Instead of talking about "malicious actors", the article should be talking about malicious developers.
Comcast actually does beat Verizon on residential services, at least when it comes to download speeds. The top FiOS residential plan is 75 down, the top Comcast plan is 100 down.
Last I checked, Verizon's 500mbps download (as part of the 500/500 symmetrical) is larger than the 100mbps download you cite from Comcast.
Will Comcast catch up to Verizon? If so, when?
That was my first thought
According to Bloomberg TV, Bing has a whopping 2.5% marketshare in the EU search market.
A tweet (in Russian) from a key Twitter account used by pro-Russian separatists, in which they claim to have captured a Buk surface-to-air missile system, has now been deleted, BBC Monitoring observes. Ukrainians say the Malaysian plane could have been downed with a Buk, but pro-Russian rebels have now denied they have it.
The discussion seems to center more around whether or not this was a "catastrophic" bug, or a "minor" bug. A bug in a library that has not yet seen a production release. So one really should ask, why not just report the bug and have it fixed, instead of seeking headlines?
There seem to be some people who would like to see the LibreSSL project fail. It makes one wonder why, as the OpenSSL near-monoculture has served the world so well.
My experience with Comcast as an ISP is that the service itself is actually pretty good, if a tad expensive. I have a high-speed, low latency connection with native IPv6.
I would agree with this. The internet service is quite good, if pricy. And having IPv6 dual stack is very nice.
If I am hearing correctly, this guy was signed up for 105 megabits per second... Do you know how hard it is to use 105 megabits/second? Netflix in HD only uses up 5... unless this guy has a family of 20, with each person watching HD content, 105 Megabits/second is a waste of money.
Unless you are paying his bill, what is it to you what level of service he decides to get for himself?
"Research" (and I use that term loosely) about the problems with the science of climate change apparently is quietly funded by the very energy companies that are pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Energy companies which would have revenue issues if they were held accountable for the pollution they pump into our ecosystem.
The main question I have to ask is what the opinions reflected in the survey really reflect, a reaction to the misleading campaigns of the climate change deniers, or an actual understanding of what is happening to our planet.
Take a look at the issues in Miami due to increasing water levels...
In his all-hands strategy email of last week, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella demoted Windows to a handful of terse mentions deep in the 3,100 communique, a clue how he, and thus the company, now see the firm's long-time cornerstone. "Windows will deliver the most rich and consistent user experience for digital work and life scenarios on screens of all sizes — from phones, tablets and laptops to TVs and giant 82-in PPI boards," Nadella said in one of the first uses of "Windows" in his massive message. That sentence appeared well past the half-way mark in the email: 60% of the message preceded it.
Is Microsoft now unable to innovate within the desktop Windows space? Is Mr. Nadella's memo a tacit admission by Microsoft that there is little innovation left in the desktop space? Is Microsoft's inability to innovate in the desktop space indicative of a larger problem within Microsoft? Has rigor mortis set in?"
Why not use older computers for tasks that are appropriate for their capabilities?