No, NASA just plans to de-orbit it safely, making it hit the sea in some remote area. There was something like plan to bring it back with a Shuttle - but now there's nothing that could bring back to Earth such a large thing intact.
9083 posts • joined 28 Feb 2010
There's a difference - when you have to pay for libraries you use a smaller set and often want to use what you're paying for, including latest releases. Also, commercial libraries may care more about backward compatibility and breaking changes.
With FOSS some applications are really a great bunch of libraries cobbled together somehow - after all everything is free and people look for libraries even for the smallest and easy to write code. This mishmash soon becomes very hard to properly maintain, as each library should be tracked (some are updated regularly, other seldom, a few never), updates checked for security fixes, and when new versions introduced everything need to be re-tested (good if you have automated tests - not so good otherwise...)
and if the libraries themselves don't have a proper management and the next version may breaks your application because FOSS developers may not have the will and resources to keep updates different versions.
Most commercial libraries are regularly updated - but not all the updates may be free - you may need to upgrade the library and pay the upgrade price, something come developers may not be willingly to do and keep on using older, non secure versions.
Many libraries also come with source code - not open source, of course - so you can fix issues yourself if you're able and have time. That's again something you may need to pay an additional price to get.
I always got my libraries with source code for that reason - developers who are cheap will deliver cheap code, it's inevitable.
There are also those who don't use transactions and use "autocommit" because that's how their old dBase/Paradox/Access/mySQL database worked....
Not that SQL Server 6.5 helped much - it escalated locks so quickly any transaction opened for more than a few seconds had good chances to lock whole tables...
Actually, it became the only choice for those unable to buy 7 support, so to keep on running Windows applications the only choice was to switch to 10.
I did the month 7 support expired - not before.
While Windows 10 is still a problem - one people have to live with. And I bet 11 will be even a bigger problem.
(No, I can't switch to Linux for lack of applications and hardware support - both at work and home - at home I could switch to Apple but it's a problem on its own too).
What made an hell for UI developers under Linux? One of the reasons the "year of Linux on the Desktop" is still set at Star Date 2123847891273981289317891.2?
Because Apple OSes - always regarded the pinnacle of UI design - let you choose how the UI should look?
The OS MUST dictate the environment - UI included - so you know you will find a coherent environment from machine to machine, and developers will know how their UI will look and behave on any machine.
User in exchange get applications that behaves - at least for common operations - the same way, although the Web crazy made too many application a bunch of ill-designed UI cobbled together to look like web sites - which requires you to discover for each new one where the hell commands are - and often even what a command is - and of course needing always a mouse.
The fact that Windows UI went backwards when Nadella put in charge some cheaper incompetent people doesn't mean windows managers are a bad idea - instead it's time Linux understand the need of a coherent system and choose a standard UI for all distros and a standard API.
Sorry, children - you don't understand this event will shape what you can do what a computer for years to come. It's not Apple vs. Google vs. Microsoft vs. Linux. This is not a tech issue. This is an antitrust issue. It is about how much power we are willingly to let in hands of a few already too powerful companies.
We saw how letting Google then Facebook hoard data eventually moved Microsoft in the same direction (and Apple too - but trying to block everybody else on its platforms).
If Apple is able to enforce its anti-competitive policies others will follow because there's easy money to be made. Computers (not only the small mobile ones) will become totally walled off and you'll be able to to only what graciously permitted by your overlord of choice.
Unluckily the problem with young people is they see some shiny-shiny colourful fashionable item, and they can't see the devil behind it, or are ready to sell their souls because some imaginary advantage it gives them.
That happens only with OEM licenses - which are cheaper for that reason. And you may still obtain to re-activate it in some situations.
My retail copies of Windows moved from old computer to new computer without issues - but they are more expensive.
Of course if your license keys comes from somewhere on the internet....
They are awful people, I'm sure <G>
Actually you keep on dreaming on a market that does not exist.
Sure, if Office existed it could ease the transition somehow for those who need to use Office only - but why MS should ease that transition? In the business space it does still sell Windows.
Moreover Office for macOS does exist, but still not everybody jumps on Apple, and it's not the price only - it's the whole ecosystem - people don't use Office only.
No, those days are long gone - since the market changes, and anti-trust cases against MS forced it to change its beahaviour.
Windows is broadly documented now ,and does you can still find applications that don't run? Actually you can easily run quite old applications without issues. You've even got an embedded Linux to run Linux applications.
Not that MS became a charity or a truly nice company - just it has no need to act like it did in the 1990s. Very different landscape and competitors.
The problem is the user base - there are not enough Linux users willingly to buy Office for Linux. There's a tiny percentage of desktop users, and among them, even a smaller one willingly to buy a closed source office suite.
If you create an environment unfriendly to commercial software - but on the server side, maybe - you can't complain if such commercial software doesn't come.
There are too few valuable targets there - and probably far harder to extract cash from them - even Western cybercriminals probably prefer Western targets - moreover some social engineering techniques would need a knowledge of Russian they don't have.
State-level cyber attacks are another story, and of course police doesn't target them.
Is this a menace?
Because Marx could have dreamed of something different, but his system is so flawed that since 1917 we just saw Communism leading directly to bloody dictatorships with some oligarchs at the top using the State as a private property.
So China is not a blot - it's just another instance of a flawed idea, and thereby it can't really be different.
How to rob the poor to give to the rich - it's fun to see how a country ruled by a Communist party is a heaven for the worst oligo-capitalism, or maybe that's exactly the cause. When you're brainwashed since childhood to admire and worship some "dear leader" without any doubt, you're going to look for one.
Face it. English is not the only language of the Universe. The fact that a foreign word sounds bad in English, and one can't understand it's a foreign word, just means that person is an ignorant English supremacist. And they should be shamed as such.
If they can't understand differences, have to destroy them because they can live only in their little poor world it's they that have to change, not the others.
"ONT" just means Optical Network Terminator and you'll still need one in a GPON network be it 1G, 10G or 25G (10G is being tested with the first customers here, while I see Switzerland IIRC someone is offering 25G already)
Being GPON connections already shared among many users, the ONTs are installed one per user - it won't be really effective to install one for more than one user. An ONT is quite cheap.
It's also usually easier to run a fibre cable in existing ducts (it can run with power cables as well without safety issues) than a Cat5e or Cat6.
That depends only on how your monitor is set, and the environment light intensity, distribution and direction.
Having a monitor set for photo editing - with brightness well set taking into account ambient light as well, instead of being at 250% as in most monitors, plus colour temperature at 6500K instead of 9000 and over which makes it too blue, white background is quite fine. Both natural light and artificial one are designed to come from one side, diffused, at the proper angle and with proper contrast around - something that unluckily not many places, especially offices, can deliver. I still find incredible how many working places are inundated with the wrong kind of light.
Especially for me because my sight depends on the size of the pupil - and with a black background it means it opens more and I see worse, incrementing eye strain, not decreasing it.
Maybe some creative accounting to create huge expenses somewhere else to avoid to pay taxes there?
"Look, Microsoft country X has bought the rights on the new Azure logo for 200 billions from Microsoft Bermuda, so we can't really pay taxes for the next one hundred years, we are very sorry..."
What do you prefer? To pay for your school and hospitals also, or pay for the next Bezos/Zuckerberg/Cook ginormous yacht/mansion only?
Raising prices may hit profits more than taxes. Only bling goods prices can bi fixed (mostly) at will - as the average consumer doesn't really care about the price - and higher prices can even make them more exclusive.
But in all the other sectors higher prices may shift sales to competitors, or simply reduce sales. And since that's still a small dent in their huge profits, they would be really avid and stupid trying to kill the golden eggs goose with a sharp price increase.
Really? So why exporters are so worried about tariffs? How could tariffs affect importers and not exporters - which are tightly coupled?
Tariffs do affect exporters as well importers - they could sell less because of higher prices, or have to accept to offset some of the tariffs with reduced profits to keep market share. Who have to sustain the major burden depend on who the exporter and importer are and their relative strength in settings buy and sale prices - and often it could be simply the exporter local branch.
If it affected only the importer - who would care if Trump or Biden sets a 1000% tariff on foreign goods or services? They would be the perfect tax, exporter would keep on making money and local buyers will happily pay the tax while buying as much as before... in which universe that happens?
This lack of economics basics do well explain why some ideas are acceptable to some voters.
You can tax shareholders only when the company pay dividends. The company may not pay them. What to do? A property tax on shares then? Probably it's better and simpler to tax company profits?
And why in such situation a foreign shareholder should not pay nothing (which would become immediately a huge loophole) if the company operates in your country and does take advantage of local state spending and investments?
There are countries in Europe where companies do not need to pay for medical insurance because there is a National Health Service. Why they should not pay their share of it too?
Pricing is never so free like sellers would like. Apply the full amount and you can lose sales to competitors, or pay part of the fees to avoid losing market share but reduce profits...
Moreover tariffs are not applied on services only - they are applied to products - just like Trump did. It's how to win allies to front China...
No, it's the other way round - they believe that successful companies are endowed by their creator not to pay taxes, while less successful ones, or simply local ones, have to sustain all the tax burden.
Yet, nobody asks the to pay "more" taxes - only the same taxes other less successful ones pay. Being successful the simple amount will be higher.
Here the problem becomes who taxes - US doesn't want US companies European operations to pay taxes in Europe and hope to tax them in US - but European nations can't just look at huge US companies funnel huge amount money outside Europe doing nothing (and other countries as well) and paying peanuts locally. US in the same situation would act the same way.
If Biden believes European and other countries will subsidize his spending plan is utterly wrong and makes he look just as stupid as Trump - simply the money don't exist. For example EU has its spending plan for pandemic recovery as well - and because taxation in most countries is already high enough - more money has to come from those who dodged taxes till now.
It is true that EU has to tackle some internal dodging as well - for example that allowed by Luxembourg and Netherlands (plus others), but two wrongs never make something good.
His analysis is interesting - in a time when capitalism did really exploited people - it's his conclusion that are deadly wrong. He was against religions, but tried to found a new one.
And luckily not everybody pushed them so far - moderate Socialists well understood reforms didn't need bloody revolutions, rights suppression, and dictatorships - that even when "in the name of the people" are still bloody dictatorships - and drive any nation right into the direction of exploiting people again, just under a different guise.
Yes, especially that of those "bad people" who went to Taiwan or where shielded for a while in Hong-Kong... think of what China could have been if if wasn't heavily damaged by Mao, his wife and their crooks - who killed millions. Moreover, who helped China to fight Japan? How worse could have been, without that help?
Now Xi Jinping aims to be the next Mao, and removed even those little safeguards China had after Mao. Of course actually nominating oneself some kind of lifetime emperor is a very Marxist thing - "power to the people!" - of course there is only One People.
"Many European governments, particularly in the East, have proto-fascist governments" ????
Actually there are only two - Poland and Hungary. Plus Belarus and Russia, if you wish to include them but they are not "proto" at all - but they are the offspring on that other "Marxist" marvel that was CCCP. People like Putin should have professed a lot of Marxists beliefs, to become Colonel in the KGB.
Maybe you also mean people like Salvini in Italy? Do you know he was a "Young Communist", hanging out at collectives? Because, after all, the boundary between Communism and Fascism is very thin, and moving from one to the other very easy. After all, Mussolini himself was a prominent Socialist before founding the Fascist Party (the Communist Party didn't exist yet in Italy at the time - they detached from the Socialist Party only in 1921).
No, they won't abuse it because the system is built exactly for that. That's "stalking by design" - although Amazon wish it only could stalk its users - but obviously it won't be able to ensure it.
Have to call Shenzen to start mass producing "Tiles" in some cute and/or innocuous-looking shapes... "hey, girl, attach this cute soft and fluffy cat toy to your bag....", "look wife, I got you this 'Prada' (he he) wallet for your birthday...."
Those working at Amazon & C. are now utterly unable to understand what they are putting on the market - they can see only the $$$$$$ they hope to gain if they can gather more user data.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021