Get ready to hear the 10-20% figure more, since it seems to be a right-wing meme at the moment. Anyone who has actually been a state IT employee, like myself, knows that it is false and actually a reversal of reality. State IT jobs pay less and have better hours and benefits than private sector IT jobs. For pete's sake, that's why I went to work for the state.

Actually, the best way to fight piracy is to make a product pirates aren't interested in.

Yes, but if you can't communicate your results, what good are they to the rest of us?

I voted for communication because the state of science journalism compelled me to.

You are running a software built by said commercial 3rd-party company. They don't need that server in the middle to see all of those things.

So there's no increase in capability if they are malicious. There is an increase in risk if they are incompetent - and do something like cache requests/responses containing that data.

Try using Apple HW instead of just bashing it. There are a lot of MB/MBP out there running MS crap because they are so reliable, and actually run software without machinations. Rating a new version of an OS as a service pack is ludicrous. Maybe you ought to actually use a permissions based OS before you run your keys the next time

Ah. Yeah, I understand you now. Sort of like the old wives’ tricks for telling whether you’re going to have a boy or a girl... people will swear by them, but in fact they’re bound to be correct 50% of the time, and people don’t remember the times they were wrong.

Why?

In any event, hiding the dialogs when GIMP loses focus makes a hell of a lot more sense than dialogs that won’t minimize or hide at all. When I want to see the desktop, I want to see it without any stupid unhideable dialogs in the way.

I don’t want a single window mode. I want the things I mentioned. Unless I maximize the window, and then perhaps yes a single-window mode would be better than letting the floating palettes overlap the image window.

And we're all eager to enable whatever DRM Microsoft deems to push onto our computers. In the form of 'updates.' Oh joy.

Yes, we're really eager for that, and it's good that the self styled experts at Slashdot agree that it's in our best interest to bend over and smile whenever Redmond chooses to install whatever they wish.

If they disable the Internet access to their local community then we have less traffic to deal with. This, in my humble opinion, is a win for the rest of the enlightened world in the US

>>>The very reason we HAVE a SCOTUS is to protect the individuals from majority abuse.

But the SCOTUS is part of the U.S. Government. It often acts like a rubberstamp for the Congress and the Executive branches, and when it doesn't rubberstamp, then the president sometimes threatens the court (see FDR and the Court-packing Scandal).

The U.S. Government should not be self-policing itself. That's why it's necessary to have an independent party, i.e. the States, be granted the ability to nullify unconstitutional laws. They created the Constitution - they ought to have at least some power to enforce it and nullify unconstitutional laws - just like any other binding contract.

One reason is the U232 decay products, whose hard gamma emissions frighten even the steeliest nuclear scientists and technicians. These facilities require many times the usual amount of shielding to be safe. That said, research is ongoing. There is a lot of thorium around, and countries without uranium can usually scrape some thorium together.

You can go to Mars, but don't drink the water, because water always wins.....

I wonder if you breathed in Martian Methane if you would become a fart monster who wanted to invade Titan or something.......

Not my country. Canada was literally partied into existence. The founding fathers showed up in Charlottetown with a ship load of champagne to talk about confederation. You know, just in case they could find something to celebrate.

I had a chat with a fellow from Accenture about advancement in his organization. Not only did he say there was plenty of room for it, but it was required. In certain technical categories if you didn't move up the food chain they would terminate you.

No, it won't. Unless by "a couple of beers" you mean "12", and by "you" you mean, "someone who is anorexic."