That would be the sect that lined up again and again to buy tickets for "American Sniper"

The underscores are awful. Almost invisible.

Plus one informative.

Well, let's see what TFA says:

What part of the word "boycott" do you not understand?

I tested HWE on a few test systems before rolling it out across the rest of my systems. Long story short, several of the test systems had intermittent networking problems after the upgrade, which caused the systems to hang until power-cycled.

In my environment, stability is more important than having the latest gee-whiz features, and due to slashed budgets, supporting new hardware is a problem I don't have, so it's not worth the trouble to try to use the Trusty kernel right now.

This is unfortunate. I was hoping to not upgrade my Ubuntu 12.04 systems for another year or two, until the systemd dust settles, and I know other people in the same boat.

Yeah, if that's what happened. But that's not what the article says.

It says that on March 21st, Google had already fixed the flaw and rolled out the patches internally. Fine; they get to cover their own asses first. No argument.

Then a week went by.

They haven't been in the press enough recently...

I want to know, but I also don't want to know.

Whatever it was, I can tell that it was chewy. And that I've lost my appetite.

I've worked with the IETF on several RFCs. I'm also familiar with the challenges that the Tor project faces daily, and what they have to do to stay ahead of the entities trying to break Tor. I think for Tor to even stop to talk to the IETF would be an waste of their time; Tor needs to be nimble, and the IETF standards process is painfully, horribly slow and unable to move quickly on anything. Given that Tor releases updates on a cycle that is shorter than the normal time a draft spends in the AD review queue, by the time an RFC got to the standards track it would already be out-of-date.

The real powerhouse in speech recognition tech isn't MIT -- it's BBN, at the other end of Cambridge.

Interest, yes. Cash, no.

That's what being very poor means.

Exactly my thought. The profit margins for Google are never going to be higher than they are right now -- the next billion people aren't going to be able to afford the $150 jeans Google is showing me ads for... and the billion after that are going to be even poorer. When you're wondering where your next meal is coming from, you probably aren't going to spend a lot of time on Google+.

The idea that Google is going to make money on subscription services is dubious. It's a business model (hello, AOL!) that doesn't work, even in markets that actually have money to spend on such things.

Couldn't they even say "thank you"?

It doesn't seem that long ago that if someone posted a duplicate story to slashdot they'd need to wait more than thirteen hours.

Have we really run out of other things to bash Microsoft about?