Assuming you're not running major data service out of your house, what's the point of diminishing return for connectivity?

I'm making the assumptions that the link speed you're sold is actually the speed you get and that there are no resource constraints, artificial or real, that would stop you from utilizing the maximum bandwidth.

Do most web sites have per-connection caps on how fast any one connection can download files or data? Could you mount a file store on AWS or any other cloud storage provider and use it like a local NAS disk?

"Because we're on an irreversible trajectory toward integrating technology with our cars and houses, bodies and brains"

Cars and houses sure, but bodies and brains? Speak for yourself there pal, I'm not having anything electronic inside me unless its absolutely necessary such as a pacemaker. There's no way I'd have the kind of trivial consumer tech implants so beloved of sci fi writers. It might be some peoples fantasy to be a cyborg but its not mine.

I agree. I call bullshit.

What he describes is plausible, especially if the flash is socketed. But, not bloody likely. Considering that this malware would have to add itself to the existing flash image as an option rom or by infecting and rewriting part of the bios code and then writing that back to the rom.. Unless this was a targeted attack, the malware author would have to work out logic for each one of the major base BIOSes in use - phoenix, award, dell, lenovo, etc to be able to infect them. This is ignoring lots of machines which prevent either prevent rewriting the flash without physical access or require the new system image to be signed. Also, keep in mind that testing this ahead of time is rather difficult given the wide range of different BIOSes on different motherboards, etc. any unexpected bug could render an infected machine unbootable. So, hell of a lot of work for the malware/virus author with quite a lot of risk for failure.. especially when there's a lot of lower hanging fruit.

I don't doubt that it's happened to someone out there.

Also, I do believe this is one of the scenarios Intel TXT is for.

You had me until you spouted this cut-n-paste piece left wing rubbish:

" Perhaps, when we have destroyed the concept of copyright as a tool of corporate greed"

Copyright is the only way small musicians and authors can hope to make money on their work. How about you spend a year of your life creating something then find you get f*ck all for it because - hey , its free! RIght? Art doesn't just appear out of nowhere, people have to put time and effort into it just like they do any other endeavour. And similarly they should be rewarded for it - not have the reward decided by a bunch of tight fisted kids who know the price of everything but the value of nothing.

Land line: $25/mo.

Cell phone: $60/mo, plus the cost of a phone.

We're not there yet. And cell phone call quality sucks.

I am sorry, what data does it have?
Oh, you mean it has unsupported assertions that match your desired worldview?

Let me make my own suggestion:
Pre mid 90s, CS was a rather unpopular course, generally filled with people who had a true interest in it, and in quite low numbers.
Therefore it tended to have a moderately (more) balanced gender participation, although that does vary quite strongly depending on location.

During the later 90s, the 'tech boom' made it a much more popular course for a lot of people who through it could be a path to 'success', the
content was watered down, the attendance went through the roof, and more of a male bias was seem.

HOWEVER, what to know where the opposite happened? business courses, MBAs, Laywers, Doctors.
Thats right, women CHOSE to avoid tech because they saw a larger payout in other areas - and women in general are better at long term planning.
Women went for the established, known risk long term payout of those kinds of course (at least as viewed at the time), whereas Men tended to bias more
towards the 'excitement and risk' of tech, with a lower probable payout.

But history meant a few of the tech people ended up making it big - so not its 'unfair' that more women didnt choose that path, and its the mens fault.

Get real, CS, and other tech courses, were most certainly NOT sexy in the early-mid 90s, and women were not excluded - most people who took them
were looked down on by much of the rest of the faculty.

Or, should we perhaps look at the current gener in bio-research, and advanced medical? a HUGE bias to women - who is screaming out about fixing that
equality? yes? please? no one? thought not.

Its just more of the usual - if something does well, women want 'equality' inforced there, but if it doesnt, they are happy to ignore it.
Or should be be trying to fix the gender gap in trades and manual labour areas? more women working in mines and fabrication?

Thought not..

Of course while they like to point out that their service areas don't overlap so "competition" won't be impacted, they fail to note that because their service areas don't overlap, there has never been any real "competition" to keep prices down.

Damned if I'm going to buy a smell phone and pay for a plan just so you can interrupt my life anywhere, anytime instead of leaving a message on my land line.

I never have understood the world's fetish with the US dollar. Every nation has a currency. The US economy is just as prone to stagnation, deficit, over, and under valuing as any other currency.

I'd like nothing better than to see the Rothschild's hold on international markets broken. If it takes China to do that, then all power to China in the endeavour.

While a zoo may seem like a comfy environment some animals just don't do well in captivity.

I believe this is generally true, but at the same time I think there's also an undercurrent of anthropomorphization here about animal psychology that can get dangerous. Too often it seems like we talk about what animals "want" and "don't want" when in a lot of cases things that would bother humans just don't matter to animals because they lack the kinds of emotional processes unique to humans.

"The cost savings is great, but isn't the biggest driver for me, it's mainly the principle that I don't own the device I paid for, and I'm really tired of having cat litter everything in my home."

So exercise your rights as a consumer to research beforehand and not buy it. Or return it. Or modify it, as you have. Or, for god sakes, ask your vet or friends with cats or reddit for advice on having cat litter everywhere (I believe the most common solution is a covered box with fairly high side.) You can also teach your cat to pee/crap in the toilet, believe it or not. There are little "litter box" inserts that reportedly make it pretty easy; the cat goes "oh, another litter box" and uses it for a week or two, and then you remove the insert, and if the cat notices, they go *shrug* and still use it. No more litter, no more stink.

But for god sakes....I was around on Slashdot when the fist inkjet printer companies started chipping their cartridges. I also learned about Gillette in...either middle school or high school. That was a century ago, if not more. The "handle is free, the blades are disposable and we have a very healthy profit margin on them" model is quite, quite old. Why are people surprised? Especially if you read Slashdot, why didn't you do research on it?

Your robotic, do-everything catbox would've cost substantially more if the company were not figuring on a continuing revenue stream. In fact, it might have cost so much that nobody would've bought it.

I think there's probably a reasonable argument to be made that a move to a foreign location, even one nominally more "native" than a zoo, is a definite hardship on an animal who has become habituated to a specific environment.

Now, if the "zoo" in question is a 10x10 concrete room with bars, then maybe the quality of life in a larger and more natural (in the sense of less confinement and concrete) environment is worth a temporary disruption.

But what about zoos that give primates large, outdoor spaces with natural accommodations like ponds, trees, shelter and primate experts who ensure their physical health and mental stimulation? A "natural" environment may be at best an equal trade and in some instances worse if it comes with a change in the fellow-species population (change in social status, loss of familiar animals or mates, etc).

I'm not always sure that "natural" spaces really are as natural as their made out to be unless it means putting the animal back in its native environment -- sure, their animals but they can become as habituated to a captive lifestyle as any animal. My dog may love to run free outside, but he seems pretty well adapted to sleeping on the couch and probably wouldn't like being made to live outdoors 24x7 after living his life indoors.

My dad had zero engineering or technical ability, which I can attest to through the two lawn mowers "inspected" for problems that ended up being thrown away after too many parts were removed for inspection to reassemble, and all the shit that never got fixed around the house.

But that man could level a parked motorhome like he was Apollodorus of Damascus so we could run the refrigerator. I was always impressed with the newer motorhomes we saw on our trips that had hydraulic jacking systems built-in and could self-level, but dad always felt all you needed were a stack of 2x scraps and a fine accelerator touch. I'd swear he would occasionally use stacks of 2x4s and I'm not quite sure how he managed to get a 26' Winnebago on a stack of 2x4s.

I think they definitely get mileage out of it, but China has some of their own inbuilt paranoia about NK. The last thing the Chinese want is a war on their border. The refugee crisis would be completely destabilizing on its own let alone the risk of war with the United States.

I can only guess that this a veiled threat to help limit their capabilities or risk being collateral damage in any responses that may target assets in China linked to North Korea.

It's also a way of engaging the segments of the Chinese leadership sick of getting caught up in North Korea's antics. The NY Times had a piece this morning highlighting an anti-NK article written by a senior Chinese army officer.