Someone who has to currently buy their natural gas from Russia, which tends to carry some conditions along with it.

If their QA is anything like game developer QA, they found all the problems and management decided that the ship date was more important.

Umm, you do know that all that stuff about the woman you won't name was made up by her ex-boyfriend, right?

Now there's a credible source of "journalism" if I ever heard one!

Gamergate is a smear campaign based entirely on lies and bullshit, used as a shield to protect a bunch of people who really don't like the woman behind those Feminist Frequency videos. Nothing more.

The issue is *really* a bunch of morons on 4chan starting a "movement" to discredit people, on the basis of some flagrant lies made up by the ex-boyfriend of a developer.

This thing is so stupid that even *Cracked* has shown that it's total bullshit from top to bottom.

I put it on my iPad 3 and it's noticeably slower. The big thing I'm seeing now that I never saw before is typing lag. That is annoying. I've also seen extra delay in some cases with the screen realizing it needs to rotate, and a bug in one specific app with keys on the keyboard disappearing entirely. On the performance end it's not that impressive in any way.

That said, having extensions in Safari has been nice, keyboard swapping is handy, and the family sharing feature is really great. So I'm not going to be rushing to roll it back, but I really don't understand how simple things like typing could get so much slower on the same hardware.

Well, he's got a promising career in the NFL then.

This has nothing to do with open source at all. An organization closed down a unit, and got rid of some projects. That happens pretty much every day in the private sector and in the closed source world. What makes open source special in this regard. Do you expect them to keep supporting things forever even when the organization doesn't want to anymore?

The only difference is that with open source, someone could take that code and keep working on it, if they wanted to. That's it. The rest of this has nothing to do with open source at all and is just a flagrant attempt at drumming up controversy by asking a bullshit question in the headline.

It's not a card game. It's a video game with a card game inside it.

Calling this a "card game" would mean that Final Fantasi IX was a card game because of Tetra Master.

No, it's not a "card game". It's a video game that uses a card game inside the video game for certain things.

http://stackoverflow.com/quest...

That's a list of very strange language features. Unsurprisingly, Javascript makes many, many appearances.

Seconded. I'm running an RT-N66U and it's been rock solid, good range, good throughput. Haven't needed different firmware but I know it supports some options.

I had a 3700 and it worked great until the N reception on it was suddenly gone one day. That was annoying.

This is all about your definition of "dead". COBOL is "dead" in the sense that it's not being developed, it's not generally taught, and it's not generally used.

It's "not dead" in the sense that some people are still using it to do meaningful work.

The number of dead languages will vary considerably based on which definition of "dead" you use.

Speaking as a developer who works for a government, option 2 is rarely possible.

Keep in mind that the "government" is a collection of departments, branches, sections, or whatever you call them. Those are run by managers, which are run by more managers, which all have their own agendas, budgets, and powers to protect. Now add in politicians at the top, who change pretty regularly and have very different goals from everyone else.

So, in the best case scenario, at the start of a project everyone agrees on what it needs to do, what needs to be replaced, and everything else. You have specs, and you know what the goals are. Great! Then an election happens. New party in power, and priorites change. Now it has to do something else.

Oh, then a manager retires and a new one comes in. Now it has to do something else.

A new law is passed, now it has to do something else.

Someone changed their mind, and now it has to do something else. ... on, and on, and on it goes. This happens *all the time*. And that's if the people actually know what they want, which in my experience often isn't true in itself (like the Air Force ERP that didn't know how many systems it was replacing).

In a case where there is clear goals and strong management, #2 works great. Often times things just change too much and the only sensible way to accomplish anything is to go with #1 and do the project in smaller, more manageable pieces.

And a lot of the time, the contractor is utterly incompetent and more interested in billing hours than completing the job.

Let's not pretend that companies taking government contracts are good guys, here.