Nope. Look into CALEA.

They can use a great encryption algorithm, but if they continue to not authenticate the basestation, as per 2G specs, then it doesn't really help. It wasn't until LTE that this finally started happening.

I'm not sure what impeachment would have to do with a SCOTUS ruling, but it can be checked by a constitutional amendment, or a future SCOTUS ruling.

You're more than welcome to get emotional about whatever you like. But, you are in the minority of popular opinion on this matter. Even among those informed enough to have looked into the concept, they appreciate that it is an implied power of the court (all the courts, btw, not just the supreme), it is a reasonable implication, and consider it congruent with the intentions of the drafters of the constitution.

I'm not sure I follow your claim about it only applying with the supreme rulers of the land decide it does. Not to say that various leaders didn't overstep their bounds. An easy example is Lincoln suspending habeus corpus, and then ignoring the judicial review against him on the matter. But this merely requires improved enforcement of the checks and balances in the system.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. . . . [A]ll executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution." If the constitution is the supreme law, and the judges must support its supremacy, the only way I can perceive of upholding this is by way of judicial review. It might not be explicit in the constitution, but this is a very strong implication.

It's a....It's a.....It's a rocket ship!!

Thank you for that :)

But it is nice be told what realm the product deals with beyond "Microsoft", "Linux", "Server", "Cloud" and "Enterprise developers" (terms like "Container" and "application" are far too generic, and have far too many meanings within the realm of software engineering, so that means nothing to me without more context). By providing such a background, I can know without reading the article if it is something that is likely to be of interest to me. At the very least, the first linked article should broadly describe what the product is before leaping into the announcement. Instead, I find myself scanning the article, getting confused, glancing around the website for useful links, finding a "what is Docker" link, scanning that, and still being a bit confused as to how this is different from virtual machines, despite having a section titled "How is this different from Virtual Machines?"

Don't you just love it when Slashdot summaries talk about some niche product without introducing the topic, just assuming everyone knows WTF it is?

Even TFA mentions research that goes all the way back to 1990. I'm all for progress in this field, but every time I seriously look into it, I see people who are "5-to-10 years away from practical applications" which continues to be the company line for decades on end, or companies that claim to do something truely novel, yet for some reason can't seem to get enough funding to avoid bankruptcy or support any further research. All this just reinforces the, "please tell me when something NEW happens" attitude. And they would do themselves a huge favor if they at least made an effort to not bury such a lede in a headline that sounds like old old old news.

Hmm, looks like Araknitek didn't form until February 2014, so at least that much is newish. But yeah, this article does a pretty lousy job at separating out what specific developments are new compared to what aspects of the story are background.

Is it just me or does it look like this article was written in 2006, and just happens to have a 2014 datestamp? I'm pretty sure I've read most of this information years ago.

I can't even imagine an A/B, let alone C or D switch in a computer lab. I've always thought of them as either a home PC make-do, or something you use when you want to solve the weird sort of "why on earth would anyone want to do that?" sort of problems.

Yikes, I can't imagine that. My school was smart enough to keep the noisy printers off in a separate room where they couldn't really be heard. Unfortunately, dumb enough that when I say "separate room" I usually also mean "separate building...half a mile away...uphill."

The best was when there were entire computer labs of Model Ms...such gorgeous cacophany