Considering how they're working lately, my guess is the next thing to be removed is the plugin support since they know best what functions their browser needs.
Pocket is proof thereof. If anything, this could have been solved by a plugin rather than shoving it down everyone's throat.
Well, umm.... *cough* *cough*
What did they replace their email program with? Pine? Elm? Mutt? Eudora? Thunderbird? Outlook? Outlook Express? Citadel? Courier? Squirrelmail? Something else?
Gnus writing to a file processed by Thunderbird message passing to Seamonkey sent to an instance of Microsoft Entourage passing to Outlook Express in a VM that is forwarded to a qmail instance which delivers it to Kmail that encrypts it with GPG and sends it to mutt which ROT13 encodes it and converts it to morse to be punched on cards and delivered by snail mail.
Everyone calls it contractor.
In the article, it mentions female undergraduates, and only females. Guess what, men get raped too. Why is there no insurance for that case? Because every man is an insaitable sexual animal who can't do anything but assault the nearest woman? That's not very gender equal, is it, to automatically assume that the male is automatically the rapist? Isn't this the very definition of sexism, to treat someone differently solely by gender?
That's ignoring the absurdity of not checking this in court or anything either. In some states, rape is a capital crime, punishable by death in the US. If another person and I have a vendetta against someone, can't we just file two reports? Boom, no proof required, no pesky legal checking. Minimum, they'd be ruined for the rest of their whole lives: potentially, they could wind up on death roll (in some places). That'd be indirect murder, clearly a very funny college prank, yes?
It's astonishing to me how no one thought this through or even put aside their cultural biases to do any research into this whatsoever.
At one time news was factual and verified. But these days anyone can post whatever they want and have very little to back it. Hoping I guess they guessed correctly. If indeed we now know the terrorists only used non encrypted SMS imagine how they now know how to use the proper encrypted tools from now on. Thanks to our wonderful news media pointing it out. The really bad part is that all we ever do is react to a disaster that already happened. We don't learn from the 9-11's of the world. We don't police our boarders we don't profile for fear of offending someone. Islam is NOT a peaceful religion, don't let anyone tell you it is. Much of the Middle East problems stem from religion. The Islamic belief is no exceptions beyond total devotion to Islam. All else is evil and must be eliminated. Even the moderates in the Muslim world simply look the other way unless they are specifically attacked. Deep down, they are required to believe what they are taught. This now has spread to the West and if Christians are to survive we must stop it now or become silenced.
News never has been and never will be factial and verified. Have you ever read Revolutionary War articles? Have you seen was Julius Caeser wrote back to Rome? Media has always had a political aspect to it, that's nothing new. Back in your day, there were a fair few terrorists who did all this too, might I point out. And lastly, if that is the kind of government you wish, may I suggest Russia? I think your political philosophy matches much more with theirs than the United States'. Good day to you, sir.
Sorry but the OP is correct... this situation *has* been manufactured by the USA's long-standing practice of pissing in other people's pools.
If the USA (and other Western nations) just kept their noses out of other country's politics then there wouldn't be this rapidly growing anti-western sentiment within the Middle East.
Hell... the USA and UK invade Iraq on the fraudulent proposition that Saddam had a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction -- and look how that turned out.
The USA has almost certainly killed more innocent men, women and children (conveniently categorised as "collateral damage") through their drone strikes than daesh has ever beheaded, shot or blown up.
The USA regularly executes its own citizens (hello Texas???) who the feel have violated their rules (rape/murder) -- yet complain so loudly when other cultures, religions or countries do the same.
Message to the US government: do not expect *anyone* to be pleased if you piss in their pool. Do not act surprised when those people decide to come piss in your pool.
I believe that what daesh and Al Quaeda have done is totally barbaric -- but then again, the same can be said for those Western nations who have engaged in acts of terrorism and murder against other nations.
Let he who is without sin
Why doesn't everyone just grow up and start acting like adults for a change????
Comparing Texas and ISIS really isn't fair. One executes for capital crimes after a lengthy trial and a 10+ year waiting list (ehich you could argue is more merciful than life in prison), and the other shoots anybody for any reason at any time. One blows up innocent civillains, the other pays for infastructure and rebuilds destroyed towns. As much noise as we like to make about it, America's actions in the war are far more civillized than ISIS' ever has been.
That being said, I will give you credit that this whole thing started with the US, that is true. And as a result of Paris, there is a lot of racism directed at muslims the last couple days, or at least it suddenly feels like so. Nobody yet realizes that calling for the mass execution of muslims because they are evil and rape and murder sounds stunningly like Nazi rhetoric against the Jewish (just as untrue), and worse, it appears as though now it's culturally acceptable. Why people can't behave as old as they are and stop playing a global game of comparing dick sizes I'll never know.
Of course. It's us vs them. They hate our Western, Judeo-Christian way of life. They want a one-world caliphate dominated by islam (I will not capitalize the word out of disrepect). islam is not just a religion; it's a complete system: religion is one aspect, there is also politics, civil governance, you name it. These asshats want the world under this system. Thankfully there are several sects and they all hate each other. Iran is a bulwark in the region against these people, although they are far from innocent. Notice these asshats won't life a finger to Iran? They know what would happen should they try.
Were I the president, I would fire bomb them for weeks on end with MOABs and napalm. If the bombs don't get you, lack of oxygen will. Enough playing games with these people. They want us dead. So, yes, when white Europeans die, it's a big deal. These people are roaches, so when one or more of them dies, it's not a big deal at all. They want to kill us and take over our way of life. Do you think for a second the migrants, 90% of whom are military-aged men is a joke? I've got family in Europe in several places, and they are considering moving because things are not what they should be. These men rape and kill everywhere they go. Sweden had, until islamic refugees, one of the lowest rape and crime instances in the EU. Now? Sweden and much of the EU will become like Detroit, just with different kinds of "gang bangers".
From their perspective, you want to kill and murder them all too, and apparently are willing to use highly explosive and vuiolent means to do so. Furthermore, you'd be willing not only to kill the terrorists, but every single living thing in all of those countries.
I despise ISIS with a burning passion for what they've done, but when other westerners get on a high horse about them "murdering us" and how we must "kill them all", you really don't see the irony that they're in the exact same position? That's not even starting with the fact most muslims are normal people too, outside of the reach of ISIS. It's not like we can quit now, but it's absurd to see how eager you are not only to repeat the events of 9/11 and worsen the situation even further, but about how you're just as violent and psychopathic as the terrorists you condem.
It isn't a Fork of Unix, but a new product.
I don't dispute that GNU doesn't base on the original Bell labs Unix code, but is instead a full rewrite in order to promote FREE SOFTWARE. But all these Forks of the Unix code base, they aren't real UNIX anymore. Because why do you fork something. Do you do it in order to create the same piece of software? No, you want to do something different, chose a different path. That's what all these operating systems did you regard to as being the "real UNIX". Them chosing a different path is completely okay, its nothing wrong. Its just that BSD isn't an Unix anymore.
Now to the GNU operating system. Why did they chose to _rewrite_ unix, and not just create something entirely new? Because they wanted to create a free _implementation_ of unix that would work just like the original Bell labs unix worked, so that software could easily be ported, and improvement patches still could be shared freely over the internet, just like in the old days.
The name "GNU Is not Unix" was chosen in a joking manner, just like YACC for "Yet Another Compiler Compiler". It doesn't reflect the truth.
So, to summarize, the GNU developers did want to keep as close to unix as possible, in order to make life easier for people who want to migrate, and to provide a general-purpose base for free sharing of modifications and improvements. The forkers like the BSD team however, wanted to tailor unix for their needs, for their specific use-case. Of course the operating system becomes something different in the process.
Except that the HURD kernel (GNU's native) is radically different from any UNIX kernel, Stallman disagrees with all the unix's licenses, the GNU project doesn't endorse or even accept the legitimacy of any UNIX, and several very important GNU tools (emacs, gcc, gdb, etc) actively violate UNIX philosophy.
You've got it backwards. Stallman set out to make a completely free (well, by his definition, anyway) ecosystem of tools. He actually didn't (and probably still doesn't) like UNIX philosophy very much, they just happen to have done much of the work for him. In contrast, even though they don't use any of the originial code due to lawsuits, the BSDs aimed to make an opensource reimplementation of the UNIX ideas, albeit it with different focuses. All of them stay true to the originials, and if you were to use OpenBSD or FreeBSD for a bit, they're a marked contrast to Stallman's dream of a modern day lisp machine.
That's what a lot of people don't understand. 15 million people not having to do tedious mindnumbing work that can be replaced by a machine is a GOOD thing. The fact that this is seen as bad news is proof of our disfunctional society and economical model. The day basic income comes in together with a reform of our economy, is the day automation will truely be embraced as it should.
Here's the problem though; to pay for basic income, everyon e has to earn less. Are you willing to settle with getting nothing but a 4th of your salary? Are you willing to forfeit all profits you could ever make in a business so that you could feed someone else? That's exactly what it would take to maintain basic income, to redistribute wealth evenly. I like the idea of everyone earning a set amount and then working for more, but then the system breaks down, because nobody wants to contribute back. The truth is that the majority of people want to keep their own success, and if anyone who's ever lived a life in poverty were offered a life as a millionaire, there is absolutely no way they would give that life up for their previous one.
Everyone wants to be a millionaire, but society can't support that. In destroying any opening for the poor people, you ruin million's of other people's lives so that the ones at the top earn a little bit more, yet paradoxically state that a functional society is one where everybody earns the same. You can't have both; you either employ the poor, or you have 99% in poverty.
15M UK people could do something else. The world fails to end.
If this bank doesn't help them find some work, there's going to be hell to raise, especially when 15 million people is about a quarter of the entire UK's population. If a fourth of the US was layed off, do you think that would end peacefully?
Automation makes sense when the job is dangerous or risky to humans, or requires extreme precision. Replacing everything with automated machines for profit gains makes it hard for low end jobs to exist, and thus for low end workers to be employed. We have here a very large mass of people who feel hopeless and have nothing to lose. We also have a very large resentment towards the upper class and a weak middle class. History has presented us this situation before, and I encourage you to research what happened then.
Only the deligators and litigators navigator that irrigator. I suppose I'll just program an escape in Jaw-va and give it as many bytes as I can: I'm sure it'll really fight tooth and scale.
Please don't kill me.
The idea that they're trying is using technical measures to keep the CIA and friends out, and the legal protection to stave off warrents. It's a decent idea when you think about it - it's not bulletproof, but a step up from existing measures. Furthermore, it makes it more illegal - going after an American on foreign land isn't domestic surveillance and it's not foreign surveillance either, making it harder to justify, and as such hopefully making whoever approves this crap more worried about the potential reprecussions. And that I think is the real purpose of this: not to make users immune to the intrusion, but simply to make it more difficult. I don't mind a fight being up, even if it is yet to be determined how effective it is.
Who thought we'd ever see a big corporation use a loophole for the benefit of its customers? I almost want to say that's what really scares me, if bribery didn't work.
Not too long ago, Europe objected that the US wasn't adequately protecting European citizens' data when US businesses are subject to government spying. These are legitimate concerns, but Europe is doing exactly the same thing the US is. As a US citizen whose data might be processed in Europe by multinational companies, how can I trust that my data is safe? When US companies and the US government are involved, I have the recourse of the court system. But there's no such recourse for me if the EU is spying. As a US citizen, I don't want my data shared with or processed in Europe. At least if it's in the US, I have a modicum of hope that the courts can protect me from government abuses.
UK != EU, especially when the UK's not even fully in the EU. Although reduced from what they used to be, Germany's concept of privacy far exceeds American or British standards; your data is much safer there, although ultimate privacy is an incompatability with the advent of the internet.
I have a theory that it's impossible to prove anything, but I can't prove it.