WHY did Intel need AMD? Really!!!! WHY???
WHY did Intel need AMD? Really!!!! WHY???
performance was shown to be abdominal.
Well, at least performance wasn't thoracic.
Yeah, I forgot a lot of good ones. Sharks, eels, piranhas, snakes, volcanoes, rising water on sinking ships, asteroids, robots, machines on the blink, doomsday devices, heat, cold, incompetent technicians, ghosts, time travellers, parties unknown, mad scientists, angry scientists, monsters created by mad/angry scientists, radiation monsters, diseases,
And then there's the *real* villians: bad actors, bad directors, bad screenplays, bad ideas, ruining good books, bad soundtracks, theatres that set the sound too loud, people that talk during the movie, people that use electronics during the movie, people that talk to their electronics during the movie, spoilers, overpriced tickets, overpriced snacks, commercials, product placement deals, cameos by overrated actors, actors that are in too many movies, sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots, retcons.
Is the fact that people do this kind of really clever shit for more or less ordinary income, is it proof that the economy is in some way broken?
The economy undoubtedly is broken in many ways, but I think exploits like this are less about the economy and more about programmers getting bored and wanting to show off how clever they are; and if they can also make some money doing it, so much the better.
Not my fault their business model is not profitable.
Not their fault your web browser is insecure?
If it's from Hollywood, post 1968, then:
1. The villain will be a US military agency, a US spy agency, a corporation/CEO, a gun company, a non-renewable energy company.
Wow, I must have misunderstood the plot on all those post-1968 movies where I thought the baddies were commies, nazis, drug lords, foreign terrorists, domestic terrorists, anarchists, poor people trying to get rich quick, rich people trying to get richer quick, crazy people trying to do incomprehensible things for incomprehensible reasons, wayward do-gooders, megalomoniacal supercrooks, pirates, pirate hunters, aliens, alien hunters, vampires, vampire hunters, zombies, orcs, dragons, ghosts, etc.
If you don't like the simulation you're living in, you can always rejoin us here in reality.
Don't forget -
b) Internet Explorer
The US cotton industry claims that a repeal of the abolition -- which destroys innovation and value creation -- will foster an environment that'll be more positive for their business and would be good for innovation in the industry. They went on to say that it "would provide opportunity for significant innovation and differentiation" and that it'd enable you to "do some very interesting things."
Yes. But we need to be aware that man is not the only source of antibiotics. They naturally occur. We get a good lot of them from plants and bacteria, starting of course with penicilin which we got from mold, and which was already present on salted food and damp environments. What we did was to make antibiotics present in organisms other than their natural sources.
The Andromeda Strain was published in 1969.
The United States has some disease reporting, it started at least 75 years ago before the antibiotic bubble. This CDC Report summarizes the present state of disease reporting, in two pages. We need higher standards of reporting and legal penalties for failure to report.
Why are we calling this "fake" news instead of "incorrect news" or "wrong news" or "wacko conspiracy theory"?
Because the "news" in question isn't just false, it's deliberately false and inflammatory. As in, made up out of whole cloth by trolls, just to wreak havoc, or by paid provocateurs, to drive gullible people towards advertisements by provoking them. The people behind the fake news are well aware that it is 100% fiction, and they don't care.
That's different from inadvertently getting a story wrong, and it's different from being genuinely insane and thereby sending out incorrect information that you honestly think is correct.
"Fake" is in fact the most accurate way to describe it. So if you're going to question other peoples' ulterior motives, what dark motives are you concealing?
The closest to an argument I've heard is we'll tax factory output instead of income, but that doesn't work. You'll be accused of seizing factories ala Communism.
No matter what you do you're going to be accused of something by the people who stand to benefit from the status quo. If you let the possibility of accusations veto a plan, then you'll never be able to plan anything; which is de facto equivalent to planning for the problem to be resolved (one way or another) for you via massive civil unrest.
"Tax the robots" is probably as close an answer as you're going to get to the "who's gonna pay for it" question. Elections are won on feelings, as you say, and I suspect there are going to be a lot of anti-robot feelings in the future, unless/until this problem is solved.
Eh, I think you meant "mechanical engineer"(*)
(*) I don't mean a robot who is trained in engineering, I mean a human being who designs physical objects
Eich resigned because of external pressure on the Mozilla organization. I hear that one of the lobbying activities against him was when the dating site "OK Cupid" started informing Firefox users who accessed the site of Eich's activities and that they should download a browser made by people who don't nominate someone with gender discrimination issues to be their CEO. At the time, 8% of OK Cupid customers were there to arrange same-gender meetings.
They felt he was the public face of the company.
Russ Nelson published a piece on what he theorized was the economic motivation of Blacks to be lazy, and was booted off of the Open Source Initiative board. He wasn't thinking about how it would be perceived. A modified version of the piece is still online, but not the version that got him in trouble. In general, executives are seen as the public faces of their organizations even in the case of Nelson, who was not the chairman of the board, but was simply a member of the executive board. In Nelson's case, it wasn't that he made publicity appearances and press releases, it was that he was one of the people with the power to direct the company (and thus a more real face of the company than soneone who just does PR), and folks did not trust that someone who wrote what he did would behave as they would like in that position.
HELP!!!! I'm being held prisoner in /usr/games/lib!