Yes, another OSS project by Microsoft

errrh, Microsoft has more than 130B revenue each year. 10 B in 10 years is less than 1% each year.

If a US company does not support US army, US army turns to China or Russian companies?

No, the US military goes to great lengths (and sometimes expense) to have things domestically made, mainly for security but also for economic reasons.

"mainly for security ... also for economic reasons."

Given how powerful the military-industrial complex is I'm not sure if those should be reversed to "mainly for economic reasons... also for security". US military from one point of view is a huge state subsidy not only to capital owners, but to the people employed there as well.

All military forces do that. Not specific to US or any other particular state.

next version of Hololens will solve the view field issue. I think MS will delivery next-gen hololens to Army

I am not sure if the FOV issues has been solved but it is being improved a lot in the next version according to patent filings https://mspoweruser.com/microsoft-found-way-double-hololens-...

I didn't downvote but what makes you think?

microsoft mentioned earlier this year that it would release the new version in 19

yes, source graph looks great. Using docker, every easy to deploy on any OS

The confluence's editor somewhat meet your needs.

Good call, though it's commercial as usual.

Yes, .Net Framework itself will evolve very slow. New features will be added to .Net Core Only.

IBM's market cap is a little more than 100B so far. It costs more than 30B to acquire RH, that means IBM realize that if it doesn't do something useful, it will sink.

RH maybe the only one that's worth of purchasing and IBM can afford.

> If not Amazon, another company will do business with gov. Face recognition is mature enough, there is no very high barrier. Even if US gov doesnt adopt such technology, another gov will do.

> It is just business.

Guns are a mature technology, and pretty easy to use. If I don't do the hit for Vinny, some other hitman will, so I might as well make some cash. It is just business.

The fact that someone else may perform a morally dubious action if you don't does not provide any justification for you to perform that action.

gun is gun, please don't mix together. Face recognition doesn't attack people. I admit that someone might feel uncomfortable but it can protect you in another cases. (another privacy vs safety argument)

Needless to say this technology can only deploy in public places. If someone appear in public places, why you think he would like to become invisible to all others.

In the meanwhile, I agree that no gov employee can be authorized to access the data without limitation. There must be some laws to regulate its usage.

> gun is gun, please don't mix together. Face recognition doesn't attack people. I admit that someone might feel uncomfortable but it can protect you in another cases.

Guns don't attack people either. There's a saying: "guns don't kill people, people kill people."

And they kill each other much more the easier it is to do so...

Data is truth, it wants to be free. It will be free. It is impossible to control. I have tons of confidential data under my control and I can do what I like with it. At a company/government with controls that are nothing less than stellar in comparison to most.

> ...do the hit for Vinny...

Why did you choose that name?

So I'm not sure 100% where I stand morally on the "if not us then someone else" argument as whole but I'm pretty sure it's better to just not let that person/entity be you (in this case Amazon), and figuring it out from there.

Even if the world is lacking in your brand of ethics/morals doesn't mean you need to stoop to the same level as someone who doesn't hold the same brand of ethics/morals.