Girls aren't the target audience of a toy like Buzz Lightyear.

And then you've got Darth Vader: the blackest brother in the galaxy. Nubian God.

Spacex could put 70,000 metric tons in an orbit that would eventually end up falling into the sun.

Unlikely in the extreme.

DeltaV required to reach the sun from Earth surface is about 31.7 km/s.

For reference, deltaV required to reach Earth orbit is about 9 km/s.

Note that fuel usage on a rocket varies exponentially with deltaV requirement. Assuming a Falcon 9 could put a 40T payload in Earth Orbit, it would be capable of putting about 60kg into the Sun.

And that 60kg would include the rocket housing the waste.

Even if a couple of rockets burn up in our atmosphere, we would pollute our planet less than any other failed solution we have tried so far.

On the other hand, if a couple Falcon 9's full of radioactive waste were to burn up in atmosphere, they'd pollute our planet with less radioactivity than the coal plants on the planet do every day. Do remember that the largest source of radioactivity in the atmosphere today is coal smoke. By orders of magnitude....

Also ALL of Apple's documents currently present side by side the ObjC and Swift API.

Only the API reference documentation, not the conceptual docs, the sample code, etc.

There's going to be tons of Cocoa stuff to mess with. You're basically using all the Cocoa classes, just with a bunch of extra wrapper code, in a language that's slower than Objective-C, for little real benefit beyond syntactic sugar.

Worse, as things stand right now, if you start out using Swift, you're going to quickly start running into walls where the introductory documentation you need just doesn't exist yet. And when you get into trouble, you're going to go searching for code snippets on Stack Overflow and using Google, and approximately 100% of those snippets are going to be in Objective-C, not Swift, which means you'll have to know enough Objective-C to translate those snippets into Swift. In other words, if you don't already know Objective-C, learning Swift requires a fair degree of masochism right now.

So no, new developers to the platform should definitely start by learning Objective-C, and should reevaluate that decision after they have gotten comfortable with Objective-C. In two or three years, assuming Apple doesn't drop Swift like they did their last three or four scripting language bridges, there should be enough Swift documentation and code snippets to support developers who are just starting out, and companies will be just starting to hire a non-negligible number of Swift developers for serious work. Learn Swift then.

Not necessarily. You can write some C++/Objective-C wrappers for Apple's APIs, and then write the other 95% of your app in pure C++. Objective-C is a preprocessor, not a real language, and can be mixed with either C or C++.

Anyway, good luck making money as an iOS developer. It isn't as easy as it used to be.

Of coursen not, and I never said it has. However, it is the page rank algorithm that results in this selection, so Google is not entirely uninvolved.

Two things:

1) You can't gerrymander a Senator, since (s)he's elected at large in a State.

2) The word "gerrymander" is based on the originator of the idea, Elbridge Gerry, who first did it. He was a member of the "Democrat-Republican Party", which eventually fissioned into the Democrat Party and the Whig Party (which disappeared later, to be replaced by the Republican Party at about the time of Lincoln).

So, yeah, the idea came out of the Democrat Party, and spread to the Republican Party after the Republican Party came into existence 50 years later.

Do note that some elements of the Republican Party and Democrat Party switched places later. Many of the things advocated by the modern Democratic Party were introduced by the Republican Party back in the day, and vice versa. As an example, Segregation was a Democratic idea for nearly a century before they change their minds. Likewise, to the extent that Desegregation was even an idea, it was a Republican idea for that same period, then they changed their minds a bit later (as far as I can tell, because the Dems came out in favour of Desegregation, so the Reps HAD to oppose it - stupid gits).

And here it is, the simple answer to a 2500 year old philosophical debate, in a /. posting...

Dennett (an actual philosopher) calls this kind of statement a "Deepity". A hollow phrase sounding profound, but it's actually either false or trivial, depending on how you read it.

Words are the primary tool of people in power, and have been for 10,000 years. Only those who neither understand nor wield power disregard them.

By encouraging it and actively looking to get high-profile illegal content uploaded, yes. Did you miss all the news about what the prosecution discovered in their internal e-mails and stuff?

Given his history, even without knowing anything about this case at all, my bet would've been on his guilt. He's a career criminal, he's been convicted before, changed countries at least twice to avoid the legal consequences of his actions - yeah, I would be more surprised if he were innocent.

Sure, there were blunders and probably a few laws were broken during his prosecution, but to all the fools rooting for Kimble here I say: About time justice finally caught up with this guy who's been a career criminal for most of his life, sold out his friends to the law before to get a better deal for himself, and has dodged prison by changing country too often already.

I hope they put him away for good.

And I hope his fanclub here will learn the difference between downloading movies for free and rooting for freedom. It really is such a shit that "free" in english means two completely different things.

None of what you're talking about has the slightest bearing on what we're talking about. I fully agree that screwing your customer to extort money out of Netflix (or whoever) is bad. What I'm saying is that if you're on a capped connection—capped in terms of total data quantity, not instantaneous speed—there's no neutrality violation involved if Netflix agrees to pay your ISP so that their usage doesn't count towards your cap. That's not a double dip. It is quite literally exactly the same as calling a toll-free number; you pay your ISP for service, plus you pay for your use, but the company on the other end chooses to pay for your use instead.

What would be a violation is if the ISP demands that Netflix do so, or else they won't provide the instantaneous bandwidth required for a satisfactory customer experience. Similarly, if an ISP charges extortionate overage fees for going beyond your data cap, rather than something reasonable and proportional, that's a potential net neutrality violation in that it essentially forces Netflix to become a toll-free service to avoid screwing over their customers.

Oh, and the war machine takes 100 times the funding,

Hmm, NASA budget is ~$18B. Are you really suggesting the military budget is $1.8T???

If so, you might want to reread the budget sometime. Hint: it's actually about 1/3 that.

If you want to see where the real money is going, try looking to the mandatory outlays (SSA, Welfare, that sort of thing). Hint: Mandatory outlays are about 2/3 of the total budget (130x NASA's budget).

Start using a democratic system where every vote is equal, it's called Proportional Representation and works very well.

Alas, in the USA, we vote for a candidate, NOT A PARTY!

Yes, I'm aware that in Europe you just vote for the Party you want, and then the Party picks the candidate. Won't happen here without a change to the Constitution....