and if they kept working on GCC instead and integrated it in their IDE they'd need to open-source Xcode.
GCC was integrated into XCode for years. The reason they didn't need to open-source XCode is that they used it only as a standalone executable. They use Clang the same way, they just base things on intermediate output from the compiler (as they did with GCC).
They also had GDB debugging integrated in XCode, as they do with LLDB - again no issue because they just use the standalone intermediate executable.
If you read about how GCC is built, it sucks technically to integrate into an IDE. Clang was built to do a much better job of that, and it has... again, nothing to do with license.
The issue is not 'it looks foreign', it's a fscking productivity nightmare. I've been using Gnome 3 since it came out, and still every day it annoys the crappers out of me. I've been too focused on my work to change to something else, but it's wearing very thin and I'm going to switch very soon.
I think this is the root of this issue with the Gnome foundation - you are part of that foundation and your impression is that users don't like it because it's foreign. That's plain old wrong. It's not a good design for a productive desktop.
The alt-tab/alt-esc shenanigans is just ridiculous, every time I switch machines (yes my works forces me to use Windows for some stuff) I have to stop and think - "Oh what machine am I on, what keys to I press" - Sure the Gnome way might be better, but heck, they may have well made my keyboard switch to dvorak when I'm synergy'ing to my Linux box.
I imagine I can change this (maybe?) but I'm busy, I don't have time to manage configuring my desktop to be normal again. And if I use someone else's desktop I'm still going to land on the same issue unless they've tweaked theirs too.
This is just one of the many "desktop usability regressions" I find with Gnome3 and the real world benefit for this change alludes me. But as it is now, alt-tab is the "Show me a random window" key combo.
Pre- existing conditons are long term storage and handling of the existing radioactive stockpile, and the vulnerable Spent Fuel Pools, earthquake resistance in the coolant subsystems, and Fukushima..
Want more? Fine.
1) Agree to move the waste from the vulnerable storage pools to proper on site cask storage.
2) Do earthquake resistance improvements instead of studies.
3) Fukushima. Get an International plan in place to wall, corral, and cap it.
Then talk about more nuclear waste producing power plants to make the world safe from carbon dioxide.
It is just really hard not to learn how to read in our society. You pretty much need to be in an environment where the parent is actively trying to prevent literacy to be illiterate in our country.
Ur... no. Your democratic style decentralised society will be ripe for conquest by those ruled despotically and hierarchically by kings and queens. The sharp point always beats the 'decentralised' surface.. After an apocalypse society will begin reforming in the way it always does, around armies and war.
I would make a sarcastic reply indicating that your sarcasm detector is in need of calibration, but I think that due to said miscalibration the point of it would be missed.....
If any of us, as individuals, are unfortunate enough to have income drop significantly, the tax on that income will plummet as well — and a direct payment, or negative tax, might even be received from the government, thanks to the earned-income tax credit. In this way, the tax system can be viewed as a colossal insurance system, guarding against extreme income inequality. There are similar provisions in other countries.
But it’s also clear that while income inequality would be much worse without our current tax system, what we have isn’t nearly enough. It’s time — past time, actually — to tweak the system so that it can respond effectively if income inequality becomes more extreme.
I made this argument in 2003 in my book “The New Financial Order” (Princeton University Press). And now there is substantial evidence that inequality has been rising rapidly. In his monumental new book, “Capital in the 21st Century” (Belknap Press), Thomas Piketty of the Paris School of Economics documents a sharp increase in such inequality over the last 25 years, not only in the United States, but also in Canada, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, China, India, Indonesia and South Africa, with people with the highest incomes far outstripping the rest of society. The book is impressive in its wealth of information but it is short on solutions.
Professor Piketty talks about instituting a “global tax on capital” but acknowledges that it is a utopian idea and says that “it is hard to imagine the nations of the world agreeing on any such thing anytime soon.” He talks about raising the rate of the top tax brackets and raising inheritance taxes but sees “little reason for optimism” that this will happen. There have been big increases in taxes on the rich in the past, but he points out that these tax increases were put in place only in response to wars — specifically, World War I and World War II.
Let’s try not to have another major war. Instead, there are some positive things we can do now. As I said in my 2003 book, it would be wise to start amending the tax system immediately. I suggested this fundamental reform: Taxes should be indexed to income inequality so that they automatically become more progressive — meaning that the marginal tax rate for the highest-income people will rise — if income inequality becomes much worse. Ian Ayres of Yale and Aaron Edlin of the University of California, Berkeley, made a similar argument in 2011 in The New York Times.
There is a practical reason for starting now. If we wait until income inequality is much more severe, we will have a whole class of new superrich who will probably feel entitled to their wealth and will have the means to defend their interest. That’s already gone far enough. We shouldn’t let it become more extreme.
There is also a theoretical reason. It is what the psychologists Yaacov Trope of New York University and Nira Liberman of Tel Aviv University called temporal construal theory. They showed that people are more idealistic and generous when dealing hypothetically with the distant future than they are about actions they need to take today. That’s why it pays to ask people to decide on measures to uphold egalitarian ideals when they don’t have to cough up the money immediately.
In a draft research paper in 2006, Leonard Burman, director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center; Jeffrey Rohaly, also of the policy center, and I analyzed a kind of inequality-indexed tax system. (We called it the “Rising-Tide Tax System.”) With the benefit of hindsight, we came up with a system that could have been put in place in 1979 — when inequality was much milder in the United States — and that could have prevented any increase in after-tax inequality through 2006.
Though our proposal worked in theory, we found that putting it into effect would encounter difficulties. For the system to be effective, the top tax bracket would have had to rise to well over 75 percent — a political nonstarter, in our view. We also believed that there would have been negative economic effects, including more tax avoidance. So we concluded that the proposal wasn’t ready for advocacy. We held off from finishing and publishing that paper.
Today, though, there are some possibilities that might alleviate, at least partially, any increasing inequality in future years.
In testimony before the Senate Finance Committee last month, Mr. Burman proposed a version of inequality indexing that might be politically acceptable today. His idea was to integrate inequality indexing with inflation indexing: Instead of just linking tax brackets to inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index, as we have done for years, he proposed that the adjustments also take account of rising inequality, if it occurred. He proposed a system to offset the loss in tax revenue that inflation indexing would produce, in a way that would get us closer to a target distribution of after-tax income; if inequality worsened, higher tax brackets would bear a bit more of the burden, and people at the bottom would bear less.
A relatively minor change like this should be politically acceptable. It is a reframing of inflation indexing, which is already a sacrosanct principle, and would be revenue-neutral. By 2025, Mr. Burman argued, it could pay for a doubling of the earned-income tax credit, “with more than $100 billion left over to adjust middle-income tax liabilities.”
Such a plan would be a nice first step toward making our tax system manage the risk of future increases in inequality.
Many of us are NOT ready in the event we are evacuated from our homes. Being ready is often the difference between life and death. Get a kit, make a plan, and be informed! Dawn Lindblom from the American Red Cross gives you the essentials you will need for an emergency. This news story focuses on wh ( http://survivalism101.com/disaster-preparedness-home-evacuation/)
I have seen IETF in operation about 12 years and I have worked with industry bodies such as 3gpp - worked on one particular standard which actually went through the standardization process. Standards bodies are supposed to be slow and stodgy, that is their purpose. There was a time when we used to get objections based on corner cases which (we believed) were irrelevant, but, in any case, the objections were made in good faith. I used to enjoy the debate, trying to get another, obviously very smart person to see my point of view. Nowadays we get objections which, you know, are because of some directive from the other guy's C*O level or some legal or marketing directive, which he is powerless to oppose. You feel embarrassed for the guy, because you know that he isn't allowed to change his stance and therefore all debate is immaterial. This is the effect of corporatization.
linked internet site
%folderspin-filename-C:\Thuan\Content\du lich campuchia - zsub\du lich campuchia - clean% - bclwacket6bas blog
As long as the commander is named Koenig...
Link to Original Source
The US National Security Administration (NSA) has been aware of the "Heartbleed" bug for over two years and has been exploiting the bug to carry out undetectable spying on US strategic competitors, including China. Major US media organizations such as...
Tests confirm Heartbleed bug can expose server's private keyPCWorld
Bug may reveal private Internet informationRU Daily Targum
How the NSA shot itself in the foot by denying prior knowledge of Heartbleed
Los Angeles Times-TechCrunch-Mashable
all 3,566 news articles
Cream Pemutih Badan Alami Herbal
Obat Pemutih Gigi Alami Herbal
Obat Cream Pemutih Wajah Alami Herbal
Obat Hernia Celana Hernia Alami Herbal
Obat Ambeien Atau Wasir Alami Herbal
Obat Cream Pembesar Pantat Bokong Alami
Pelangsing Badan Fruit Plant
Cream Pelangsing Badan Alami, Perut, Paha, Pinggul
Obat Perapat Untuk Wanita
Obat Rambut Rontok
Alat Pembesar Payudara
Cream Untuk Mengencangkan Payudara
Cara Mengecilkan Payudara
Obat Perontok Bulu Alami, Permanen, Herbal
Obat Memerahkan Bibir
Obat Untuk Selulit
Obat Jerawat Alami Paling Ampuh
Obat Selakangan Hitam
Obat Pemutih Badan
Penghilang Bekas Luka
Obat Untuk Diabetes
Penambah Tinggi Badan
Obat Pelangsing Badan
Obat Mata Plus
Obat Gemuk Badan
Obat Pelangsing Meizitang
SCP doesn't 'replace' TCP any more than UDP does.
You're right, only fossil fuels or nuclear have the capacity to provide the majority of our energy needs. Nuclear is historically the safest energy source as well - hydro has had quite a few disasters, for example. ALSO, we should acknowledge that the greenies have a good idea - use wind power when the wind happens to be blowing at the proper speed. If you happen to live on a fault line, geothermal is pretty good. For the 80% of of our energy needs that can't met by "alternatives" sources, we can choose nuclear or fossil fuels. That doesn't mean we should be anti-hydro, we should acknowledge that hydro is great. We just don't have any more 200 mile stretches of wilderness to flood, so we can't increase our hydro by much .
(I put solar in a separate category because the 95% of the solar industry that are scammers give the 5% who are honest a bad name.)
None of the above. I have what you call
I'm not really angry, not sure why you think so, perhaps you mean emphatic?
Whats your excuse?
and if they kept working on GCC instead and integrated it in their IDE they'd need to open-source Xcode.
For slightly less purile fun, look at https://www.youtube.com/watch?... (The large haddock collider)
I'd like to see some guy run the marathon as fast as the wheelchair guys.
Anyway, same crap is happening here in Alberta, Canada. With math as well as reading "discover for yourself how numbers work".
This was the fastest Santa Anita Derby since Indian Charlie went 1:47 flat in 1998 and California Chrome final time was also quicker than Sunday Silence and Winning Colors, who both went on to win in Kentucky the first Saturday in May. ( http://www.betonline.ag/sports-betting/horse-racing/california-chrome-betting)
It was an alternative with a brighter future than GCC. It wasn't ready for mainstream use or even complete for that matter.
Apple are not in the business of making compilers. They don't sell their development tools for a large profit. It makes financial sense to open source it so others can help them finish it.
Simple steps to hide WhatsApp last seen on android and iphone ( http://techidate.com/simple-steps-hide-whatsapp-last-seen-android-iphone/)
If I were in their shoes, I'd simply change course, post a public apology, announce Gnome 4 and bring back everything that users are missing. That should give them enough support to stay alive. I'm sure there is still time for them. But as I said before, I don't think they even care so let them die.
Or, hell, just add back most of the configuration options they removed from the system. I know a blank screen is trendy nowadays but sometimes I just want to look at a screensaver, y'know?
But these days it is mostly older folks who have a static computing environment they've been using for the past 18 years or so and want to continue using it and don't appreciate change. Sadly, in order to be relevant you have to change. This has been bleeding into systemd, and even the Linux kernel. I suspect some of these fine folk will move to FreeBSD if they feel that the Unix philosophy is threatened enough.
The financial issue will be resolved soon enough. It's a temporary problem, and it will be handled.
Senin 14-04-2014 — Result Togel Singapura Senin 14/04/2014 — Paito Togel Singapura — Rumus Togel SGP 2d — Angka
jitu Togel Singapura Senin 14 April 2014 — Syair Togel Senin 14-04-2014 — Shio Togel SGP Senin 14/04/2014.
Welcome to the minority you share with the employees at Amazon HQ.
construction wastes crushing station
Our company takes years to do research and development on the machines to handle construction wastes and has created the mobile construction wastes crushing station made up of crusher, screener, frame and sand washing machine. Compared with the traditional fixed crushing station, this new equipment is just like a mobile medium and small scale processing plant with features of advanced design, reasonable functions, good performance diesel jaw crusher, simple operation, high production efficiency, stable processing and low operation cost. By using the mobile construction wastes crushing station, customers and companies can realize the recycling, reduction and harmlessness of the building wastes and achieve goals of economic benefit, social benefit, ecological benefit and low carbon economy.
Better city and better life. The construction wastes are not at all trashes that have no use in later life. They are just the resources which are put to the wrong place. The nation has started to pay attention to the reuse and recycling of these construction wastes and put this issue on table among so many solid waste disposal handling problems. We believe that our mobile construction waste crushing station will surely bring you new and surprising solution.
Solar / wind / geo / hydro INSTEAD OF nuclear is a "people who can't do arithmetic" thing. Together, they can reasonably provide about 20% of our energy needs. The founder of Greenpeace agrees - the other 80% can come from fossil fuels, or from nuclear. Those are the two options that can provide the majority of our power. We need power at night, we need power when the wind isn't blowing, and when it's blowing too strong and windmills have to be "turned off". If you'd like , I can point you to a paper that gives all the detailed facts in 10 pages.
MATE is being developed, and has ome support from some distros. Even OpenSUSE is offering a MATE package (they took only TWO FSCKING YEARS to do so, but at least they did).
You can donate here - but perhaps we should wait their statement about how the money will be spent. Just in case.
It is important to note that the 2C you are talking about is surface air temperature. It is less than 1 percent of our climate overall. The oceans are a vast reservoir of thermal sink, as is the stratosphere. 2C over the Holocene minimum does not even seem like enough buffer against the return of the ice to some. It isn't even up to the Holocene optimum which was not long enough ago to have a significant impact on evolution. Local effects will be more extreme - milder arctic winters and longer growing seasons should improve crops in Russia, Canada and northern Europe. Africa will see more precipitation turning the Sahara into grassland again. Oceans will rise some, but they have risen 400 feet already. This may stress reefs, but really - they are millions of years old and have seen this before.
We lose New Orleans and Florida, but they were just on loan to us anyway. Ports save a little money on dredging expenses. Not a big deal.
What we gain is 50,000 years of uninterrupted warmth to do our human evolution thing. To discover fusion, mine the asteroids, explore the stars, find a way to close the carbon cycle. That is preferable to an imminent return of glaciation, the inevitable nuclear winter and population bottleneck that costs our culture and science which might naturally ensue.
Decree 31 requires an responsibility on upstream and downstream companies in the Indonesian oil and gas sector, and related supporting industries, to make a priority on the employment of Indonesian workers, and particularly forbids employment of expatriates for the following roles:
health, safety and environment;
supply chain management, including procurement and logistics;
quality control, as well as inspection; and
exploration and exploitation functions below superintendent level or equivalent positions.
Decree 31 allows the utilization of expatriates for oil and gas activities in restricted circumstances, slike employment of expatriates:
as director or commissioner for the purpose of encouraging investment in the oil and gas sector;
for professional positions requiring specific skills and technological expertise in this sector in order to transfer knowledge relating to new technology; and
for certain positions that cannot be filled by domestic workers.
The application of expatriates for ‘non-prohibited functions’ in the oil and gas industry ought to be permitted by the Directorate General of Oil and Gas. Decree 31 endows with for a reasonably meticulous set of requirements that should be met by the expatriates in question. -For example, they should have at least of 5 years related working experience, be 30 – 55 years of age, be able to communicate in the Indonesian language and enthusiastic to transfer knowledge and skills to Indonesian workers. The Indonesian language requirement for expatriates has attributed in some of regulations, even if to date it has not been imposed firmly.
Although Decree 31 is intended for encouraging the use of Indonesian workers in the oil and gas sector, there had been no complaints, but there is a warning, it risks further limit the availability of skilled senior international personnel that the Indonesian oil and gas industry presently requires.
Businesses operating in the Indonesian oil and gas sector should be aware of the restrictions concerning hiring expatriates, as a result of nonconformity with the said restrictions range from nuisance of administrative sanctions, probable revocation of the pertinent expatriate’s work permit and non-recovery of operating costs from the government. The degree to which the new requirements are enforced in practice must be monitored by companies operating in the Indonesian oil and gas sector.
For more information:
I think my preference would be to always attempt the check and in the case of a soft-fail to indicate that there was a soft-fail so the user can still make an informed decision. Or at least a semi-informed one.
I would like to see the numbers that point to such a conclusion.
It is not always necessary for an article to be well written for it to have a good idea at its core. As a technical writer and former network manager, who spent over a decade on Usenet giving and reading advice, and has also studied education - I know that the success rate of any advice is very audience dependent. If your audience is going to be regular people, then you have to give advice that regular people can or will follow. If your audience is tech people, then you can be more technical. Duh. Sometimes the best advice about giving advice about technical things is to offer two versions. One for regular people and another for technical people. Subtly let the regular people know when they can stop reading. Try not to be too insulting.