A family-member bought eclipse glasses for the extended family on Amazon. She bought it from this 100% legit listing: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FSoluna-.... When we started seeing the news stories about fake eclipse glasses, we went back to the site and checked the listing, which said they were CE and ISO certified for eclipse viewing. The glasses had the ISO certification printed on them as well.

So we went and viewed the eclipse. I probably only looked at the sun through the glasses 30-60 seconds total, but my kids may have spend longer looking. The next day, I noticed that my vision was blurrier. Since there are several things that historically can impact my vision, I decided to see if it improved in a few days. When it didn't, I double-checked the glasses. That's when I saw the reviews and Q&A on the listing talking about the fakes, and sure enough, the ones we received were fakes from China. We did not receive any email from Amazon

Comparing them to a real certified pair, the fakes let through more light, though not enough to cause me to squint. The fakes don't have that metallic sheen the real ones do, and I wonder if that's the infrared/UV shielding. I went to the eye doctor and they found no signs of solar retinopathy, though admitting that the signs can take a few weeks to show up. I think my kids are too little to accurately report slight vision changes, but the other 2 people who used the fakes didn't seem to have any issues.

What is interesting here in terms of the lawsuit is that on Amazon, even if you are reading details about a legitimate product and looking at a picture of the real product, there's no telling if what you're going to get in the mail is actually that product. In fact, unless you're looking for it, you rarely even know what seller is being automatically chosen when you add something to your cart.

I'd like to see this poll redone with these options:

* Yes, and I read the full memo
* Yes, but I didn't read the memo
* No, and I read the full memo
* No, but I didn't read the memo

This sounds great to me as a buyer. But consider:

1) Company A buys tons of products from a competitor
2) Company A returns them all at competitor's expense
3) Bye-bye competitor

The optimizations for the kernel are important, but for specific workloads you still have to optimize those specific components, like the Python stack, various parts of glibc and other standard libraries, etc..

Just replacing your kernel is nice, but it's not nearly the end of it.

Clear uses gcc-5.3.0 - see https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdownload.clearlinux.or...

I mean, it's free (GPL), open source (C++ with plugins in Lua), and there are no paid accounts. Why bother looking into MInecraft when we can just build it ourselves, and in a more original and better way?

In the study the people read for four hours before sleeping. I love reading as much as anybody, but is this a realistic scenario? I'd be more interested to see the sleep disruption from 30 minutes to an hour of reading on light-emitting screens before sleeping.

Who wants jobs?

Seriously, who wants to commute 5 days a week and work 8+ hours a day doing something they'd rather not?

Let AI take all the jobs it can. As it does so, shorten the work week, provide more benefits to the people, and before long we're living in a utopia where more time is ours to work on our hobbies and spend time with our families and friends. Of course, we'd have to prevent private industry from owning all the robots and AI, less they become the de facto new government.

My thoughts on this is that an arrangement could be made where private industry has to pay a monthly fee to the government - what amounts to a small salary - which goes towards benefits/income to the masses. Private industry gets work done through AI and robots at less than what it would cost to employ someone, and that money goes to the benefit of the people.

Of course, it's more complicated than that, and that's just one possible scenario that could work. But the point is - the goal isn't more jobs, but a better life.

But this is not UEFI secure boot, but a completely different thing.

Then they will not be windows 8 certified, and may not affix a "Windows 8" WHQL sticker, or advertise their systems together with any Microsoft Logo.

You remove it (or never have it to begin with if you are a hardware vendor) and put your own platform key on it. For examples on how to do so, please google James Bottomley's blog.

misinformed much?

You do not need to disable UEFI in order to boot a different OS, but only need to disable Secure Boot.

You can disable Secure Boot and still boot multiple OS's (with UEFI, as almost all the major distros now support). You can then add a second key and re-enable Secure boot, and dual boot any OS you want with Secure Boot enabled.

And to answer my own question: All the Apple fanbois care, obviously.

Microsoft were fined for a reason. Who cares that google complained? They make a browser... this is sooooo non-news.