Slashdot Mirror

This link not good enough for you?

http://freshome.com/2008/01/14/ceiling-book-storage-idea/
http://www.multipleautomation.com/hidden_ceiling_bed.htm
http://gizmodo.com/365748/bedup-saves-space-by-storing-your-bed-in-the-ceiling
http://www.garagewerks.com/serv_ceiling_storage.html
http://www.instructables.com/id/GARAGE-STORAGE-SOLUTION/

I am sure you get the idea.

>>Precisely. I'd go without virus software rather than pay for it

That made me think of the dude who lost a house because he didn't pay a $75 fire department levy.

If A-V keeps you from having to rebuild a machine + restore everything on it even once, it's a pretty much paid for itself.
I would have no issue paying a reasonable fee for antivirus if there weren't adequate free options available.

http://gizmodo.com/5706926/facebooks-profile-redesign-is-coming-later-today-but-heres-how-to-get-it-now Opera works fine.

I didn't used to see that much of a point to Wikileaks. It is the very effort to fight Wikileaks that has convinced me that it or something like it is necessary. If a press organization accepting leaked information is sought to be classified as a terrorist organization, then not only is Wikileaks necessary, it is too late and not enough. I wonder what powerful people who advocate such things do when not in public. I want Wikileaks to be a part of telling me about that. If you do too, consider donating.

See the twins that can understand and/or hear each others thoughts

http://gizmodo.com/5682758/the-fascinating-story-of-the-twins-who-share-brains-thoughts-and-senses

He was sending the profits to Hezbollah, (recognized by the USA as a terrorist group):

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/01/dmca_unlocking/

http://gizmodo.com/5702752/how-a-suspected-terrorist-led-to-the-first-unlocked-phone-dmca-violation

http://iplextra.indiatimes.com/article/08OA5Nj4tzeWa

who said it was impossible..?

In the fine Gizmodo article, author Jesus Diaz states, "...this bacteria is made of arsenic, something that was thought to be completely impossible."

Then in the next sentence he contradicts that assertion.

The difference is, Apple has already demonstrated its willingness to brick phones that have been jailbroken. You may call it FUD, but I call it being cautious: why would I buy from a company that's done it before, and has a very obvious hate-on for open environments?

Because it's FUD. The idiotic article you linked was a consequence of an early, flawed jailbreak technique for the first gen iPhone. Apple knew about this and knew that it was going to "brick" (not unrecoverably) jailbroken phones if users tried to update them to the new iOS version, so Apple issued a stern warning basically saying "all bets are off if you jailbreak". Ever since then we've been hearing losers like you whine about how Draconian Apple is going to BRICK YOUR PHONE ON PURPOSE!!!11!! OMG

If you do enough research, you'll find out that the blame for that one truly did lie on the jailbreak (the jailbreak authors more or less admitted as much). All iOS jailbreaking is done by exploiting security holes. It should not be a surprise to you if you have any experience in the area that it is possible (and in fact common) to exploit security holes badly, such that when the system being exploited is updated everything breaks. IIRC, in this case the jailbreak used an exploit to install a patch in some low level bit of firmware to alter its behavior, but the patch was buggy. The bug happened to not break the iOS release the hacker developed his patch for, but it broke later releases.

And Apple has an obvious hate-on for open environments? Um, you may have missed that they hate openness so much that they willingly contribute to some major bits of open source infrastructure: two open compilers (GCC and clang/LLVM), and the HTML engine which even some of their direct and bitter competition uses (Webkit).

There's of course the tiny little issue :

a) you're right, there's no threat, and lifting security precautions won't change a thing b) you're wrong, there is a threat, and lifting security precautions means a weekly re-run of 9/11

If b) is true you're asking thousands of people to die just so you can have a little easier time at an airport. And, frankly, anyone reading the news knows perfectly well b) is true.

What you say isn't true, btw, you have the option of paying enough to charter a flight and avoid the continental U.S. altogether. The problem isn't what the sovereign united states do, the problem is that you are prepared to accept any amount of discomfort for a few bucks.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. You forgot option c): There is a threat, albeit not a statistically significant one, and the "security precautions" we are currently taking are little more than a sleight-of-hand intended to make the flying public feel (no pun intended) like the government is doing something to address their fears. If the threat were anywhere near as real as you imagined it to be, we would *still* have airplanes blowing up weekly. Remember the underwear bomber, the shoe bomber and Flight 93? Those were all thwarted by the actions of other passengers on the airplane, not the TSA. What we have right now is an out-of-control government bureaucracy trampling on our 4th Amendment rights, and still letting terrorists and entertainers smuggle contraband on board airplanes.

Regarding charter flights: c'mon, that's seriously disingenuous, not to mention one-sided. If you are that afraid of being blown up on an airliner, YOU could use charter flights rather than commercial airlines. "the problem is that you are prepared to violate others' civil rights for a few bucks." It's no less true when you say it than it is when I do. Just sayin. Furthermore, what you are saying isn't even true. TSA does require some screening, even for chartered aircraft, if the aircraft weighs more than 12,500 pounds (see here for details) and they were trying to expand that program to privately owned and operated aircraft in 2009, although that measure was dropped due to public outcry (see here and here). So no, you can't really take a charter flight without being screened, although for now you could fly in a private jet, if you can afford the cost (you probably can't, unless your last name is Pelosi, Clinton or Bush).

It's not a question of believing FUD or whatnot... I have an Android phone, and it's well known that Google has that ability as well. Microsoft has been very open about having the ability with the Windows phone. And I'd be very surprised if Nokia and Crackberry didn't have the ability to remotely brick your phone, too.

The difference is, Apple has already demonstrated its willingness to brick phones that have been jailbroken. You may call it FUD, but I call it being cautious: why would I buy from a company that's done it before, and has a very obvious hate-on for open environments?

Both Apple and Nokia are investigating similar technologies for use for their touch screens, so chances are pretty good that at least one of these neat ideas will reach the market. That is, unless they get bogged down in a patent war over this too. (Microsoft's patent predates Apple's by nearly half a year it seems.)

Both Apple and Nokia are investigating similar technologies for use for their touch screens, so chances are pretty good that at least one of these neat ideas will reach the market. That is, unless they get bogged down in a patent war over this too. (Microsoft's patent predates Apple's by nearly half a year it seems.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/01/lars-rasmussen-why-i-quit_n_776807.html
http://gizmodo.com/5690405/facebook-email
http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/29/rasmussen-facebook-google/
http://www.google.com/

$195/Month for 150Mbs is $1.3 a Mb. Assuming that you can get those speeds reliably, and from all accounts you can, that's ridiculous cheap.

At the most populous carrier hotels in NYC (60 Hudson and 111 8th) the cheapest you can get from all 15 or 20 Tier 1 and Tier 2 providers that tangle those places with their fiber is $2 / Mb. And this not having it conveniently delivered to your door step. It's off some switch in a co-located rack in a crowded data center in the city that you pay for transit to.

And since were are talking a data center that shares ports owned by Google, Limelight, Akamai, Level 3, Verizon, you name it, money changing hands and bidding happen on circuits by the hour. There's plenty of competition for the bandwith provider in NYC, and the best they can do is roughly $2.00/Mb.

Verizon is UNDENIABLY underselling their FiOS bandwidth. They own the 2nd biggest Tier 1 network so they can. Another thing you should know is that Verizon put the breaks on new fios rollouts because they were taking huge hits for each new installation.

The most informative article on the uselessness and stupidity of the TSA was linked to from TFA. Very informative read, written by someone who really knows what she's talking about.

lets take a different direction here since you think all this security is necessary to keep planes secure (planes that have been flying safely for over 100 years previously without such security measures)

what happens when the the "terrorists" notice the lines of helpless people waiting to be scanned or groped and decide there would be great irony if they packed pipe bomb into a carry on bag and detonates it while waiting in the line?

I don't think the security measures they are taking are really effective to begin with and are just needlessly invading peoples privacy. This is why i think they need to stop. as an example someone posted this in a related article (Adam Savage from mythbusters claiming to have gone through airport scanners with two large foam cutting saws)

So if these methods aren't even working, then what is the point in continuing them? and to make things worse they provide another possible area of attack where people now need to congregate before they even reach their plane. if i really wanted to cause fear, i would attack the lines of frightened people waiting in line to get to the "safe" area on the other side.

so are these invasive methods really making us more secure?

http://gizmodo.com/5697222/adam-savage-mythbusting-airport-security-wtf-tsa

You would THINK that...

What are you some new kind of astroturfer? Your claiming to agree with the objectors yet link to these Millimeter-wave scans where what people are really objecting to is these near photo quality scans. With the millimeter wave scanners there is nothing anatomical that is really visible they could do 100% with the magnatometer and mm Scanner and it wouldn't bother me. The Millimeter-wave scanner is passive, it's not irradiating you at all, it's just scanning you in a wavelength your body happens to be glowing in vs. the z-scatter that is active, the machine irradiates you.

I might just get some SPF 1000 with barium sulphate enhancement for the next time I fly.

Would you still be ok with it if they stored the pictures they took, the stored pictures they insist don't exist somehow wound up on the internet, and eventually those pictures of your wife wound up on 4chan? Just saying...

Along those lines, see http://gizmodo.com/5674433/my-ipad-let-me-down.

The image you link to is fake.

http://gizmodo.com/5443901/is-it-this-easy-to-pull-straight-nude-pics-from-airport-scanners-%5Bnsfw%5D

Okay, different type of screen swivel but Fujitsu Siemens have had one for ages:

http://gizmodo.com/150000/fujitsu-siemens-lifebook-tablet

I'm just not able to trust AT&T on anything after seeing these stats:

http://gizmodo.com/5428717/att-has-spent-less-on-network-construction-and-capital-expenditures-every-quarter-since-the-q4-2007

Obligatory link to My First Cavity Search: A Children's Guide to Understanding Why He May Be a Threat to National Security.

http://gizmodo.com/5688087/the-tsas-sense-of-humor-makes-me-nervous

(But seriously, TSA? Child molestation is cool now?)

It's going to be the next big career move for pedophiles. "Grope Children and get paid for it!"

Obligatory link to My First Cavity Search: A Children's Guide to Understanding Why He May Be a Threat to National Security.

http://gizmodo.com/5688087/the-tsas-sense-of-humor-makes-me-nervous

(But seriously, TSA? Child molestation is cool now?)

Dig a little deeper. I know this because I followed the whole thing incredibly closely and I remember my anger at Jobs when he appropriated the DRM-free movement without so much as even a nod towards the people that had been fighting for this for so long.

I don't have a problem with Apple. I do have a problem with Steve Jobs, primarily because I think he's deceitful. I don't understand why saying something unfavorable means that I hate Apple, and from your reaction it really looks like you idolize them (or Jobs, or both). No company is worth that. But as I said, to each their own.

Your original post said something about us being thankful to Apple, which made me puke a little because Apple in no way led the movement, they merely used it to escape regulatory scrutiny in Europe, the timing was brilliant for them, and as usual their PR was masterful. They did good by offering us the privilege to buy non-DRMed tracks for 30 cents extra. But thank them??? Hell fucking no.

Anyway.. I'm breaking my own rules now.. threads like this rarely result in anyone changing their mind, and I hate becoming a caricature of the internet tough guy meme.. I hope I have the strength to not respond to the next message on this thread.

If you gonna cite, then cite right.

Also, "stories" by samzenpus are actually random copy/pastes from digg done by a bot.
It is an experiment into mob sourcing.
Nobody checks validity of those stories before they are posted.

It's much much cheaper to shoot in 3D than to do it in post-processing

Says you. A CGI professioanl says shooting stereoscopic is more expensive. Who am I going to believe?

Technologically advanced, maybe, depending on how you look at it, as there is tremendous disparity between the cities and the countryside in that regard.

A remote mountain in Nepal has better 3G service than San Francisco, a large progressive city in "the world's only superpower"...

Asia in general is on the rise, better catch up!

There's a difference. The car has a 20-year-old antecedent. The industrial design of iDevices does not necessarily, except for those elements borrowed from Dieter Rams's work for Braun.

Actually, MS is huge in the server market. There are certainly more Windows servers in existence than ones running Linux, for example.

Share in terms of sales that's probably right: http://blogs.computerworld.com/16263/windows_widens_lead_over_linux_in_the_server_market

But that's probably wrong in terms of units in existence. There are lots of Linux servers out there because it's free. When you need an extra one, you install one and that's it. No need for licenses.

The fact that people are actually buying Linux servers and they make up 20% of the sales (as per the IDC numbers) indicates to me that there could be more Linux servers installed than Windows servers, because the ratio of nonpurchased Linux servers to purchased Linux servers is very likely to be higher than 4:1. Many places do buy and use Redhat, but guess how many Centos servers they would also have installed and used. Many companies have installed many free Linux servers without _ever_ buying any at all. A previous workplace had lots of such free Linux servers scattered around the world. And they weren't "desktops", Windows was the standard for desktops there.

I'm not including stuff like linux based APs, DSL routers etc. I'm talking about those towers and rack stuff.

Google alone has quite a number of Linux servers. http://gizmodo.com/5517041/googles-insane-number-of-servers-visualized
I doubt they'd do so well if they had to resort to paying for say Win2K8 R2 :).

Microsoft doesn't have a dominating presence in the server market. They do have stuff like AD, Exchange and Sharepoint. But the way I see it, if the OSS bunch start moving up the ladder it's going to get ugly there for MS.

The desktop market will probably remain Microsoft's for years to come, unless someone finishes something like ReactOS soon (and even so they'd probably get tied up in court).

...most of the displays you see on walls in buildings are Windows.

Yep. Don't forget about this incident! http://gizmodo.com/5035456/blue-screen-of-death-strikes-birds-nest-during-opening-ceremonies-torch-lighting

Yes, they were selling WMA files, to be exact.

Compare and contrast Ray Ozzie's farewell with that of another recent high-level departure, J. Allard. These men, at the heart of technology for all their adult lives, were in positions of the highest influence at Microsoft. They're obviously both brilliant, and not needing to cash a paycheck. They see a change coming - a huge change - and they want to be a part of it. They don't see that happening while they work in Redmond. So they go. But on the way out they look back at the poor souls they leave behind and they tell them in their farewell: "You too can be a part of this new world. You just have to think different." The door swings shut with a click and the obvious conclusion remains unsaid: "but you won't."

If you call this a "review from a usual website," Gizmodo basically said the phone was so weak and has such a little chance on the market, that they weren't going to review it. http://gizmodo.com/5667723/why-were-not-reviewing-the-nokia-n8

Apple using logo of Belgian Neo-Nazi party

It has the App Store. How are they going to provide an iPad like app store without iPad like DRM?

And along the way, Apple is taking some of the most successful parts of iOS, like the App Store—with automatic installation of applications—and the springboard—rechristened launchpad in Lion. http://gizmodo.com/5668805/

The words are right there. All you have to do is read them.

You are quoting Gizmodo? Why don't you go any place that has a clue? Heck, the part where they say that the App Store is part of iOS should have tipped you off. But then, you'd actually have to have a clue about what you are talking about.

I find your sig amusing - advocating against censorship while defending a company that openly promotes it on their platforms.

This might get you started

It has the App Store. How are they going to provide an iPad like app store without iPad like DRM?

And along the way, Apple is taking some of the most successful parts of iOS, like the App Store—with automatic installation of applications—and the springboard—rechristened launchpad in Lion.
http://gizmodo.com/5668805/

The words are right there. All you have to do is read them.

Yeah? How's this for numbers?

http://gizmodo.com/5639822/25-years-ago-today-steve-jobs-left-apple

Perhaps WikiLeaks will now leak the reason for his denial. Would be poetic.

That could well happen:

WikiLeaks Leaks its Own Donors Due to Email Mishap

Have you seen some of billg's leaked mails on Windows? He ripped XP to shreds. He was at the helm, and didn't like what they were doing. You think he was any happier with Vista?

http://gizmodo.com/5019516/classic-clips-bill-gates-chews-out-microsoft-over-xp

He was the head of the company, not the guy who makes every decision. He disagreed with a lot of decisions. He should have replaced more people with any organism that could muster a coherent thought that persisted long enough to compare with the next thought. That was his failure.

Ballmer eats donkey cock all day and shits out specs which are automatically turned into the next GUI design and API. Bill was no saint, but I don't think you realize how little low-level control he had in the last few years. He bitched about things being wrong, sure. But in 2003/4 he was *told* that Vista was shite and would have to be rebooted. He gave in, and Jim Allchin retired out of shame I would assume. Ballmer was busy purchasing used donkeys from seedy mexican bars.

http://www.windowsitpro.com/article/windows-client/allchin-on-vista-it-s-not-going-to-work-.aspx

Quote:
copper—which is everywhere around you—will be gone in about 61 years;
antimony—widely used in medicines—will be depleted in 20 years;
while indium, rhodium, platinum, or silver—which are present in many essential consumer electronics—won't last much longer.
And those estimations are only valid if we manage to consume half of what we are consuming now.

http://gizmodo.com/5219598/how-long-will-our-world-last-yes-we-are-screwed

But not to worry that was 4 years ago, before the GFC. Surely the future is so much rosier now.

http://gizmodo.com/5660828/magic-software-eliminates-objects-from-reality-itself

I'm sure this has nothing to do with people breaking their iPhone 4 on purpose because the antenna is bad and they want a different model phone or heard they're redesigning the iPhone 4 in September

FTFA: "With just 4 months of data, it's clear that the iPhone 4 is significantly more prone to physical damage than its predecessor."

Actually that's not what that means. What is clear is people are breaking the iPhone 4 more than they did the 3GS. Could be any number of factors, doesn't necessarily mean iPhone 4 screen worse than 3GS. I think squaretrade needs a Jump to Conclusions mat. It's pretty scary though that a company that offers warranties makes unscientific assumptions about the products they're warrantying, I'd expect a better conclusion than this from SquareTrade "Research"

Maybe it's for a 'Receiver having concealed antenna that suffers poor reception when held the wrong way'?? That would be a little more specific (and a touch less obvious) ;-)

Good thing that Apple avoided that with the iPhone 4 then.

In denial are we?

Falcon

Gee, why did I know that there would be at least one Apple Hater who couldn't help but show us that he doesn't know what "concealed" menas. Somebody should mod you up "Insightful", because that's what your little post is.

Maybe it's for a 'Receiver having concealed antenna that suffers poor reception when held the wrong way'?? That would be a little more specific (and a touch less obvious) ;-)

Good thing that Apple avoided that with the iPhone 4 then.

In denial are we?

Falcon