The richer people get the more they dwell on the environment, quality-of-life, health-and-safety, wealth disparity, etc., so they advocate all sorts of limits, requirements and obligations on behalf of various agenda. Liberal gentry will not permit the masses to indulge a post scarcity world.

I call the Justice department the ringmaster in violating the civil rights of The Press.

I call the Justice department the ringmaster in agenda driven gunwalking cover-ups.

I call the Justice department the ringmaster in whistleblower persecution.

Price fixing e-books? Yippie disposable income doesn't actually rate at this point; we have bigger problems.

I agree. This "problem" is in the process of solving itself and adding a bunch of statist gobbledygook to the matter won't improve the outcome. Cut the damn cord. Make the cable people deal with a competitive market.

The best contribution The Great and The Good can make is to ensure network neutrality. Leave the rest to the consumer and simple competition will fix the problem. This isn't the water supply or national defense. Just facilitate competition and let consumers work out their tee-vee problems.

Since what folks have in mind by "AI" changes to exclude anything within the capability of machines, we're implicitly ready for whatever emerges.

My DSL is up. It's either fixed or didn't involve my part of the system.

CenturyLink (formerly Qwest in my case) has been very reliable during the past year. You get the rate you pay for as well.

Until very recently Government America used males (exclusively) for cannon fodder about once a generation. Be thankful the worse you'll ever face is a paid-leave time off disparity.

Or don't. Farming internet karma with 10+ poasts a day (!) when you're supposed to be actually earning your salary is much more fun.

Machines have no trouble with <option checked>foo</option>. The desire to force XML compliant checked="checked" on HTML is not rooted in parsing difficulty or performance or any other machine processing rationale. The only actual problem with <option checked> is that it offends the sensibilities of XML advocates. Writing interpreters capable of handling "unclosed" tags or valueless attributes is a solved problem.

Among the common compiled languages we have C++ which "is ambiguous, context-dependent, and potentially requires infinite lookahead to resolve ambiguities," * and which precludes the use of parsers based on formal grammers. Perl is an example of an interpreted language that can't be parsed. Here is a thousand or so words on the implications of Javascript semicolon insertion.

In short, your appeal to the rigor of compiled or interpreted languages is not credible.

Jaczko isn't credible. He is a head case that drove his colleagues, including his fellow Obama appointees, to publically and unanimously condemn his tenure as NRC chairman while seated right next to him during congressional testimony. They forced him out because they'd had enough of his shit.

So now he is going to be a professional anti-nuke gadfly. Last week good 'ol Senator Harry Reid resurrected the head case and put him on the NNSA board so he can make that group dysfunctional and say scary things about the stockpile. Now that he's out of the shadows he's taking more shots as nuclear energy as well.

If you read the linked story you'll eventually learn what, specifically, his problem is with contemporary operating reactors; they are large and have enough residual heat to damage fuel after shutdown. The notion that our power reactors are too large is not new. It has been well understood since the beginning of nuclear energy production. Jaczko is talking about it because that's his job now; use the credibility of his "Former Chairman of the NRC" moniker to make headlines by saying scary things about nukes.

Incidentally this discussion raises the question; how large can a reactor be without risking fuel damage? The answer is about 60 MW thermal for traditional PWR light water designs. Common power reactors are 2000 MW thermal.

BTW, we aren't going to do anything about any of this. We're not replacing the reactors, or coal or gas or building out green energy or anything else. We're a balkanized welfare state nation occupied with feathering our environmental nest while evacuating our industrial base to Asia. The power system you have now will be approximately the power system running when you die. Maybe a reactor will melt and we'll replace our nukes with more gas consumption. That's about as much as you can expect.

;)

That's right. China's per capita coal consumption is far less than typical Westerners, so until the Chinese have wrecked the environment at least as much as you have, for at least as long as you have, and a good deal worse and longer for good measure, then you need to shut your stupid fat face.

You can dream up all the X replacements you want, but you need to deliver working code.

Good job Wayland.

I'll bet the insanely rich are relieved to have had their spending prerogatives blessed by none other than you.

o_O

That's a yacht? Looks like a commercial fishing vessel or a coast guard cutter.

I suppose if you need to intercept drug smugglers or rescue someone it might be the thing... but most yacht buyers are looking for a nice place to drape their naked women.

More tools to efficiently create more sites for fewer actual visitors.

Go to the gallery (it doesn't hurt, really.) Sort by "Rank". Note that you've never seen any of these sites. Scroll down, noting that the thumbnails repeat (...) after 6 rows for a total of 24 unique sites.

Which is pretty good, considering how many distinct CMS tools against which all high "Rank" sites must be amortized.

One day something important will happen and the Western world is going to have to stop making so many web sites. And that sucks, because I think every brand and line of lingerie should have a complete site with lots of models, rebuilt from scratch every 18 to 36 days.

So in the mean time, yay for CMS tools.

Not really. There is no Human 2.0. Our ancestors weren't incompetent at life. The principles they codified into our constitution are largely valid today, and they left room to correct the parts that weren't because they understood they were fallible.