There are, but drones are only a small part of the armed forces easily reached by radio requiring powerful jammers that would be easy targets and they're usually support for people on the ground - not necessarily your people but affiliated forces. If you want to do a door-to-door search it would be extremely hard to do that by droid remote control, no matter how many operators you have. The goal of autonomous robots is genuine remote warfare, where you have the ability to run an occupation without having boots on the ground. Apart from AI sci-fi stories we do expect somebody to give the robots commands and accept their behavior even though the robot is working out the details of who to shoot itself.

Well if you are gaming when are you ever CPU limited with a 4+ GHz quad core? It would be nice if they dropped the integrated graphics and sold it for less, but the six/eight core processors are typically for people who do video encoding, 3D rendering, lots of VMs or some other semi-pro use. Even GTX 980 Ti in SLI should run fine on an i7-4790k, I guess for triple/quad-SLI you need the extra PCI lanes but then you're extremely far out of the mainstream even for gamers.

Actually, most European countries are divided as well but we typically have a proportional representation with a 4-5% minimum which means we have more than two choices which creates an entirely different dynamic. Now naturally it divides itself into blocks it means there can be 2-3 different directions and 2-3 specialist parties that support their side and their relative strength matters. I'm guessing with a European system you'd have Democrats, Liberals, Republicans, Christians, Tea Party, Libertarians and Greens. Suddenly you're not losing just a few swing voters, you can lose voters in any direction.

Forming a new party actually has meaning as a 30% party and two 25+5% parties have the same power, unlike the US system where starting a party competing for the same voters spells doom for everybody. I used to think our system was worse because of all the compromises and coalitions and in-fighting, but really all the US system does is bring all those warring factions together in the same party. All the bargain-making is just done between factions in Congress, not between parties.

And the voters don't get to be a part of that process, here there's different shades of red and blue that shift far more easily in the polls. If the voters think the conservatives aren't being very conservative or the liberals very liberal or don't think you're doing a very good job, there are other parties with similar politics that would be happy to take over. The politicians have to work all the time to convince the voters that their party is the right one, there are relatively few genuinely safe votes. Typically only 50-75% will vote for the same party twice in a row.

So I think it's the system, of course the only way to change the system would be getting an amendment through Congress so.... yeah, you're pretty much stuck with a two-party state that will flaunt a few divisive political issues while making sure their campaign contributors are happy. They're quasi-monopolists on each half of the political spectrum, they got no reason to want to change and the third parties don't have the power to change anything.

Which is why /. relies on its terms that among other things say:

The catch is of course that the last part might be false, I could be pasting someone else's copyrighted text into a /. comment. Since I can't give a valid license, /. won't have a valid license so they'd have to take it down. Can a 140-character phrase be copyrighted? Yes. absolutely. The courts have found that the phrase "E.T. Phone Home" was infringing when used to sell unlicensed coffee mugs. Though copyrighting a joke sounds like a joke, I can understand wanting credit but not trying to license it.

True, but at such massive bitrates (up to 250 Mbit/s) that pretty much anything will look good and in bandwidth-challenged areas they do physical distribution. And they only premiere a handful of movies each week, size is not a big deal. Since wavelet encoding is heavily patented I'm guessing DCI got a waterproof deal before choosing it as the digital cinema standard, with patent holders hoping this would spur adoption. Obviously it didn't and since then better formats have appeared, so it's never going mainstream. Right now BGP seems to be the superior choice and since it's a subset of HEVC if you license it for video the photo format should be "safe" to implement, which means it might get camera support. Having "native" support without going via RAW would be a big deal.

You are really missing the point.

You keep saying that, yet you cannot cite a specific thing I have said that is demonstrably wrong. Again, CITE SOMETHING SPECIFIC I have said and then CITE SOMETHING SPECIFIC from reported media that contradicts it. I dare you. I double dare you. Or must we really take this to the physical challenge?

Yes, it was, and, as far as we know, she did.

I am not aware of that, nor am I aware that she signed the usually required separation paperwork to certify that she did. In fact as mentioned above, it appears she did NOT sign the normally customary separation paperwork.

There has been no proof to the contrary, just claims like yours.

Aside from the fact that you appear to keep assuming that this is not a strict liability sort of laws, you keep forgetting how the system works. It's rare you have a smoking gun in hand when the police arrive which is coupled with a confession there and later at the station, instead law enforcement tends to build a case based on other evidence over time.

There is already ample evidence suggesting of mishandling of classified information... which hopefully will be investigated and with any luck a prosecutor will bring charges for it (though the current DoJ is not so honest).

Furthermore, as time goes on and the Hillary documents complete being scrubbed by state, if they cannot locate even one of the 15 missing Blumenthal, that in of itself doesn't prove that she didn't hand them over, but does set the state for a another potential criminal trial where it is again up to her to prove that she did in fact turn over everything.

In a 'she said' vs 'they said'... based on what else is known... who is more credible?

Alas the current AG is demonstrating herself to be nearly as corrupt as the previous... so such charges are not likely to come... something you will no doubt see as further proof of a lack of proof of criminal wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton.

Try wearing a business attire and tell a tech person what to do. Then wear a tech attire and tell a business person what to do. I've worked both sides of the fence as a consultant and if you don't show you understand the relevant dress code nobody will take you seriously.

Quite a few years ago I was using Linux as my primary desktop, cool. Wesnoth was a semi-clone of other TBS fantasy games, cool. Played it, got stuck, didn't want to spoil it by looking for solutions, eventually gave up and learned that due to a game engine change the main quest was impossible. I was seriously pissed, why bother spending all that time and effort when all you're going to get is a proverbial "fuck you". Games are not like productivity software where you're talking degrees of functionality. It's either fun and gives you positive return or it's shit and gives you negative return. Wesnoth is in my "it's free but not worth it" category.

Whaaaaaaaaaaat? AMD and nVidia has a quite well optimized proprietary OpenGL engine following the latest standards, Intel has not. Intel is doing it open source because who could possibly benefit, Matrox? They have about 0.00% market share these days. AMD and nVidia already has engines doing it better. They got nothing to lose and a fair bit to gain from doing it open source. You have to be pretty deaf, blind and dumb to not see that AMD and nVidia has a competitive advantage they don't want to give away. Mesa is about 5 years behind OpenGL, in terms of hardware sales that's forever.

That's the wrong end to start in, if removing the resource limitation is trivial that's a better solution than any resource management system, whether good or bad. At least if you're fixing this problem for you and not rolling out a resource-gobbling solution to a million devices. Before lots of applications running at the same time would trash the disk, with an SSD I just don't care since at >10000 IOPS it serves everything at once. The side effect is of course that I'm becoming more indifferent to inefficient solutions, but as long as it doesn't make a difference in practice I don't care.

You keep proving my point.

Repeating the same falsehood over and over again doesn't actually make it true you know.

The State Department cannot locate them. That does not mean Ms. Clinton did not turn them over.

Remember the old days when we mailed a check to a bank to pay the monthly mortgage or credit card statement? Ever have one 'get lost in the mail' or somehow not get it into their hands before the due date through no fault of your own? Do you recall what happens? Usually late charges as it was your responsibility (not theirs) to make sure that your payment arrived on time. Same actually can be seen in the terms & conditions of many online banks & payment systems today.

What does this have to do with Hillary? It was HER responsibility to turn over all documents, not that of the State Department to make sure they gather it all. It's why usually when on the way out of federal service you sign an OF-109, certifying under penalty of perjury that amongst other things:

1. I have surrendered to responsible officials all classified or administratively controlled documents and material with which I was charged or which I had in my possession, and I am not retaining in my possession, custody, or control, documents or material containing classified or administratively controlled information furnished to me during the course of such employment or developed as a consequence thereof, including any diaries, memorandums of conversation, or other documents of a personal nature that contain classified or administratively controlled information.

2. I have surrendered to responsible officials all unclassified documents and papers relating to the official business of the Government acquired by me while in the employ of the Department or USIA.

Such terms would seem to apply to even the SoS right? Oddly enough, (despite it being the norm).

Even without signing the document, the requirements to turn over all official documents still exists, the paperwork is just a reminder with a legal threat attach to drive the point home.

Coupled with the fact that certain documents which are known to have been created and/or received during her time in office which do not appear to be part of what she handed over to State upon her departure, we have really only 4 options:

1. She did not turn over the missing document
2. Somehow the documents became permanently lost during delivery
3. Somehow the documents became permanently lost after delivery
4. Somehow the documents became temporarily lost after delivery and will turn up eventually... say in a different box.

You seem to be pushing for #4 as a possible reason as to why the documents are not currently discoverable, yet as time goes on we will know if that is true or not (once the rest of the emails have been examined)... while certainly possible, given other false statements (only used one device, never sent/received classified information, etc), we have a pattern of dishonesty emerge that while it doesn't prove #1, does start to make it a more likely scenario, doubly so when this isn't the first time documents she was required to turn over mysteriously disappeared (though in the 90's case, reappeared)..

There is a reason federal employees use federal email systems and not personal ones, that way the burden on the employee to archive all documentation is far far less. By opting for her own system she made compliance that much harder, and legally any failure to comply is on her... hence the investigations.

Clearly you have a belief of what happened and are trying to make reality fit that belief. Good luck with that.

Hello projection, you are awful thick this evening!

You will notice a difference between our two line of arguments... we both believe what we are saying, however one of us has repeatedly provided supporting material as well as referenced specific information... the other has only made textual arguments based on nothing but their own words.

If you wish to continue to discuss this, I highly suggest you brush up on the additional information I have provided and find a flaw with it, rather than keep with your current line of *fingers in ears* "blah blah blah, I can't hear you but you are still proving my point".

This is hilarious, it was quite obvious that you only read the first paragraph article you cited... and now you didn't even read the first paragraph of what I last cited, allow me to demonstrate. You claim:

State may have them. Nobody knows except the State Department.

Except that's not what the State Department has said, to quote the last article I cited (and the first paragraph no less):

The State Department said Thursday that it could not locate “all or part” of 15 e-mails provided last week to the House Select Committee on Benghazi by Sidney Blumenthal from his exchanges with then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Still not convinced? Why not consult a whole number of articles from various sources which report the same thing?

http://news.yahoo.com/state-de...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/15...
http://www.nbcnews.com/politic...
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/25/...
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/26...
http://www.foxnews.com/politic...
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sta...
http://timesofindia.indiatimes...

Noticing a trend yet?

Thus, your claim that we know she didn't turn over all of the emails is false. The State Department might have them, they might not.

So you are calling the professionals at the State Department and national archives incompetent because they cannot adequately locate these documents they may or may not have? Riiight. Occam's Razor would seem to apply.

You're misunderstanding the quote. According to them the information should have been deemed confidential.

On the contrary, I understand it quite well (as unlike you I've spent some time reading on this subject. Failing to set the 'classified' flag on an email doesn't change whether it is actually classified or not, it simply flags it for filtering & handling... not unlike putting "ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGED" in a subject line of an email. It's the content that matters, not the subject of flags.

It wasn't, though. That means there is no proof that she sent material that was, at the time it was sent, deemed classified.

Again... that's not what the IGs (two of them) have said. Though even your use of the term 'proof' is laughable. The intelligence agencies do not deal in proof the way the rest of us do, but in terms of probability. And the IGs have determined it is very probable that classified information that Hillary had access to is not in the control of the government due to her. That's the first step to opening a criminal investigation which will hopefully lead to a trial and proof that even you would accept.

Say hi to President Sanders for me.

YMMV but personally I hate parallel parking with my no assist, no camera, no proximity sensor car. I hate trying to predict through the mirrors how far I got left until I bump into someone, mostly I'm overcautious meaning it takes me way too many cycles of back and forth. And even minor superficial damage is very expensive if they get need to get it fixed through their insurance company, which I'm either paying out of pocket or suffering a big bonus loss.

I've tried using more modern cars with sensors/cameras, honestly that makes it quite easy. But once you're there it's not really a big step cost-wise to just let the car assist you, though I do consider a bit useless half-step. I'd rather have a fully automatic system, but I guess they're not ready for that quite yet. I guess it's coming sooner than the self driving car though.

Like a tram or train or whatever you pull the emergency brake.

My guess it means you'd buy the kind of car you need 90% of the time, in my case that'd be a one-seater with ~20 miles of range. When the whole family is going to the cabin, I call and get the big, long range vehicle and it'll deliver itself to my doorstep. And once I'm done, it'll return itself. Most of the annoyance of renting a car today is the overhead, secondly it's the insurance and any scratches or fender benders. With robot cars they shouldn't really be your fault, more like going on public transport where it's their problem if the bus hit/got hit by something.

The whole source code is available on GitHub once you sign up. You can share improvements with Epic or other licensees of the engine, but nobody else. Though I guess you'll have to replace the "if you make money you owe us royalties" bit, since science doesn't usually make money with something suited to who you want to pay. Just don't pretend it's open source, because it's definitively not.