Yeah except you can't keep that price and get a decent handset, that's why I just switched the wife over to Republic Wireless, same $25/month but she can use a non-sucky phone (Moto X) instead of her cruddy Optimus V on Virgin Mobile plus she now gets unlimited voice, twice as much data, and roaming to Verizon.
In theory that's correct, for instance our company has a policy that a manager and no more than two of his direct reports can be on a flight together, but the number of times that policy is violated when a bunch of the bigwigs are taking the chartered jet to a meeting far away makes it a bit toothless in reality. Who's going to fire the CEO and a bunch of EVP's?
Sure, the data might be safe from a government's prying eyes, but will it be safe from a government who kindly pays for the data, with the company acquiescing between it wants to maintain its lucrative business links with the authorities?
...that also has the power to jail anyone, including corporate executives, for undisclosed national security reasons and undisclosed duration if they fail to cooperate?
So the net effect is that the fuel company that screwed up the instructions is out the ~$4.3m in markup they could have made selling the fuel to H211 as a private company, sounds like a complete non-issue to me, if you screw up the paperwork and lose out on potential income too bad. Why this is any kind of an investigation is beyond me, the government is out $0, they got free use of the plane over 200 times, and they got rental income for hanger space that most likely would have been empty if H211's plane wasn't parked there. In fact the government is out money for the audit (or out auditor time which is the same thing since I'm sure there's plenty of actual waste or malfeasance they could have been uncovering).
I think it's absolutely wrong to out someone who is actively trying to remain out of the spotlight
Let's say for argument sake that it is accurate. That is the bitcoin owner, who isn't spending any of the bitcoins.
The person does not want to talk about it. If he is serious about that, waving microphones in front of the man is NOT going to encourage him to be forthcoming with personal stories.
So what does it change? Nothing!
There is no benefit to anyone. Now if the guy wanted to open up and share stories, that is what the media is hungering for. But he isn't doing that.
The BEST thing the guy could do is say "Yes that is me. I have nothing more to say, and I don't think I ever will. Now get off my lawn." and then refuse to say anything more. In fact, judging by the story, that is EXACTLY what he did say. There is no story or controversy around it. This is just some guy who has access to something valuable.
Some of the media folk may want to ask him questions, hoping to make a buck when he shares a story, but if he chooses not to share anything they'll quickly lose interest when the next something shiny comes around.
is there some way that the real Satoshi could affirm his existence
What does it gain anybody?
Let's say that is the guy, he didn't lose the key, and he has access to a valuable resource. So what? I know several people who are fairly wealthy, their wealth does not define them, nor does it make them inherently powerful or anything. What is the point of having them prove their wealth to someone?
About the only thing anyone would want is to hear stories. No matter if that is the man or not, the real bitcoin owner does not want to share stories. Sticking microphones in his face and asking him questions about his life is unlikely to encourage him to share personal stories. There is nothing to gain by trying to point out that a person has a valuable object when the person has insisted for years they don't wish to discuss it.
Incorrect, though the numbers are close, see Table IV.C.1-6 a, the weighted industry average puts cars
The core components, such as Direct3D and DirectInput, are considered part of the operating system [microsoft.com]
Considering how they are tied to windows core components, I suppose there is a slim chance that Windows 7 SP2 could potentially include DX12 in it.
Of course, there is also a slim chance the Easter Bunny will bring me solid gold eggs and Santa will fill my stocking with hundred dollar bills. I'd much prefer either of those.
Better be for Windows 7 or devs will not use it
Perhaps you missed the announcements that have been coming from Redmond for nearly a decade. The core components, such as Direct3D and DirectInput, are considered part of the operating system .
Starting with Vista the version of DirectX is incremented with the version of the Windows SDK, and no back porting will take place. (powerpoint)
Since many people didn't catch it, they re-announced it with the platform update for WIndows 7: If you want DX11.1, you must get the service pack update .
The have already said announcement at GDC will not deviate their course; DirectX 12 is being announced late March as part of a series of press releases right before the new Windows SDK for the 8.1 Update is released in April. All of the updates are part of the Windows SDK for 8.1 Update. , much like the Windows 7 Update where they released a new Windows SDK to accompany it..
And a fifth time, just in case you missed it: Effective 2006, Microsoft has stopped distributing individual DirectX packages. It is now a core operating system component. They have not backported the drivers for nearly a decade, and they have repeatedly told people that the backports are gone. It will not be on Windows 7.
Got it? Can it be made more clear?
XP = DX9c. Vista = DX10. Vista SP1 = DX10.1. Vista SP2 = DX10.2. Win7 = DX11. WIn 7 SP1 = DX11.1. Win 8 = DX11.1. Win 8.1 = DX11.2. And now it looks like Win 8.1 SP1 = DX12. It really shouldn't be that difficult to grasp.
Because I do NOT trust code from Russia, China, anywhere in the Middle East, and a few other places. Just look at all the crime (Target for one) that's based in Russia alone.
Well, unfortunately, maintainers have found they also cannot trust sources in the US and other nations due to corporate and government intrusion either. Nor can you trust the code is entirely bug free, and who knows if the security flaw bug was intentionally introduced.
The only answer for open source maintainers is constant vigilance. NOBODY is to be trusted.
Search back to when Linus Torvalds was asked if the NSA and other agencies had ever tried to make him to install back doors in the kernel. He said "Noooo..." while emphatically nodding his head "yes". He also claims to verify all the submissions that make it in, and claims to double-check all submissions that claim to have been made by him since spoofed changes have been known to happen.
Based on the heated, usually profanity-laden messages from the kernel mailing list when a maintainer lets a kernel bug through and he caught it, I'd say his personal level of distrust is just about right for what he is maintaining. Not even the highest-level maintainers have his complete trust.
It isn't an attack, it is a proxy. The company's node (computer) is configured to use the company's proxy to get out to the Internet. The connection to the end system is between the company's proxy and the end system. The user has no equipment in play.
Where I work (U.S. Gov't Agency) does this, though they exempt links to known online banking addresses.
Employees are trained annually and sign papers acknowledging they understand what is going on. Don't like it? Don't work here. Or, as most people do, use your own device on a cellular connection and don't use the company's equipment or network.
But that's easily solved by XP Mode, which can be downloaded from Microsoft's site. So let's say she has a computer w/ Windows 7 and needs to run this, she can, for this application, run XP mode, run her greetings & card workshop in that Window, and she'd be just fine. She doesn't have to put up w/ all the security holes that won't be patched under XP moving forward.
I think you missed the point:
She has no apparent need to replace XP. The software does everything she requires.
She uses a computer for tasks X, Y, an Z. The computer she has right now today is able to perform those tasks in a satisfactory manner.
Sure, she can go buy a new operating system, also a new computer because her 10-year-old box won't handle it well, and also the latest generation of a bunch of software, and also install XP mode to run her old programs, and the net result is that she is running exactly the same system she had before, just on a newer box. It solves no problems except perhaps imminent hardware failure due to dust and age.
She currently has no need for the replacement software. Her current solution works just fine, thank you very much.
Interesting, though I have to wonder if Macho Springs/First Solar isn't receiving some type of subsidy that allows it to reach that price.
It's the current installed cost of utility scale solar.