It's almost always a lack of will to spend the money required or accept the pain necessary and NOT technical feasibility. If you build your systems to the strictest of standards or beyond, then you are by default in compliance with the rest.

Doing things "right" almost always gets hamstrung by the dollar figures required or by "business" push-back. "Do we really need to install IDS/IPS equipment in every little branch network we have?" Yes, yes you do if you want to prevent and catch breaches early. "What do you mean I shouldn't use my iPad pool-side while on vacation to do my work? I'm the CEO." Yes, but that guy taking pictures of your screen behind you on the balcony isn't and the guy that's going to steal your iPad while it's unlocked when you get up to get your margarita certainly isn't.

Fine. But you said it was hard for you to fathom. Convenience and money are the reasons people take the other route. That's hard to understand?

Sea water. It come (these days) fully loaded with everything needed for algae.

Because many corporations will not let you access corporate data (including email) outside of maybe a web front-end without having some kind of say in how your device behaves (example: screen lock settings).

This means if you want native application access while on the go for convenience, you have two options:

1. Carry two phones (personal and corporate)
2. Let "corporate tendrils" onto your personal.

It's worth pointing out that many corporations will provide a financial stipend to use your personal because that saves them money. Depending on your carrier and the size of the stipend, it could just about pay your monthly bill.

That ship sailed the moment Javascript was born which was pretty early in the development of the WWW.

The problem in the US isn't the absence of such laws, it's the absence of oversight and enforcement of those laws.

Why would you enforce a law that has no explicit penalty, seems like a waste of resources ;)

Based on evidence of the effects of dissociative drugs, psychedelic drugs, and general anaesthetics, it seems likely that our 'singular, waking awareness' is primarily an effect of the information transfer between various brain regions through the posterior cingulate cortex.

Of course, knowing that doesn't make it any less of a head-fuck to contemplate how strange it is to be anything at all.

While you're not wrong, I do think that from the perspective of the article, it's also not really so relevant.

Basically from my understanding, he's saying here that if we handle the sub-systems in a more traditional manner - as in, existing edge detection and motion detection algorithms in standard computing systems - that with ~50 parallel threads, we could have something brain-like.

It's also worth considering though that this is far less cool than it sounds at first blush simply by fact that the sub-systems would not be brain-like in the slightest.

While it may seem analogue, I'd definitely call the brain digital from a functional perspective.

The amount of neurotransmitters, strength of electrical activity, and so on are definitely analogue inputs; but due to the way that action potentials fire in cells, you're either "firing them" or "not firing them" (analogy: magnetic data on a disc is also analogue, but we only really care about the on/off state of it). Most information appears to be transferred based on the rate of firing them, and is not encoded in any special aspect of the spikes themselves. Furthermore, you might then assume that the rate timing of the spikes may be considered analogue data - again though, it's not really. There is a refractory period that limits the maximal firing rate of a single neuron, and downstream effects of this basically mean that the firing rates themselves could also in theory be quantised in a digital manner (although it'd be a massively complex problem to actually figure that all out).

While the whole system is quite fundamentally different from our current digital computers, it is nevertheless something that could also be a digital system.

... conceive of what function such a bit could have, without having some down side..

Power-save -> 0, Performance -> 1

It's still under development AFAIK and so to say that it failed seems to be the incorrect analysis as best I can tell. It's unclear if it will ever reach a state where it's ready for prime time or whatever, but I wouldn't count it out just yet.

Here's what I can tell you.

1. Outside of torrents, you're not going to get the full benefit of that gig for most applications.
2. Netflix is awesome with it. Load times of a few seconds for high def.
3. Hard wire anything that doesn't move often (TV/Blu Ray/PS3/Desktop/etc) and have plenty of ports around the house you can plug your laptop in just in case you feel you need more speed.
4. Use wireless the rest of the time. You seriously just won't notice that big of a difference web browsing unless you have serious interference issues although if you're gaming, you'll want to use the hard wire.

Honestly with current web applications, a gig is just about overkill. Sure that might change in the future once gig becomes more prevalent, but it's seriously overpowered for pretty much everything currently. Short of having multiple people streaming HD video and downloading/uploading via torrents, your pipe is going to be bored most of the time.

This is completely and patently false. There ARE regulations on wifi. They are merely moved into the unlicensed spectrum which is NOT the same thing as unregulated. Granted, the regulations are pretty few, they are NOT non-existent.

Statistics, probably not. But to confirm they're not just all made up, I checked a few of the ones that were obviously a password for another site (one of the '+' addresses) and after 4 tries, found one that worked (on the 'other site', not on gmail). So they're definitely not just 'made up' passwords; they just aren't necessarily a password that was ever actually used for the email address they're associated to.