I think the person the questioner was talking to was a tad out of touch. And we see that regularly on Slashdot with people absolutely convinced that $TECHNOLOGY is never used because they don't see it used in their circle of technology acquaintances.

The four most commonly used platforms right now are LAMP with PHP (not Perl, not Python, Goddamnedfuckingawful PHP), JEE, .NET, and "front-end web (Javascript/HTML/DOM/CSS)". Coming up the rear are Objective C on iOS, Java on Android, and Native (non-.NET) C++ on Windows. Anyone who claims any of these seven (well, six and a half - Java on Android and JEE obviously share quite a bit, including an entire programming language) platforms are "legacy" are completely out of touch.

JEE and .NET are big in the corporate world and usually one or the other is the core platform for their modern web-based business software infrastructure, usually built as web applications (that is, servlets and .NET's equivalents serving HTML and Javascript for standard browsers, we're not talking not applets) accessing backends via web services.

LAMP is generally used for a lot of new projects that end up phenomenally successful but start as essentially hacks where someone wanted something and didn't know much about coding, but knew enough PHP to put something together that did what they needed.

Objective C on iOS and Java on Android are, obviously, the two major mobile platforms. And C++ is used on Windows because it's what was, until recently, the only standard Windows platform and a large number of Windows developers are still wary of .NET.

Even outside of the golden seven, we have languages like C that still serve a critical purpose in some domains such as kernel level systems software. And what remains is mostly a set of platforms that aren't "legacy", just not as popular. Python, Perl, node.js, Coldfusion (another platform I'd wish would die already, even more than PHP), Ruby, and others.

Legacy? I guess nobody's doing new COBOL development to the best of my knowledge, or new Fortran. Some would dearly like Adobe Flash to be legacy, but until a viable cross-platform DRM scheme gets added to HTML5, I don't see it going away.

But .NET? Claiming it's legacy shows astonishing ignorance.

There are calls to have people who dispute or are sceptical of certain "consensus" paradigms thrown out of their jobs, of their institutions and in some cases tried as criminals.

Which is not unlike the way political and religious authorities have treated "hertics" in the past.

Several annual trips to NYC makes you a tourist, it's not nearly the same as living there.

Congratulations. You're the fourth (fifth, if we count hypothetical Nakamoto) person (maybe more, if we assume the moderators currently modding me back down also share the same misconception) who seems to have no understanding of how the Internet works and what the effect is has on privacy.

You are correct that logging, by itself, makes no difference. But logging is one of the key components of Bitcoin that destroys the ability to be genuinely anonymous on it. For more details, I suggest you read the response I made to the second of your sibling posts. But essentially, to re-iterate, the more you use a wallet, the more information "leaks" about you because the logging exists, is public, and will, from time to time, involve you making transactions with people who know you. Without the use of an extremely trustworthy Bitcoin laundering service, it will be the case that ultimately any well connected retailer or employer can find out what you've been spending your money on.

Comparing it to posting AC on Slashdot is inane and absurd. Indeed, even posting under a pseudonym on Slashdot, as I do, grants me more privacy than my attempting to use Bitcoin to buy both Samizdat and food.

That makes more sense - never mind "why does it need execheap", I was wondering why a game developer would be using mp3 files in the first place. Looks like "Miles Sound System" handles Ogg Vorbis as well, in addition to the various mixing/filtering/positioning functions in it.

I may be wrong on this, but in the US, HIPAA would rule the day on such a case, no? That would mean that 200k Pounds Sterling would be a wee drop in the bucket compared to the fine such an organization would face here should it face a data leak of that magnitude.

You're making substantial assumptions about what kind of teeth HIPAA has. When I worked at a medical software company -- wherein I was directly responsible for systems handling patient data, went through HIPAA training, and worked directly with our HIPAA compliance officer to determine technical measures -- it was damned near toothless; what we spent hiring said officer and taking said measures was much more than we would have been fined for a single breach. (We wouldn't have been able to sell the system or satisfy investors unless we could pass an audit, so it was the right business decision to make, but much of what our compliance officer told us was how much work we didn't have to do; the actual compliance requirements often fell far short of what I considered best practices).

Too often I see arguments and rhetoric where the person advocates AGW mitigation if the whole argument up to rationalizations for CO2 emission reduction were as strong as the relatively strong evidence and models for some degree of AGW

Often also ignoring such issues as how well do the models agree with actual observations. Along with if the "mitigation" will actually do much. It isn't unkonwn for wind and solar power generation to have a higher "carbon footprint" than regular fossil fuel plants.

Has nothing to do with religion or political stance being hindered by science. If you associate science IN ANY WAY with religion or political stance you are fucking up - especially so if you believe it backs your political theory to the point of calling something "settled"

It's the science which is being hindered here. Quite likely to the point where what's actually being done can no longer be called "science".

all attempts to disprove it have failed and until evidence can be presented to disprove or bring the results into question it is settled

Assuming that attempts have been made to falsify (disprove) a theory. Whilst that's the way "science" should be done it's all too easy for people to be more concerned with proving theories. Possibly especially if the theory is important in some way or other.

So, no, it hasn't, not really.

I guess it's because I left the States before mobiles really took off, but it wasn't until a trip back a couple of years ago that I started to understand the situation--the telcos have done a very good job of enforcing an integrated-vertical/everything-as-a-service model there.

But that's not how it works here (Stockholm). I do happen to have a subscription, basically because it's more convenient and I get a free phone every 2 years for signing up again. But it is entirely possible for you to get a late-model phone made by any of the major manufacturers and working service without talking to anyone at a telco. You can walk into just about any big electronics retailer like MediaMarkt or ElGiganten (or even some of the smaller outfits like TeknikMagasinet or Kjell&Co), buy whatever phone you like, then stop off at the Pressbyrån or 7-11 next to the T-bana station on your way home from the shop and buy a prepaid SIM for it. And I've friends who do just that.

You showed him how to close, but not how to resize or to minimise?

You'll find it on buses and trains in a lot of European cities.

But not in Stockholm, which I think is a bit odd.

OTOH, cheap plans with ample mobile data are readily available here, and even if you can't always get 3G the bandwidth is still pretty good, even in the subway--they apparently have repeaters installed in the tunnels.

Merely claiming "A is just like B" does not a valid analogy make.

I am aghast at the notion that there's a country where it does cost money. It's simply unconscionable.