This is based on WebRTC which is a W3C draft that both Safari and Internet Explorer have committed to implement. There has to be a first browser to implement any proposed standard.

If you look at the absorption and efficiency plots in the linked nature abstract, the improvement is pretty broad spectrum as it is. Based on the Fourier analysis plots, it does seem like a slightly wider pit spacing would better concentrate the energy in their desired sweet spot, but CDs and DVDs would be too wide. HD-DVD actually looks like it might have the most ideal pit spacings.

Actually, that already happened. As the abstract of the paper notes, previous research has already identified how to theoretically optimize patterns, but arbitrary patterns require expensive photo lithography equipment to create. This research shows that an existing inexpensive mass production technique generates results that are almost as good as the optimized patterns, but not quite as good because the spacing of the pits is a bit too periodic (especially across tracks rather than along them).

This is an HBO series, not a movie. They are big on dramas, not CGI explodaramas. I have my reservations about how well this will translate, but if it sucks it won't be because they turned it into a Michael Bay action shit-fest.

We prefer Firefox, but I was about to switch my wife over to using Chrome as it has become impossible to figure out which of the dozens of tabs she has open was slowing everything down, even with ad-blocking enabled. It will be interesting to see how the multi-process support impacts memory overhead, though, as Firefox has had the lead on Chrome in that area.

The A+ and B+ boards still have composite video, they just output it on the smaller 3.5mm jack to save space, like many other mobile devices do. You can get adapter cables to split out the typical red,white,yellow RCA connectors for a couple bucks.

Because previous laws aren't applicable to this situation. To my knowledge, and according to the two surveys of federal obstruction of justice statutes, all previous laws (like 18 U.S.C. 1503 and 1505) only apply when there is judicial or grand jury proceeding at the time. The purpose of 18 U.S.C. 1512(c) and 1519 (enacted by Sarbanes-Oxley) were to expand the scope of obstruction laws to apply when an investigation was underway but charges had not yet been filed. That is what the prosecutor means when saying the intent of these sections was to close a loophole or fill gaps in the current law. I have to agree that it needed to be filled, and this was the correct statute to apple to this case.

In both the new and old statutes cases the offender must be aware of the proceedings or investigation and act with intent in order for the law to apply, so they can't be abused in that manner. Sarbanes-Oxley also doubled the maximum penalties for these laws, which increases the potential for abuse. Personally, I would feel better if the statutes explicitly stated that the maximum penalty should be proportional to the penalty of the crime being covered up. That is currently up to judicial discretion and precedence, AFAIK.

And those risk tolerances change over time. It's been 10 years since SpaceShipOne won the X-Prize, and Virgin Galactic started taking reservations not too long after that. Someone could have gotten married and had multiple kids since then. What was an acceptable risk to them as a bachelor, may not be an acceptable risk as a parent. I wouldn't be surprised if this has been a latent concern for some time, but one could be ignored for the meanwhile since it was still a ways off. Heck if the schedule kept slipping like it has been, the risk equation could have changed again, so why not kick the decision down the road. This crash forced the issue into clear view.

Yeah, but not by default. I agree that this won't influence most businesses who are still running IE. But old grandma running IE 6 will find that her internet is broken, and will ask someone to fix it for her, which most likely will involve upgrading to an newer browser.

It may also bring back the days of banks requiring the use of IE, as none of the citi group websites support any version of TLS. Of course, those in the know should cancel their citi accounts. Even if you don't use their website, if their security is this lax in one area, it probably isn't great in others as well. Sucks for people with mortgages and such that are very expensive to move to another company, though.

Yeah, more test data across the spectrum of body types is always a good thing. The article mentions that they are working on building dummies to better model elderly people as well.

Nobody includes failures during component testing into the failure rate of a rocket. Doing so is completely meaningless and disingenuous.

[quote]It's just irresponsible for the package maintainers to come back and say "we can't pull it, we're leaving it as is, and we're not patching it either".[/quote]
The package maintainers didn't say that. This package is in the universe repository. The entire purpose of this repository is that volunteers can upload packages that Canonical has decided they aren't going to support. So Canonical isn't the package maintainer and you can't really blame them for not supporting packages that they said they aren't going to support.

Furthermore, it sounds like the ownCloud developers want Ubuntu to either use the latest & greatest release, or remove the package entirely. If that is correct, then I think it is irresponsible on the developer's part. Version 7 only came out 3 months ago, so they really ought to be providing security patches for version 6.

While that is good information in general, SSL would help in this particular attack, as it would still block the Tor exit node from seeing the data.