Exactly. This press release is just a convoluted way to advertise how badass their product is.

Whether or not mathematics qualifies as a science is more a matter of philosophy than definition.

When a scientific theory is proposed, you can choose to believe in it or not — but belief doesn’t affect whether the theory accurately describes reality. As independent experiments accumulate consistent results, confidence in the theory increases because the data keeps confirming it.

Newton’s theory of gravitation, for example, turned out to be incomplete when tested at extreme scales. Still, within the limits of everyday experience, it remains perfectly accurate. For centuries, every possible experiment agreed with Newton’s equations, so people accepted them as “true” — and for practical purposes, they still are.

Climate change follows the same logic. It’s supported by a vast body of observations and consistent models grounded in well-established physics. Most scientists accept it because the evidence is overwhelming. Yet some, like Trump, reject it — not because the data is lacking, but because when facts clash with ideology, the mind often builds a comforting alternate reality instead.

The thing with science, is you can stop believing in it, it still works. Trump doesn't believe in climate change. That doesn't prevent the climate from changing.
2+2 is 4. You can ignore me and think it's 7, but if you got 2 apples and someone gives you two more apples you still get 4 apples in the end, not 7.

office365 on the web - while not perfect - works on all OSes and printing is just about generating a PDF, which you can pring no matter the OS you're using.

Now, sharing files is a pain since you can only collaborate from OneDrive (or SharePoint) with office, but still. It kinda works.

Also I almost laughed at that one: "Google's free Sheets product, launched in 2006, captured casual use cases like potluck sign-ups but failed to dislodge Excel from enterprise work"... Google apps were excellent for a V1. We've been waiting for a V2 ever since. It is terribly lacking in functionality.

Steve Mann apparatus was medical, nothing to do with Meta glasses which no one needs. And it was 12 years ago and nobody could corroborate any of his claims. Not saying he is a nutjob here, but he may have blown this thing way out of proportions.

It was probably invented by the mail-clerks at Exact Sciences. They were tired of the mishaps when receiving Cologuard return-samples whose patients didn't understand the packaging instructions.

I wonder if anyone's going to revive that old hacking tool, "back orifice".

Cheech and Chong could have benefitted from this technology.

Thanks. Now you tell me...

If the camera is poorly aimed, it puts a whole new meaning to end.

If one changes how electricity is billed, ie, the more one buys the more expensive it gets, that would help a lot. Particularly when those huge-demand customers would end up paying for the development of the very power plants that they require in the process.

Demand-surge pricing is already common in many places. I see no reason why it shouldn't be applied to industry.

I don't feel Microsoft engineering quality has been declining. It's the same crap again and again.

At work I could've bought a fiber Ethernet tester, a copper Ethernet tester, and a Wifi tester. I would've spent around $8000 for all three for the degree of testing I was buying.

Instead I bought a $12,000 tool that can test fiber, copper, and wifi. Because carrying around three tools and using three tools if up troubleshooting a streetlight-mounted terragraph backhaul device or AP is really cumbersome.

It's cumbersome to have to carry multiple devices if one device can do the job. I can think of lots of applications where this would be useful if it's durable enough, and they all boil-down to neither having to carry multiple devices nor having to carry a large, rigid tablet.

I'm still flabbergasted of the claim that the original pad that Gagarin launched from is supposedly being set aside as a museum. That simply doesn't make economic sense. First reason, pads are not free to build. They're quite expensive. Second, the facility is not in Russia, so its utility as a museum for Russian propaganda purposes is questionable.

It would make a lot more sense if they simply chose to do upkeep on only one pad, and for whatever reasoning they chose the pad with the now-broken equipment, and the the other pad at the site is so hopelessly out of date due to a series of refreshes to the in-service pad that the costs to refurbish it into usable condition are quite high. That at least would be logical, and frankly isn't a sign of decay in a program either. It makes sense to not spend money on something disused when budgets are finite. But to claim that it's reserved as a museum? Bizarre, to say the least.