They talk about how it's a stability release, but if you are going to compile your application with the newer dev tools you are going to have to do some work adapting to the iOS style permission model.

I'm really glad to see Android adopted this model, the previous model made no sense from any standpoint - it was worse for the users, and worse for security. Now that Android will ask for permission when you actually want to use some protected resource, they can make a way more informed choice if they should allow it or not - and on the fly decide an app can access some things and not others (say allowing Contacts but not location).

It's just a shame the older style permission model will be supported for some time to come, as it greatly eases the ability of spyware to operate on Android.

To avoid the 20% to 40% power loss when converting from DC to AC

...they're doing it wrong. DC to AC conversion is easily achieved in the high 90% range. For instance, a typical solar inverter is around 95% efficient. And you can do better, it just gets more expensive (although that's a one-time cost, whereas energy loss is a constant concern.)

Someone is pushing some other agenda here.

Sure. Did it to myself decades ago. Offspring of my genetic line aren't of the least bit of interest to me; perfectly happy raising kids of other birth who needed parents (5 so far, mostly excellent results.) Plus that whole "all the bareback sex with my SO we want, any time" thing is awesome.

Which, again, is just how I approach feline guardianship. Don't need new kittens from them. Plenty of kittens out there that need to own their own human.

Oh? So you have the source code? Snicker snort.

Your ignorance is no laughing matter.

Because of how easy Objective-C is to pull compilable headers, and how easy it is to extend any class and override any method (swizzling), you have everything you need to change ANY app or system process even though you don't have all the original source code. It's lots more powerful than just having source code for the OS and not apps...

Its' really too bad you can't understand how much more powerful this is to actual hackers.

There are still a LOT of non-smartphone owners, they would be considered switchers too.

Get back with me when they make a prediction outside their error bars.

10 quid says the next mass extinction is the 1% purposefully "culling" the heard

So... if you stay quiet, you should be okay.

Those 400MHz klystrons must have some hellatious waveguides to feed!

Dude If that thing spawns an "Earth eating black hole" living next door to it would be like about Mars. What everybody forgets is a blackhole has conservation of mass, charge and angular momentum, so a blackhole whizzing around the LHC ring would act pretty much like every other thingy whizzing around with the same mass, charge and angular momentum. Even if the blackhole escaped the ring, it would only be a blackhole as long as it's energy was high enough to maintain it's event horizon; that energy is dependant on it's velocity, which is a vector involving speed and direction! Yeah that's right a quantum blackhole can un-blacken if it collides with another particle and loses energy, it can un-blacken through Hawking radiation and it's only black if your close enough to it's direction of travel.

No way, man. He can only afford a new iPhone every other year! That's bordering the poverty line.

So your saying that Climatology is a sub-discipline of String Theory?

It's not that bad, you just have to read "The Jabberwocky" to them for a warm up first.

Close but the Schwartzschild radius solution only applies to non-rotating bodies and any particle I can think of that is subject to relativistic mass increases also have spin, a closer fit would be a Kerr–Newman metric, however I'd assume that these solutions ignore external gravitational fields, which might be valid approximation over interstellar distances, it might not be valid in Earth's atmosphere for cosmic rays or inside the LHC. Perhaps a real physicist could chime in with a more learned point of view.

Don't think he was a duck. From the fact that he was about to give us a list of real languages but then failed to do so, I can only assume the last "ducks" was him exclaiming at being overwhelmed by a wave of ducks, that subsequently ate him.

Yes, I am quite sure the real problem is he was a victim of.... fowl play.

That's entry level C++? That list sounds like at least a mid-level C++ programmer... how are they supposed to be entry level but have had the experience to understand a wide range of legacy code?