They couldn't do it with iOS, but why couldn't Microsoft just do what BB did and throw an Android compatibility layer into Windows? Since from what I'm reading now it doesn't sound like these new projects are going to fix UI specifics, why not just say "fuck it", and put Android or Dalvik in a VM?

Yes, now those five poor bastards who bought Windows 8 phones might, at some still unspecified date, get some decent apps. Of course, even binary Android compatibility hasn't done a fucking thing for Blackberry, but like, this time, it's gonna be so totally different!

That has to be the fastest turnaround time for Microsoft committing to a feature and then putting it off to a later release.

"Buy into our platform, and some day, we'll deliver on those features we promised you."

To an outside observer. I don't think it's the same in the inertial frame.

Before we call this real, we need to put one on some object in orbit, leave it in continuous operation, and use it to raise the orbit by a measurable amount large enough that there would not be argument regarding where it came from. The Space Station would be just fine. It has power for experiments that is probably sufficient and it has a continuing problem of needing to raise its orbit.

And believe me, if this raises the orbit of the Space Station they aren't going to want to disconnect it after the experiment. We spend a tremendous amount of money to get additional Delta-V to that thing, and it comes down if we don't.

Ah, yes. Warmist nut jobs. I bet you are one of those people who gets offended when they get called a denier. I bet that you are also not qualified to know whether those claims of a climate change link to earthquakes are true or not.

But hey, don't let that stop you.

What an idiot. Sorry, how responsive is the federal government to the needs of the People? There have been studies done that show that citizens have little say in how policy is formed. We vote for Kodos or Kang every two to four years and not much changes for the better.

So what am I supposed to do? Sure, I can get involved politically and I do that to some extent. But I have a 40+ hour a week job to maintain, kids at home once I get there at night, and life maintenance/kid stuff to do on the weekends. So I don't have a massive amount of time to spend on making sure government agencies are following the law and acting appropriately. And, frankly, I shouldn't have to! That's why I elect people in a representative government. My elected representatives are supposed to look out for their constituents. I am painfully aware that they do not often do that. But that's not my fault, it is theirs. They were elected to do a job just like I was hired to do my job. My boss does not constantly check up on me to make sure I'm doing my job. If he had to do that, I would be fired. I am expected to know what my job is and do it correctly with minimal supervision.

As you can probably tell, I am sick of people blaming the citizenry for government corruption and/or incompetence. Yes, people need to pay attention, stay engaged and vote responsibly. But big business, intelligence agencies and wealthy special interests have been working for years to rig the game and get what they want. They do it behind closed doors to purposely keep the People out of the process (just look at the TPP for an example). And then there's that fact that the public is lied to and propagandized such that a lot of people don't understand the issues and rely on bad information. So fuck off with this blaming the public crap. Yes, the public has to stay on point. But it is not nearly that simple, and it's not their fault when people entrusted with responsible government let them down.

You get 50%?! I'm on a supposedly 105 Mb connection and speed tests routinely report 10 - 12 Mb. I would be thrilled with 50% of advertised bandwidth.

If you're referring to Surface, surely by now you have to admit it has failed to live up to expectations.

What I want to know is: Why all the act about encryption? If there is going to be a backdoor, and everyone knows there is going to be a backdoor, and the backdoor is enforced by federal law, then why go through all this circus?

Thanks!

Brian Webb isn't listing this on his Vandenberg AFB Launch Schedule yet. I think he's going to wait until someone official tells him a date.

Agencies like the FBI, CIA and NSA have long relied on the general ignorance of the public, and even of Congress, on various technical matters. Further, they had their claws into academia and were thus capable of controlling the dissemination of information in regards to technical matters. These agencies still believe they are dealing with various kinds of ignorant rubes who will believe any technobabble their representatives care to spew. But this isn't the fertile ground for their particular brand of bullshit. The IT world is dominated by people of a rather different mindset, and while companies like Microsoft, Google and Apple couldn't really be regarded as friends of liberty, what they are is highly protective of their revenue streams. Crapola plans like encryption back doors and universal spying on their traffic is already damaging these companies' international reputations, and risks undermining many years worth the work of selling their platforms to foreign buyers.

And this, as sad is it is, is why these agencies will lose. Not because any of the Captains of IT Industry or anyone in Congress gives a flying fuck about liberties, but because it poses a threat to profits. I guess the little guy has to accept that the enemy of their enemy is their friend, and hope the IT companies win the day, but what bothers is that we may win the battle, and lose the war, simply because instead of a bunch of government spooks spying on every bit that gets transmitted over the Internet, we'll have a bunch of corporate spooks.

With some optimism that might only be thousands of years rather than hundreds of Millions.

But it's only necessary for Earth to be uninhabitable for a short time to end the Human race. And that can happen due to man or nature, today. If people aren't somewhere else during that process, that's the end.

Even Marx himself predicted that a necessary period of transition from Capitalism to Communism would be the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat". We can all debate the niceties of Marxism, but the fact was that its formulator and primary theorist believed that the people would need to be "shepherded" to the Utopian Marxist society.

The real problem for Communism is that the industrialized countries never bit. There were a few abortive revolutions in the mid-19th century, but the leadership of these countries were smart enough to recognize that political liberalization was the antidote to a restive working class. Most countries saw enfranchisement of larger numbers of people, increasing influence of legislative assemblies, and a more populist approach to government.

That's why the only countries that actually grasped on to Communism were primarily agrarian states like Russia, China and Cuba. In pure Marxist theory, agrarian states have not developed to the point where they are ready for the Communist revolution. That's why you have offshoots like Marxist-Leninism, Maoism, Trotskyism, Stalinism and the like, all offshoots required to explain why economies dominated by agrarian workers should skip the whole mercantilism/capitalism stage and go straight to Communism.

My personal feeling is that Communism, like other Utopian socio-political and economic ideologies like the various strains of Anarchism and Libertarianism, are impossible to implement. Anyone attempting to will have to make so many compromises that the ideology itself becomes compromised.

That's not to say Marxism doesn't have its uses. Certainly Marx's insistence on history being seen through the lens of economics was critical to the transition of that entire branch of academia from political narratives to a more comprehensive view of the functioning and interactions of historical societies and events. But as a socio-economic and political model, it's a flop. It can't be implemented without dictatorship, and as we've seen so many times, once the dictators gain the power to effect the Communist transformation, they are so corrupted by that power that they actively kill the revolution themselves.

It's also that Elizabeth warren is one of the few who actually thinks Wall Street fraud should be prosecuted.