Comment well ... (Score 2) 198
... if this research is so obviously critical, it's not like only the government benefits from or cares about network security. Let those who think it is so critical pay for some.
... if this research is so obviously critical, it's not like only the government benefits from or cares about network security. Let those who think it is so critical pay for some.
Makes me wonder about the economics of producing these things. Apparently something related to the OS choices makes it worth Intel's while to develop separate models and the infrastructure to build each one, rather than just building the higher spec model and slapping either OS onto it.
It's things like this that hearken back to the glory days of the Evil Empire, and why people find it difficult to trust MS now.
Well, I can't speak for the Ubuntu one, but I have a Yoga 2 10" tablet with Windows 8 with nearly identical specs, only the Z3745 processor instead of this stick's Z3735. The difference in CPU is not significant.
2GB of RAM is not enough for web pages with endless scrolling, such as Tumblr, or bloated pages such as Vice.com. Chrome sucks up the RAM, and when there is none left, things aren't pretty. I use "The Great Suspender" addon which saves unused tabs to disk and frees up memory, but even that isn't enough. We are past the point where 2GB of RAM is enough for even simple web browsing. Maybe Ubuntu manages the limited memory better, but based on how much Chrome is using, the OS choice may be irrelevent and these devices really need 4GB of RAM.
Now you're just picking up any little thing to criticize because I called you out on the strawman argument you made. You aren't looking to have any sort of substantive discussion - that much is obvious - so good day to you.
I believe that JustNiz is the slashdot handle of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. After a long hard day of writing a majority decision protecting our 4th Amendment rights, she decided to relax by reading some good 'ol nerdy slashdot stories.
Unfortunately instead of escape, she ran into this story, which understandably griefed her a bit. Now she has to put up with your meany comments about her not caring about rights.
Having fun with your straw man arguments?
Never stated nor implied that the US has a perfect history (or present); merely that most of the rest of the world is hardly a model.
It's not really just about annoying the neighbours. If you stick all the poor people in the same neighbourhood, then all the poor kids will go to schools with poor kids, and all the rich kids will go to school with rich kids. Since schools are funded by property taxes, the poor kid schools always end up having less money. If you mix poor and rich kids in the same areas, and they attend the same schools, and benefit from the same property taxes, then things end up much more even. Instead of one school having everything, and another having nothing, you'd have all the schools with similar amounts of resources.
Some states (like Michigan) have addressed this by changing things up, and funding schools on a statewide basis rather than from property taxes.
Hint to cable : Deliver more for $8 than Netflix instead of charging hundreds per month.
Like US car companies, it is very hard to admit when the fat years are over. Give them time; I suspect they will come around a bit.
They're a company that wants to stay in business. TV's about as locked in as can be and even they're draining audiences in one form or another. The internet is an amazing levelling field, and even if terrestrial TV packed up and quit tomorrow, there'd be no firm reason NetFlix alone would dominate the internet markets. They're playing the same game by locking up good content behuind their platform so that if/when the sh hits the fan, they'll have something to keep loyal customers paying well for their services.
Er, so?
Yes, on a broad scale to get quality TV, it will still be made by people who make money off of it. It should be a relief that someone can still do that, not a bad thing.
Plus, SpaceX is already printing parts. So how is it news when their competitor does it?
Wait until they find the body of the Windows Phone fanboy.
The UK handled everything per the law. They received an extradition request from a country they have a treaty with regarding this. They are required by the treaty to deal with these, they can't ignore them. So they reviewed it in court, to make sure it was a valid request per the treaty and decided it was. He appealed and the case moved up the chain until the high court heard it and decided that this extradition request is legitimate under the treaty, the UK has no standing to refuse.
Up until this point, Assanage was in no trouble in the UK, he hadn't broken UK law, they were just acting based on the extradition request. However then he fled. That is now a violation of UK law. He violated the conditions of his bail. That makes him a criminal in the UK. Skipping bail doesn't make you a "political prisoner" it makes you a standard criminal.
I mean it is a really, really minimal legit player base it could possibly effect. You would have to be someone who plays only F2P games, and has made so few in-game purchases that you haven't even spent $5. There are just extremely few people who are like that. Further, even people like that can still play, they just can't participate in some of the other Steam features. The games are still available to them.
None of the restrictions are on buying or playing games. So even if you've never spent money (I'm not clear that retail doesn't count but let's say it doesn't) you can still play all the games you've got, and buy more games to play (at which point your account becomes unlocked). So you can do with it the main purpose: Play games, including free to play ones. It isn't like they are demanding money to unlock an account.
Also in the event this really was an issue for someone, they could just buy something cheap. I mean if you've dropped $50+ on a retail game it is not that big a deal to spend another $5 if it comes to that.
Sure, why not? There comes a point where an individual is so dangerous and destructive that a society cannot contain the violence they unleash at every opportunity. Life in prison merely changes the population exposed to that individual. Prison guards, staff, and other prisoners deserve protection from such uncontrollably violent people just as much as anyone else. Capital punishment reduces recidivism rates to zero. No one who has been executed has ever been found to continue committing crimes.
Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.
