I lost a opportunity to moderate you insightful (you already got a 4 anyway) to take a chance to say thank you very much for your explanation. Your second paragraph is just so clear and simple. I think that I have understand a new aspect of the physic in a minute. Great.

Sometimes a simple phrase open a mind so quickly that I wonder how fast we can progress is we got the chance to read a lot of them...

Yes firewall has bugs. It's still simple to swap firewall model in case of a successful attack against one of them. If the infrastructure is really so critical, adding layers for packet monitoring and for packet validation should probably be a good idea.

You simply don't know the future security bugs that will affect your infrastructure. Just look at http://www.cve.mitre.org/ or any distribution security announcement like https://www.debian.org/securit... . Security bugs are discovered all the time. With this fact in mind you realize that you need more than a single protection layer to get a chance to detect and drop a harmful traffic. The bug could be deep into the kernel, making almost any magic possible from the application point of view. Having only a few ports open is not enough to protect against this, as the kernel structure and notion of port could be corrupted.

This will make the failure looking like a thing of the past and make hope for a successful new future.
But this don't grant that this will work as expected. Especially after you use the same plan almost each 6 months for more than 3 years now !

There exists a more cynical possibility: some entities could have buy enough share to impose key members into the board, fully knowing how the story will end. The cost of destroying Nokia could have be lower than the risk of losing others long term investments of the same entities.

Very true. How the board was misinformed to the point of doing a such clear suicide is still part of the hidden story. Even more strange is the constant support the board give to the CEO even after all the alarms was turning full red. The "No plan B" concept was the biggest mistake ever from a board.

This is a new chip with a ARM Cortex-A5 core, making it directly compatible with all distributions with an 'armhf' port like Debian, Ubuntu or Linaro.I like the fact that it is compatible with the Arduino Due connector. It's probably the easiest Linux based Arduino hardware compatible board.

http://www.at91.com/getting-st...
http://www.atmel.ch/tools/ATSA...
http://www.at91.com/linux4sam/...

"I've just picked up a fault in the AE35 unit. It's going to go 100% failure in 72 hours."
vs
"From its omniscient view it can see chances to combine work and share resources that no human could."

The fiction in the movie "2001: A Space Odyssey" is maybe to believe that the human brain could ever compete with a computer.

I just buy this setup last week and it work perfectly well at 3840 x 2160 @ 60 Hz with Debian Jessie and the last fglrx-14.20 driver. The monitor is packed with a DP cable (and a HDMI cable by the way) so it worked out of the box with a FM2A88X Extreme6+ motherboard. I have see 30 Hz display before, but sorry, I can't enjoy them to test 1080p60 applications in a window while having code and debug around others windows.

Electronics schematic and hardware routing is a pleasure on UDH monitor, as coding side by side to the full documentations and output results. On the fun side, Google Earth is probably the most impressive with so much details that it's a bit like an immersion. The APU is still capable by itself to yield a few frames per second in full screen mode. Really need a powerful GPU if you expect more...

The monitor have a little bug in the power management that require to cycle his power to sometime weak it up, but this is a minor issue for me.

Of course there is requirements for networks with different features compared to the current Internet, Cisco just have to realize that it can't call them 'Internet'.

'Internet' precisely define a relatively cheap to operate neutral network that don't grant performance. Anyone can use it like it want to as long at it contribute to it and don't cause problem to the others participants. This fact have a lot of implication on how the network is managed and how it is sustainable financially.

It's right that the internet is not the best network for a categories of uses cases that need granted performances. This is a justification to build a other better network that fit the expected requirement. Call it 'Servicenet' of you wants. But this not a justification the fight against the net neutrality of the Internet.

The Toyota Prius have it at least since the Prius II from 2003. Now that depend how much you think this is a common car model...

This is old news: this system is already used on some cars since many years. Toyota for example have it at least since the 10 years old Prius II.
And now think about the driverless Google car...

Take the question in a other way: if the car is autonomous there is no driver anymore, so in case of inevitable fatality (maybe no involving an other car at all), who will likely die in the car, depending of the last car action ?

Now imagine that the family of the killed peoples sue you for having rooted your car and modified his safety rules that make you survive instead of many others.

Ok, but the problem is that you will maybe not known in advance that you are in a car that is programmed with this feature.
You might be in a car owned by an other, in a taxi, in a bus, etc...