I think it's pretty f-ed up to say a company has to give their IP and trade secrets to their competitors (aka, your friends) so they can take their business, and then call it fairness. It isn't, it's theft.

Kinda sounds like China's business model, eh?

I agree they can't toss the EU completely away...

However, why couldn't Google just yank their servers out of the EU..and station them all around the EU. Sure, there might be a little performance hit, but at least they'd not be compelled to follow the EU rules, and I doubt the EU will firewall all things google, you know?

I'm also highly allergic to cats...

;)

Really? What vulnerabilties did you find?

Or are you talking about something completely unrelated?

If only the vast majority of people "questioning authority" were not merely looking for a new authority.

Clinton was known for renting out the Lincoln bedroom, and stealing porcelain. He wasn't the first corrupt president, wasn't the last, and wasn't the worst.

In retrospect, Clinton wasn't the worst president, but he wasn't good. He was unfulfilled potential (his wife probably says the same), but way better than Bush or Trump. Consider:

In terms of foreign policy, when the former Soviet Union needed help, he gave them the middle finger. Multiple times. This directly led to Putin (and Bush made Putin many times worse). His China policy turned out to be awful. Giving "most favored nation" status to dictators without extracting human-rights concessions is the wrong path forward. We should reduce trade with evil countries, not increase it (in his defense, it was more difficult to predict at the time). He had a habit of ignoring problems like Kosovo until they got out of hand, then getting involved in ways that nobody understood, thus thinking he was wagging the dog. Black Hawk Down happened during his time.

In domestic politics, he quickly gave up on healthcare, and turned into a fiscal conservative. He implemented a lot of Newt's "contract with America," including deregulation which led to the Bear Sterns disaster. He gave the FBI and police too much power, which led to disasters like Waco and Ruby Ridge (no sympathy for those two groups, but it was a sign of a police force with too much power and too little competence).

After the 1993 WTC bombings performed by the nacent Al Qaeda (not yet named), Clinton failed to take the threat of terrorism seriously.

Clinton was a smart, charismatic guy with a lot of potential but failed to turn it into a great presidency.

Although, from my two second check just now, Venus is technically considered within the Goldilocks zone for this solar system it is right on the very inner edge of it. This finding differs from Venus in that respect, making it more interesting as a possibility.

All highly speculative of course, but to be fair that's exactly what the article says. Atmosphere detected, everything else speculative.

...5th Ave. and NOBODY is fucking stopping him because GopSCOTUS gave him "Presidential Immunity".

U.S. is bigly fucked up.

I love scapegoating individual developers as much as the next guy, but if you take a look at the Win32 API, you'll find loads of fun "features" such as:

- Every single function that takes a string has two implementations: one that ends with the letter A (and takes its strings as ASCII) and one that ends with the letter W (and takes its strings as UCS-16). And then it has a preprocessor-define (with no suffix) that gets expanded to either one implementation or the other, based on your compiler settings.

- windows.h defines preprocessor-tokens for min() and max(), which means any C++ program that ever calls std::min() or std::max() will error out with a very strange compile-time error, if it included windows.h first; the work-around is to define NOMINMAX first to prevent windows.h from polluting the namespace.

- Modern windows is perfectly capable of arbitrary-length file-paths, but ships by default with a 260-character filepath limit anyway, "to preserve backwards compatibility with older software that expects that limitation to be enforced". To get correct behavior you have to hand-modify your registry; otherwise you find out about this limitation when you go to unzip a .zip file and the unzip mysteriously fails even though the .zip file is valid.

These are all defects that other OS's simply don't suffer from, either because the other OS's were designed correctly from the beginning, or because the people in charge of the other OS's long ago took the hit (in short-term breakage) and fixed the problems rather than letting them linger forever to preserve backwards compatibility.

All Windows developers (good and bad) have to deal with these issues, probably forever, and every line of code they add to work around these problems has to be supported and debugged and tested as well, hence the damage compounds.

Before Trump, it was a cultural norm that a President of the United States was expected to follow ethical and moral guidelines as well as laws; not only because anything less would be dishonorable and a disservice to his country, but also because otherwise he would pay a steep political price for his unethical behavior. Trump's most significant political innovation has taken the form of figuring out how to convince a plurality of the American public that the only real standard for Presidential behavior is "whatever you can get away with".

Why would you stop a selective recount aimed at finding more votes in a specific set of counties that tended to lean toward one candidate? Hmm...

The above is a one-sided interpretation, but it's not an unreasonable one. The situation was that Florida had voted with punchcard ballots, and there were problems with a percentage of the ballots, both "overvotes", cases where more than one candidate was punched, and "undervotes", cases where no candidate was punched in a race. But it turns out that when you're talked about punched cards, "punched" is an ambiguous term. There were cases where chads (the little rectangular pieces of paper that get punched out) were left barely attached ("hanging chads") and cases where they were partially punched but still fully attached ("dimpled chads"). And everywhere in between.

Gore's team called for the targeted recount, arguing the theory that the targeted counties had more elderly populations who were more likely to have failed to fully punch their choices, resulting in "undervotes" when the scanning machines read them, i.e. the machine saw no holes for a race and decided that the ballot didn't vote for anyone. They argued that human examination of those ballots could clearly see in some cases that a position was punched and that a recount should be done to count those. The Florida State Supreme Court ordered a selective recount of the counties the Gore team thought should be recounted, to correct correctable undervotes.

Bush's team argued to SCOTUS that the selected counties were all Democrat-leaning (they were) which meant that the voters in the Republican-leaning counties that had not been selected were not receiving equal treatment under the law. The initial statewide count was done by machine, but the recount which would be more "permissive", finding votes where the machine wouldn't, was only being done in counties where the newly-found votes were more likely to be for Gore.

SCOTUS stayed the recount while they decided how to handle this, then ruled a few days later that the recount was unequal treatment, that a proper recount would need to be statewide and it would need clear rules for how to count ambiguous ballots, rather than each county defining its own rules. But by then the clock had run out anyway. The court's rationale for staying the count while they decided was that if the count proceeded counties would release updates that would likely show the vote totals shifting, which would make rejecting the recount look really corrupt if it went against Bush and if they decided that's what should be done. "Oh, the conservative court let the count go forward until they saw it wasn't going their way, then they rejected it" was worse than "The conservative court stopped the recount before it produced any results", was the theory.

You can certainly argue that these published positions by the court weren't the real reason, but they're not without merit.

In any event, as a careful, methodical, independent recount determined months later, the Gore-requested recount would still have shown Bush won. An incomplete recount which resulted in no win would have been a Bush win, because the state legislature was voting to send Bush votes for that case. An incomplete recount in which Florida failed to submit a slate would have been a Bush win, because the US House would have picked him. The only scenario in which Gore won was a statewide recount that also tried to tally "overvotes" -- having humans try to discern which of multiple punched chads was "most" punched, but no one at the time thought that would favor Gore, and it wasn't even being discussed.

Aside: "Corruption" is the wrong word. Corruption specifically refers to bribery and other compensation-related schemes (not necessarily monetary). "Partisanship" is a better word.

Indeed it does.

Yep. So all of the F-Droid-distributed apps will be associated with one account. Or maybe it'll be distributed across a handful of accounts.

For open source apps absolutely anyone can package and submit an app under their account.

You think Google is going to verify that an app was submitted by the author/developer rather than some F-Droid guy who submits all of the F-Droid apps?