I think china tried both prohibition and non-prohibition, sometime back. The latter didn't work out so well for them.
Try putting a load balancer (Cisco ACE, Citrix NetScaler) on a virtual IP and load balancing the UDP packets across several nodes behind the balancer.
No, I don't think so. RMS worked at MIT for over a decade.
Here's the current list of the top 5 most read articles on the New York Times:
1. Jetliner Explodes Over Ukraine; Struck by Missile, Officials Say
2. Obama Points to Pro-Russia Separatists in Downing of Malaysia Airlines Plane
3. Fallen Bodies, Jet Parts and a Child’s Pink Book
4. Maps of the Crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17
5. World Leaders Match Anger With Calls for Inquiry Into Ukraine Plane Crash
I'm going to really go out on a limb say that Putin has already lost the propaganda war here...
" Very useful! "
- Mr. McAfee and friends
Planes and runways have lights.
The aim here is a baby step towards language-agnostic reuse of code developed over decades at great collective effort.
My thoughts so far: the only code suitable for exposure are functions and methods that accept and return basic types (int, char, string) — or data structures or objects made up purely of basic types. Introspection/reflection capabilities in a language — including the ability to examine method signatures — are important. Languages like Perl (whose subroutine parameters passed in the @_ array, but without formal subroutine signatures) are a bit of a puzzle."
As another pointed out, Russia isn't anywhere near the first country to do this; in fact, doesn't the European Union require it Union-wide?
Anyway, I'm most curious how the Kremlin defined "personal". Being that a lot of us are software industry programmers, product managers, etc., it'd be useful to know what kind of changes we need to make to our respective companies' international back-end infrastructure.
People will like the smaller car and lower price,but if it doesn't have the range... they will not flock to it...
A lot of families have more than one car. You could have a large, gasoline powered car to go visit Aunt Mabel or on a camping trip in the Grand Canyon, and a smaller electric car for commuting, runs to the supermarket, etc. The hope is that eventually electric vehicles will have the range, rapid recharge rate, and charging infrastructure that they can compete with and replace gas engines; in the meantime the technology may already be mature enough to compete in particular niches. The nature of disruptive technology is that it initially plays to its strengths and gets a foothold in a market where conventional technology does not perform as well, and as it improves it eventually moves in and takes over from the conventional technology.
That being said, we are a long way away from a fleet that is all-electric or even substantially electric. It's growing rapidly compared to where it was a few years ago (basically, no electric cars), but it's still a tiny segment of the automobile market. According to Wikipedia,
When Homo sapiens show up, they've got an entirely new technology- the atlatl, or spear-thrower. They can throw a dart 60 feet with enough force to impale a large animal. This means they don't need to get as close to strike. It also means that when they do strike, the prey can't hit back. The difference in build between Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis seems to reflect this different hunting strategy. Neanderthals are short and stocky, like wrestlers. Homo sapiens are long and lanky, like basketball players. For the one, strength is key. For the other, speed, agility and long-distance throwing are key.
This may also explain the different effects that the two had on the fauna. When Neanderthals show up, we don't see any major extinctions. When Homo sapiens show up in Eurasia, we see the disappearance of mammoths, wooly rhinos, Irish elk, etc. The run-up-and-stab it hunting approach of Neanderthals wasn't that different from the hunting strategy of saber-toothed cats from the prey's standpoint. Raining sharp sticks of death down from dozens of meters away was radically different than anything the local fauna had ever faced before.
You know Russell Peters is a comedian, right?
In the current case, it would appear that Russia doesn't accept the U.S. argument that civilian infrastructure should be off-limits. Whether the U.S. can complain here or not is debatable. The U.S. has targeted civilian infrastructure during conventional operations; they knocked out the power in Serbia during actions in Kosovo, for example. So the Russians could easily argue- and not without merit- that if it's OK to take out the power in Serbia using a stealth bomber and a conventional bomb, it ought to be OK to turn out the lights in the U.S. using a logic bomb.