Comment Re:Cost (Score 1) 184
That said, I wouldn't want to be the lucky guy who gets to find out.
Then I suggest you not enter any races in which the loser will die.
I would suggest that you give more thought to 'races' where outnumbering the opponent and firing anti-aircraft weapons at them from the ground is acceptable...
Even if we suspect that a nasty shooting war with a modern adversary is in the cards, it's a bit of a problem that our current next generation super plane costs so much that we'll necessarily have them in quite limited numbers and be unwilling and (in a conflict of any nontrivial size or duration) unable to expose them to serious risks.
This is especially bad if they turn out to be seriously vulnerable to any missile system developed that isn't ruinously expensive per shot or a closely held secret used only by somebody's elite guard. Obviously the cost of pilots means that the US isn't going to be doing many aerial human wave attacks (short of a WWII-style mobilization); but we certainly aren't going to be fielding larger air forces, or ones better able to resupply after losses, because our fancy aircraft cost north of $100 million a pop.
Did anyone *really* expect a crapp to have any sort of security whatsoever?
It's a trifle surprising given that the usual 'eh, let's just wrap our shit mobile website in a UIWebView and call it a day' school of 'app' development would likely have inherited SSL through sheer laziness, while whatever attempt at app development CNN attempted is apparently so dysfunctional as to be markedly worse than the state of website logins in general, and apparently so incoherent that the phone and tablet versions don't share login behavior...
That seems like the sort of thing that takes effort to screw up.
The
It doesn't help that the squeeze is really coming from both sides: On the low end, the performance of onboard audio has improved(SNR may still make the golden-eared cringe; but horrors of the old days are mostly banished, so adequate performance, usually with fairly well behaved default drivers, is rarely a problem).
On the high end, odds are good that the user already has a preferred DAC and amplifier which will skip the cheap and electrically noisy PC entirely. Even fairly nasty onboard sound often has digital out, and with HDMI and displayport including audio support, so do most graphics cards, even integrated GPUs.
Unless you are trying to drive a touchy and analog only device, maybe a nice pair of headphones or an older amplifier or receiver, there just isn't an obvious need for what creative is selling.
How do you defend yourself against accusations like that as a man? We are extremely sensitive to being criticized by women, can you really say thats not true without becoming another "point of proof" that they have?
Well, the most obvious step is to distinguish between "That's not true of me" and "That's not true". The first statement(while not always accurate) is much easier to confirm or deny. Plus, you aren't immediately put in the position of having to 'win' the debate in order to lay out your own position. If you immediately conflate population-level complaints with personal complaints, you end up taking on a markedly larger and more challenging position.
It may also be true that you suspect the harassment to be the work of a vocal and dedicated minority(and it would actually be rather interesting to see what the logs say about troll distribution in various internet locations) rather than a general thing; but you still gain nothing by tying the desire to defend yourself with the desire to defend a population.
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken