Gob

Jitsi (Open Source/Cross-Platform) - Replaces skype, msn messenger, google+, and many more chat/voice/video communications. Further, it supports end-to-end encryption, where some of the vendors above snoop through your data.

Your package private variable "clickListener" is not initialized.

Your package private variable "clickListener" is not initialized.

I think you have misunderstood what Hadoop is and how it relates to Google. Here's an FYI:
 
Hadoop is actually an open source project spear-headed by the Apache foundation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Hadoop).
 
You are correct, though, that Google does offer it on its cloud platform. Further, this platform is closed source, and contains "trade secrets" with regards to the VM implementations you mention above (fun fact, their own implementation of the JVM keeps Oracle at bay).
 
However, Google is just running Apache's Hadoop with some optimizations (https://cloud.google.com/hadoop/what-is-hadoop). Further, because it is open source, you can run Hadoop on your own systems, AWS, DigitalOcean, etc. So you have more freedom than you think.
 
The main reason you don't see Hadoop interfaced with C++ is because Hadoop itself is written in Java, and thus, there is a huge convenience sticking with that language as you do not have to reimplement libraries that are already implemented in the Hadoop packages. So you actually could interface C++ executables, it would just be tedious (and fun with JNI!).
 
 
As for this java vulnerability, my opinion is that java client applets should have been killed years ago. If they had, I bet the "Java is insecure" stigma would be no where near as prevalent. 

Really, the man pages are your best friend here: type "man pipe" in the command line. But these are also replicated everywhere, like http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/pipe.2.html.
 
Just as an aside, I suspect the reason you are not getting many answers is because you are claiming to understand how to use pipes and what they do, and then don't really pose an answerable question. So it is hard for someone to give you an answer. I will try, though.
 
The "int pipe(int fds[2])" system call basically sets up a buffer in the kernel space that allows userland processes to intercommunicate. There is an example in the link I posted. But the gist is that you pass an array of two ints to the system call. If the system call is successful the array contains two File Descriptors. fds[0] is the read end of the pipe, and fds[1] is write end. After fork()ing the process, depending on the communication direction, the child and parent will use the close() system call on the end of pipe they are not using, and then use the write()/read() system calls on the corresponding end to send/receive the bytes to/from the kernel space buffer. There are other methods for inter-process communication, but they may require synchronization (for example shared memory, see "shmget").
 
Hope that helps.

Yeah I think I mis-typed. It is Windows Server 2012.

The reason why it would better for an APU's GPU to perform some of the operations normally performed by the CPU is because of the overhead of pushing data around the PCIe bus.

Further, it is not solely the size of the atoms that constrain the size of the classical transistor. At smaller and smaller transistor sizes, the distance between the source and the drain of the transistor is so small that it gets harder and harder to control the flow of current due to quantum tunneling.
 
However, I have heard of some promising research using photonics (much faster clock speeds, less electromagnetic cross talk, significantly lower temperatures, etc).
 
 
Quantum computers are not a replacement of classical computers. In fact, in heavily serialized loads, a quantum computer will perform far worse than a classical one. Quantum computers are built for parallelism and that is where they shine (understatement).

I don't know if you are trolling or not, but I have seen others make this statement several times. I personally believe this logic is flawed:
 
Firstly, "DOING ANYTHING WRONG" cannot be finitely defined because laws are not static over time. That means, yes, now you may not be doing anything wrong, but that does not mean that all those activities you have done in the past will be legal in the future. And now the government has piles of "evidence" of all the "illegal" activities you have been associated with.
 
Secondly, there are many examples of laws being defined by governments and their interests, not by human morality. For example, it is illegal to J-Walk or to not wear your seatbelt or bike helmet (not saying that these things aren't a good idea, but do they need to be law?). Are you doing bad things when you J-walk or not wear a seatbelt? Are you hurting others? But this does bring ticketing revenues to municipalities under the guise of "helping the public". Which furthers my point, as I do not know a single person who has never J-walked. So you may be doing something "WRONG" and not know/remember it.
 
Lastly, and probably most simply, surveillance of a populous expresses a desire to control that populous. This is a contradiction of what a democratic government should be. The people should control the government, not the other way around. Not wanting total, unconditional surveillance is not about "HIDE"ing anything from the government, it is about not being truly free.
 
My two cents, anyways.

Yeah, we had a ton of fine arts electives at our school, but that was about it (I too skipped history/geography where I could, but at the time I think I still had to take history 11). Sounds like a good school though. I went to Argyle Secondary.

I don't think it is about bragging rights. I am not against the Korean monitors, I am just aware that there is no such thing as a free lunch. If something is cheaper, it probably is for a reason. Further, they didn't offer me much of a cost savings to begin with. If you want a pixel perfect Korean monitor, it will cost you at least $330. If you want a 3 year warranty, that is another $50 at least. That's $390. If you want a nice stand (which I do), what another $60-100? so that is about $450-490. This does not cover any duties that I may have to pay getting it into Canada.  I bought my monitor from Dell (U2713HM), and it cost me $550. A whole $60-100 more than if I got it from a Korean reseller (with all the same warranties,guarantees,stand). And with Dell if anything goes wrong (ie dead pixel), they will let me keep using the monitor until my new one arrives. I would gladly pay an extra $60 for the hassle free aspect of the replacement policy alone, ignoring the fact that the Dell most likely has better construction and that you are dealing with a well established company, not an ebay reseller, who could disappear in a year ( or less ).

I don't think it is about bragging rights. I am not against the Korean monitors, I am just aware that there is no such thing as a free lunch. If something is cheaper, it probably is for a reason. Further, they didn't offer me much of a cost savings to begin with. If you want a pixel perfect Korean monitor, it will cost you at least $330. If you want a 3 year warranty, that is another $50 at least. That's $390. If you want a nice stand (which I do), what another $60-100? so that is about $450-490. This does not cover any duties that I may have to pay getting it into Canada.  I bought my monitor from Dell (U2713HM), and it cost me $550. A whole $60-100 more than if I got it from a Korean reseller (with all the same warranties,guarantees,stand). And with Dell if anything goes wrong (ie dead pixel), they will let me keep using the monitor until my new one arrives. I would gladly pay an extra $60 for the hassle free aspect of the replacement policy alone, ignoring the fact that the Dell most likely has better construction and that you are dealing with a well established company, not an ebay reseller, who could disappear in a year ( or less ).

I don't think it is about bragging rights. I am not against the Korean monitors, I am just aware that there is no such thing as a free lunch. If something is cheaper, it probably is for a reason. Further, they didn't offer me much of a cost savings to begin with. If you want a pixel perfect Korean monitor, it will cost you at least $330. If you want a 3 year warranty, that is another $50 at least. That's $390. If you want a nice stand (which I do), what another $60-100? so that is about $450-490. This does not cover any duties that I may have to pay getting it into Canada.  I bought my monitor from Dell (U2713HM), and it cost me $550. A whole $60-100 more than if I got it from a Korean reseller (with all the same warranties,guarantees,stand). And with Dell if anything goes wrong (ie dead pixel), they will let me keep using the monitor until my new one arrives. I would gladly pay an extra $60 for the hassle free aspect of the replacement policy alone, ignoring the fact that the Dell most likely has better construction and that you are dealing with a well established company, not an ebay reseller, who could disappear in a year ( or less ).

What I do not understand, is why some people say I "trust" or "believe" TTL. Really, reviewing it isn't a matter of trust or faith, it is a matter of statistics. You need to read many of them in order to improve your "signal to noise ratio", where noise is caused by things like bias (even if you believe the person has a lot of integrity, it does not matter, they are biased in some way shape or form because they are human), bad luck in the silicon/manufacturing lottery, or improper usage/handling (even experienced reviewers are guilty of this, remember linus and the inline resistors used with the H220 stock fans).
 
All I know is that I saw TTL make some good points, but we don't know the whole story. For example, why didn't he try another board? Other posters mentioned how he stomped all over the H220 saying it was worse than H100, which most people know is clearly not true, which may have been a result of all three forms of "noise" I mentioned above.
 
My point is this. If you are planning to buy a product, and want an accurate as possible review, read/watch as many as you can, and make up your own mind about the product.

My point is that the power consumption drawback is not worth spending 100$ on a router.
 
I am aware that this is not true in all scenarios, I am not talking about all scenarios.
 
You contradicted yourself because you said that a dedicated router will likely outperform a pfsense , and then you said it wouldn't make a difference in most cases. It is only going to "likely" out perform the router if I am doing a lot routing that benefits from the router specific hardware, if that case is rare, I, as a user, am going to see no performance difference.
 
Both wired and wireless. The router's memory buffer is tiny compared to my pfsense box (50MB vs 1GB), and it would get bogged down while torrenting, trying to maintain connection state for many connections. So that dedicated switching hardware was not very useful when the bottleneck was memory.
 
As for the functionality, the user above posted a few, but options are endless really. I especially like ssh support!

I made a pfsense router of an old dual core laptop. It does not pull that much power, it is whisper quiet (40% of the time the fan isn't even running), I built it for $30 (had to buy a nic), and it probably performs better than any other consumer router.

What I do not understand, is why some people say I "trust" or "believe" TTL. Really, reviewing it isn't a matter of trust or faith, it is a matter of statistics. You need to read many of them in order to improve your "signal to noise ratio", where noise is caused by things like bias (even if you believe the person has a lot of integrity, it does not matter, they are biased in some way shape or form because they are human), bad luck in the silicon/manufacturing lottery, or improper usage/handling (even experienced reviewers are guilty of this, remember linus and the inline resistors used with the H220 stock fans).
 
All I know is that I saw TTL make some good points, but we don't know the whole story. For example, why didn't he try another board? Other posters mentioned how he stomped all over the H220 saying it was worse than H100, which most people know is clearly not true, which may have been a result of all three forms of "noise" I mentioned above.
 
My point is this. If you are planning to buy a product, and want an accurate as possible review, read/watch as many as you can, and make up your own mind about the product.

And if you are too lazy to learn the syntax/api's of a compiled language, you can use a program called "autohotkey", I believe it can do what you are looking for.