I am not blaming anyone for having something stolen. If you leave you laptop locked to a table in Starbucks, and come back from the bathroom 10 minutes later, it is not you fault that the laptop is stolen. You can report the theft to the cops, and it will be investigated. What you do not have the right to do is throw a temper tantrum and hold everyone in the coffee shop hostage until the laptop is returned and then sue the workers for allowing the laptop to be stolen. Yes, this exaggerates what is going on here, but really we all take risks and have to understand that those risks have consequences and we cannot protect everyone from the consequences of all risks.

I do not see that posting nude pictures of yourself on the cloud has equal expectation of security of walking alone at night or getting drunk at a party. If some people think that pointing out that the cloud is insecure is bashing the victim, then I suppose running educational campaigns where we tell people not to accept drinks from stangers at bars where the drink might by have date rape drugs in it is attacking the victim. It is not. All these cases must be prosecuted, but prevention and education is also important.

And this is where what some of what is going on here makes sense. Some people think they have a right to do whatever they want, even if it is illegal, as long as they don't get caught. We should talk about thing that are wrong to do, not because of a punishment, but because of right and wrong.

An aggressive spam filter, like what might be in place in a corporate server, is going to prevent a lot of legitimate email. The mail at my work is so aggressive that I do no have anything sent to it. The Apple Mail.app client, is also aggressive. So aggressive that I just have it mark spam because it will mark perfectly innocent mail as spam. Google has the additional problem is that it is advertiser funded. It cannot just mark all advertisement as spam, which is what most of us want, and still remain in business.

I would be pretty to think that kids think that way. If that were the case, we would see more people taking classes like that. One of the purposes of the AP Exam is to get kids exposure in high school, possible credit for college, so they can go on and do what they really want to do. So someone taking an AP Literature exam is looking to get credit for the class and either take a more advanced core credit or maybe complete all the English core. Computer Science, as opposed to secretarial skills, are going to become increasingly important to any field. Anyone who wants to be a lawyer, a field that is going to be largely gone, at least at the high pay, in 30 years, would be well advised to take such a course, and really all hard science courses, if they want to pass the entrance exam. Speaking of that, there are efforts in the way to get kids at least into a two year college, but most are likeley to need remedial course, so they spend their first year paying for non-credit non-scholarship qualified classes. it is a problem. AP CS reteaches a lot of the math and application that were not learned in other classes.

And this is my problem. There is nothing in AP CS that I would need for my time in engineering programming computers to solve problems. I think that the class is somewhat irrelevant to someone who want to pursue CS because most hopefully already have the basic skills taught in the class by the time they are a senior.

One real issue is people who can teach is class. It was only 35 years ago that I was sat down on a computer and taught to write basic programming. It will take time for the pipeline to fill with qualified teachers. One hopeful sign is that we have a lot more introductory engineering classes than when I was high school, made possible because we have been cranking out engineers in this country since the end of WWII. So in another 20 years, we might have CS teachers.

Collecting personal information on users is the status quo. All backends, be it google, apple, ms, collect information on users. It is how they make money and 'improve the product'. So instead of being in a position where everyone can agree that private information is private, we live in a world where we have to really work to understand what information is private, and what isn't. We see this with law enforcement and text messages. Most would say they are private, but law enforcement says they are public information. It is a small jump from text messages to photo sent to another person. If information collection were not the norm for everyone, then perhaps we could be upset that private information is being collected. But the web site provides a service, and of course it is going to take it's cut, in the forms of saving photos, for providing that service.

This is the way the web works. Service in exchange for private information. If it were 2000 it might be surprising. But it is not. And most everyone who is using snapchat has grown up in a world where such is standard mode of operation.

The headline is accurate. For instance, if you have a student calculate a value and they give you 10 decimal places, and only four decimal places are correct, then that student has failed at math. The most fundamental error one can make when reporting values in math is reporting more accuracy than is justified by the computational method. The Intel manual says the all digits reported, except for the last, is accurate. Since this is not the case, Intel has failed at math. Even with the change in the manual, if the chip continues to report inaccurate digits, Intel is still failing at math. The only difference now is that Intel admits that it is failing, which is one step forward. To use you analogy, the NFL is not guaranteeing that the actual ten yards have been met. All they are saying is the displacement is sufficient to justify the nominal requirements for a first down. The do not , for instance, say that a play needs 3 yards, 1 foot, 6 inches, and 13 mils to reach a first down. But Intel does pretend it know the down to that level of accuracy.

If a car is self driving, then having some knowledge of the speed limit is good. If not, having the car limit travel based on speed limit is a very bad idea. For instance, those signs that read and display speed of oncoming cars in real time have some uses, but also have significant negative effects. They tend to encourage drivers to travel at maximum speed, which creates a jumble of cars and can at times encourage unsafe speeds. There used to be a lot of more of these around, but now I notice they are gone except in a few places. On the freeway, of course, one has to travel at prevalent speeds, and it is often necessary to get out of situations where there are dangerous vehicles.I can see myself getting kill because I not allowed to breifly accelerate to high speeds to get away from a oil truck.

If the Terminator comes from the future, let's be realistic! He'll show up with lots of bloatware. Not only will ke kill you, he'd go through your social media accounts to track down and kill everyone on Facebook that you ever went to high school with. He'd also check your mail, handle phone calls, self-install software updates from the future, keep track of your bank account, play second-person-shooter video games, autoplay video advertisements, and sound cool alarm tones to remind you of your impending appointment with death.

When I was growing up, my relatives had a washer and dryer, but when they broke they went back to having the in house staff wash clothes on the outdoor basin and hang out to dry. It was simply cheaper to do that. Other relatives simply had the people next door wash by hand because it was way cheaper than using a machine. Now labor is more expensive, and machines are cheaper, so most people have machines do the washing. Mostly it is because machines are cheap and a new generation thinks that using machines is cooler than paying someone.

It reminds me of this poster. If a pretty poster and a cute saying are all it takes to motivate you, you probably have a very easy job. The kind robots will be doing soon.

One imagine that in one took an ant colony, scaled it up to many colonies, and harnassed it's power output, it might be able to get a gigawatt more cheaply than a coal fired plant.

I see three problems here. First, this is a press release, so it has all the validity of any press release, in other words nothing. Second, nothing has been built, at least nothing approaching a gigawatt, and no way to know if the design will really scale to a gigawatt. Third, they are comparing the real cost of building a coal fired plant to the imaginary cost of building this device. That said, given that an advance coal fired plant is more in the range of 3 billion, the real cost of both might be comparable, and cheaper than the $40 billion for a conventional nuclear plant.

But really, the costs and all that is really besides the point. No fusion reactor has been able to produce significantly more power than it has consumed.

I have often suspected that part of the reason that MS continues to make a phone is so it won't be accused of being a patent troll. If it is making phones, then it is not just trying to monetized a portfolio by attacking others who are doing the real work. I suspect the Surface is the same issue, and the the two might actually be breaking even given royalties.

I also think that this has nothing to do with MS or the royalties to MS. I think it has to do with Apple. Samsung, for some reason, gave MS a sweetheart deal on the thinnest of evidence. Samsung did not go to court, wait for google, but just paid MS a reletively large amount of cash for every handset sold. This tells me that there was so backroom negotiations going on, possible lawfully questionable negotiations. This, probably, is negatively effecting the Apple situation because if they were so eager to give MS money, why are they fighting Apple on claims that are at least as good? Which means that whatever possible underhanded deal Samsung made with MS is no longer paying off.

This seems like good advice, but it does not necessarily lead to the idea of a suicides because a business failed. Suicide, especially at a young age, I think is either a mental issue or lack of experience with failure. It is not failed bussiness tactics, or losing respect among your peer group, or being made fun of on twitter, because, really, what does a person care about what some strangers think(unless you are a 13 year old adolescent). When we look at some suicides, these kids have had their life propped up, been protected from failure, ridicule, and hard work,. When they are then subject to a public failure, it is simply too much for them. I am in no way saying it is their fault or anyone's fault. I am simply saying even if you do everything right, even if you have all the support in the world, bad luck or a single bad decisions can still make the enterprise fall. A lack of experience of how to deal with such failures can lead to a person taking the quick way out.

There, simplified it for you. Even quantum tunneling can't penetrate the barrier of a thick skull.

You should think that through a little more. Extraterrestrials might breed like spiders where the males get cannibalized after mating. Can you imagine "To Catch a Predator" on another planet?

CHRIS HANSEN: Tonight, we're waiting for NudeSpiderMan as he crawls up... he thinks he's just here for sex. Little does he know that he's about to get trapped in our web.
NudeSpiderMan: Hi, are you "Charolette"?
DECOY: Wow, you look cute! Hold on while I finish spinning this orb around the lunch I just caught for us!
NudeSpiderMan: Sure babe, take your time...
CHRIS HANSEN: Hi! How are you doin'?
NudeSpiderMan: Oh no! All the way here I wanted to turn around! I knew I was being stupid!
CHRIS HANSEN: well, NudeSpiderMan, I don't understand. You knew she was going to rip your head off, but you came here anyway...?
NudeSpiderMan: Yeah, yeah... sigh... I knew I was stupid... I kept telling myself to turn around... Now I'm losing everything!
DECOY: Oooh, yeah! SWIPE *munch* *munch*
NudeSpiderMan: Chris? Chris? Are you OK? Oh no... she went for him instead... I'm such a loser!
DECOY: You know, I might want seconds!
NudeSpiderMan: Well babe, I still want to stick my head in your mouth, even if I'm not your first...

I dimly recall that method too but IIRC the array couldn't be saved to tape- you needed POKE statements underneath the DIM. There was also another method involving adjusting the SP register to lower the top of the stack and claiming a few kilobytes of RAM for whatever purpose- but that approach had the same problem with not getting saved to tape.

I remember I had a yellow book that was for kids learning assembler, and it had a cartoon CPU with registers for hands and feet. I can't remember the title- I just pulled the ZX81 out of the closet to look for it, but it isn't in the box anymore. I still have the 16K pack and the awful little ZX Printer that sparked onto rolls of aluminum thermal paper.