You mean it's bloated. I'm using Chromium now and it's faster, uses less memory, and has all the truly important functionality with few extensions. Firefox incorporated stuff that should have been plugins, in fact, stuff that used to be plugins, like a sidebar and dictionaries with syntax underlining. Except, of course, chromium has that stuff, and it's still smaller and faster.

I have no loyalty to software. I see no reason why I should have any. Chromium is superior and available under the same license. That's enough for me!

Although Atoms already have the GPU on-die nowadays...

Wow, that's a LOT of features. But I love this part...

Currently the code is in an early implementation phase, and not all of these have yet been implemented.

They even forgot to mention these other interesting Btrfs features that make it WAY better than all of the other file systems:

Solar powered journaling
Quantum string mirroring
Automated backup cameras
Continuous vacuum suction with no loss of data
and it's high in Omega-3 fatty acids.

"Far" left/right is most likely an overstatement, though (or so I would hope...)

Inquiring mind wants to know what book that might be... (hey, a mind from somewhat different culture, with some number of great books you might have never heard about! ;p )

More than that, you might not need even 7200 RPM drives. There are large capacity "green line" drives from some manufacturers, 5400 RPM, that might be perfectly enough.

I'm sure other posters will have much better recommendations as to how the overall setup should look like, but for whatever it's worth from me - stay away from consumer NAS solutions, they have usually quite small transfers (and I guess its important to you, with files being rather big). Large tower with plenty of space inside + Atom motherboard should be enough, otoh (as long as that Atom board has enough SATA ports...)

That's still very US centric. Apple has "mindshare" lately, it seems. And only 2% of total mobile phone sales, 15% on "smartphone" sales (with Nokia having half of that, and 37% of the total)

Behind Nokia there is Samsung with 20% (in a year, large part of their phones will suddenly be "smartphones"), LG 11%, SE & Motorola 5% both, (who knows how many more here, between 5 and 2%)

"revenues, profit and market capitalization" means only that given manufacturer rips its consumers off handily, if they can do it with such miniscule marketshare.

Nokia has 37% of global mobile phone sales (and BTW, they don't depend on Chinese sweatshops; they own all their manufacturing facilities, majority of them are not in China), Samsung 20%, LG 11%, SE & Motorola 5% each, (who knows how many here), Apple...2%. Plus don't forget about Symbian having half of smartphone market and Apple 15% of that, however poorly the category would be defined.

And yes, in the biggest and more serious battle, about access to radio technology behind mobile phones (to which also Nokia greatly contributed, not only them; they are probably the biggest contributor though, hence the main opponent for Apple...but also they don't have much to lose, due to some temporary turmoil, in the US; so I wouldn't be too surprised if other players basically "outsourced" this case to Nokia), the total share matters; radio modules are nowadays basically the same. Heck, quite a lot of "feature phones" built around touchscreens shows up recently...

Also, ask yourself why the much bigger players aren't "attacked" by Nokia. They have much more to gain if Nokia case was weak, many more radio modules sold...

"Hey! Where my Facebooks site at? I can't find it and I searched all the Google on the Interweb!?" - Dick Cheney

"The issue has been resolved ... Good news, people" is not quite correct. Naturally, the status quo of bending laws here and there (simply change them isntead of such show...) has been reestablished to your satisfaction; but that doesn't resolve the issue.

Oh well, it's the direction of the world anyway. I'm happy I can already see it, at leats locally.

Isn't it fair to say that if you're worried about roundoff noise in repeated calculations, you've passed the point from being just a scientist to a someone who should be concerned with general programming theory and conventions, and hence at least familiar and comfortable with notation that denotes type?

My introduction to IEEE 754 was brought about via Python, when my chemistry kinetic simulations weren't running right (many millions of iterations, scaling factors with huge and tiny exponents). Understanding and fixing that problem took an hour or two, which far overshadowed the minute-long pause when I first found that 5/2 = 2.

In the end, the benefits of having the power of a real programming environment far outstrip the very small entry barrier. I personally feel that in the modern world you have no business calling yourself a scientist of any kind unless you can write a basic data manipulation script (parse and write a flatfile csv/tabs/CRLF etc) in some language of your choice. Massive quantities of data and meta-analyses are now the norm, making manual transcription or even copy/paste a thing of the past, and it is not acceptable to be hobbled by the feature set of existing software.

Look at what the intense lobbying and marketing going into anti-drunk driving. The best example being MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers.) To (rightly) save +10,000 people a year from being killed.

Once we have robotic controlled cars that can reduce traffic accidents by a suitable amount there will be a similar incentive to get rid of the bad driving of humans. Think MAHD (Mothers Against Human Drivers.) And I think saving another 10,000 plus people a year and further reducing insurance rates etc will make it worth it. People will be able to work or entertain themselves during their commute instead of trying to multi-task and get into accidents.

Same here. Unfortunately, it's not a very quotable song except for the title, so I am not going to be able to sneak any lyrics from it into a casual Slashdot post.

Okay, I lied. You caught me under false pretenses.

New York Lawyer, my good man, thanks 10,000 times for your work and effort, but as a non-lawyer I have NO IDEA what your post means. It must be bad, but really I don't know what it means. Can you tell me, a non-lawyer, what it means other than "You're screwed" or some such thing? I just don't know...

It's typical to overhype and exaggerate results like this. What's interesting is if it really is that easy to make reliable, robust, defect free logic circuits so easy, would it be a good thing or a bad thing economically. I'd certainly be out of a job if a grad student could magically mix up an SOC complete with electrical interconnects and packaging while his/her advisor slowly whittles away at his/her self esteem