CoD and Halo? Whaaat? Have you seen this?

Wii U the best library? What on Earth are you talking about. The Nintendo store looks downright depressing compared to what you get for other major consoles.

Too little, too late. Their major problem is that, for whatever reason, there are no fucking games for it - and I don't mean indie games, I mean serious stuff. Just look at what comes out for PS3/PS4 - most definitely closed platforms. Then look at what comes out for Wii U. I made the mistake of buying one. Sure, I like the console, but after playing through every major title available for it (with exception of broken-by-ui-design AC3), there's simply nothing else left for me to do on it. And no, I don't consider junk like "NintendoLand" to be a major title. It's a game collection, with some good games, but once you master one or two of them, it all becomes rather tedious. Heck, I even got the Wii Fit U. What a total waste of perfectly good hardware. The mini games ("exercises") seem to be something students would do for a class project, and the setup is the most annoying thing ever. You can't simply just get on it and have fun, nosiree.

Sorry, I can't type, it was DEC hardware, duh.

Somehow I fondly remember VMS running on HP hardware back in the 90s. A local university had a dialup guest account. It was fun. Going back to the DOS prompt after a finished session always made me hurt and long for something better than DOS.

Write to them, using snail-mail, sent registered and with receipt confirmation. Tell them what you think. Tell them that they are to serve you, their member, not the other way round.

IEEE is both historically and contempraneously a completely practitioner-oriented organization. It's raison-d-etre is to serve enginers. Some of those engineers happen to do engineering research, but that's but a fraction of its membership.

Any form of such manual version control is ridiculous. These days you're even supposed to use something like etckeeper to keep your server's configuration under version control, and for a good reason. It comes with next to no operational overhead and lets you easily figure out where things went wrong. Initializing a git or hg repo on a folder is a two-liner. Tools like smartgit/hg, cornerstone or tortiose svn (all excellent!) let you ignore the command line interface to version control, for the most part. Who the heck has time to muck about with tarballs. If you really need them for distribution purposes, for crying out loud write a cron or hook script that generates the needed files and pushes them to a web and/or ftp server.

I agree with your points but one.

What is the point of source control being "handled" by a separate team? It's a tool primarily to aid the developer in her own development process. It incidentally documents the development process's history, allows maintenance of old branches, and so on, but those are side benefits that still don't require a separate team to "handle". Sure, some internal IT team would take care of deploying the repository server and keeping it running happilly and the data backed up, but goes without saying, I hope.

Now of course the other teams can use the repository to manage their code-related artifacts, such as test cases, CI configurations, and whatnot. But still - a "team" for source control? Maybe with some long obsolete tools you needed a team to handle it. I'm glad that we can replace a "team" with a couple hundred bucks worth of off-the-shelf tools.

I'd just run my own "cloud" instead, using, say KVM. With billing etc. like in the old times.

Alas, the article refers to the contrails that show mostly failed intercepts. So you have an Iron Dome engagement, as you claim, on an incoming that was determined to be a threat. It also demonstrates in terms of high school physics why such intercepts are bound to fail in the conditions listed. It's pretty much as simple as that. The king is naked, but a lot of adults have a problem acknowledging such simple truths.

On top of that, Israel-located commenters of the article seem to have a bit of a problem with discriminating successful and failed intercepts. That's because a lot of intercepts happen during the unpowered, ballistic part of the incoming's flight. Yes, the interceptor will explode, but that's immaterial. It will poke a couple holes in the expended motor case and will alter the incoming's trajectory a slight bit. Again, it's all very simple, and people somehow can't swallow the simplicity of the argument.

It's like Feynman's famous presentation of the root material cause of the Challenger disaster. All the while the bureaucratic machine of the Commission, and NASA, was expending untold resources skirting this material cause, and the root underlying organizational cause that then proceeded to kill the Columbia crew.

The way Bennet describes the particular phone, a $100 Tracfone ZTE sounds like a much better deal.

Interesting. One learns every day! Thanks.

I'd certainly be possible to get a modern 68060 to run at 4GHz if it ran with the memory that was used for those systems back then. To run it that fast, you'd need all of the RAM to be on the die, and it'd need to be the static, cache-style, blazing fast RAM. A 68060 isn't really a 68060 anymore if you'd add three levels of cache to it.

Algorithms and data structures. They are equally important. With the memory being so slow compared to the CPU, sometimes you can get very good performance gains just by using proper data structures and layout - you'll see the difference even in Java.