So if "enterprise" moved apps to the "cloud" then everything you said is moot no?

...do you think "enterprise" wants to keep all this stuff inhouse forever?

In Australia (that place where we had a couple of serious killings and decided to do something about it) the law states that you must keep your firearms in a locked safe that only you (or another person with a gun licence) has access to.

If I have a gun licence and the police come around to do a spot check and ask my wife to open the safe, and she does, I loose my licence. She is not allowed to have access to open the safe with firearms.

On the one hand its seems you people bitch about endless manipulation and conspiracy and on the other you claim your right to bear arms somehow protects you. If one took information to be power wouldn't you use the appropriate amendment to mandate access to information as "bearing arms" and an instrument for good as opposed a constant state of death and social division over these weapons?

Perhaps government and corporate secrecy is your real domestic threat and openness, access and debate are truly the arms of the modern age that will protect you.

"....I really don't see how it's so hard to find a way to reconcile ones religious beliefs with their scientific ones......"

None of the mainstream religions have a narrative that matches science. Saying "we dont know about the big bang" != "Jesus is cool" ..you may be the exception but the moment a belief becomes a way to inturpret realtiy the human race loses

"...Should the world now treat all Americans like paranoid war-mongers that embrace pre-emptive war and a police state?...."

Yes.

(At least that is what many US posters claim when talking about politics, gun control and "occupy" on Slashdot)

Governments go to war not people.

> What the US is doing is bulling at it's best.

+1

I have mod points but......(Its taken me a decade to say that :-)

In my colo I have a power allocation. Having X laptops each with their own power would probably eat my allocation before a 1RU server would.

"......Let's say the government stops spending so much on defense....."

Thank you for your economics lesson. You could have opted to suggest the US Government invests in green energy projects, R&D, space research, (healthcare?) - but no you picked defense.

The day that countries stop spending on defense and move those resources to better the plight of their citizens and the human race is the day we as a species take a large jump forward. Justifying that defense is necessary so that Mandy from Iowa can stock grocery shelves after school doesn't amount to progress, it amounts to perpetuating a gun culture or at least one that is dependant on a handful of boardrooms paying a congress of politicians to own masses of people.

** The kinda sorta flip side is that quality newspapers (or blogs or whatever) will win... once there is no "free lunch" on news, pretty much all news will have to be for-pay again. **

I'm 40. I have never read a newspaper and had an interest in most of it. I would struggle for 3-4 articles (?3%). But if I buy a newspaper I buy it all.

It might be quality reporting (on the fact that some inbreds are having twins | Victoria's secret is no longer secret | the christian right follows jesus, etc) but its mainly worthless drivel that does not contribute the prosperity or well being of the human race as a whole.

"...will actually vouch for the work of their reporters..."

Please don't get me wrong - I agree with the need for reliable sources, but:

* Have you been on Facebook? A billion Sheeple will repost without any investigation of facts. Surely that means that their belief is strong or interest diminished in the junk they post. Perception is reality.

* Should we trust news? Really? Ever? Without going to look up a few facts?

Oh OK - you mean stuff you could do with rsync / bash / cron in a heartbeat?

Are you retarded?????

"....I don't think anyone could argue that the Catholic Church doesn't do an amazing amount of good for impoverished African states....."

AIDS + no condoms????

"...'Our tolerance must never extend to tolerating religious hatred.'...."

Fuck you Julia I'm an atheist and the whole concept of religious tolerance revolts me to my core. I do it because I don't think people are ready yet to en masse face the realities of the universe and life without religion (aka one less thing to worry about).

I don't stir the pot actively but if a religious person injects themselves in my life I have zero tolerance. Having an official state that religion is on the agenda for Australia is piss weak. We don't have an official religion.

".......keeping others from doing me harm......"

Like killing you and your children by perpetuating bad lifestyle choices on the basis of "your rights"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIwrV5e6fMY

"...she has six years to live...."

".... It was also heavily criticized for its National Intelligence Estimate in 2002, which supported claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction...."

So basically an idea to sell to the crowd that it is listening to their feedback. I doubt it. I am pretty sure that any intel agency with a budget is aware of most of the important stuff before we are.

The BBC is touting some tripe as to what the people across the pond are doing? It seems more like a way to soften their failures in light of the agenda to preserve their incursions into citizen monitoring.

By choosing a level that you are aiming your app at and testing it on said versions / platforms / etc.

The other part is to use plain old HTML instead of AJAX everything and pick your compatibility battles where you have the high ground

I normally take the middle path and only use generic and robust techniques for the core of an application.

Also if you are selling a viable business application you can say things like IE9+ compatible to avoid such hell. Granted if you are writing for Joe Public then you have to be more mindful of older browsers but compatibility is not that hard (I haven't suggested HTML 5 I'm just suggesting using the appropriate level of language to solve your business case. )

If the client want HTML5 features to work on an old browser then they are already making a choice to either have multiple versions of a web application or have a structure fails gracefully for each one....sounds like divorcing your cousin - things are a bit fucked up to start with