I hate to break this to American readers, but the US market is more disconnected than all other developed world markets, and many developing world markets too. It mainly has different OEMs, wildly different policies coming down the road, much larger vehicles on average, worse charger infrastructure, lags in EV market share penetration, and radically different availability of models. It just is so disconnected from the rest of the global market.

I was thinking more like naval jelly or Ospho, both of which are based on phosphoric acid. But a clean toilet is nice, too... for me to poop in. Isn't it ionic? Specifically, cationic?

You're not necessarily wrong, but more moving parts come with their own special kinds of problems.

Nonsense. TFC[itation] claims in the headline that "Ontario set to begin construction of Canada's 1st mini nuclear power plant" but then goes on to say "Premier Doug Ford's government has given Ontario Power Generation the green light to start construction on Canada's first small modular reactor". These two statements are not equivalent. "Set to begin" implies readiness, which is not the case. They were not just waiting for the go-ahead to turn shovels. You can see this is true because of the subhead "OPG to finance construction through cash, debt" which says they have not even financed the operation yet.

This is not the first time someone has gotten the go-ahead to build a SMR. NuScale got type approval for their design, but then they decided not to bother building it because they decided it wouldn't be financially viable because there were not enough potential customers. Your own citation also states that the SMR project would produce "3,700 jobs per year" which is frankly horrific for a project which is supposed to make nuclear cheaper.

Will they build this reactor? I'd bet no. If they do, will they meet their budget? No reactor has, as again, a quote in your own citation points out. Also, if they do build it, will it usher in a new age of SMRs? No, they will still be the most expensive source of power around, so it certainly will not. In fact they will raise costs, because there are unavoidable per-unit costs both in construction and decommissioning. In fact, increasing the number of reactors only increases the chance of a costly failure.

Do you somehow not have a maximum buffer size?

Probably not, but it improves the odds.

A third of them have been actively voting for it to happen this way, because they are dumber than boxes of rocks.

IBM is a bureaucracy, but without any of the oversight of a functional government. So no, they do not have competent HR.

I worked for an IBM acquisition (Tivoli) shortly after they were acquired. This is not a good plan, but I was young and dumb then. I got hired by in fact a brilliant HR person, who was a pre-acquisition hire. She was very intelligent and useful. Once they figured that out they moved her out of the support division ASAP.

The person they hired to replace her was someone I knew from the local nerd scene in Austin. She was totally worthless, which I knew ahead of time. When I heard they'd be hiring her, I shook my head.

Really primitive drones wouldn't have had this kind of failure, because they would have used a more limited but also more reliable ultrasonic sensor. It uses 1970s technology (except with a 1990s technology IC onboard) which has been more or less perfected.

Of course, if they had just had a backup sensor to cross-check with their LIDAR, this still wouldn't have happened, so this is just because they were being cheap. The most rational backup would have been... actually another LIDAR sensor, but a far more limited and thus far cheaper device. Barring that, ultrasonic works, but they are kind of large.

They can mitigate the risk by putting those machines on their own networks and firewalling them down to the bare minimum needed for operation. If you did that, you would still be leaving so much open that you'd still be at risk (because you expect to do more than just process ATM transactions.)

Yes, this story is about old Windows because old other operating systems were scarcely used for anything by comparison because they were scarcely used by comparison in general... except DOS of course.

Most of us know of a few examples of other kinds of systems being used for special purposes, often Amigas because they had cheap genlock capability. The Prevue Guide is the obvious example. But as many of those systems as they were, they were nonexistent compared to CNC machines with only DOS drivers.

This is a very US centered event. It's unreasonable to expect everyone around the world to know the term, but when the issue at hand is whether the people involved in the supposed scandal are claiming that everybody knows it means something that everyone actually involved knows it doesn't, the understanding of the term in the US is what's relevant.

Also, it's pretty easy to find out, because it's pretty well documented.

That's right. The more work you can do without having to load from or store to memory, the better. We have both instruction and data caches on the processor for the same reason, that RAM is still faster than going to system RAM.

On the contrary, just getting a Rust program to successfully compile can teach you a whole lot about all the stuff you should have been worrying about with C or C++, but you were simply ignorant of or implicitly assumed would be OK.

They don't understand the high skill jobs. They do understand fruit picking, nominally anyway. They don't seem to understand that they don't want to pick fruit for a living, though, that part is a little weird.

That's hard to say, because everything about the censorship is opaque and also inscrutable, and when they appear to be attempting transparency, the explanations are also often inexplicable. But then, that's how Slashdot is as well, except that there's usually no explanation.