Do you ever wonder what the world will look like when everyone has their own personal quantum computer?
There's no proof that it has anything to do with Wikileaks, but in a world of IoT devices with no thought toward security, anyone who cares to do so can mount DDOS with the power of a national entity.
What's the point of doing what Assange and Wikileaks have been doing without any moral position? He isn't helping his own case.
No, of course it is not legal to set a trap to intentionally hurt someone, even if you expect that the trap could only be activated by the person committing property theft or vandalism. Otherwise, you'd see shotguns built into burglar alarms.
Fire alarm stations sometimes shoot a blue dye which is difficult to remove or one which only shows under UV. Never stand in front of one when pulling the lever! But they are not supposed to hurt you.
And of course these booby traps generally are not as reliable as the so-called "inventor" thinks and tend to hurt the innocent.
It costs approximately $15,000 a year to support each PC user, while Mac users actually give their tech services departments $30,000 a year, for no reason whatsoever, and never call for support.
Wow, where to start with this one.
The claim that monarchies are legitimate so that makes them non-fascist is total bullshit - those monarchies didn't just naturally evolve - there was a lot of blood spilled in the process.
Oh shut up. Now you're picking random potentially totalitarian things out of the air as if Fascism is a generic term of really bad totalitarian governments.
Monarchies are a completely ridiculous diversion and no, they're not the same. They're not even the same type of thing. Fascism is an ideology, not a constitutional system of government. And nobody would argue that monarchies are "legitimate" so that makes them "non-fascist", because the term has no meaning here. Are fascist governments not "legitimate"? I'm pretty sure Mussolini was the legitimate leader of Italy until the Italians found a new use for meathooks.
Nor is this a discussion of totalitarianism, and we're not trying to define totalitarianism. We're discussing Fascism, a specific ideology, created by Benito Mussolini in the 1920s, and expanded upon by Adolf Hitler and others after that.
Europe in the 1920s and 1930s is precisely relevant to defining Fascism. That's when the first Fascists appeared. And almost from the beginning, Mussolini was adamant about "protecting" the "Aryan race". Between his own rhetoric, and Hitler's influence, this culminated in the Manifesto of Race on the Italian side. I don't need to tell you what it culminated in on the German side.
If you reject the inventor of the term "fascism" as being somehow unconnected to his own ideology, and decide to ascribe completely unrelated movements and constitutional systems (!!!) to Fascism purely because they're totalitarian, then again you're just plain not addressing the term.
And to circle back to the topic, I called Trump a fascist. Not a communist. Not a king. Not a totalitarian. Not a dictator. A fascist.
He's a racist who demonizes and dehumanizes non-whites, and scapegoats them for America's "problems". He has contempt for democracy. He directly and actively promotes violence against his political rivals. He wants to use the law to punish those who oppose him, from politicians to the free media.
I don't like Clinton, but she's none of those things. And you have to be those things to be a fascist.
No it's not legitimate if he merely mentioned either. Merely mentioning a trademark doesn't mean you're in violation of trademark law, otherwise you wouldn't be able to talk about most commercial products. The precise restrictions on trademarked word use are best described by a lawyer, but remember the intent of trademark law is to prevent people from passing an item off as something associated with the trademark owner, not to restrict people's ability to talk about products they've seen or owned.
For more information, visit Bing and google "trademarks".
Medical professionals have a professional duty to state medical facts. If they refuse, they can and should be placed in a different career path.
An accountant or lawyer promoting a Sovereign Citizen view of the relationship between client and state would be struck off. A Bridge Engineer who rejects Newtonian (or better) mechanics would be struck off.
This isn't like banning a doctor from discussing gun safety because you lobbyists are worried it might lead to a decrease in household gun ownership. This is about nurses being required not to mislead people about medicine, abusing their positions as respected medical professionals to sow misinformation. It's not a freedom of speech issue, it's a professionalism issue, and critically it's a life and death issue.
Funny thing is after I lived with the flip phone for a year or so, about a year ago I bought the cheapest smartphone I could ($30, at Walmart!) and was stunned at how much better it was than the GN. OK, the screen was worse, as was the amount of storage -- though the fact it took SD cards mitigated that in part, but it really was faster, smoother, and the UI had less bugs. It resold me on Android.
I honestly don't think price has much to do with device "niceness" in the Android world. Sure, in the early days, you had a few "cheap" phones with sub-WVGA screens that were barely usable, and right until a couple of years ago even the slightly better ones seemed cobbled together, but right now I'm actually seeing low end hardware that's caught up with Android's needs, while critical features continue to get removed from phones as they get more expensive.
And some of those removed features do, actually, make the phone less frustrating. That cheap $30 Walmart special had dedicated navigation buttons for example - its replacement doesn't, meaning I have to swipe from the corners to get buttons that'll close a full screen app or just send that full screen app a "back" signal. How is that an improvement? It isn't. The buttons are removed because it interferes with the lines of the device and would make it fractionally bigger, aesthetic considerations that undermine usability and makes the device more annoying to use.
I'll be honest, the most expensive modern smartphone I bought was a Galaxy Nexus. It definitely didn't make me happier; the quirks and horrible UI actually made me switch to a flip phone in an effort to regain my sanity.
Bad news. I just invented time travel, and rather than do something worthwhile like kill Hitler (or, in some other way, ensure he never gains power) I've decided to cause minor annoyances for other Slashdotters.
I'm going to go back in time, suggest to Steve Jobs he adds a scroll wheel to the iPod, and change history so it becomes the most popular MP3 player of all time, and Creative becomes an also ran rather than the inventor of the cPhone!
That'll make the comment you just wrote look ridiculous!
Genuine question, but has Microsoft had any problems enforcing the Windows EULA? Because when I buy a computer, the software is already there too.
This might be the next thing in portable gaming systems, but there is no way this will be 'console' class.
The latest Nvidia Tegra X series chips have excellent performance, in the same ballpark as previous generation of game consoles. Now, while you might say "Yeah, but not the current gen", Nintendo has lately prioritized price and flexibility over having CPUs and GPUs comparable to Microsoft and Sony's. If the Wii and Wii U were considered console class at the time, so is this. Except they couldn't cluster, while this one can.
I don't think it's reasonable to suggest it's a PS-vita with a dock either. The video is at pains to suggest the technology is designed for a more fluid playing experience, with the type of thing you want to do (play against friends, play a conventional game at home in comfort, play in a plane or train, etc) determining how you configure your console.
Will it work? No idea. If they can keep the price down, conceivably yes. I think the big problem with consoles right now is that they're expensive toys for a committed minority. Nintendo misfired with the WiiU, but the biggest, most glaring, fault wasn't the hardware, but the price and pricing.