Yeah what would we do without the Google+ app.

Google makes a ton of money on the data they acquire from those apps. iOS users represent heavy consumers. Google needs access to those users and their data more than apple needs Google. That's why Google pays Apple to make sure Google remains the default search option in iOS.

Metro apps have ads built in - the provided Weather app has a block ad permanently lodged between the hourly forecast and the radar maps, for example. This has nothing to do with the web, the browser, or slashdot.

You deleted all the relevant bits of the post to make a non-point about some random ad blocker that would have no effect.

Well, back in my day there were only three episodes of Monty Python's Flying Circus, which we quoted every day at lunch, and we liked it that way.

I intended to be snarky here, but the more I thought about it, it really is Dice's website. They post stuff, and we keep coming back and reading it, even though we're not paid to. What part of that do you consider "not OK"?

If you know Idle (Eric, not the IDE), you get the job automatically. If you can get me tickets to Spamalot.

This is Slashdot. You only get abuse.

I know C++. To me, anyone who knows python but not C++ is half useless. If you only know Java, you're 25% useless. And if you know only Visual Basic, you're 125% useless.

Too late. It's been touched.

For those of you not reading Slashdot on Windows 8, you may not realize that local advertising support was built directly into Windows 8, and ads appear in certain Metro-style apps, exactly like iAds on iOS.

Of course since the research paper was written in 2009, this still shouldn't come as much of a surprise, as you've all had six years of warning.

Keep reading the report, and you'll see that they doubled back and covered their other tracks several times. Scheduling the malware activity levels to coincide with Israel's work week would be in keeping with the other forms of camouflage and diversion that were employed by Duqu 2.0's operators, and prove almost nothing at all.

Various leaks after the fact strongly implicated Israel was responsible for Stuxnet (including a YouTube video of an IDF general being congratulated on his team's creation of the malware at his retirement party), but Duqu? The only confirmed relationship to Stuxnet is that both were found in Iran's nuclear facilities. And several nations have as much interest in Iran's nuclear program as Israel, including the US, China, and Russia.

Read further down in the Fine Report, and you'll see why that strategy probably wouldn't have helped much. After the initial installation, the Command and Control network ran almost exclusively in RAM on Kaspersky's servers; the executable files were deleted to leave as few detectable traces as possible. Of course that meant the malware would be lost during a server reboot, so it depended on the actions of the other nearby servers that would eventually detect the rebooted server was uninfected, and would then re-infect it. And just in case Kaspersky's admins rebooted all servers simultaneously, wiping out the entire C&C system, they left a back door open in the form of a few unimportant PCs infected with persistent malware that would simply launch reverse tunneling proxies at startup. The attackers would have been able to reenter the network without needing to phish them again.

Thing is. Apple doesn't care. This service can loose money and as long as it makes the iPhone more attractive to potential buyers it is worth it to them. Same with the new news app. I'm honestly shocked they didn't make the streaming service cheaper.

Do you think Y2K would have gone so quietly had the entire IT industry simply ignored the problems created during the prior four decades of programming? Do you think the ebola outbreak would have been stopped so quickly had the world's health care organizations simply ignored the problem?

So yes, it was Y2K all over again. Some people noticed a huge looming threat, they brought it to the attention of the world, the world eventually responded with enough resources to solve the problem.

Complex systems have a lot of variables; that doesn't make them poor candidates for modeling. On the contrary, you simply have to rerun the model as you learn more and better data.

The prediction of "a million victims" was made in the earlier stages of the outbreak and grabbed the attention of the world, so we more clearly remember it as it was on that day. But just because we remember what the media said in October of 2014 doesn't mean they weren't continually working on it. After the model started reversing course the headlines stopped being so alarmist, and so the general public barely remembers the much less dramatic follow-on news "Ebola trending downwards", "revised estimates", etc.

Was this a deliberate attempt by the people generating the model to drum up public support? Was this simply the media grabbing on to the worst case scenario because it made the best headlines? Was it an honest mistake in reporting? Perhaps the "garbage in -- headlines out" came from a source other than the model's data.

Certainly not all the input was inaccurate. There could have been incorrect accounting for the effectiveness of education or news efforts. The medical personnel may have improved faster than predicted. Mobility limitations might have reduced the spread to a manageable rate. Or it could simply be the outcome was a 1:20 chance that beat the predicted odds. There are way too many variables to even know which was the least accurate, but I wouldn't claim any were as bad as "garbage".

They specifically said that iOS 9 will support all the same hardware as 8