bleuarff

My understanding is that GAFA (sometimes GAFAM, including Microsoft) is a european term, while FAANG is an american one.

I can't tell if you're a troll or you just show an utter lack of empathy. Which ironically is a symptom of sociopathy and would warrant a lockup according to your views.

There's a Stack Exchange site for that: https://patents.stackexchange.com/

That's technically true, but a bit misleading. The battle of Poitiers was in 732; whereas the siege of Vienna was in 1529, 8 centuries later, when the reconquista had ousted the arabs from Spain.

I second that. I rarely use the !g bang (no need for that, DDG has the anwsers), but when I do I don't get anything more significant.

Another point of the article is that the majority of the land owners refused to answer the question. You don't even know what you can and can't do until you're trespassing. Please RTFA.

It is indeed insidious in that the general public has no way to know the place is private and not public space.

I agree with you. A bold claim with very vague explanations makes it a bit hard to believe. I'd love to have more details on how they pulled that off.

The attack was in june, when it was ~ 100K TH/s rather than 10K. The factor becomes ~15x instead of 150x. But I must admit I don't know if that makes such an attack still feasible.

I agree in principles, but there's a difference. A system able to break a strong encryption could cost more than the world GDP and is not reallistically feasible, while owning 51% of bitcoin power is possible - not cheap, but possible.

This has happened in the past, see http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/06/after-reaching-51-ne... .

I agree the required power must have grown since 2014. But not knowing by which factor, one can only assume it's still feasible.

I can't find any source for it, but I remember reading not so long ago that 2 or 3 mining pools were responsible for 2/3 of the total bitcoin mining power. That's not something in favor of trusting the blockain as infallible.

With this "blockchain revolution" hype, I've been waiting for these 51% attacks. Maybe people will realize that this is not a foolproof solution and that it can "easily" (you only need computing power, a.k.a money) be beaten.

I guess a cheap and efficient propulsion that doesn't fit our understanding of physics was too good to be true. Still, it's a bit sad, that would have been beautiful if it were true.

Probably because without these regulations, there would be no visibility for niche productions, no way for them to reach the few people who want to watch them. That may run contradictory to capitalist beliefs, but the system intends to allow existence of films/music/cultural products which (regardless of quality) have too few customers to survive in a non-regulated market.

If you wish to keep having diversity in your cultural industry, that's not a bad thing.

We're a .NET shop that has started using node for new projects, and it's been a happy path so far. Native modules have only rarely been an issue, only when they require a specific version of Visual Studio, of course different than the one we use. All our build tools are available under Windows. Stability is not a problem either. Test and prod environments are linux boxes, but I have never seen a bug that appeared only on one OS, so cross-compatibility is not an issue. And there are plenty of text editors and related software you might need to choose from, so I don't think you'll miss anything critical.

If you're interested in physics in metal, I suggest you listen to Negligent Collateral Collapse, and particularly their first album, Reprocess Segment Database Extender. Great fun, although not suitable for everyone's ears.

I will definitely have a look at this release, it seems to bring quite a few changes. We've been happily using Riot in production environments for nearly a year now, since before 1.0 release. I can't tell enough how happy I am with this framework. It's incredibly easy to build quite complex interfaces. Thanks Muut for that!

I think you're confusing hyphenation as word-break, which should be automated based on font, screen size, etc. But hyphenation also applies to 2 words that have a different meaning when not hyphenated. And this brings meaning, which Amazon should not interfere with.

Every feature branch is pushed to the remote, with a pull request to merge into our integration branch.