In America, most stores won't take your card unless you plan to spend less than a pittance. Most stores will deny you if your transaction isn't 5-10$
Not sure what backwards part of America that post came from, but I can tell you for certain that it's absolutely false in every part of America that I'm aware of. I use my debit card everywhere, for everything, including buying a single item at a dollar store if that's all I want to buy. No one has ever once even blinked. $1 at the Dollar Store, $3 at the fast-food joint, whatever, everyone's happy to take my business. I stopped using cash for anything at all over a decade ago, and the only people who don't want my card are the government -- they would rather I write a check for my driver's license renewal or whatever (which is funny, no one else will accept a check anymore around here).
It's not a convenient option. I live in an essentially horseless society, but I don't mind, and it's not really limiting my freedom -- I could get a horse if I wanted, but why would I want it when it's so less convenient?
Personally, I haven't used cash in over a decade. The cashless society arrives the same way as the horseless society, not by limiting freedom but by providing better options, and letting people choose what's most convenient for them. Unless you want to force people to keep using cash, the cashless society is probably inevitable, precisely because people are free to choose other options, and will.
The summary doesn't mention extra terrestrials. Is this because they don't want to jump to conclusions or is it because the nature of the pulses doesn't appear to be organic?
When astronomers point a telescope at the sky and see a large bright object, they tend to assume it's a star, not a giant alien lighthouse. If they see a bright flash of light, they assume it's due to some natural process and not an alien strobe-light. Is there some reason they would jump to an "it's aliens" conclusion in this case? You do understand that light is light, right? Even if the wavelength puts it in the radio-frequencies instead of the visible-spectrum? There's no particular reason light in one part of the spectrum is more likely to be made by aliens than natural phenomena.
Actually, only about 2500 at the current (FY2014) fly-away price ($35 million) of a new build current model (AH-64E).
Wait for a 2-for-1 sale.
First off, we do have Streisand effect, I never heard of this guy until today.
That would imply the opposite, then. People had heard of Barbara Streisand.
The simulator is effectively WINE for iOS: it reimplements the iOS APIs under Mac OS X, and the toolchain compiles an x86 binary instead of an ARM binary. No one should have to explain why that's entirely useless for trying to build an ARM app on iOS.
They would if they want to make the ludicrous assertion that that's "entirely useless". Over 95% of the testing you do during development of a non-trivial application is stuff that could be tested perfectly fine under WINE or an even less complete API mimic, indeed could be tested by compiling natively to whatever platform you're developing on. The vast majority of code in a non-trivial application is completely platform/OS agnostic.
So it doesn't seem that mysterious.
Once again demonstrating the principle: the less you understand a problem, the more obvious the answer seems. (Related to the old programming adage: Confidence is the feeling you have before you understand the problem.) No actual problem has an obvious solution. If it did, it wouldn't be a problem to begin with. Whenever you feel something is obvious, it's a dead-giveaway that you're missing something important...
She's mentioned in nearly every CS textbook...
Yes, but that's often where many aspiring software engineers first learn of her, or Ada Lovelace. Ask how many aeronautical engineers first heard of the Wright Brothers from a college textbook on aeronautical engineering.
Don't take my word for it, look at who submitted this article...
I don't doubt that mdsolar has a point of view that could be characterized as an "agenda", but your conclusion about his intent being obfuscation rather than to inform sounds like a bit of propaganda to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you. Frankly, it seems like you're the one attempting to obfuscate things by bringing up irrelevancies to distract from the actual, informative content of the article (which is, as noted, a factual report written in neutral terms and quite newsworthy). Simply put, you don't like the truth, so you attempt to discredit it by deflecting attention away from it and instead to the person who brought it to our attention. The truth is what it is, regardless of who brought it forth and what their motivations were for bringing it to our attention.
Your agenda is no less clear to the folks who really do pay attention.
Well, you can either take advantage of the PosReady thing or not. If you do, yes, it may be that only some rather than all your security vulnerabilities will be patched. If you don't, it will be the case that none rather than some are patched.
Why do people insist on studying, helping, fixing the mentally ill or the drug abusers?
Healthy human compassion.
What about those who are "healthy" but run into unfortunate events (car crash, cancer, getting laid off)?
We care for them too.
If we're going to treat society as a single organism, wouldn't we want to give to the most capable rather than the least?
That would be a false dilemma. If the two options were mutually exclusive, what you said would make sense. As it is, what you said is just idiotic.
Where is this constant need to fix people coming from?
Again, basic human compassion. You should try it sometime...
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken
