No, they announced they will drop support, but not until HTML5 storage support is in, which is already supported by Internet Explorer 8, Firefox 3.5+, Safari 4, Google Chrome 4, and Opera 10.50.
"I used to agree with this...but now that I have spent more time in a business setting, I can say that there are very real reasons why top posting and html email make sense."
Then fail to provide any reasons why top posting would make sense.
It's also the same with Firefox and their rejection of anything but Theora
More like vice versa. Theora is an extension of VP3, the only codec whose patent holder (On2) has licensed it worldwide for use in software meeting the definition of free software. All other codec owners have rejected Firefox.
Meaning this happened before and they still were not prepared?
Why in the hell is the max $75 million?
The fund for oil spill cleanup aught to be every dime they ever made not a tax I pay. You make the mess you clean it up.
>
This reminds me of the IBM Secure Cryptoprocessors, which are *pretty much* physically secure. But still people get in now and then usually through software or neat stasis tricks so the device can't respond to your intrusion.
I know Markus Kuhn et al have published some software-based attacks against CCA (the standard software IBM ships with the coprocessor), all of which have been fixed. I have not seen anything about a successful attack against the secure hardware enclosure. Got a link?
Are you trying to say that the WSJ is something good, and hence he can”t be that bad? I’m sorry but that doesn’t work, since the WSJ in now included for the very reason of fitting the rest of his portfolio perfectly, in terms of crappiness. ^^
No, I'm saying that the post to which I responded in which the poster said he'd pay for the WSJ but not for Murdoch's crap is internally inconsistent...
...before Murdoch destroyed one of the greatest newspapers in the world. I'd gladly pay to read the NYT or the Washington Post online, just as I've paid for the WSJ online for a decade, but pay to read Murdoch's crap? Heck, I'd gladly pay money to keep it from showing up in my search results.
Murdoch's crap now includes the WSJ. Just sayin....
The Chinese government activelly encourages Chinese companies and people to steal ideas and processes from Western companies so that they can later compete with them not just in China but also outside.
Even the laws there are done in such a way that any Western company that wants to enter the Chinese market has to do so in a joint venture with a Chinese company which then can learn from said Western company. There are already cases where once a couple of Chinese companies where "trained" in this way, the laws where changed to kick out the Western companies and those Chinese companies started competing in that area outside China.
Example: Lenovo.
Sending your R&D to China is pretty much just giving it for free to the Chinese government.
[Note that I am not critical of the Chinese for doing this: they're doing what's good for them at the expense of dumb Western shareholders]
Lenovo? Who'd they JV with?
it's all about installed cost per KWh per year. He shows charts of where the cost has to be to compete with other energy sources without subsidies. (This changes with latitude; as you get closer to the equator, it gets better. Spain is competitive now.)
Madrid is at roughly the same latitude as New York City, so much of the US should also be "competitive." Yet somehow I don't see too many solar farms around here....
He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion
