Perhaps they wish it would have been still called by its original name: GRID
(I'm guessing that both identifiers would comply with this new WHO guideline, but one is certainly more politically correct than the other)

Well, since the country is actually officially the Democratic Republic of the Congo, I guess your suggestion isn't as offensive as it could have been ;^)

Hmm, Socrates didn't actually write/say this (apparently someone else wrote this as part of their thesis in the 1900's and it's been misattributed many times since then) as there are no actual surviving works of Socrates (most of our information about Socrates comes from Plato, one of his disciples).

It is also seems highly unlikely he would say something anything like this except as part of the losing part of a Socratic argument exploration. As I recall he was essentially tried on charges like corrupting the youth and blasphemy and generally being a devil's advocate and disavowing being a teacher which would seem to put his politics on the other side of this quote...

FTFY

Unless of course you engage in vodka eyeballing for protection ;^)

It's because the algorithms are the easiest parts to get right (because they are mostly just math and have been successfully ported and rewritten into many different programming languages many times). How you use the algorithms are the biggest part of the problem (e.g., actually getting random numbers to use as keys, or not having buffer overrun issues).

One of the issue with OSGP is that they used RC4 incorrectly (well, to be fair they probably weren't up on a weaknesses of RC4 discovered in 2001) in addition to the fact they were attempting to roll some of their own algorithms...

Corporation may not deserve punishment, but what about the people that made the decisions? If the people making decisions are attempting to stand behind the anonymous shield of the corporation, does that negate that punishment can be attempted?

If you think carefully of why you make any purchase from a corporation (be it single serve coffee, acetaminophen, or hamburgers), it's often related to brand and your personal view of their corporate history. Should a restaurant be punished for food poisoning you by you never visiting there again? How about if a restaurant bribes kids with happy meal toys? Or if the CEO directs the WinShape Foundation which contributes to causes you don't like? Why not boycott if the company doesn't happen to make you happy and their are other viable alternatives. Why should we forgive a faceless entity? It's not like it's a human.

Even with humans we have institutionalized "revenge". Why even punish humans who commit crimes at all? It doesn't generally net out for society (e.g., look at the cost of the death penalty or even simple incarceration). Most animals don't seek revenge. Often businesses don't even do revenge (business is business as they say). Institutionalized revenge really is all about maintain civil society by bleeding away our desire for revenge. The issue you should be addressing isn't the target of the punishment (e.g., a company or a human), it's how/why to satisfying our desire to punish something or someone for insulting our sensibilities...

FWIW, the organizers of our society have recognized there are different type of corporate organizations (e.g, non-profit, Benefit, or B-corporations, etc). But the "standard" type of corporation is really just a limited liability construct for the benefit of the owners (e.g., stock holders), nothing more, or less. You might even say a standard corp is more akin to a totally amoral superorganism (to use your terminology) than the other type of corps. You might imagine how you might relate to (or be afraid of) a human you knew to be amoral...

Basically KOLD is a SodaStream like product. The reason they think it's revolutionary is that they got CocaCola to sign on to it.

AFAIK, unlike SodaStream, KOLD will creates CO2 from a chemical reaction and pressurizes it with a pump (not feeding it from a proprietary pre-filled canister). Not sure how much DRM they were planning for this part, but I'm guessing not much now ;^)

Well some of still believe huge multinational businesses aren't human beings therefore do not need or deserve forgiveness.

If a business dies, another one will take over (or do you still buy your drygoods from FW woolworths and not Amazon). Sure it might be a shame that some people lose their jobs, but it's not like we a shunning another human being from society where they starve and die. I'm not advocating holding petty grudges, but I'm saying we need not anthropomorphize corporations. Corporations are simply limited liability constructs created to facilitate the concentration of capital for investment purposes, not living entities that can have their feelings hurt.

Although of course certainly employees of such an entity are human, they can (and usually do) associate with different companies over a lifetime. For most individual humans, your identity is constant for your lifetime, you cannot easily make a fresh start (w/o moving to a new place and with the internet maybe not even moving will help) and concepts like forgiving a mistake makes more sense (although I'm sure there will be many that debate this for some individuals).

So maybe a corporation is more like a family? Corporations dump their leaders on occasion (often do with bad news). Why not have this leader (Mr Kelley) dive off with a golden parachute for approving this mistake (maybe he could get one of his old jobs back at Coca-cola or North American Van Lines, GE, Ford or Procter and Gamble) to attempt to regain trust? If a family was known for doing that would you even forgive them? Maybe this is better at illustrating how corporations don't deserved any sympathies granted to humans, right?

If you put a fork() in HURD it won't be heard...
(AFAIK, fork() is an emulated syscall in hurd.glibc because it must manually dup all the open file descriptors on the underlying mach port objects)

Maybe legendary news on this site?

The indigestion will be with you all week...

Most policies have a convenient *out* in that they allow themselves to give out this data so that they can stay on the good side of the government. CPNI deals with sharing data with other private parties, not government.

FWIW, Here's what a MetroPCS's subscriber agrees to let the company do with private information when signing up for their service (basically anytime anywhere they feel it's worth it for them)...

Apparently the common practice of injecting waste water (which predominantly originated from waste water used to help reactivate conventional oil wells, and only sloppy hydro-fracking waste water processing to a lesser extent because it is more recent) deep underground into other depleted oil wells which were targeted for storage can explain the uptick in earthquakes in Oklahoma and around the Midwest.

The theory goes that when this injection practice started years ago the storage wells were empty, but as these storage wells filled up, more pressure had to be used to inject the water and this triggered the more recent seismic activity. Apparently this theory was corroborated by researchers correlating existing known faults and the locations of storage wells.

Sadly, this "sloppy" practice of injecting waste water into depleted wells continues unabated...

AFAIK, the main theories bandied about for how a reaction-less drive might work come down to basically harnesses some sort of Mach's principle effect (e.g, Woodward effect) which would be analogous to using "friction" from fields (usually EM) setup by the rest of the universe and/or somehow exploit the creation of quantum vacuum virtual particles to supply some local reaction mass and using a form of magnetohydrodynamics for propulsion.

The physics loophole that they seem to exploit is that in our description of physics, not all vacuums are created equal (e.g., a vacuum in one frame inertial of reference is generally not actually a vacuum in another frame of reference when a vacuum is thought of as a volume of space where distant fields cancel each other out). This indirectly questions the nature of the frame of reference in the asymptotic limit of space from which we might define an "absolute" vacuum. You might also think of it as asserting that maybe there is actually an aether of some sort?

To provide a car analogy, people are suggesting that wiggling in an asymmetric way and effectively using vanishingly small amount of friction supplied by the rest of the universe can get you moving in one direction kind of like getting your car moving when it's stuck in snow with (almost) no traction. It doesn't take much traction to get you going in the right direction as long as you are wiggling the right way...