One of the things my father (grade 6 education) beat into my head non-stop when I was growing up: "The only person you can't learn from is the one you don't talk to".

So if I understand the article correctly, the issue is that the companies that would benefit from the research are funding it? That is a story HOW?

Or ...... you could just ignore things until you were ready to answer them. You don't *have* to have email open. You don''t *have* to have twitter, or facebook, or anything else running and open. Shut the bloody things down and be done with it till you're ready.

Unfair? No. Neither Facebook nor anybody else has a right to that data - it's up to Apple to decide what the will and will not give access to.

Hypocritical? HELL, yes. Apple is not doing this to protect user privacy - it's doing this to keep the gold mine to itself.

That would make me very, VERY proud to be a Canadian :)

I remember back in the day some guy writing a backward-chaining inference engine in a series of Lotus 1-2-3 spreadsheets. It took a few hours to come to the conclusion that 1 == 1, but what the hell.

Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you should.

Sylvester Stallone as "Snaps" Provolone, mod boss. Hilarious https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Because you mentioned a bunch of internet services that have absolutely nothing to do with "the cloud".

Do I use hosted services? No.
Do I use IMAP? Yes.
Do I use Web hosting? Nope.
Do I use QuickBooks online? Nope
Do I use Gmail? Yes.
Di I use Adobe online? Nope
Do I use a DNS registrar? Yes
Do I use DDNS? No.

But guess what? *I* don't use "the cloud". The point being that just because you use somebody else's service, does not mean you use "the cloud". Every one of those things you mentioned as examples existed before "the cloud" did. And just because some of those services may use or be cloud providers themselves does NOT mean that I also do. It's not transitive. My accountant has a housekeeper - that does not mean that I have one too.

"On the internet" != "In the cloud"

*sigh* ............ LOOK AT THE QUOTE. It doesn't say anything about where the satellite was launched FROM - it simply says Australia was the 3rd country to LAUNCH a sattellite.

We bought it, we paid for it, we built it, and we designed it. It was a Canadian-owned and operated scientific satellite. NASA got involved after we convinced them that they'd benefit from the collected data - they didn't think the technology was advanced enough for what we wanted to do.

I know a lot of Canadian, British and German countries that were involved in the design & development of the Abrams, too - but when was the last time you heard it referred to as the "joint American/Canadian/British/German/whatever M1"?

It was launched from Vandenburg AFB, after it was built in CANADA and shipped there. It was launched for CANADA, when CANADA paid them to.
Still a Canadian satellite, still years before the Australian satellite. Where it was launched FROM I didn't address, because that's not what I was correcting.

Dump on whoever wrote that ambiguous headline, not me.

50 years after Australia became the third country to launch a satellite into space, they had another big announcement.

Australia's 1st satellite was launched November 29,1967. Canada's Alouette satellite made us Canucks the 3rd country behind the Soviet Union and the USA when it was launched September 29, 1962.

I have CDO. It's like OCD, but the letters are in alphabetical order, the way they should be.

Libertarians are automatically against anything that has even a hint of humanity. We eat children and abuse the elderly for sport. At least, thats what I'm told I believe by random people on the Internet.

Yeah, but it's so much easier to complain about how "they took our Slashdot!"

Those who hate group X have a hard time seeing that there is a lot of shit flung at group X here. Substitute whatever group you want and there are people who irrationally hate them. I agree that there are very few places on the Internet where you get a larger cross-section of society than here. Despite all the crap, there is still a lot of insightful commentary Glad there are others who still recognize that fact.

Interesting is one way to put it with that additional context. That actually subtracts from my estimation of the original comment, but "headline" was all that was available to comment on before. He's certainly made headlines, but I have yet to see one that wasn't actually about an important issue. I'm not in Oregon any more though, so I only see the national ones.