Thats fine. Knowing vi 'because its there' is why I know vi.

Using it by choice? Retarded.

Because playing NES games on a touch screen would be so awesome ... NOT.

The original point stands, nothing you'd actually want remains.

I understand the 'because its my phone and I should have the fucking ability to do with it what I want' aspect, and its a valid one, but once you get past that theres no real reason to jailbreak.

yea, no need to get out of the stone age or anything.

What is it with people being proud of using the lowest common denominator? I can use it too, but why the hell would I given the option?

If I log into some archaic system that only has vi, sure, I'm fine, but given the option it just isn't impressive. Theres a reason I don't use those old archaic systems anymore. Its not the wheel, its not 'the best way to do it' its just the way thats been around since the beginning.

The headline is fine, the summary is wrong. If you want to be precise.

He is stating there will be a rate of 100,000 cars per year. That is what the headline said and what he said. Neither the headline, nor Musk said it would be 100,000 cars for 2015.

The summary, however, did put the line in that says: CEO Elon Musk said the electric-car company would deliver 100,000 vehicles next year.
That is what is incorrect.

Although a production rate of 100,000 cars per year will eventually create an actual 100,000 cars in a year, it will only do so once the rate reaches that level and sustains or exceeds that rate for an entire year. In this case, the last of the 100,000 cars actually produced in a single year at that rate would be finished sometime in 2016.

Those who buy the rigs have money and business connections, but don't know how to build good rigs. Those who build them don't have money or connections, but plenty of experience making rigs.

Sometimes those two capabilities overlap, but there's a lot more investors out there than there are computer hardware experts.

Considering that bitcoin isn't big enough, nor has it been around long enough to bail out, using the bank bailouts as a comparison is a specious justification.

Just because a new system is different than a bad system, does not logically imply that it is a better system by default.

That all depends on the ratio of waste/toxic material produced between gold and Georgian wattage, which I don't think that anyone has solid facts on. I'm guessing that power generation in the Republic of Georgia isn't the cleanest that the world has ever seen, being that it is in a small, former Soviet republic.

So, despite the admitted use of some rather nasty chemicals and left overs from gold mining, what goes into those MW of power generation isn't necessarily any better.

I'd love it if someone posted some numbers.

I don't think anyone actually had the idea that they wanted to take the world with them in quite the same way Hitler did.

Hitler actually ordered scorched earth tactics, the superpowers were initially convinced that you could win with nuclear weapons (like the US did against Japan), and by the time they got into a arms race, it was mostly mechanical up to the point that both sides eventually realized that they both had enough weapons that there was no way that a first strike could succeed.

Once they both realized that nuclear war was unwinnable, they both came to the table. That is not even close to the same thing as Hitler, who would have been plainly aware that he had no forces, and wanted to take everyone down with him anyway.

Arms races, even very dangerous ones, are not the same things as insane dictators having delusions in bunkers. They move ahead for very different reasons.

Also, Soviet-style communism has surveillance since the Cheka. There was no need for fascism to bring that out. Soviet surveillance and purges quite clearly predated the rise of Nazism, let alone its demise. There was no such "infection" of Soviet communism, it was a feature from the very beginning, and one that would have been a hold over from Tsarist Russia, if anything.

Hitler loved his outsized, but impractical weapons, like the V1 and V2 and the ever increasing size and complexity of his tanks like the Maus. The V2 team members weren't shot for the same reason that Hitler thought he had more divisions while he was in the bunker. Hitler was grandiose and not completely connected with reality.

Hitler just *knew* that the revenge weapons would work and turn the war to his side, despite realistic arguments to the contrary, so he wasn't going to do something as silly as shoot their designers. I mean, that would have been dumb, right? Even insane people will have their own internal logic.

He knew, but he was trying to both make his dream come true, and also he understood that the regime was not one where he was unassailable.

He could have tried to sabotage the program, and the reality is that this is probably what he should have morally tried to do. Given the focus of the Nazi leadership on the rocket program, that would have almost certainly meant discovery and an untimely demise. So while that would have been the truly heroic path, it was also a death sentence. It also would have made almost no difference in the war effort, aside from possibly saving the lives of those civilians. Again, if he was heroic, he would have tried, but being willing to die to stop the uncertain possibility of future casualties is always a hard choice.

What happened is that he likely didn't want to sabotage his program, because it was his dream, and he understood that he needed to produce to both prevent it from being shut down, and also to keep himself out of the camps. In effect, he was the prototypical "normal scientist working for the evil villain". He understood that he alone could do nothing, and decided to make the best of the situation by moving forward the science. Not wholly reprehensible, but clearly un-heroic.

As I said elsewhere, I think he takes this criticism because his "heroic" stature and image when associated with NASA is contrasted with his work for Germany. The reality is that his actions were no more or less a feature of the place and time when he did his work. It is easy to be a saint in heaven, as they say. In the US, he was free to pursue his goals without having to accept slave labor or the need to make weapons, so he did neither.

The truth is probably a lot more complex, and honestly, much more human.

My guess is that he really wanted to make a spaceship, he got funding, got in over his head by showing dual use for his rockets, and then was pretty much co-opted into the war program.

He certainly was subject to arrest, and was arrested at one point. Only his particular position allowed him to avoid it becoming permanent. It is difficult to believe that after that, he was not actively trying to keep himself useful to the regime so that he wouldn't be arrested again.

Was he an Oskar Schindler? Almost certainly not. I'm guessing he simply saw the people assigned to him as what was needed to get the job done and that complaining about their fate would do nothing more than allow him to join them. I imagine he simply kept going and probably used his dream of building a spaceship to put a silver lining on the situation.

However, was he a committed Nazi? Also quite unlikely. If he could be accused of actual abuses, those were likely a mix of his overwhelming belief in the value of what he was doing and fear of what failure would expose him to. It is unclear what the mix was, but it is unlikely he was ideologically motivated. Instead, he was a technocrat, and like many technocrats, humane concerns can often fall by the wayside, a mindset that would certainly be enhanced by his need to survive.

The quotes show that he was certainly not invulnerable, and his actions are in line with the survival of a technocrat. This doesn't make him a hero, but there may be extenuating circumstances. We almost certainly would not have condemned him if he was some simple farm overseer expected to make use of slave labor to make a quota, but von Braun gets a lot of criticism in proportion to his future prominence in the US Space Program.

Christ, it was one of the first lessons I learned that one could not simply sniff incoming packets and assume there was any order to them. People have been writing UDP protocols for decades now that require reassembly of packets into proper order.

I get that multipath TCP means a lot more traffic will be sent in odd fashion, but really, if the recipient TCP stack can grab and reorder them, then that's what counts.

... Right, because they can't just recombine the data from their multiple taps back in their data center.

Because ... they don't do this already to correlate data from different single path streams or anything ...

Those agencies will have no problem for dealing with this particular issue.

Not really.

'The bad guys' have multiple options. Comcast will do DPI at the edge where you have only one path, so multipathing won't effect them and throttling your torrents will still be trivial. The NSA/CIA will just recombine the streams in their data center from the multiple taps they have. Its not really difficult if you have enough CPU and they have the budget to ensure they have enough CPU ... and if they don't have the budget, they have enough dirty on congress to get their budget upped until they do.

Don't get ahead of yourself, we don't know how much of the labor is automated yet. Maybe with Chinese robots.