stupid things like that. Keep it up and and enjoy your divorce...
No to all of your questions. Better go skydiving or crocodile hunting instead.
Verizon claims to have done its part.
If only we had sent Verizon into the Middle East...
What do we get from sending a meat robot to mars, other than the sort of daredevil glory?
We'll learn how to live on Mars.
We are just risking killing people and making the mission more expensive by trying to mitigate that risk.
That risk and the need to mitigate it will always be there no matter when we go.
One day it will be important for people to go to mars (e.g. like when we run out of space on earth). Until then, there is really no reason a machine can't do the job a human can do more safely and cheaper.
Okay. When will that day be? Are there other reasons we might want to leave Earth, other than running out of space - like perhaps some sort of extinction-level-event - that cannot be foreseen that far in advanced? That day could be tomorrow (in which case we're fucked). Machines alone cannot help us learn all the things humans need to know to survive on Mars. We cannot know when we will *need* to live on Mars. Chance favors the prepared.
...if the commercial rockets were rated for manned missions, but the recent launch failures are a reminder that rocket science is right at the edge of what humans can engineer.
Although, even man-rated engines can fail...
Is certifying an engine that will carry humans to be safe for carrying humans a "waste"?
.
And for comparison, how much money have we (all) spent on food we've only eaten once?
Not all money spent, even for something immediately disposed/destroyed, is a waste.
This would have been an OK thing to ask 10 years ago here. But these days, Slashdot is chock full of assholes, shills, right-wing extremists, and just trash in general. Very few worthwhile people are left here any more.
all the current refugees from there are bringing the stupid mindless liberal idiocy with them, trying to "Californicate" Nevada
Yes, because things like equal rights for black people is such a horrible concept. **rollseyes**
Not sure what the point was, or why you replied to me...
I said the F-22 was the best in the air, but we simply don't have enough of them. I'd rather have 1,000 F-15/F-16 fighters than 100 F-22 fighters.
170 or so that we have, just isn't enough for a major war.
We probably should have done just that, bought 500 F-22 Raptors and filled in the gaps with the F-16/F-18.
Once you have control of the air, you can use the older planes, to some extent.
The F-35 is an amazingly expensive airplane for something that can't actually do anything well.
Surprisingly enough, the production line is not gone, though it is shut down. The decision to shutdown production was coupled with a deliberate decision to preserve the F-22 production capability for possible reactivation. The estimated cost for reactivation of the mothballed line is on the order of 200 million dollars, the cost of one or two aircraft.
If you think it really can be restarted for $200 million (this is the US Military Industrial Complex we're talking about), then I've got a bridge to sell.
If we have 1 to 2 years warning, sure, we might be able to do that...
What happens if we have 6 weeks warning?
How many would have been the "right" number?
500, perhaps 700, would have been a good force number...
You station 120 in Europe, 120 in Asia, 120 are in for upgrades, heavy overhaul, mx, etc., and the rest are based in the US.
As it stands, they are a token force, much like the B2 bombers.
Ask the Germans how effective their ME-262 jet fighters were in 1944. They were 100 mph faster than anything we had, nearly untouchable, but they just couldn't build enough of them.
Numbers matter...
Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.
