Where I work I think the bandwidth is fine but the latency is horrendous, with every individual connection having to be checked against an extensive list of unapproved sites. So on-demand loading is an irritant/causes jerky scroll motion, even when content rearrangement is not invovled.

Where "well-written javascript" means popping the images in while I'm reading, and not fucking waiting until I'm trying to scroll down to read more.

Yes, even in systems other than democracies it's usually on the people as to what they'll put up with. In ours the populace is ultimately to blame, for the corruption that exists (whether Leftism- or corporate-induced).

But in our defense, we've been disarmed. Both literally and figuratively. While maybe technology and deepness of pockets has rendered us no longer able to physically restrain our government and its ruling class, we've been societally neutered of the knowledge and background and spirit to resist a government and ruling class running amok. So how much can we blame the people in America today.

And having an open southern border is pure genius on the Left's part. We people used to come to here to leave communism because they hated it and were convinced that it didn't work, not because they thought it was the best for them if only it had a sufficient funding base. People used to come here who believed they could make it on their own, and wanted to assimilate. It's a dream come true for the Left to have masses of immigrants who believe communism just wasn't done right, and don't want to assimilate but stay divided in ethnic/cultural communities but coming together to vote Democrat.

So not only have we been disarmed, but we've been diluted. I live in SoCal and Latinos work very hard here, I notice the jobs they do and they're not easy or clean jobs, and they don't pay much I would imagine, and they don't complain. So it's not solely of them and the background they bring with them (of faith in communism and tolerance of corruption), it's also a function of America today.

I think when the Irish and Polish and Italian immigrant waves came, they actually liked the basic system of America and wanted to melt into it. They thought they could make it just fine on their own, by working. Now we have multiculturalism and its encouragement of cultural segregation, and of not learning the language and customs and fully joining in. Now suddenly these days it's like America is at a zenith of racism and the message that can and does resonate is that you can't make it on your own in America, without the Left's help.

I.e. sympathy for Leftist values has probably already reached critical mass here. So what could possibly cause the populace (the citizenry plus the non-citizenry, that is) to want to get more involved in standing up to corruption and the slide Leftward. When the passing along of the American independent spirit to the young is being suppressed, and our population is being backfilled by those who'd never had it and don't appreciate it or want it.

Kinda. It wasn't impossible to write cross platform browser stuff in the late 1990s, when most corporations started this whole "We'll standardize on browser X" policy making, but it required a discipline that had most developers throwing their hands up in the air in disgust.

Unfortunately the situation in the late 1990s was:

- The major browsers were incompatible.
- IE4+ was the most standard. Yes, really. Those versions had a relatively complete implementation of CSS.
- IE came preinstalled with the standard operating system of that time.

That was it. That was why corporations went with it. It's why they adopted the monoculture in the first place. If Netscape had been a little quicker with Mozilla, or been more enthusiastic about CSS in Netscape 4.x, and if CSS had been a little more complete, things might have been different.

This doesn't set back fascism a little, just reveals it a little (and when the populace doesn't care, then those are not both one and the same). And too many laws is bad, but, at least at the amount that we have, that's not what's leading to uneven enforcement.

A couple of the earlier comment-leavers (I didn't read all of the comments) touched on the problems:

and:

One of the reasons we have uneven enforcement is because we have a ruling class in this country. It is comprised of those on the Left who are in power, and that is politicians as well as government employees (and which would be almost all of those), plus those of the Republican party in power who partially align with them, plus those on the Left in prominence in the news and entertainment media.

See what the criteria are. Power, or prominence. As Andy Stern once said (about the Leftist movement in general), paraphrasing, we'll either use the power of persuasion or the persuasion of power. Republicans out of office, no matter how sympathizing to the Left, have no use to them. And do you think either of your two trolls here would get special treatment under the law, just for being good Lefties. Nope, because they have neither.

And what that charlatan so-called leader of labor (as a worker, he represents me about as much as Al Sharpton represents much of those who are Black) said points to the other problem. It's what's also in the meaning behind the Left's "elections have consequences".

It's the mindset/political philosophy of having total disregard for stability and agreed-upon things and a system of rules and laws. That if I "win" (because to them, governing is a reward (and the most rewarding thing you can do, morally)), either through getting into power through elections or other means, or getting public opinion behind me through literally however I can, then I get to set the rules.

Then I should get to set them largely independent of precedent or existing systems of rules, is what it means to them. And therefore I should get to say when they apply. And when I'm a member of the ruling class, I say they don't apply to my class. (Without a whole class of people positioned to and dedicated to or complicit with moving the U.S. Leftward, favor could only be singled out based on familial or financial gain or other traditional grounds besides this secular religious movement one.)

And there you have it. Identify any holes if you care.

I think I'm one of the two who bought from Amazon. I don't care if you put it up for free. If it really bugs you that much, take the two bucks and give it to the next homeless person you see, or in the tip jar somewhere, or whatever. (Actually, I thought I said before that you could do that :)

So will the Tesla-haters (other than the self-serving parasites Elon has made obsolete) like this, or hate it even more?

If only I could think of a car analogy to help me decide!

Well, Apple is running a modified OS X on its iDevices, and Android is Linux based. Now, before you state the obvious: in both cases, the primary userland, that is, the userland that you're interacting with right now, is a stripped down power-optimized version.

And that's true of Windows 8.1 if you use the Metro UI too. Yes, OK, the desktop stuff is there, it's on "disk", ready to be swapped into memory if you want to run it, but it's not actually active in any serious way, it's waiting for a mouse click that isn't coming. Start your task manager now if you don't believe me, and take a look at the CPU usage of, say, Explorer (explorer.exe). 0%? That's because you're not doing anything with it. You're reading this web page.

I'm guessing that if I were running one of those "Ubuntu under Android" things that you can get for Android (I've never tried them as every device I've had had some kind of hardware issue preventing it from being likely to work, and the descriptions have always suggested they suck anyway...) I'd also see next to no increase in power usage, after starting it but not actually launching any X11 applications, despite that literally being an entire desktop operating system running on a phone, with all the components being in place.

So there really aren't any power implications when it comes to Microsoft shipping a full version of Windows for power saving devices, as long as - and they do - Microsoft includes a power efficient UI (Metro) for the tasks you'll be using the device for.

The only real reason for Microsoft not to ship their desktop OS on phones is that it takes up way too much disk space. As in "That 32G you get with an HP Stream 8 sounds sweet, but actually Windows takes up about around 20G of it, so get ready to buy an SD card straight away."

That really is it. I'm using that very device. Battery life is pretty ordinary for a tablet. I've seen much worse.

What if your preconceived position is unbiased?

I know it's unlikely, but it's entirely possible the Senator researched the facts and drew his conclusion based upon those facts.

I personally think the STEM shortage H1B thing is more complex, but the view he's expressed isn't unusual from those looking at the facts. The very fact tech companies insist H1-Bs are the right approach, rather than a slight relaxation of green card standards, suggests the motivation here is cheap slave labor, not attracting talent.

And Cmdr Taco

moot is now free to join Sherrod DeHippo in obscurity.

can anyone name any Scientific discipline that has been built on models that have been shown by empirical evidence to be wrong?

Newtonian physics?

Basically to increase page impressions, which means sweet advertising dollars. Essentially you take something that's a known quantity in terms of clickbait, in this case "Google is going to start a mobile phone company!", add some details that seem slightly plausable - it'd be awkward starting from scratch, and they'd obviously not get into bed with Verizon or AT&T as both are too large to allow themselves to be influenced, so you pick the two struggling operators instead, and BANG you end up on the front pages of numerous news aggregators, your links are retweeted wildly, and you get that sweet, sweet advertising cash.

Oh, wait, you meant "Why would Google..."? They wouldn't. The story is ridiculous. Sprint and T-Mo don't even use the same network technology with the exception of LTE, and the latter is suffering from a lack of widely supported standards in key areas.

So, in #12, they decided to save us the trouble of having #13 do "The Search for Kirk". So that puts #13 as...

Kirk violates the prime directive again, resulting in yet another five-minute demotion and a random crewmember reassigned to a garbage scow for the Ganymede outpost.

Suddenly an alien probe starts microwaving Earth's oceans. To save Earth, Starfleet instantly promotes Kirk to double-plus-admiral and gives him an experimental portable time travel module, which he uses to take the enterprise back to 1980s Earth.

Once there, he must find and kill a 10 year old Benedict Cumberbatch before he invents the plague that wiped out the whales.

In the second to last scene, wacky hijinks ensue as we learn that Uhura secretly hid a chihuahua in her purse before returning to the future, which due to tachyon flux has evolved into a catch-phrase spewing mascot with the power to float just out of reach.

Finally, Kirk makes a speech (possibly as a voiceover) intended to beat some cheesy moral principle about the benefits of communism into the audience.

Credits.

Not sure what's so difficult to understand about that

Aside from TFA's exceedingly ambiguous wording, you have to admit it leads to quite a few questions.

For example, Windows occasionally shits the bed (I know, I know, call me a hater), sometimes even because of their own updates. If I need to reinstall the OS after a year because Microsoft pushed out a bad update, will I then need to buy a new copy just to get back to what I had for free the previous day? That seems to leave an awfully lot of room for intentional "accidents".