nknight

5 ms·

1.
by nknight 14y ago
The capsules holding astronauts obviously have to land intact at some point, unless you thought we sent all astronauts prior to the Shuttle up to their deaths. The Shuttle's uncontrollable SRBs have been jettisoned and recovered after every
2.
by nknight 14y ago
> Up until now, space operations have always been nonpartisan, co-operative, and peaceful. Oh please. Space operations grew directly out of unbridled Cold War militarism, and have been pure political football at least since the approv
3.
by nknight 14y ago
Where exactly have you lived that you've avoided knowledge of Vostok, Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Soyuz, the Space Shuttle, Skylab, Salyut, Mir, the International Space Station, and the thousands of observation, spy, communications, and scient
4.
by nknight 14y ago
WTF?! I'd call that more like three orders of magnitude, and the world has been launching rockets and landing capsules since 1961. Nothing even remotely like what you are speaking of has ever come remotely close to happening. No one launche
5.
by nknight 14y ago
No, in many cases these are actual, realized losses, as in "we bought at this price and sold at this much lower price". They have no money, and no stock. Recovery of the stock is irrelevant to them.
6.
by nknight 14y ago
The problem I have with this attitude is that transparency only helps if people are paying attention. Americans aren't paying attention.
7.
by nknight 14y ago
This seemed extremely bizarre to me until I read the filing itself[1]. The RSUs in question are unvested. Apparently a change was just made by the board that means unvested RSUs will collect dividends which will be paid out upon vesting. Co
8.
by nknight 14y ago
He's actually wrong. Starcraft introduced usernames/passwords and unique names to Battle.net in early 1998. The support was then patched into Diablo 1.05. Diablo I's Battle.net functionality did not originally include usernames/passwords at
9.
by nknight 14y ago
I decline to engage in a debate with someone who has decided he can divine my worldview from a single comment about privately-owned search engines. Hint: I'm a socialist.
10.
by nknight 14y ago
I'd be fine with that. In fact, it'd probably be an objective improvement with regard to my search results. Not all of us believe search engines have some magical obligation to be complete or impartial. If you don't like the results you get
11.
by nknight 14y ago
I said "theoretically", did I not? And there was nothing particularly special about the module aside from the extreme concentration. Every piece of Java I've ever written or even looked at has this same problem on a reduced scale. My point
12.
by nknight 14y ago
> I reckon every few function calls you make could potentially trigger an exception. One Java module I had the misfortune of writing theoretically had to deal with checked exceptions on the majority of its calls, and the only possible
13.
by nknight 14y ago
What percentage of people actually get angry at this sort of thing? It's insane for luxury items -- either you value an item at the price it's listed for or you don't. If you don't, why are you buying it in the first place?
14.
by nknight 14y ago
Frankly, I didn't have much confidence in this jury. It was stacked to avoid techies, its findings on other copyright issues (e.g. rangecheck) didn't instill much confidence in me, and some of the questions that were emerging made me questi
15.
by nknight 14y ago
I guess my only direct source is that every time she's spoken of working as a paralegal, it's been in the past tense. e.g. her H-Online interview: http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Groklaw-The-blog-that-... It would certainly have bee
16.
by nknight 14y ago
Why do you think she's employed by any law firm? She's a former paralegal, not a current paralegal.
17.
by nknight 14y ago
By "suspiciously silent" you mean "Groklaw covered it", right? http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20090926131450...
18.
by nknight 14y ago
Since you've attempted to deflect instead of disclose, I now assume you are a hypocrite in Oracle's employ.
19.
by nknight 14y ago
Why, exactly is it OK for you to make up a pseudonym and libel Ms. Jones? I demand disclosure. Your full name, your address, your phone, bank, and tax records for the past year, social security statement, and a sworn affidavit that you ha
20.
by nknight 14y ago
What disclosure do you want, exactly? Bank records? Travel history? Phone records? Florian's hand was ultimately forced because it is impractical to keep consulting for multiple large companies a secret. So far, no one has ever found any
21.
by nknight 14y ago
"Wow" is right. There's also this interesting gem right after: https://twitter.com/FedcourtJunkie/status/205371711233851392 > Juror said it was his opinion that more tech savvy jurors were less likely to go for limits on openness. Ie
22.
by nknight 14y ago
> Its definitely far from an objective news source. Let me know when you find one.
23.
by nknight 14y ago
Perhaps you should know exactly who you're accusing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Webbink
24.
by nknight 14y ago
Unless they stipulated to something I missed, there's actually another very important issue on the table: Fair use. The jury decided Google "infringed", but couldn't agree whether the fair use defense applied. If Alsup rules APIs are not co
25.
by nknight 14y ago
That would generally be some variety of fraud. You can sue for damages, and there are tax laws and regulations dealing with losses due to bad acts like that.
26.
by nknight 14y ago
It's not unprecedented for tax liabilities to be waived in extreme circumstances, but just not understanding what was going on isn't an extreme circumstance. A lot of people got screwed badly by this during the dot-com boom/bust, and it did
27.
by nknight 14y ago
> It seems like the successful(popular) "NoSQL" engines will eventually reinvent many RDBMS wheels. The wheels in question aren't RDBMS wheels, they're just generic database wheels. The backlash against RDBMSs wasn't because of implem
28.
by nknight 14y ago
There is an exception as mentioned there. If you pay an amount equal to 100% of the previous year's liability (110% if your AGI is over $150k), it doesn't matter how much more you owe in April. (I personally ended up with a 2011 tax liabili
29.
by nknight 14y ago
You speak of "going public" as if it's somehow turning over power to the general public. It's not. It's a colloquial term for a series of regulatory steps required to permit non-accredited investors to invest in a business. These steps are
30.
by nknight 14y ago
They're diluted, or his are inflated, however you want to look at it. Yes, it's similar to the Google structure, but Google isn't the prototype. Lots of companies over the years have had special shares with extra voting power, families ofte

More ›