W3Counter? You do realize how dumb the use of that is, right? Most people aren't web developers and as such don't go to that site. We call that biased sampling.
And the same applies to StatCounter, which I also cited?
Yeah, "Safari" and "Opera" are such more functional names for a Web browser than "Konqueror".
They aren't better names
If you seriously think I was suggesting that they were better names, you really need to go get your sarcasm detector re-calibrated.
and that is reflected in the fact that nobody uses them.
Presumably by "nobody uses them" you mean "nobody uses those browsers", and by "nobody uses" you mean "most people don't use".
However, you have not demonstrated that there is any connection between the lower market share for those browsers and their choice of name.
Much of Safari's lower market share may be due to its low market share on Windows, an OS to which it was a latecomer and may never have had a chance to be a contender.
You've just weakened your own argument with that statement.
You've just demonstrated that you don't even understand the argument by everything you've said here.
The number one web browser is still Internet Explorer.
According to NetMarketShare, but not according to StatCounter or W3Counter.
(And the statistics for mobile browsers are a bit different.)
Pick more functional names so I don't have to explain to people, "no, dolphin is the file manager and konqueror is the browser.'
Yeah, "Safari" and "Opera" are such more functional names for a Web browser than "Konqueror".
(And "Windows Explorer" is such a functional name for a file manager; it doesn't at all sound as if somebody tried to give it a name reminiscent of their Web browser.)
After all, ed is the standard text editor.
If one can fairly say that the most objective information on an organization often comes from its historical enemies who have no motivation to play-up its status,
As opposed to its historical enemies with plenty of motivation to play up its status, so as to make people afraid of the Evil XXX Conspiracy against which the YYY Organization is valiantly and heroically fighting....
"The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst. It rejects even the assumption that human creatures could espouse a philosophy which must ultimately destroy all that is good and decent." J. Edgar Hoover, The Elks Magazine, 1956
Yeah, that guy would certainly know about evil conspiracies destroying all that is good and decent.
but no your iPhone is not running a packet sniffer
Not even if you're using a Remote Virtual Interface? If that can only be used by plugging the device into a Mac and running rvictl on the Mac, that's one thing, but if you can also get it to act as a remote pcap daemon over the network, as he claims, that's a different matter.
God forbid somebody who happens to work for or be a Congressperson spread disinfomation by alphabetizing categories...
So, judging by the reaction to the article (the whole thread from this submission),
No, not the whole thread. See below.
each and every single employee of Russian state media responds directly to Putin (even those who, say, use their wifi networks),
In the posting to which you responded, I said "just as somebody working at or for the VGTRK isn't necessarily acting on behalf of the Russian government.", which says that employees of Russian state media are not necessarily acting on behalf of the Russian government". The person who made the edit in question might well have been acting on his or her own; I'm not going to assume that they were acting part of an officially-organized propaganda campaign, or even a propaganda campaign at all, any more than I'm going to assume, at this point, that the Russians had anything to do with the decision to shoot down the plane.
but some edit directly from a political/administrative institution only "alphabetizes categories".
In the posting to which you responded, I said that one particular edit, namely the one referred to here was only "alphabetizing categories", and that one other edit, namely the one referred to here, merely added a serial comma.
If your goal was to demonstrate that people from IP addresses assigned to the US congress edit Wikipedia pages, those edits might be relevant; if your goal was to show edits, from IP addresses assigned to the US congress, that show a pro-US bias, those edits are completely irrelevant - this one might be more relevant.
God forbid somebody who happens to work for or be a Congressperson spread disinfomation by alphabetizing categories...
...or adding serial commas!
You might want to limit yourself to examples where somebody's changing the tone of an article to favor (or mock) some particular view, like the rest of the links.
And, of course, a particular Congressperson or staffer for that Congressperson isn't necessarily acting on behalf of the US Government, just as somebody working at or for the VGTRK isn't necessarily acting on behalf of the Russian government. (Perhaps it'd be more likely in the latter case, but if it were somebody posting from the Duma in that case, or somebody from the Voice of America in the former case, it'd be a closer match.)
Most of the early capability systems (with the exception of the M-Machine from MIT) were extreme-CISC chips.
Or CISC and extreme-CISC multi-chip processors, such as the Cambridge CAP computer, the Plessey System 250, the Flex machine, and the IBM System/38.
I'd suggest it was ARM more than IBM that saved Apple
The Newton saved Apple? (Remember, this isn't about today, it's about 25 years ago.)
Or maybe Intel picked up the ball and used the 68k (as their engineers wanted) for the original IBM PC.
Presumably you mean "IBM picked up the ball...".
Intel? They're the guys that make memory and strange CPUs for calculators, right?
No, at the time, they were the guys who make 8-bit and 16-bit computers used in a variety of applications; I'm not sure whether they were still making the 4004 or not.
Besides, if you were really serious about running a server with Mac hardware, you loaded up MkLinux or bastardized AUX implementation. Hell, there was even a Mach kernel implementation for Mac hardware.
...which was what MkLinux ran atop ("Mk" for "microkernel", although how micro the Mach kernel is could be considered a "topic for discussion").
I don't think the ISA was a goal, because PowerPC was really just a subset of the POWER architecture
Superset of a subset, to be precise. For example, PowerPC omitted the multiplier-quotient register, and multiply/divide instructions using it, that were in the POWER instruction set architecture, but added multiply and divide instructions that used the general-purpose registers.
that IBM currently had in their mainframes and servers.
Presumably meaning "RS/6000 workstations and servers"; the instruction set architecture in the mainframes was System/370 (or S/370 XA or ESA or whatever).
Although there hasn't been any paradigm shifting science come out of the LHC, I wouldn't say there's been zero output. We now have figures for the Higgs that have ruled out a large number of possible theories. Before performing the experiments, no-one knew for sure what the results were going to be - we could easily have had surprising results that disagreed with the Standard Model.
I.e., paradigm-confirming science is also useful.
HELP!!!! I'm being held prisoner in /usr/games/lib!
