Hillary was obviously corrupt and knew how to get away with it to the point where we risked corruption becoming legitimized with more than just a wink and nod
Becoming? You must be new.
The choice was clear. The proper lizard for the next four years was selected.
He actually hasn't been selected yet, though of course I presume that he will be.
Okay so if it has the same range of native functionality then why isn't it a vector for exploits to the same degree?
There are probably two reasons. Reason the first, Adobe has always been legendarily bad at security, worse than even Microsoft. Reason the second, Silverlight apps don't actually run in your browser. They run on the server. Only the presentation occurs in your browser. That means they're not adding another scripting language to your browser, either. Any scripting that happens in your browser related to a Silverlight app is using the existing script host.
SO for example. In the first option, we can compare the functionality of adobe to other systems. Silver light or H264 is not the same thing since unless I'm mistaken Adobe flash is not just a codec but also a language.
Silverlight is just a SDK, and a plugin which lets you use stuff in windows from inside the browser so as to enable development of applications with web interfaces (defined in XAML) in Visual Studio. The things that it provides which aren't necessarily provided by the browser already (besides vector graphics and animations) are "H.264 video, Advanced Audio Coding, Windows Media Video (WMV), Windows Media Audio (WMA), and MPEG Layer III (MP3)". [wp] Thus, it's really more like Flash than H.264, although it's not actually like Flash. You develop Silverlight applications (or whatever they are actually called) which are hosted on an IIS server, and the user has to have the Silverlight plugin to use them. But it's all just brokered through the browser and then implemented using existing Windows functionality.
Obviously, but Pebble will still have assets and can thus satisfy their contractual commitments to their customers. It seems like FitBit is only acquiring patents (I thought the Pebble ecosystem was promised to be open source at some point) so Pebble as a company will continue to exist until it has settled all debts and claims. If there is an office building, or hell, a desk chair, the company will have 'assets' so it can liquidate those.
maybe no amount of assurances from Microsoft would reassure you, but if you're in charge of a hypothetical multi-year, multi-billion dollar R&D programme and you need a desktop OS to run your software on, who would you allow to reassure you? Apple? The Debian security team? A few hundred specialist developers you just hired to build you something from scratch on top of FreeBSD?
I'd do some sort of analysis to tell me which was best, and then I'd trust the best for which I could get the source.
For a damn good reason too. Every single attempt at ARM server has failed, there have been roughly (IIRC) 4 server ARM chips that made it to sampling and all bit the dust shortly afterward when the performance was shown to be abdominal. Personally I believed AMD dropping the effort was a clear indicator that even with all their experience they couldn't build something that would beat x86.
The problem isn't the instruction set, it's all the stuff bolted onto it to try to keep cores fed. Multi-threading isn't actually that common in software, and even when it does exist it's often very poorly optimized and has declining per core performance with every core added, but if you did need a 48 core CPU because you had software that was coded and compiled perfectly so that you can run all 48 cores at full speed you can buy a Intel Phi right now and it runs x86 code without recompiling. The fact is that keeping a lot of cores busy is really hard, it requires a ton of cache and lots of interconnects between cores. This stuff adds a ton of transistors to the chip and eats up your silicon budget really fast.
Don't believe any ARM server is going to succeed until you see the silicon.
All of your assumptions are wrong.
Also, your logic fails badly.
All that is necessary is to let the laundry build up until there is a complete load and then run it that night. In your scenario, there is some need to wait until the laundry has built up to require multiple loads. OK, you might need to have a few extra clothes (one day's extra) if the loads build up so that you need to run different types of loads on the same day.
There is no difference in this process if there is one person in the household or multiple. In fact, it is probably easier with multiple people in the household.
I suspect that the concept of "laundry day" has more to do with other scheduling issues than build up of dirty laundry.
But, go ahead, making up your wrong assumptions. Progress lies in the other direction, but you probably don't care.
Remember, that the occasional time the washer is run during the day doesn't invalidate the idea. The goal is shifting use of as much electricity as possible to night use and it's not a failure if some electricity is used during the day.
Perfection is the enemy of progress as well as the enemy of good
You can't just disband a company and *poof* all your debts are gone.
I cannot draw a cart, nor eat dried oats; If it be man's work I will do it.