Typically you have peices of infrastructure which is required by many service instances belonging to many customers.

It's nearly always better to have one service instance drop offline than to have the whole peice of shared infrastructure become unusable.

I do, actually. Well, they're more partners than customers, since we give them our code and they sell it. But, yes, I have a lot of meetings with outside parties. We convince about half of them to join our Hangouts from their laptops, the others we add to the meeting via phone. Outside of meetings, we communicate entirely via e-mail. Voicemail is still irrelevant.

At IBM, my role was entirely customer-facing. Voicemail was still fairly rare, though teleconferences were the norm. Most communication was, again, via e-mail or face to face.

It's a bit of a strange country the UK, Google ASBO for a set of rather far reaching laws, that don't need a crime to be committed.

One thing that is a fairly major difference is bail, depending on the crime, it can be just a ticket maybe followed up by a time to appear in court, or maybe taken to a police station for a few hours and then bailed to appear at a magistrates court sometime later which can be months as crimes go up in seriousness you might get held overnight and appear before a magistrate to be bailed or remanded in custody.

There are no bail bonds in the UK either your safe to be let out (possibly with a tag or a curfew) or your not. It takes a lot to be kept in jail before trial. Even if you will be in jail eventually when sentenced, which maybe a year away. If you behave yourself before your trial, ideally taking positive steps in your life then you maybe even get a suspended sentence or even a conditional discharge.

So it's highly unlikely that in this case he will have been kept overnight in cells let alone been chucked in to prison on remand.

Under an American system, i guess it would depend if he has enough money to pay a bail bonds man or not. There are plenty of offenses he could have been charged with even before asbo's there was the good old breach of the peace.

Insulting Glaswegians in such circumstances would probably do it. He's liable to end up in hospital at some point, after some rough justice anyway, unless things calm down. The Police may be doing him a favor by charging him.

First of all there is no 'hyper inflation' in Russia. Hyper inflation is not just 50% or 100% inflation, hyperinflation is thousands percent and more. This is just kids play, compared to hyperinflation.

Secondly there are markets in Russia, people buy and sell products and commodities and labour and while there are regulations, actually they are much lower than regulations in countries like the USA. So store owners who paid their money for their stock respond to the market conditions by raising prices, that's market dictated behaviour and not government regulated behaviour (though this behaviour is a response to a government created problem).

The point is your example with a bakery is absolutely false, a bakery will change prices if the market forces dictate it so.

Not every hunter-gatherer got crushed by a mastodon either - that doesn't mean it wasn't a selective factor in tribes that hunted them.

There were 6 people killed one woman saw both her parents and her daughter killed in front of her eyes. Think about it. How would you feel if you were that woman. I think most people can feel some empathy. Its christmas today pick any three of the people around you to be killed in front of your eyes, doesn't feel very good does it.

You might not like the law it could be used for censorship and repression, but its not in this case is it? in fact its the complete opposite you are aware of what that little shit said and your probably not even in the UK.

He is unlikely to go to jail maybe not even fined but he has been publicly shown to be the worthless scrap of humanity that he is.

Some things are just not done, and are socially unacceptable this is one of them. When it comes to censorship and repression how about Edward Snowdon does his case count as an example?

But it does raise a serious issue - they're studying changes that don't necessarily reflect the selective pressures of present-day life.

Think about it: what are the leading causes of death for people in the prime breeding age (15-34)? Car accidents - by a good margin. So isn't this significant selective pressure to beef up the neck against whiplash, the skull against forehead impact, survival during significant blood loss, etc?

#2 is suicide. I don't know how this rate has changed over time or whether the methods modern humans choose for attempts are more effective than would have been chosen in the past. For example, while men commonly turn to firearms, which are a very effective way to commit suicide, women more often turn to prescription medication overdoses as a method, which overwhelmingly fails.

#3 is poisoning. While humans have always been around poisons, the sheer number that we keep in our houses, most of types that we didn't evolve to, suggests that this may be a stronger selective factor now than it was during our agrarian days, perhaps comparable to that when we were hunter-gatherers or worse.

#4 is homicide. We've definitely gotten a lot better at that, a person is far more likely to die from an intentional gunshot wound than a beating or stabbing. Selective pressures: surviving blood loss, mainly. Stronger, thicker bones may help in against low velocity penetrations.

#5 is other injuries. Again, we're not as likely to suffer from, say "crushed by a mastodon" as an injury, but we've developed plenty of new ways to get killed or maimed in our modern lives.

Then it gets more complicated on the basis that the issue isn't just about survival of the individual, but their social group as a whole, so even nonbreeding members can have a major impact...

I checked the site out - I was really excited to watch the movie until I realized they weren't going to pay me to watch that crap.

To make a political statement? Since when was this "a political statement"? It was an attempt to stop a movie that made fun of the Great Leader. An attempt that mostly succeeded. Which was done after previously threatening Sony about the issue.

What, exactly, is to gain by admitting culpability? Is that usually what criminals do? "Why, yes, officer! I threw the brick through my ex's window to get back at her and scare her. I'm telling you now so that you can go ahead and punish me!"

Because the world is just full of people who would hack a company to blackmail them not to release a movie about Kim Jong Un. Because everyone loves the Great Leader! His family's personality cult^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HVoluntary Praise Actions only take up about 1/3rd of the North Korean budget. And I mean, they totally deserve it. I mean, did you know that his father was the world's greatest golf player who never had to defecate and whose birth was fortold by a swallow and heralded by a new star in the sky?

No, of course it wasn't North Korea. Clearly it was the work of America! Because America wants nothing more than a conflict with North Korea right now. Because clearly Russia and Syria and ISIS aren't enough, no, the US obviously has nothing better to do than to try to stir up things out of the blue with the Hollywood obsessed leader of a cult state whose family has gone so far as to kidnap filmmakers and force them to make movies for him. It all just makes so damn much sense!

Cue the conspiracy theorists in three, two, one...

I know, write? Who gives a flying flip about an app to track a jolly magical man with an eating disorder.

Now, if someone would make an app to track the Yule Cat, Grýla, and her progeny, then that I would have interest in!