Well the big difference between those two stories (Google buys ONO and Vodafone buys ONO) is that one would imply change (for the consumer - for founders both is of course a big change) and the other doesn't. Who cares if the corporate overlord at ONO is called Richard Alden (ONO "founder" in Varsavsky's eyes) or Vittorio Colao (Vodafone CEO)?
> AVM is a very nice company and you should not accuse them without proof.
You shouldn't accuse anybody without proof. But since this is Hacker News I'll disagree with the first part of that sentence. AVM is probably the least hacker-friendly company I've ever come across. For example, they're so hell-bent on violating the GPL that they've taken it to court (and lost) .
> If the compiler happened to map [the first member of a struct] c to the last byte of a machine word, the next byte (the first of p) would be the first byte of the next one and properly pointer-aligned.
No, a compiler can't do this. You have to assume that the first member of a struct will be machine word aligned. I'm sure there are many reasons, but the one I can think of now is that structs can be dynamically allocated. That means it has to be possible to take the return value of malloc() and assign it to a pointer, and there is no way to get malloc() to return a memory block with that wired alignment (starting on the last byte of a machine word).
Krugman's prediction (originally pointed out by the title of this HN post): "By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet's impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine's."
The most puzzling thing is that he's not far from right, in a national economics sense at least. Here's the riddle: US GDP has only increased by 25% in real terms since the year 2000. But if you took an average HN reader and sent them back there, to before the mobile phone and high speed residential broadband became widespread, they would kill themselves. How is that possible...? :)