Vote for the same people who called them deplorable? The same people who coldly told them "learn to code"? The same people who, when the working class retaliated with "learn to code", considered this a hate crime? We'll get right on voting for people who call us racists, rape apologists and woman haters.

And yet the examples you gave show the logical absurdity of the nanny state.

You can't own your own body as regards sex, gambling, abortion, drugs and not have ownership over your own body for something like wearing seat belts.

If you think that people, and not governments, can decide who to have sex with; or what substances they ingest then you ought to be opposed to the government forcing you to wear seatbelts.

Obviously they keep them warmed up.
My point was about performance.

No idea what a control floor is :P

Wow, that is a lot of time to get your backup system up and running efficiently. /sarcasm
Yes, it is. so what is your point?

Here is where reality kicks in. Power plants do not produce energy, but power: electric utilities sell a guaranteed power output
The "utility company", yes. But they are free to use what ever plant they want, or simply buy power elsewhere.

Did I mention: I'm tired about idiots who have no clue how production works?

airport restaurants now? Cool.

Dammit! Why the hell doesn't Slashdot provide a preview feature before posting!?

Oh, wait.

This is how it should have looked:

Microsoft agreed to abide by Sun's licensing terms in exchange for being allowed to call J# an implementation of Java. Microsoft violated those terms by making J# incompatible with Java.

Google copied the interface specification, wrote its entirely own implementation, and made it quite clear that it was NOT Java; but rather had a high degree of compatibility with certain parts of Java.

These cases could hardly be any more different. They are nearly polar opposites.

Given that, Google was really stupid about the whole thing. It should have started with the GPL'd Java, stripped out the parts not wanted for Android, then GPL'd the whole thing. Tada! A clean and completely unassailable (through copyright) Android. Plus many millions of litigation dollars saved.

A bold statement, considering wehaven't actually mentioned any particular system. A straightforward electronic counting of paper ballots, designed specifically to be as small and easily-understood as possible, should be pretty easy for any decent programmer to audit.

It's worth mentioning that personally I think any electronic voting or tallying machine should be an embedded system with no operating system at all, and be as minimalist as possible for exactly that reason - every line of code on the machine that's not critical to serving its purpose only serves to obfuscate the critical components, and potentially hide malicious elements that could interfere with the proper functioning of those critical components.

Well I for one welcome our new soundscape-composing algorithmic overlords.

Seriously, I think it sounds very nice. The tracks do have a strong similarity, and I don't think it helps that they're all in the same key. But they are intended to be ambient music, with ambiguous ephemeral chord-progressions. They kind of remind me of Brian Eno, with some touches of Sigur Ros.

Feel free to lodge your complaints with the governments that do.

That's so far off base that I'm embarrassed for you. Nobody is being handicapped.

Great. Support net neutrality.

The laws of physics ensure someone will always be able to take away your rights using brute force. Perfect is the enemy of good.

Patents? What could there possibly be to patent on a fucking tractor? IIRC, patents are for things that not obvious to anyone familiar with the subject. What could fail to be obvious about a tractor? Using GPS? How is that not obvious? Are they using some sort of new combustion technique? Surely, combustion is exhausted of all patents by now. What could possibly be patented ON A TRACTOR?

I could see Copyright on the software... but god, what an abomination of a thought. The purpose is the tractor, not the software.

I just don't see John Deere having any patents that should be considered valid.

Wait! I figured it out! They patented Air Conditioning the cab. Of course it's not obvious. Look at all the old tractors: Open to the air, no protection from sunlight, etc. And I am sure that no farmer anywhere or even tractor manufacturer anywhere, except John Deere, had the idea and the courage to add a climate controlled cab to the tractor.

Never mind. Carry on. Everything is normal.

Trains are dying out because of cars.
In Europe we build more and more (high speed) railway tracks.

what a waste of time and resources, both, this law and EU itself.

When you lay people off regularly to maintain an environment of fear, the truely talented go elsewhere, or avoid you entirely. Meanwhile those left are more concerned with survival than innovation.

Oracle's crap software and their high pressure sales goons put them out of business.

Exactly. It's funny because it's a repeat of the battle over Java vs J++ over 20 years ago.

LOL, man i just experienced a coffee nose malfunction

That's a physical, hardware interface. This story is about purely software interfaces.

According to AirBnb,com, "The Airbnb Host Guarantee provides protection for up to $1,000,000 to a host for damages to covered property in the rare event of guest damages above the security deposit or if no security deposit is in place."

ditto

First, I was quite clear that the billing is granular to the second, I was also clear that that was the very first hit, because it's just not worth thoroughly researching since I'm not intending to set up a robocall operation.

Yes, I do think it's cheap, since they are getting paid for each call they make.

When you consider that companies used to be willing to pay a much higher rate for a human being in the U.S. to actually sit in a cubicle giving the spiel rather than a recording or a voice synth, yes I believe they get enough money to make that worthwhile.

Face it, you were wrong because your information was decades out of date. Time to move on.

Mean, median, and mode, in fact.

I think it's adorable that you somehow tie your sports car into firearms and freedom. Ok chief. Good for you.

Sorry, it's No True Scotsman.
It's called No True Scotsman, because the same logic can be applied both directions, even if you're only applying it one direction.
The fact is, if you take the average person who considers themselves Christian, you get a Catholic.

for doing just about the same thing?

Aircraft are not designed to be as reliable as possible by throwing in unlimited amount of redundancy. Usually if an environmental factor affects a sensor, it has a very high chance of affecting other similar redundant items (Remember the birdstrike and landing on the Hudson?).

In fact this is a frequent item of discussion when one is deciding between a single engine airplane and a twin. A twin engine has double the chance of AN engine failing and dramatically less chance of both failing at the same time. Unless an environmental factor was the cause of engine failure. And too many deaths came from just one engine failing and pilot trying to fight the remaining engine instead of focusing on a forced landing.

Most aircraft systems (check out the technical differences between non-TSO and TSO GPS, steamgauges etc) are designed to INDICATE a failure and stop working when there is a failure, rather than try to be as reliable as possible. This way, the pilot has an option to switch to a completely different system. Of course you need some redundancy, especially if the other item works in a different way.

So 5 AoA indicators would not be as good a design as a single AoA indicator that can reliably flag a failure. Since it can't two indicators can show a failure by showing the disagreement between them. Just fly through icing if you have 5 indicators and you'll see why that's not as good an idea. Once a failure is flagged, a pilot can disable systems that depend on it (if not done automatically) and remain in control.

Ideally a transducer that does not depend on vanes (maybe some kind of movement/capacitance sensor that can sense the movement of air along its surface) would be a perfect backup.

Awwww, you dropped your freeze peach! How sad! Now pick it up and quit fucking whining. Nobody stole your freeze peach. As for your free speech, it was right there in your mouth the whole time, and you were probably blathering something the whole time too.

You know, espionage requires that sometimes you tap peoples' lines, steam their mail open, and r00t their routers.

If NSA did that to everybody indiscrimnately, boo, bad agency.

If they did to enemies of the USA, or friends of enemies of the USA, then more power to them.

It's dirty business but it has to be done.

Are you going to argue that a country should take zero steps to protect itself?

Not only that, Huawei is accused of stealing tech from other companies. Unless Huawei extensively rewrites the code, someone from the Cisco, for example, is going to notice that their proprietary drivers are in Huawei’s open source code.

That isn't an identity now is it shit stain?

That isn't an identity now is it? Shit stain.

Your correction is incorrect, at least in the United States. Creative works are automatically protected by copyright from the time they are created; no additional action by the author is necessary. Unlike trademarks, copyright (as well as patent) protection is not lost for failure to actively defend it.

China has a dictator government, so everything in China is owned by it's government, at least from the government's perspective. Everything tech, from China, should be evaluated.