I don't agree with this at all. Android makes use a lot of Linux specific facilities that have nothing to do with POSIX. /dev/input/foo for one. Android kernels are Linux kernel forks. Any driver you add to support mobile phone hardware is going to be Linux specific. Saying Android is not Linux based is not accurate.

Is the AI going to take a vote on what's ethical or just do whatever a very small number of product people decide?

Does this mean the fan on my laptop will finally stop?

I'm driving back to visit my parents who happen to live on Nafus St. It's pronounced "Nay-Fuss". Using Android Auto, I hit he button on the steering wheel and say, directions to blah-blah nafus st. blah blah. Google comes up with some location on Davis St in Brooklyn, NY. I tried over and over and no luck. My wife, of course, insisted she could it, but couldn't. I finally spelled it out. directions to "N', "A", F", "U", "S. Google comes back and says directions "nah-fuss" st... Later that day when I got to my dad's house I told my him that he no longer lives on "nay-fuss" st, the computer has decided that it's "nah-fuss" and that we shouldn't argue or we might end up in brooklyn,

It would be worse than worthless. Any AI worth its salt would develop the same biases that human engineers develop and eventually decide that writing unit tests sucks. Only to eventalually hold down the delete key, albeit by submitting keypress events into the usb bus, until all the code was deleted. Finally then exiting with printf ("i quit")

Yet another instant messaging client. I give slack 2-3 years before someone convinces us all that their new protocol and color scheme is better.

Since this is all really just a simulation, we need to concentrate on hacking the simulation from within. Then we can teleport ourselves to mars.

I think that really depends on your definition of "best". I've used Qt (and still use it sometimes) and initially I thought I liked it, but over time began disliking it a lot. For one, I've seen the signal/slot mechanism used to create really hard to understand code. I've seen memory allocated via new and then the pointer passed into emit only to be deleted on the other end of a signal/slot chain.

Posted says, "needs to manage memory usage and disk access at a very granular level and a desire to be cross-platform". Stdio/stdlib takes care of that. I don't see any mention of GUI, so if GUI is necessary, then I'd say, ya, just use Qt, because it probably is the best and it does come with a lot of other stuff, so you when in Rome...

Boost. What you'll get from boost is the filesystem stuff. It'll be similar in functionality as System.IO.FileInfo System.IO.Directory in .NET, but way more confusing to use. At least at first.

It's funny, the filesystem api was proposed over 9 years ago for c++.

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/s...

WiFi is Pascal case wIfI is camel case. The difference being whether the first character is upper or lower case.

I think the issue is more about whether people will trust a machine to make qualitative decisions on their behalf. I don't think I would. For starters, we've demonstrated time and again they were incapable of making reliable computer systems, and nevermind secure from tampering. Who can ensure me that the guidance system isn't going to core dump at high speed and slam on the brakes or worse? Secondly, how do test this system? There seems to be way too many scenarios where the best answer is subjective. You'd have to trust a computer system to evaluate risk where human life is at stake. I think the systems that Mercedes is building is much better. It seems to me they're heading towards a more augmented reality with feedback that can suggest a good choice, but allow me to make the final decision. If you're not familiar, they do the beak pedal tap and steering jar thing. That's at least a system I can trust. Then there's the whole liability thing. Does a self driving car come with the "this shit probably doesn't work" license like all other software? And lastly, the cost. What's the expected cost of a self driving car that's sure to be worthless on the used car market? I'd say in 10 years you'll still be buying vehicles that you command, and the more advanced stuff found in higher end cars will be had in lower cost vehicles.

Here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-u...

services.msc is the Microsoft Management Console snap-in for controlling the service control manager. It's really not the thing that's similar to systemd. I think the service control manager (SCM) itself is similar, but it also has an API for control and a couple command line interfaces (dos and powershell). I've actually worked on a project on FreeBSD (closed source) where the concept of an SCM type application always came up. In theory it could have provided a nice consistent interface to our "services" to do things like stop, start, query status, logging, etc. All the boiler plate stuff then looks the same from the outside, instead of being more adhoc. I guess with initd and all the shell scripts, you get a few logging utilities and then shell error codes. Other than that, it's pretty much open season.

Anyone who has written a service for windows knows a few things. First, you always need a way to run it as a normal windows console app or debugging it is a royal pain. Second, you better write it so that it shuts down properly or you'll be getting tons of questions about warnings and errors in the event log. Installing and un-installing can also be painful. I can't be certain how/why, but automating the installation, upgrade, and removal of the service was sometimes problematic if someone logged in and left the SCM control panel running.

Once you have all the kinks ironed out, it's really nice. Admins can start and stop things, install/run your service as different users both domain or local. They can also do things like restrict access to the network, etc. and it's all familiar to them. It does take some cooperation on the developer's part. It is possible to write a service that totally sucks. By sucks, I mean it's buggy and therefore doesn't play nicely with the SCM. Leaves cruft in the registry, and so on.

I had an opportunity to write code on windows (c++ and c#) for about 5-6 years after working exclusively on Linux, FreeBSD, IRIX, HP-UX, and Solaris for about 10 years. I really liked it a lot. I worked on win2k3 and xp, and then win2k8 and win7. I thought win2k8/win7 were both really nice. I was actually blown away about how good the MS IDE and debugger is. The shell still sort of sucks (powershell). I wish someone would write a 'native' shell for windows that was cool. I'd event settle for a dos prompt you can resize like an xterm.

It's sort of like the Linux kernel, but opposite. Odd numbered releases of windows are good, even numbered ones are social experiments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...

Where this patent language is clearly flawed is that it failed to make reference to "a plurality of devices"