I'm an engineer, I solve problems.
Not problems like 'what is beauty?' Because that would fall within the purview of your conundrums of philosophy. I solve practical problems.
You beat me to it, dammit.
Congratulations: you've refuted part of my argument, but, by doing so, have made my point. The story you're linking to is about a centuries old argument against the practice. How is this not an example of a religion changing?
The American Public has rights, an individual citizen has no rights.
Take note of the above, folks.
The next time you scream about the NRA and claim that the 2nd amendment is some sort of "collective" right instead of an individual right, remember that this is what we've been arguing against for the last couple of decades. Becasue once you redefine "the people" in the 2nd amendment, the 1st, 4th, 9th, and 10th are next on the list.
The UN is great for what it's supposed to do -- prevent WWIII. It has been 100% effective at it.
Correlation is not causality.
hell, name ANY religion that has changed even one bit since its creation.
I'm going to ignore the rest of your post (sorry, not jumping into THAT quagmire) and nitpick the above. The answer is "pretty much all of them." In fact, it's especially odd that you said this in a post about islam, which claims that their god is the same god ("of abraham and isaac") worshiped by both the christians and the jews. If that's not enough example of a change for you, when's the last time you saw a bunch of orthodox jews sacrifice an animal to yahweh? I won't even go into the changes that roman catholicism has seen over the last two millennia, but suffice to say that the current pope would probably be burned for heresy by his predecessors of just a century or two ago.
Religions, like everything, change over time. Changes can be small, or large, but they're always there.
Win 10 adoption is GOING to happen fast
Really? I've still got people that won't let go of XP, and even the keenest MS users in the place are planning to wait a bit to see if it's going to be another Vista or Win8. That's only one place but it may represent a trend.
You do raise an excellent point, but MS has never put "free" behind one of their upgrade efforts before, and Win 7 is already out of mainstream support. NOBODY wants to go through another migration at this point (XP-32 -> 7-64 was a massive effort, and many of us are still recovering from the hangover) but I think this is really a "get on the bus, or get left behind" moment.
People with the buying power will probably beat on Microsoft to give them more time and delay, but in the SMB space, it's going to happen.
Says the guy that won't even put a pseudonym behind what he has to say.
I've got some news for you, AC: just because someone expresses a viewpoint you happen to disagree with doesn't make them a shill. I've been a UNIX user since the 80s, a Linux user since 94 or so, a postfix and sendmail admin for over fifteen years, and helped run a dozen MMOs back when they had text interface and were called MUDs. GPL beats BSD, vi beats Emacs, and my windows desktop runs Xming so I can do real work from time to time.
What I said was not marketing, and is not even an endorsement. I was not claiming that win 10 is the best thing since sliced bread, but rather simply stating that the economics are impossible to ignore. Win 10 adoption is GOING to happen fast, and it's going to be driven by the "free upgrade, but only if you do it right now" bandwagon. That was my only point, and wishing it were otherwise isn't going to change what's going to happen.
Wouldn't it make more sense to have users be the testers? The ones who use the products all freakin' day long? What do IT people know about how the product is used by the masses?
Oh wait. Microsoft. They don't care what the consumers really want. They want to look cool. Double fail.
Do you point your desktop Linux users (okay, so I'm kidding) toward the bleeding edge/preview yum repos? No? Then why harp on MS for aiming their previews at IT people rather than end users?
Feedback is only good if it's listened to. As we have already seen with the demise of Visual Basic 6, the ribbon of Office 2007, the colors of Office 2013, and the not-desktop-or-start-menu of Windows 8.0, Microsoft does not listen to feedback.
Who the hell was screaming to keep VB6 around? Even the VB programmers I know almost universally hate it.
No, it's apparently compatible with Windows 7 or later. Remember, Office is targeted at business, and most businesses are still using Windows 7, and will be for a considerable time to come.
I believe that's going to change, drastically. Microsoft's path with Windows 10 (free updates from Windows => 7, as long as you do it within a year of release) is going to drive the fastest corporate OS migrations ever--for better, or for worse.
I know we're planning for it. It scares the hell out of us, but the incentive to move forward is so powerful there really isn't any other viable path.
If all goes through, what will it mean?
If I understood correctly, it allows you to pre-warp some space ahead in your journey, so that you can begin your journey later. For example, to go to Alpha Centauri A, where light takes a few years, you may start the warp drive, wait for a year, then jump into the ship and travel there (taking 1 year less time).
It will not save you anything going to new places you did not plot a course to.
If that's correct, who cares if it takes a few centuries for the thing to warm up? It would completely solve the problem of how you get the crew from point A to point B alive... no suspended animation, no generation ships, etc, just board at the right time and be there after a relatively short period. YOU won't ever get to see Alpha Centauri, but frankly, from the perspective of the species, that's really not a problem.
"Companies such as Facebook and Google are closely watching this case, given the potential of billions of dollars of liability for selling inaccurate information on their customers and other people."
I was under the impression, and perhaps naively that Google did not under any circumstances sell personally identifiable data, or other information to 3rd parties. I know MS has been found guilty of breaching this, but what if at any, would Google be on the hook for here?
IANAL, and I don't know what the specifics of the FCRA are, but the summary says "providing" and not "selling." It's not a stretch to see how someone like Google could fall afoul of this (as a test case, Google "spacepimp" or your real name and see if you recognize anything "personally identifiable." My guess is the answer is an emphatic "yes").
"Robins, who filed a class-action lawsuit, claimed that Spokeo had provided flawed information about him, including that he had more education than he actually did, that he is married although he remains single, and that he was financially better off than he actually was. He said he was unemployed and looking for work, and contended that the inaccurate information would make it more difficult for him to get a job and to get credit and insurance."
Um, what? All these inaccuracies would help him get a job, unless he's trying for a very low position.
This was my thought, as well. The plaintiff is either a privacy advocate (something that I support in general), or someone just looking for a payday (something that I oppose in general). In either case, his reasoning is highly suspect.
Frankly, I doubt Lenovo even has a license to buy Xeon chips.
What kind of chips do you think they put in thier servers and workstations, Doritos?
No, it doesn't in any way excuse what Clinton did. The point is to call out the hypocrites who had no objections when Bush did something, but loudly complain about Clinton doing the same thing (and vice versa).
Calling out the hypocrites accomplishes exactly nothing--the required solution is to actually PUNISH someone for their bad behavior. It doesn't matter if where you start is a democrat or republican, liberal or conservative, white or black, male or female, etc. until you start actually DOING something about the problem, you will continue to see the same bad behavior.
When we've reduced the entire conversation to "$PERSON did the same thing" "You're a hypocrite" we've ensured that nothing will change.
An authority is a person who can tell you more about something than you really care to know.
