A machine deciding what you should or shouldn't know about isn't all that scary, a machine (or anything) being able to enforce that on the other hand...

So, when reality is racist, you change it?

Won't this just cause Bing and Yahoo to lose marketshare in India? I haven't RTFA'd very carefully, so correct me if I'm completely off the mark.

It's been available for the N810 for ages. I can't really imagine it needed much more than a recompile with some newer libraries.

To me, this just smacks of general disdain for "computer people". It's a subtle insult and an effort at class differentiation.

Do your building maintenance or janitorial workers have to wear such things?

The only way I'd say this is even remotely acceptable is if:

a) you work in a hospital environment where many of the other workers are wearing smocks or similar over their clothes.
b) the shirts are partially subsidized by the company and/or inexpensive
c) There is an actual reason for the uniforms aside from some managerial BS. IE, you do a lot of crawling around on the ground and get dirty throughout the day, and having a clean shirt bin to clean into to keep you presentable is necessary.

As a whole, it's a stupid idea. It decreases morale, especially in a decidedly 'independent' field like IT (even if it's just helpdesk).

Now, if the uniforms are being pushed down your throats because your 'independently minded' help desk has a repeated reputation for not dressing to 'business casual' (as i'm sure is the case with many IT types), that's another story. But then, that's also the issue which needs to be addressed - not making another, special-case rule for a certain segment of people.

If the UK regime is going to milk the population for cash, perhaps they ought to be pumping that cash into floundering UK science. The STFC is cutting funds from vital research, whilst a bunch of twats who played guitar instead of paying attention in maths class get to use the government coffers and their personal fucking piggy bank.

I'm burning with anger over the pure injustice of this. There is an -ocracy word meaning 'rule by the worst' that I can't remember right now, but it fits the situation. I guess I can stick with 'Kleptocracy' for the moment.

NetBIOS is NOT an "API"

Once upon a time, there was a standard INT 5C interface that was used by DOS programs to control the the NetBIOS functions built into some LAN adapter cards or other add on NetBIOS software. That no doubt is why the functionality was called "NetBIOS", because it was intended as a networking oriented parallel with the regular ROM BIOS.

"NetBIOS" is an awfully funny name for a network protocol, and of course originally it wasn't a network protocol at all, it was a higher level interface to lower level protocols such as NBF and NBT. Of course NetBEUI (NetBIOS Extended User Interface) wasn't originally a "protocol" either, but later became associated with the non-routable NetBIOS Frames or NBF protocol for some strange reason.

Sorry, I didn't realize the size of the explosives and intelligence of the attacker made the difference.

So, let me make sure I understand the nuances.

1. "Large explosives" on an airplane are terrorists. "Small explosives" are a bunch of goofs looking for a laugh, and nothing to worry about.
2. Failed bombers are "idiots" and successful bombers are "terrorists."

Richard Reid would approve of this new distinction. Let him loose and buy him a beer. "Sorry for the mistake, Dick. Try again next year."

Wow. That's a shocker. So you're saying that because Microsoft used BSD networking code in the first versions of Widows NT, it made all BSD networking code no long free?

Why has nobody said anything!

I think you might need to rethink your position.

"Native" in this sense means "uses the OS's GUI" not "does not run in a VM". QT draws it's own widgets, not using the OS ones.

Oh no, he's helping the terrorists by showing them what a reactor looks like and how it works. The Iranian people can use that to build 100billion teratons of nukes to kill stuff. Hang him.

Most people would simply deliver a baby through a vagina...

The person who wrote that has Autism.

Here's a list of 450. Now please STFU. http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/reprint/450_peer_reviewed_papers.html

The GFDL gives users of your book the freedom to make copies forever, and to make modifications for their own use. But if they modify the book *and* distribute the modified version, they have to make the modifications available under the same license. Thus the term "viral." This gives your users (other faculty?) the assurance that they can continue to improve your book, should you decide (or become unable) to continue working on it. By contrast a CC license can come in several forms. For example, a NonCommercial clause limits what people can do with your book and makes it not truly free. This seems counter-intuitive, but sometimes interesting things happen if you allow commercial applications. A CC-BY-SA license is close to the GFDL, but the statement of the GFDL is much more explicit and comprehensive. Learn more at http://linear.ups.edu/