dak1

From a user's perspective, you could create the exact same experience using vanilla XHR (which is exactly what AMD module loading does with `define`).

O'Malley was eviscerated for that statement, even though he clearly agreed with the sentiment that black lives matter.

I can understand the concern that some have that turning "Black Lives Matter" into "All Lives Matter" could conceal the reality that people with darker skin have been disproportionately impacted by our Justice system, but I also agree with the contention that overreaching and overreacting to a statement that seems completely reasonable to people not deeply aware of the discussion can ultimately have the opposite effect and serve as fuel to movements like the alt right.

Code Climate can still happily read from the GitHub project and I can add the badge to the README if desired, which is visible on both GitLab and GitHub.

And since origin pushes to both, they are rarely if ever out of sync.

And by using GitLab I get GitLab CI instead of Travis (which is quite nice), GitLab's amazing Issue tracker and board, which blows GitHub away, more fine grained control over merging (no more forced --no-ff merges if you don't want), Issue and MR templates, an activity stream, far more control over your project's settings... really I can't say enough good things about my experience with GitLab over the last ~6 months.

Plus the GitLab team has just been killing it with each release, and it just feels good to use open source (and be able to open issues, vote on improvements, track changes for the upcoming release...). Free private repos is just icing.

Setting up a project for both just takes a few initial commands to configure git:

  git remote set-url --add --push origin git@github.com:account/repo.git
  git remote set-url --add --push origin git@gitlab.com:account/repo.git

Don't let the prominence of discussions of China's "rise" fool you though, it is most certainly not a superpower. It certainly has the capacity to be one some day, but its power projection capability is fairly restricted to its immediate vicinity in East Asia still.

There's a difference between simplifying the tax code, which would theoretically reduce overhead, and providing an itemized tax break, which actually increases complexity (and yes, there's enforcement of that tax break too).

Treating a tax break like government spending seems completely rational.

It's great to hear planning and discussion on this is beginning, and that they're being honest upfront about the timeline to see it implemented.

It's basically the equivalent of climate deniers vs climate change, with the deniers' funding basically coming from a single government.

There's intense nationalism (and racism) at play here, and the Chinese government isn't funding pure science so much as it is funding science with the intent of finding a specific result.

I'm not a paleontologist, but I've lived and studied International Relations in China (at Tsinghua University, where many of China's leaders studied), and I saw first hand how research was corrupted and self-regulated to draw certain conclusions that agreed with the Government's known or perceived position. This was often felt to be necessary to protect funding and academic positions (one professor of mine in private confessed to me that "80% of what I say is true, and the rest I say for reasons we all know").

I know there is strong nationalistic beliefs around human origins in China as well, and suspect strongly the same forces that affect IR academic research are at play here.

Fake fossils are also extremely common in China[1][2], and widespread racism, especially toward black people, is difficult to overstate[3] (which leaves many Chinese refusing to believe they may have originated in Africa).

There's a good reason many paleontologists outside of China are taking many of these studies and theories with a China-sized grain of salt. That isn't to say that there isn't good science being done in China as well. But sometimes it can be difficult to separate the 20% from the 80%, and when findings seem to draw conclusions that the Government wanted to see all along, they're rightly viewed highly suspiciously.

[1] https://www.paleodirect.com/fake-chinese-fossils-fossil-forg...

[2] http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-fake-fossils-p...

[3] http://thediplomat.com/2016/06/racism-with-chinese-character...

You can see some of the before/after picutres of Itu Aba and some of the other features here: http://amti.csis.org/before-and-after-the-south-china-sea-tr...

I'm reading the ruling now and it appears the Tribunal based its decision on Itu Aba lacking a "stable community of people." I think most observers expected the opposite decision based on the fresh water on Itu Aba and its capacity to support human habitation.

I do agree though that this is probably the one point in the ruling I disagree with.

The Tribunal also ruled Chinese activity in the region was illegal, found China to be violating its obligations under UNCLOS and failing to protect the natural habitats (including willful destruction of the coral and endangered species). China's harassment of Philippine ships was also ruled illegal. The nine-dash line was ruled invalid. China's claims of "historic waters" was found to be groundless. Mischief Reef, Second Thomas Shoal, and Reed Bank were found to “form part of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines.”

Really, this was about as complete a victory for the Philippines (and refutation of everything China claims and is doing) as possible.

The court was particularly clear on rejecting the nine-dash line and China's claims of historic waters.

As much as China will say it ignores this ruling, it absolutely puts pressure on China and constricts the language it will be able to use when discussing disputes in the South China Sea. China has particularly relied on claims of historic waters, which will diplomatically make for some extremely awkward press statements for China now.

This may force China into some face-saving agreements, so that it continues to appear strong at home where it has made this into an issue of nationalism, but internationally may try to consolidate what it does hold.

Another likely option is China may try to create a ADIZ over the South China Sea like it did in the East China Sea (and use its somewhat perverted interpretation of when an ADIZ applies), with the idea that if its interests in the sea have been denied, it can try to control the air.

I expect freedom of navigation transits may increase now and with greater certainty, both from the US and from other countries including Japan and Australia, now that we know what features are entitled to a 12-mile territorial sea and which ones are not (due to being submerged at high tide).

I'm optimistic after some initial saber rattling that this may actually lead to a reduction in tensions in the South China Sea, but that is mostly up to China now at this point.

Mandarin is the most commonly spoken language in Taiwan, partly because the Taiwanese language was more or less outlawed during Martial Law rule from 1949 to 1987. It's also the primary language for education.

Taiwanese is still commonly spoken as well though, especially in southern Taiwan, and is actually becoming increasingly common (partly for political reasons, which are a different topic).

For comparison:

他會曉講台語無？ (Taiwanese)

他會講台語嗎？ (Mandarin)

I also intentionally used 講 instead of 說 for the Mandarin version, since both are valid and it makes it more similar.

A bigger difference would be the standard greeting:

你好 (Mandarin)

你食飽未？ (Taiwanese)

It's definitely not ready for primetime/production use yet.

Navigator.getUserMedia() is deprecated, so support for that won't be coming ever.

I've been tracking many of these issues on the WebKit bug tracker: https://bug.webkit.org

For example: https://bug.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80559 (Bug 80559 - [ES6] Add support for ES6 Harmony).

The release notes linked to also links to the public commit that implemented each noted fix/update/new feature.

Does he know how to speak Taiwanese?

他會曉講台語無?

No, he doesn't.

他毋會。

The above is actually somewhat close to the Mandarin version, although many other phrases can vary much more significantly.

> Instead, if the successes of the MPL team confirm any guiding principle for the future, it is this: Technical workers—not only engineers but designers—have to be involved with a process from the beginning. They will know that features must be described separately from needs, and that, when building software, smaller teams often perform better than larger teams.

"Ric Richardson is an Australian inventor. He is the holder of multiple granted patents including the Uniloc patent US5490216 and the Logarex patent 6400293. Although he spent twelve years in California to promote and develop products produced by Uniloc, Richardson grew up in Sydney and currently resides just outside Byron Bay.

He is the founder of Uniloc, a company based on the technology he first patented in 1992."

Here's his picture from the Uniloc web site: http://uniloc.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/ricrichardson.p...

He's apparently insanely talented, having "invented" the panic button, the visual voice recorder, the 3G skype phone, the secure browser, the universal database, the carbon scrubber, the book dispensor, "media objects", the "Internet Computer", QR Codes, DRM, a password replacement system, TV muting, and several dozen other devices, just in the past 16 years alone.[1]

[1] https://sites.google.com/site/ricricho/ric-s-inventions

Is your organization focused only on general elections, or on primaries as well? I couldn't find any information about primary elections on your site, even though many of the most consequential decisions are made then, when voter turnout is at its lowest.

On a separate note though, I've always thought it would be interesting to see a member of Congress be issued a NSL and then have them read it on the floor of the House/Senate (since they have parliamentary immunity for anything they say on the floor of the House or Senate).

So, by compelling Apple to code something that doesn't exist, the government would indeed actually be compelling speech.

So for it to work, you need to issue a statement every month that says you haven't been issued a NSL, and then simply not issue a statement the month you finally were issued a NSL. That would then require the government to actually compel speech (compel you to post a new notice saying you didn't receive a canary).

Of course, the above should make it blatantly obvious how absolutely absurd the blanket gag order on NSLs are.

It makes more sense to me that companies should be taking quality employees and providing them management training, as opposed to hiring somebody with a "management" degree who has little to no knowledge of the actual work that's done.

I guess that's just a symptom though of workers changing jobs more frequently.

"Apple issued a new, stronger (SHA-2) Mac App Store certificate in September, before the older (SHA-1) one expired, as planned. The new Mac App Store certificate was using the current, strong SHA-2 algorithm. However, some apps were running receipt validation code using very old versions of OpenSSL that don’t support SHA-2.

OpenSSL started supporting SHA-2 in 2005, which is why Apple didn’t foresee this issue."