Lactose intolerant people can digest cheese just fine (for the most part). Milk lactose is largely drained with the liquid in the process of curdling, so cheese has little lactose left. That's likely why people used cheese before having developed lactose tolerance - because they discovered it was safe to digest.

This is not always true tbh. Stealing hashes can require as little as an unsanitized SQL query in a web application that allows an attacker to dump the hash table(s) using nothing more than a browser. It may or may not allow for user impersonation in order to do the stuff you listed, but the point is stealing hashes does not have to require complete hacking. In such a scenario strong passwords are still quite useful.

Automated control system and/or safety checks failure, most likely - at that speed manual braking is useless (by the time you have visual on the obstacle it's too late to brake). The automated control system should have detected that one train was no longer moving or no longer in contact and should have slowed down/halted all other trains on the same track approaching the area.

Seeing that the alternatives at the moment are not exactly in the same league, they could do with more users/testing. And waiting for the Linux Skype client to be almost unable to talk to the Skype servers due to being extremely out-of-date (aside: anyone using the official Yahoo Messenger Linux client these days?) is not a good way to help having an alternative to jump to by that time.

You might want to reconsider your understanding of critical thinking (and, by extension, scientific research) if you derive the existence of a God from the existence of what you call miracles.

you're missing at least Huawei on the asian side. Also, I wouldn't call Ericsson (the current market leader) a division of Sony Ericsson, it's actually the other way around, the latter is a joint venture between Sony and Ericsson.

If you try reading the first part of TFA as well, you'll see that you don't get Apple Store access at all in some European countries (members of the European Union, mind you, even some in the euro-zone), but you do in Vietnam. How is that again about movies and video again?

Then maybe TFA is wrong - or at least in part. However, March 16th was the date Oracle changed its hardware support policy. Seeing that the Sun acquisition was concluded at the end of January, any new changes of policy most definitely do not include old Sun kit.

No 'almost' about it. According to TFA, systems sold before that date come with the 'old' Sun warranty, while the ones after have the 'Oracle Global Warranty'. The two don't mix and the old systems require 'opening a formal service case' to get the firmware that they're entitled to.

Ahem.

No. One trivial example would be when your costs are, say, 2.00. Then you're losing money at 1.99. Still, let's say the total costs per per-unit are 0.99 (a constant value is actually the worst case, as the weight of fixed part of costs drops with the increase in sales) so 1.99 is profitable. Now, profit per unit at 2.99 is twice that at 1.99, so you need to get twice as many customers at the lower price to get the same amount of profit. Considering price scaling of fixed costs, you'll need less than 2x the number of customers, but still the difference is non-zero. OTOH, there is in practice a cut-off in the number of people that are willing to buy your book at any price and it may be that you're selling enough 2.99 books already that dropping the price to 1.99 would need more sales than that cut-off in order to make the same profit. So there is in practice no guarantee of 'more money'. Otherwise you'd just keep on dropping prices to marginal cost + 1 and reap profits from billions of billions of sales.

Point is, it's entirely possible for you to have the maximum profit at 2.49 and have both 2.99 and 1.99 bring in less money. Not all functions are monotonic, and all that jazz.

Apologies. Now that is actually a good point. Of course, you can install an extension to vacuum places.sqlite (or do it manually) and remove residual data from the file. It's still going to be on disk until overwritten, but then the question is where does your need for privacy stop. As far as the browser is concerned, deleting the rows is enough, as nothing running in the browser will have access to the residual data left in the file (hence no css snooping on the history and so on). I would say that deleting should be followed by a VACUUM call anyway (since it's really a good place for it) but that's the devs' call to make. OTOH, if you're worried about someone grepping strings in the file, then you've bigger problems than just the history - it means someone has either local access or at least remote shell access. That's 'slightly' beyond normal expectations of privacy from a mere browser. Regardless, I agree that a vacuum should take place, if only to speed up normal queries to the history.

As far as the bookmarks history goes, it looks like a convenience feature to avoid data loss if the system crashes. Feel free to set browser.bookmarks.max_backups to 0 in about:config. Obscure, yes, but if you need this level of forgetfulness from the browser then you have to dig a little deeper anyway.

However, these problems are not what a regular user would care about, and it's always a fine line to balance between security and usability. The fact that you can take care of them, even though it's far from the most common user scenario, is a plus in my book.

So? let's see... I can do better than strings, that's a sqlite3 file after all. It has a bunch of tables in it, namely moz_anno_attributes, moz_annos, moz_bookmarks, moz_bookmarks_roots, moz_favicons, moz_historyvisits, moz_inputhistory, moz_items_annos, moz_keywords, moz_places.

Of course, some of those are not empty - bookmarks, for instance, if you have any set up, or places, if you have any rss feeds (which you do by default). But do check moz_historyvisits, moz_inputhistory, moz_keywords - empty. So tell me again, where is your problem? And next time please use a coherent argument - having a problem with firefox remembering your bookmarks (bookmarkbackups, ring a bell?) is moronic.

You keep posting these 'facts' about cross-licensing. You're basically wrong. RTF Filing. From Statement of facts, p 4-5

Again, according to Nokia's filing, there was an offer to cross-license, but it was Apple that first made it.

But hey, don't let facts get in the way of righteous anger.

At least the packages that are allowed to be installed are signed, which means _someone_ looked at them and approved them.

The thing that I would ask here is whether the user can install a specified older version of a given package. Say, for instance, install the original version from the main repository with a know vulnerability that is patched in the update repo.

Are you that simple?

ok, let's look at the naive picture. AAPL has about 24.5B in cash and short-term investments as of end of last quarter. That's telling you nothing yet, since the company also has other current and non-current assets, and you have to subtract liabilities. Let's say current assets minus current liabilities (net tangible assets include non-liquid ones and various accounting issues in this market), that's about 18.5B. No sane company would use that completely for acquisitions, today's lending markets being what they are. But still. Now, Nokia has a market cap of some 49B and you bet any hostile takeover[*] would require quite a premium to convince shareholders, plus investment banking fees. Putting that at a 40% extra is very conservative, but let's assume that. You end up with some 70B acquisition costs. So AAPL would have to raise roughly Nokia's market cap beyond their net current assets, which is slightly less than a third of their market cap. Apple's stock would tank if they tried to raise that kind of money, either in the stock market or via bonds, making it even harder to do.

So no, Apple can't buy Nokia.

[1] management is free to refuse a takeover offer. Then, if enough shareholders disagree, they can hold a shareholder meeting, boot management and go ahead with the sale. Then, you have regulators to convince to approve the sale, particularly for such large companies. So it's not that simple even with a public company. Just ask Larry, Oracle has been playing this game a lot lately.