It shouldn't have been built, but for other reasons - the biggest one being the enemy for which they're designed to fight is not who the US military is likely to be dealing with in the future.
What role do these hyper-advanced aircraft have when you're fighting Al-Qaeda, ISIS, or whoever the stone-age-terrorist-du-jour is? We're not going to be fighting China, that's for sure; both they and we are way to inter-dependent.
So sure - the money already spent is sunk cost. But why throw good money after bad?
What did we do before Wikipedia?
We read the original books many of those Wikipedia articles have been copied from.
waitwaitwait...are you telling me. that the summary. got it right?!
Why all this wider and taller but no thicker?
Because there were no women on the design team.
You know what was a really good Microsoft offering, for its time? Microsoft Dinosaurs. And I liked Encarta as well.
The web has largely rendered those sorts of projects pointless from a corporate perspective, obviously. Plus I haven't used Windows as my main desktop OS for 13-14 years.. but still, I have fond memories of those two products.
Don't worry, Google will be improving the tool soon - they plan to do it right after they've updated Google Voice!
It's like putting too much air into a balloon!
So we have a bunch of male scientists who apparently didn't know about rufies.
Wait, what? All of a sudden we've decided that violating rights is OK if it makes us more secure? When did we decide that?
just around when the ink dried on the constitution. you don't think this country has a long, long history of violating rights in the name of security?
The whole thing sounds like using a massive amount of expensive technology to replace a very small amount of skill.
Yeah, but we're talking about the guy who runs the patent troll firm Intellectual Ventures. I suspect he's got a whole slew of patents covering the theoretical oven he's describing.
I suspect he likes pretending he has other interests than patent litigation, though, since that isn't the sort of thing that's going to look great in an obituary.
Yes, it has warts, security issues and the original database services were anything but plug-compatible, but it's a great language for quick-and-dirty.
Yes, let's gloss over PHP's security issues. I mean, It's not like the developers ever broke crypt and then debated whether or not they were going to fix it...
I'm still watering my veggies with a sprinkler, for the most part. I check my soil's moisture with my finger, and I calculate how much water has been put down using either a couple tin cans or some cheapie rain gauges.
I guess this new equipment is now going to be added to the list of things I'm not using. On the bright side, it also means some hacker isn't going to turn my vegetable garden into a bog garden from the comfort of their parents' basement... they'll have to sneak into my yard and turn on the faucet by hand (and hope they make it past the dogs and the homeowner).
So Google+ has apparently taken off! I must have missed the memo!
Well, I suppose if the frame of reference was Orkut, then yes it has. Sure, Google+ has tens of millions of members... who aren't actually aware they are members of Google+.
Yet nobody seems to complain about this much–presumably because, when you put it this way, it seems kind of silly to suggest that a company whose business model is predicated on getting its users to use its product more would do anything other than try to manipulate its users into, you know, using its product more.
Back when I was on Facebook, it seemed like every change they made was designed to make me want to use its product less. So much so that I eventually asked them to delete my account.