Perdition

How are they buying Bitcoin in the first place?

I also doubt that people who don't have bank accounts have private computers. So really the pool is "people with computers and bank accounts in countries so replete with fraud that Paypal and CC companies don't service them".

I first saw it on a friends laptop which has a shitty screen with the brightness cranked too high and it looked gold/white to me. When I looked at it on my desktop (which I have set so that blacks are as black as the monitor gets) it doesn't look anywhere near white/gold.

You got some citations? Because in most of the countries you are talking about the poor who will do anything to survive aren't getting university degrees and sexist discrimination exists in abundance.

For example in many Islamic countries like Iran women do make up a significant portion of engineering graduates (sometimes even a majority) but few end up working as engineers due to sexism and cultural expectations.

I did some Googling and what I found didn't really support your argument.

https://hbr.org/2014/03/whats-holding-women-back-in-science-...

That sounds like a crutch for a malfunctioning team and bad management.

I find it incredibly ironic how many software companies apparently don't believe in the power or usefulness of Information Technology.

Companies don't care about security and don't pay for security professionals.

Most big hacks could have either been prevented, or detected and limited, if the company had a proper security team with the authority to make the changes needed.

It will take legislation increasing the liability for companies before this gets fixed. The Internet of Things in particular is going to be a massive problem unless manufacturers are liable for the security of their products.

Aircraft delivery of nukes is cheaper and better for tactical application (easier to disguise the nuclear capability of the strike). But they are far more vulnerable to interdiction and counter-force strikes.

I suspect the UK's reliance on SLBM's is due to the size of the UK which makes finding sites for launch facilities difficult, and would expose their civilian population to too much risk from counter-force strikes (they were going to get nuked a lot already to knock out their airfields and harbors).

There is a difference between "being as simple as required to reliably function" and "being as simple as possible".

False activations of things like alarms are dangerous because it conditions people to ignore the alarm or react slowly.

Going skydiving is taking a risk. Going skydiving without training and without checking your equipment is just being an idiot. It isn't noble or poetic it is just dumb.

The only thing sadder than McCandless pointless depth is the people whose own lives are so devoid of meaning that they seek inspiration from a fool who killed himself.

Except he didn't prepare as well as he could.

IIRC there was a ferry or similar a few miles upstream of where he was "trapped" (because he didn't expect the river to swell as it did) and died.

Learning about seasonal weather and checking alternate routes are a basic part of wilderness survival.

Why would you presume that a startup would offer better wages and conditions for those "below the API"? The first one might, but then the second one would start trying to drive costs down in competition.

In countries that allow such things there are plenty of private college "startups" and they are almost universally awful. There is more money to be made churning out hordes of poorly trained students than there is in properly training them.

DevOps was originally supposed to be about moving dev and ops out of their respective silos and into one combined team so as to break down communication barriers and help each side understand their duties better. Under this model there is no such thing as a "DevOps engineer" as "DevOps" is a team structure not a job title.

Now days "DevOps" often just means "cloud deployment engineer" or "we can get a developer to look after the servers".

What you seem interested in is the ops side of things. Usually this will be under a title like sysadmin, deployment engineer, "DevOps".

Yeah but ejecting is often career ending because of those G's.

Difficulty of international agreements, and the expense.

Upgrading to fully autonomous systems adds a lot of cost but is only going to make a difference in a small number of incidents (civilian aircraft don't fly as low and fast as fighters, and civilian pilots aren't distracted by being shot at).

In reality giants like John Deere have such chokeholds on the market that they can either buy out "disrupters" or bankrupt them.

Hardware is so costly and slow moving compared to software that the swiftness of startups compared to incumbents isn't enough.

Tesla for example is basically a charity project where the automotive industry is being given the technology in order to encourage them to adopt it. If Tesla was being run for purely economical purposes the incumbents would have moved to buy it or crush it.

Not a chance. Anything sufficiently complex enough to be a "work" is automatically copyright (in most countries).

That means absent an open source license you cannot "copy" (as distinct from "view") or create a derivative of that work.

"Open source" does not refer to the code being publicly viewable (Microsoft tried to pull that one a decade ago).

Incorrect. A free account means your repos are publicly accessible, it does not mean the code in those repos is under an open source license.

So you are arguing that despite the US (and other Western governments) capabilities at electronic intelligence being openly talked about in the press since the '90's that the terrorists only learned about this due to Snowden?

Osama wasn't keeping an air-gap because of Snowden. He was doing it because Clinton was calling in cruise missiles on terrorist cell phones back in the '90's.

I think a better argument is that only stupid terrorists talked on the phone/internet and eventually they would nearly all be "naturally selected" out of the "gene pool" until all you have left are the smart terrorists who teach their disciples how to be smart.

Unfortunately the stupid terrorists were also the ones least likely to successfully carry out a significant attack.

You don't want a "framework" you want a CMS or "app platform". Drupal isn't a "framework", laravel/symfony are "frameworks".

You are comparing a Tesla model S to a kit car chassis.

There is also no antipathy between plugin-based/modular systems and MVC. The reason node mostly has barebones frameworks and no content management platform like Drupal is because it is so new.

This would break too many websites (I've seen it used by a lot of banks as part of their authentication systems) to get through any kind of standards committee. Instead download something like RefControl, and advocate for browsers to include such functionality in their core.

Messing with the URIs isn't going to work because most ads are from ad networks and their domains can be blocked. And no ad network is going to trust some system where they need to rely on the client server to not lie about ad impressions.

Adblock mostly misses self-hosted ads anyway.

I'm not sure of any names but I know there are neuroscience people that study vision and might be interested in studying you.

The human visual system is fascinatingly complex so something like this isn't too surprising.

Yeah if you are focusing on points in the background you probably won't notice it (because your eyes are moving as the image moves).

A better demo would probably be something like a fight scene. Close ups of fast moving objects very obviously show the difference (a classic mistake of bad cinematographers, which they often try to mask with darkness).

>24fps has long been the standard for "as smooth as real life" motion in the movie & TV industries.

Which is fine only for non-action scenes, and film also has motion blur to make movement look smoother.

Action scenes in games (especially without pseudo motion blur) look significantly better at higher than 30 fps.

24 fps was also chosen as "the minimum we can get away with", so I see no reason not to increase it when you don't have to pay for film stock.

I would think you have something significantly wrong with your visual system if you can't see the difference. People have gone "blind" while having no physical defects to their visual system, so it is possible you really can't see the difference.

I don't think you should be insulted for making this claim, but there are a lot of trolls out there that make it. So it is a bit like getting annoyed by a bunch of trolls running around claiming the sky is green and then running into someone who really sees the sky as green.

I've included a link to a demo that to me shows clearly the difference in frame rate.

http://www.30vs60fps.com/

>which enabled working-class people to own fairly large amounts of clothing for the first time, and even have fashionable clothing, which had once been the exclusive preserve of the rich.

No, that was due to social reform as a result of the threat of anarchist/socialist/communist uprisings against the established order.

Average living standards went down during most of the industrial revolution.

>reforming that system worked out a lot better than trying to work with people who were so threatened by change they would destroy other peoples' method of earning a living.

Except the capitalists attempted (mostly successfully) to destroy alternate ways of earning a living other than industrial work.

America was flooded with immigrants because it was a chance for peasants to have land of their own.

They are a huge publicly traded corporation and you expected different?

They don't even need to invalidate the patent, they can just run the lawsuit out for decades and most likely get the patent holder to settle for a pittance.

So they sell a database with an analytics front end?

To RMS? Probably.

The majority of programmers use free software for practical reasons and are willing to "compromise" with the desires of proprietary software companies.

For RMS free software is an ideological struggle. In his ideal world proprietary software wouldn't exist.

I believe judges have compelled people to surrender decryption keys.

It is in concept no different to having a magical safe which can't be opened by any method except the owner's key. The court does have the authority to compel you to surrender that key (or go to jail for contempt).

Of course we all know this is really about fishing expeditions and not warrants issued on probable cause.