Wikipedia has a brief, general description.

One example of Agile approach is named Scrum. c.f Beginners Guide to Scrum - my referring t Scrum as an agile approach, considering that it's not, per se, a formal process model.

Another example, which has perhaps been around for longer, is named Extreme Programming c.f Extreme Programming, at the Cunningham & Cunningham, Inc. Wiki

"[...] Agile, which may not be appropriate for all organizations or projects"

That's fair.

To my understanding, HTML5 and JavaScript are the driving technologies behind frameworks such as PhoneGap and appMobi. Just sayin' - those languages are mobile platform compatible. (Objective C and Java, each, maybe not so much so)

I'd like to think that that could be open to negotiation between Samsung and Apple, if Samsung's lawyers were to present the topic to Apple's lawyers, both for purchasing the rights to it and so in order to end the continuing case (and - implicitly - its resultant legal fees, etc).

Then again, if it could possibly be that easy to resolve, I wonder how the courts might feel about how their time has been spent, on the case?

So, how scalable can an agile process be, I wonder?

I like how that serves to shed some light, candidly, in regards to the possible effects of naivete - not to put a mint on the proverbial pillow, y'know, just to draw a highlight on the matter.

Taking up the side of the FNG, I think that the discussion may serve to draw to light: A concern about some kinds of complacency in the workplace, frankly. I suppose that to drop the name, "Agile process", then, it might *not* serve to resolve that immediately, but maybe it could serve to shed some more light on the matter, in turn? as far as how a workplace *can* function....?

Ross Lovegrove might have some designs for that future.

Seriously? I mean, seriously? ICANN, even briefly, introduced online gaming into the process of creating new top level domains? I knew that the Internet could resemble a circus, but that really stretches the limits of believability.

Pardon me while I file a registration for .barnum.

I hope he has insurance on that ;)

I would suggest that the government of the state of Utah may at least develop a plan for some new and ongoing Public Service Announcements, to address the concerns of the matter to the public, before any more controversial measures could ever be taken to more serious consideration for civil discussion and possible legislation, in the state.

It seems to stand to reason that the fires could have all been prevented, if the individual recreational shooters having started each respective fire would've been aware of the additional dangers posed when discharging firearms in a dangerously dry climate, and would've been aware that they were in a dangerously dry climate, and moreover if they would've been personally responsible enough to then avoid discharging their firearms in that climate - and if they would feel they must get some firearms practice, nonetheless, then to use use controlled ranges, as the state had so wisely suggested.

I'd say it could be more effectual for the state to suggest to individual gun owners and gun enthusiasts in Utah they must all exercise their own respective senses of knowledge and personal responsibility, more effectively - and for the state to perhaps set the example, as such - to the point of preventing those wildfires, specifically. I think that that should be far more effectual than any too impassioned arguments, in regards to the many popular concerns of the matter, in the overall democratic climate of the state and the broader nation.

That's my two cents, just thinking to the broader scope of the matter - erm, so to speak.

In one rendition, and in some abstraction: Google processes a search query by executing an algorithmic function onto a limited data set, then displaying the results of that function. Though, for purposes of philosophical rhetoric, I may be willing to limit the concept of "opinion" to such a matter of algorithmic selection, I don't know if the concept of opinion could be either judicially or legislatively defined as such, and the definition be accurate to all of: The lexicon; the systematic function of a search engine; the principles on which the system was designed. So, in short, I don't know if the concept of "Opinion" would apply to that, in the courts.

Separately: Though I am not a lawyer, I would like to think that you could claim that the Offend-o-tron would be an expression of your right to free expression. No comment about 4chan ;)

Cheers, ser!

I would think that the measure of "free speech by an item of software" would boil down to a matter of the rights and limits for free expression by the programmer[s] of the item of software. Granted, DNRTA - with apologies, will get to it shortly...

...mmm, kinda?

Thanks, but I really didn't ask such an oblique question.

Do oil refineries have to pay insurance to the surrounding communities, for the possibility of a catastrophic failure at a refinery? I don't suspect so. Oil refineries in the US, then, implement security protocols, checkups, and more checkups, to prevent the possibility of refinery failure.

I'd like to mention, then, that NewSpace companies will have more on the line than any governmental space agency even possibly could. I'm sure they must all well understand the full extents of the importance of launch vehicle safety and launch site safety, thoroughly.