Never seen it before either, and that's exactly how I read it too. Scary that he was right about knowing what you meant.

The part of my comment you elided was "and offering medical services", which completely changed the meaning of the quote. Are you aiming for a career in journalism?

To be clear, it is not illegal to claim to be a doctor in contexts that don't involve offering medical advice/service, so there is no conflict with the first amendment.

The rust lang site c0d3g33k linked has all the information you could want, but I think the Wikipedia article is a great high-level summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

Yes, you can, at the bar or wherever.

If you're claiming to be a doctor and offering medical services, however, that is a crime. Same for legal services, professional engineering services, etc.

The truth is that I almost never read books any more. I listen to them, because audio books are much more efficient for me. Of course the narrators speak much more slowly than I read text (even though I often run them at 2X speed), but while listening I can accomplish something else, too. I can listen while exercising, while driving, while fixing things around the house, shoveling snow, cleaning the cars, etc., etc., etc. This makes reading less of an indulgence and more of an optimization. I find that the amount of non-fiction I consume has increased dramatically of late (used to be 90/10 in favor of fiction, now it's 60/40 in favor of non-fiction), though I'm not sure if that's because I'm simply less interested in fiction than I used to be or because of some aspect of the format.

The big downside to audiobooks, of course, is that a lot of stuff hasn't been produced in audio format. Audible has a pretty good selection, but it's a tiny fraction of what's available in print, and a fraction biased towards popularity (which is good and bad). A lesser disadvantage is that the quality of an audiobook is dependent almost as much on the skill of the narrator as on the skill of the author. In particular, a bad narration can ruin a great book (though even an outstanding narration can rarely save a bad one). Oh, and there's also cost; audiobooks are more expensive, even with Audible's platinum membership, and they can't be easily lent or resold, but on balance I'm willing to pay the higher prices for all of the advantages I get from audio.

Well, they think they do. The haven't proven it yet :-)

All of the manufacturers understand perfectly well exactly how important range is to making an EV a general-purpose vehicle. What no one knows, yet, is how to make an EV with 300-mile range that doesn't cost upwards of $80K. Tesla doesn't have any special knowledge in this regard, but the market for vehicles in that price range is obviously small.

I should point out, though, that my Nissan LEAF is our primary family car. It's not a general-purpose car -- we have a large SUV that does all of the things the LEAF can't do, like haul 7 people, tow heavy loads, go offroad and cover long distances -- but the LEAF is our family car. We drive it far more than the other, in both number of trips and number of miles, and when I say "Okay kids, get in the car!" they pile into the LEAF.

If a candidate who claimed to be knowledgeable of cryptography gave me this answer it would be a big red flag, unless they quickly clarified that this was only a high-level, conceptual description and not an outline of the actual sequence of operations.

The biggest problem with this protocol, even if some of the technical defects implied by the description aren't really there but just a result of providing a very high-level description, is that it enables Bob to encrypt Alice's message with Charlie's public key and send it to him, causing Charlie to believe that Alice sent the message.

Honestly, the best answer to this question is something along the lines of "Use PGP and tell it to sign and encrypt to Bob". There are a lot of subtle and tricky pitfalls with cryptographic protocol design and implementation, so smart engineers use existing, well-vetted tools and protocols.

While that's not unreasonable, it really doesn't address the problem. The problem was that not enough people were running unstable, so it wasn't getting enough testing. I suppose slowing progress even further might have pushed a few more people to use the dev kernel... but I doubt it.

If you think that's confounding, try reconciling it with the statements immediately before it:

I.e. 19% growth in revenue = good, 20% growth in revenue-generating activity = bad. Which is it? The author can't have it both ways!

I realized I forgot to finish my thought after I had posted it. I should have concluded it with, "For that matter, I don't want to be dealing with arcane systems or fiddling around with misbehaving technology at home either."

I've looked into Vera's products previously and have been quite impressed since they appear to have the ability to manage all of the things I've thought of so far (e.g. sprinklers, blinds, garage, etc.). That said, the last time I looked through their app catalog I noticed that there were a number of holes I'd need to fill with custom plugins I'd be writing for myself. That situation may have changed, but it kept me from jumping on that wagon. At this point, I figure I'll just wait another year or two, since I expect that most of those holes will be plugged, either by Vera's app community, or else by another vendor with a competing product.

Precisely. I've been looking for a simple way to automate various things around my home, but I've been holding off until these systems can pass the "if I sell the house tomorrow could the new owners get by like normal without an instruction manual" test.

Which is to say, the bar for entry should simply be "works like a dumb device", with any technological enhancements layered on top of that functionality so that it supplements the dumb functionality, rather than replaces it. Instead, many of them outright eliminate the dumb functionality or else make it dependent on the smart technology, meaning that they're utterly useless if the wrong link in the technological chain has a hiccup. If I move out tomorrow, I want the new owners to be able to use the place like a normal house without having to configure arcane systems, regularly maintain misbehaving technology, or worry about which OS they're running on their phone or personal computer.

Duress codes are an old idea, and a great one in some contexts, but I don't think they're really appropriate for everyone, or even the majority of people. Given the data we have on how many people manage to forget their passcode and lock themselves out of their devices when there's only a single passcode, adding more of them would be a recipe for confusion-generated disaster.

Also, I think having various unlocked-but-not-unlocked modes is the wrong solution. The right solution is to just leave the device locked. Then if the police want to peruse it, they can proceed via the court system.

The wipe feature notion raises really interesting questions: In some cases, it would be awesome, for example activists resisting oppressive regimes (we can debate whether or not we believe the US is such). In others its primary use case is to facilitate destruction of evidence of actual crimes, which isn't so good. There are also risks in pushing the envelope too far because it may facilitate laws like the ones theorized by that other rather paranoid response to my post, which may actually make things worse.

It's worth pointing out that you can already implement the "limited" feature with Lollipop: Just create a separate user account with limited stuff in it. If you want to be very careful, make it look like that is your primary account and the other (real) one is for your significant other's casual use or something. Switching between accounts is very easy and fast, and automatically invokes the lock screen.

None of the ideas you raise are at all new; they've been discussed a thousand times in the Android team and are discussed on a regular basis. I don't know if you find that comforting or not, but there it is :-)