I'd say it depends on what and how one is reading.
It's not the same case when I read a programming book with examples, in contrast to novels. I tend to remember the former better because I'll usually try out most examples from the book.
First time I stumbled upon this version of Windows about half a year ago. I actually installed it on one of my laptops. When it's BOOTed, the "GUI" is pretty much like in Safe-Mode, only in full display resolution, i.e. a blue background and a console window. I don't remember exactly, but it was missing a lot of libraries.. so I couldn't actually install much software. Though, I'm sure it's possible to install all the missing libraries via Microsoft's website.
So, McAfee identifies a single node as "associated" with the incident: li107-40[dot]members[dot]linode[dot]com. And Linode has a post which specifically references a single node being associated but under Google's control and not malicious control at all times.
Doesn't appear to me that there's any contradiction. There is no evidence that a Linode was used for anything malicious. There is evidence that a Linode was used.
OK, if Apple will release such an app... let's not start this topic. Instead, consider this example:
I've built a software that allows publishers to distribute their books on many devices at once: Kindle, iPad, iPhone, Sony Reader, etc. Do you think Apple and Amazon will allow me to release such apps for their devices? I doubt it. The only way left for me is to write it as a webapp. Such control is bad for free market in general.
Do you think Apple and Amazon will allow me to releas
such apps for their devices? I doubt it. The only way
left for me is to write it as a webapp. Such control is
bad for free market in general.
First you assume Apple won't allow such an app. Then you reason on your assumption which may have nothing to do with reality. That's exactly what I call FUD.
BTW, I bought a kindle edition of the book yesterday on Amazon.com and was reading it on my iPhone with a free kindle app. I assume, that if I had Kindle too, I'd be able to read said book on both devices.
Apple did not care much where music on you iPod came from — why should they care where do books on iPhone/iPad come from? The more content available, the more useful the device is. It is hardware that makes money for Apple, and if something helps to sell more of it it is good for Apple.
I have always thought that achievement is when one accomplishes his/her goal, be it $1B worth startup or a level-up in a game.
Though, I think the author is talking about useful achievements. This gets a bit tricky: it's all about how you see the world. In my opinion, I would make a useful achievement when I influence people to take some action. This could be: subscribing to my webapp or even making people follow me on twitter, if that was my goal. The key word here for me is - influence. Nevertheless, achievement is all about reaching your goal. At least that's how I see it.
How open-source can be seen as a threatening factor for capitalism? In my opinion, thanks to open-source, entry barrier for startups is much lower. Even though, 99% of startups fail - 1% will create new workplaces or will be acquired by another big capitalistic company.
It's the usual sleigh of hand that equates capitalism with specific current players. Like the Economist said, "being pro-business is not the same as being pro-market."
The terrifying thing is that it's easy for a good writer/orator to convince legislators that software is a zero-sum game. It's easy to visualize a big pie of software and see open source conversion as cutting into the profits.
Whereas for those of us actually in the industry it's obvious how pathetically shallowly we've scratched the surface of the potential of software, and how commodified open source software is the foundation of future software progress which will never be achieved if everyone has to endlessly pay a tax on every decades-old innovation that a company stole from academia to bootstrap a software business back in the day.
Coming up next are [...] probably new embedded languages: Javascript or Lua.
This is interesting. On Sysoev's personal website, there is an article "Why Google V8 is not suitable for embedding into a server yet"(Russian) http://sysoev.ru/prog/v8.html
Basically, he's saying that V8 was developed with Google Chrome in mind, so it's not an easy task to embed it with any other software. The main point is, V8 can't handle memory allocation errors - it just crashes the process, which is suitable for Google Chrome but not for a server.
