Slashdot Mirror

Do you have any concrete, verifiable examples of this that you can cite?

Quite a few. Here is just one: Matthew Werenczak.

Would you like some more?

The topic is Google chrome (which is the Google branded version of chromium). I am running it now. I downloaded it from Google. Look at this page. It clearly claims suitability for Debian/Ubuntu/Fedora/openSUSE and other OSs.

If the first update will break it, they have no business offering it without a big fat warning.

I'm not sure why Debian cares about Chrome one way or the other. It isn't FOSS.

You might suggest that Google changes the webpage - presumably it was written back when it was true. Better yet, tell your friends to not install software outside of the package manager unless they know what they're doing. Since you obviously know what you're doing, I'm sure you'll figure it out. :)

The topic is Google chrome (which is the Google branded version of chromium). I am running it now. I downloaded it from Google. Look at this page. It clearly claims suitability for Debian/Ubuntu/Fedora/openSUSE and other OSs.

If the first update will break it, they have no business offering it without a big fat warning.

the timing you claim is a little off, and this year the ice held its ground, but the general trend is not something a rational person would bet against:

https://sites.google.com/site/...

http://www.srware.net/en/softw...

https://code.google.com/p/chro...

For most intents and purposes, there is little real difference. SRWare clearly states here, http://www.srware.net/en/softw... that they hack Chromium - but on other pages, they compare Iron to Chrome.

If you're working from the same source code, the only real differences are those features that you might enable/disable when compiling. Am I right? If so - then it might be argued that Chrome is the more intrusive, more invasive version of Google's spyware. Chromium would be less intrusive spyware. And, Iron is an attempt to turn off all the spyware.

and Chrome is the only way to get this content under Linux

looky here -

A little effort & Firefox uses Chrome's PepperFlash.. Quite well, I might add.

and before anyone slams me for using flash, some sites I _need_ to use (cough)godaddy(cough) require it. Simply set it to ask to be enabled. Problem solved - options are good.

I believe they're both involved, but the two sites (discowhatevah and pixelwitches) both give Mel as the contact.

I remember Mel, kind of full-on (shades of Christopher Skase) - she's the does the thinking and talking. Pixelwitches how, um, original.

"those that can do, and those that can't, teach". i.e. advertise your WordPress version, don't keep it up-to-date, use images where ever possible instead of pesky text, alt tags are for wimps, CSS means make shit up - maybe it'll parse [sigh]. I'm guessing "select" contract work means "if you're gullible".

Dear Slashdot, please do my homework - I've got a killer idea for PixelCamps (low-resolution only), should make a million. Point me at a training program I can scrape for my next arts grant application.

Strange that PixelWichrrs don't list a portfolio Cough

• yewsi
• codecrackers
• turtlecamp
• dinkumdocket
• Dozens of others - including the recently lapsed (major oversight?) sWInary.com

I've seen worse. I'll stop now.

Really? Please link to mailing list posts from Lennart pushing Debian or Ubuntu to to adopt systemd (advising on features/benefits relevant to an upcoming decison the distro already had to make does not count).

Does this qualify ?

Switch back to the old version of Google maps

How can a guy get a patent for a method to exercise cats with a laser pointer? It happens and there's always one patent examiner who doesn't do the job correctly, but that's the overall problem with patent reform right? Laws change, rulings can be overturned but for now at least you can't patent an algorithm. You can patent a software invention however that uses algorithms but that software invention must be innovative and unique.

With enough people using SnoopSnitch ( https://play.google.com/store/... ), which detects Stingray cell phone trackers, and a collection site on Facebook or any other social media site (Reddit sounds like a good candidate), the locations of these things could be mapped and published in jig time.

Except that they're mobile perhaps?

Sure! And it only took 10 seconds of Googling to find. This book chapter explains how public hysteria forced the NRC to repeatedly tighten regulations, which drastically increased costs not only due to the sheer increase in materials and increased labor to design things to comply (what the author calls "regulatory racheting"), but also the need to repeatedly re-engineer things as the regulations changed mid-construction (what the author calls "regulatory turbulence").

You can check the mix here.

These two meanings may have "appeared at the same time", but it was definitely more understood to mean "causing nausea" at the time. And it really is only through decades of misuse that the current definition of "affected with nausea" is accepted "at the present time".

For some careful English speakers, nauseous means causing nausea, and nauseated is the term for experiencing nausea. These are the traditional meanings (though nauseous initially meant inclined to nausea before gaining the sense we now consider traditional), and they’re still the ones put forth by some English reference books and usage authorities. In actual usage, though, nauseous has supplanted nauseated in the experiencing nausea sense, and nauseated is reserved for a few specific uses.

http://grammarist.com/usage/na...

https://books.google.com/ngram...

Ah, but how does the traffic get from Netflix's ISP to your ISP?

Hint: The actual internet is more than the oft-imagined cloud on network diagrams. Network operators agree to interconnect with each other, for mutual benefit, and if such an agreement is unbalanced (because one party is handing off more traffic than the amount they're willing or able to deliver) one of the network operators will end up paying the other.

A simplified version, wherein we're both network operators, Case 1, equal traffic flow:

Shakrai: "I have 3 terabit/s of peak hour traffic that you can deliver for me."
suutar: "Perfect. I also have 3 terabit/s of peak hour traffic that I can't deliver but you can. Let's connect our networks."
Shakrai: "Sounds good."

Case 2, unbalanced traffic flow:

Shakrai: "I have 10 terabit/s of peak hour traffic that you can deliver for me."
suutar: "I only have 3 terabit/s to hand off to you. We're going to bill you for the difference, okay?"
Shakrai: "Sure."

That has been the paradigm on the internet for a very long time, because it's recognized that it costs money to get a packet from Point A to Point B. Networks pay for connections to other networks unless they can absorb a roughly equal amount of traffic. You can't dump terabits of traffic into someone's network without offering them something in return.

Netflix wants to blow up this longstanding model because bearing the full cost of delivering their packets eats into their bottom line. It doesn't kill their business model, the fact that they're profitable attests to that, but it sure seems to keep Mr. Hastings up late at night. If you actually drill down into this issue you'll find that they've hijacked the concept of network neutrality. There a ton of arguments to be made in favor of network neutrality but Netflix is not one of them.

With enough people using SnoopSnitch ( https://play.google.com/store/... ), which detects Stingray cell phone trackers, and a collection site on Facebook or any other social media site (Reddit sounds like a good candidate), the locations of these things could be mapped and published in jig time.

There's an app that instantly wipes your (android) phone after X incorrect attempts. Set X=1 before going through customs.

so, back of the envelope calculation here, assuming they waste at least 30s of the callees' time for each call before they hang up.
Assuming an average lifespan of 70 for the sake of round numbers, they've wasted somewhere around 52 lifetimes of other people's time.
These people make Jeffery Dahlmer look like a piker. They should be locked in a metal box with spike on this inside. Killing's too good for the lot of them.

I pay to have a phone for my benefit, not theirs.

I'm not aware of any coal disaster that has rendered an area the size of a state or province uninhabitable.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/...

Richard Nixon would not today be a big supporter of the monstrosity the EPA has grown into.

Hell, even Eisenhower warned about the rise of the 'scientific-technological elite' in the same speech where he warned about the 'Military-Industrial Complex.' Many people excerpt just the 'good part' out of his speech.

About 1/4 of my apps (the ones I can't uninstall) require me to grant them the right to record voice without notifying me. It's really shitty. On the iPhone I'm in control of privacy, on Android, google is.

XPrivacy

See also: AppOpsXposed

HTH, HAND

Same shit, different decade. Next up: Santa is real, because every Christmas NORAD tracks him.

"Monoblock" or "the primordial monoblock" is a term for the presumed state of the presumed material comprising the presumed universe just before it presumably exploded. Everything, no exceptions, including space itself, all in one tiny... something, (tiny with respect to... something), that did.... something, and then [waves hands] Big Bang! Try this google search.

Science can trace the expansion of the universe backwards quite a ways, within the bounds of our understanding of physics as it stands and it makes sense, albeit some very strange and difficult to swallow sense. But go back far enough, and a point is reached where our physics simply do not serve to describe the previous state. At all.

I liken it to tracing a pitched ball backwards, not having been around to witness the pitch, but analyzing the arc of its trajectory and theorizing that the ball erupted spontaneously from the ground in order to arrive where it is. We can't account for such a spontaneous emission, but after all, hey, there's the ball, right? The immediate and obvious objection is that "but physics tells us that can't happen"... well, physics tells us the exact same thing about the big bang. That's why I consider the comparison apt.

I'm not saying the big bang theory is wrong; I'm just saying it is definitely unproven, and that there are severe and fundamental problems with attempts to prove it at this time. Tomorrow, we have new physics, and that may resolve everything very nicely. But until or unless that happens -- until someone shows how the "ball could erupt from the dirt, spontaneously or otherwise" -- personally, I'm reserving BB theory acceptance.

You cannot make a statement that "all" of something is true, then be proven false, and just amend your statement to "almost all".

Why can I not? I just did. If the amendment does not affect the argument — if the argument remains just a convincing with "almost" as it was without it — it is fine. We are, presumably, trying to improve our understanding of life here, not play a game.

You have given not one single reference that children born out of marriage are considered with suspicion at all

I have, actually — the term "bastard" is a derogatory one, and not just in English (two other languages I know attach the same negative connotations to fatherless children).

Are you sincerely questioning the premise, however, or just grasping for straws? Are you really not convinced, growing up in a single-parent household is a handicap?

https://maps.google.com/maps?q...

See the crater-shaped valley? With rivers? And strange semi-circular effects on the jungle?

The buried temple with the huge roller ball will probably be discovered Real Soon Now.

And the giant apes.

https://www.google.com/search?...

There are half a dozen at least, pretty good quality for sat photos. There are also actual photos of tanks and artillery. Oh, and there were photos of the Muk launcher moving out of the Ukraine and into Russia after the plane was shot down.

download the PDF, print it out, trace onto a pizza box or whatever:

http://www.google.com/get/card...

then buy the lenses for 50 cents on ebay or a local science toy shop.

or buy a kit from one of the links above for a few bucks.

http://www.pocket-lint.com/new...

Heh, I used to do multi-conference room / theater AV integration for large defense companies. The number 1 problem was always audio.

1. Test. Test test test. You can get almost any cheap thing working well if you bother to test and tune everything BEFORE the meeting. The most expensive thing can fail for silly reasons if you don't bother to test everything BEFORE the meeting (usually because some executive schlupp dials into both the audio bridge and VTC MCU at the last minute). Then freeze the configuration. Yeah, good luck freezing the configuration with engineers and tinkerers running around.

2. POTS sucks. Maybe some telephony devices are able to negotiate better than 8kHz 8-bit audio sampling if their codecs match up, but you're better off going with something with VTC-quality audio using H323. Most VoIP teleconferencing lines don't bother trying to beat POTS audio quality. So even if you have a nice Polycom phone that does good AEC and NC, you're still going to strain to hear what's going on.

3. Speakerphones suck. Most of them don't bother doing good AEC and NC. Get a good bluetooth or USB headset. Gaming teamspeak headsets are relatively cheap. As long as it's digital, so they don't introduce any analog amp noise from the system.

4. PC/laptop microphones suck. I don't know why no one bothers to test them to the same level as your average cheap dumbphone speakerphone. They pick up all kinds of system electrical noise, and rely on software to do any AEC or NC, which adds more latency. About a quarter of the people in our daily standup have laptop microphone fails on Google Hangouts or Skype each day. Most end up dialing back in from their smartphone when that happens.

Anyway, all that said, our current standup room setup consists of a Google Hangouts room on a permanently-fixed Mac mini with a $50 "Blue Snowball USB Condenser Microphone" and Logitech USB camera attached to it (the USB audio coming in from the Logitech camera was deemed insufficient, even for the small room we had it in.). For remote participants, I've had good experiences with extended use of the $200+ Jabra PRO 9470 Mono Wireless Headset, which is switchable between PC and POTS/VoIP phone use, but a simpler/cheaper bluetooth headset would probably work just as well paired with smartphone/PC.

And set up an echo server for everyone to test their setups. https://support.google.com/cha... . Or at least go to http://www.onlinemictest.com/ or something. Did I mention you should test?

I'm also looking forward to someday playing with Amazon's Echo thingy someday, since for $200 it seems to have a lot of the technical audio features of more expensive audio conferencing systems:
http://www.amazon.com/oc/echo/
assuming it will be able to act as a simple bluetooth speakerphone instead of only for all of the other AI junk they're cramming into it.

It's not about politics, it's about her boyfriend.

The State Departments server can only deliver mail through Earth's Internet.
It's well known that she keeps in touch with P'Lod, her alien lover.
So she needs access to InterGalactic email, which P'Lod got her an account on.
She's not lazy by any means, but keeping track of multiple email accounts is a pain in the neck, so she uses the P'lod one for everything.

If you want some more "facts",
Just search google for: Hillary Clinton P'lod

https://books.google.com/books...

I will call it Real Unreal and whenever you start shooting the government will come and steal all your guns and bullets.

Kinda depends where you're at and what you're shooting at. At the range or in the woods during the season, fine. In the city or the suburbs, you start hearing gunshots you hit the deck and dial 911. With luck, the cops show up, arrest the damn fool and confiscate his weapons and ammo. Just because you got a right to bear arms don't mean you got a right to be irresponsible with them.

There isn't an issue with having multiple accounts: https://support.google.com/acc... The framework now allows people who don't want multiple accounts to have just one, easily. The vast majority of people don't want to futz with multiple accounts, plus it's much easier for Google to have an unifying framework on the backend.

If I want to see the research (I mean real research) on human reaction to mercury , and maybe any studies or abstracts about it, I can't really use Google now. The first 200 website are anti vaccine websites.

It must have something to do with the type of searches you have preformed in the past.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd...

Granted, I only look at the first page of results, but non of them had anything to do with anti vaccination.

I really don't get how people don't find this scary. What if the next CEO decides global warming is a hoax or that the earth is flat? Do you think the current Google will find websites that complain about Google's stance on privacy factual?

I quit using google a few days ago after reading one of the slashdot articles on alternative web searches and this makes me even more glad I did.

My daughter has a Macbook Pro she is currently using as a doorstop, it looks a lot like one of the ones pictured.

1) YOU are the one who does not speak for anyone but a tiny monitory, as actual sales figures of devices clearly illustrate. People like thin, lightweight phones, and mostly as others have said never replace the battery before they get a new phone.

2) You say "you want a battery which can be removed so the phone can be powered off without
any question"

Come on, be honest. What you REALLY WANT HERE is for the phone to no longer be trackable and/or receive/transmit any signals. That's fine, I can even understand that.

As that is your actual need, there are other ways to accomplish this without making the phone worse.

" similar to PageRank, but instead of more links to you = better rank"

  That's an oversimplification. The algorithm also factors page quality, layout, reputation, and authoritativeness to decide which pages rank higher for any given query, for each given users location. Just having other pages link to any given page doesn't give a higher rank without the aforementioned factors covered.

https://support.google.com/web... pretty much covers all the requirements to get a high ranking for a given query.

posted anonymously for a reason.

why do banks get to pick and choose who to do business with?

Well first of all, they shouldn't be required to do business with someone who repeatedly commits fraud...

However what is happening here is not the choice of the business. It's the government saying "we can make life very unpleasant for you in terms of audits etc. unless you cease doing business with this list of people". The government has been going after many adult businesses in the same way for a while now, google Operation Chokepoint

Right on. It annoys me when I see people using google search to go to a specific website, rather than use the address bar to go there directly. If you try to explain to them that the address bar will take them there without having to click the first search result, it's like they don't even want to know.

And you know what annoys them? Your insistence on harassing them about trying to use their computer more "optimally" when what they're doing works just fine. Moreover, you're actually wrong.

Frankly, I think it's probably better for most people to use search than typing urls anyhow. A search captures their intent better than an actual URL in most cases. Consider the case of a single mistyped letter. The actual search will likely correct this error automatically. A URL with a mistyped letter may well be a scam or malware site. In fact, the indirection of "search as address" is also a handy safety filter, as search providers like Google have the resources to scan and block sites with active malware being hosted on them.

Even if you discount all those factors, the point remains: Is it really worth bothering people about a few seconds of wasted time when they're still getting the same results? Save your battles for the important stuff.

There are a series of "craters" in the U.S. as well, though much older. The Carolina bays are elliptical depressions located along the Atlantic seaboard of unknown origin. Theories of the origins being geologic or extraterrestrial impacts have come in and out of favor. Nobody really knows. (And before you say that impact craters are round regardless of the angle of impact, that's true until you get to very shallow impact angles. Then the craters end up being oval.)

That sign in at a Google search screen bothers me, at which point is one going to be required to use it.

Last time I checked (which was today), creating a Gmail account required a mobile phone number. So for someone buying a mobile phone in order to have a mobile phone number in order to create a Google account, where is one supposed to search for reviews of mobile phones? If a different web search engine, then why not just stick with that instead of using Google Search?

3D-printed metal has been used for quite a while in some of the lower-performance stages (lower pressure, lower temperature). Examples here. The key benefit is that they are able to integrate convoluted channels within the structure for cooling or mixing. You can also reduce weight by taking away significant internal volume, replacing it with ribs or a sparse matrix. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it's mainstream, but it's close.

Here is a link to the source:

https://sites.google.com/a/dee...

Uhm, maybe you're thinking of Ellen Pompeo?

I think every marriage should have an exception for celebrities though. Which is why I would let my wife sleep with Ellen Pompeo any day.

Or Google Contributor?

And here is why.

Some of us are dedicated to tripping up the algorithms. Some of us aren't afraid of anything or anyone, be they terrorists or governments.

Human waste includes urine, which is part of "night soil".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...

But yes, "night soil" could only be part of a system. But there are other parts, as mentioned in a section quoted at the end.

I don't know about England specifically, or later years, but this says:
"Population and Economy : From Hunger to Modern Economic Growth"
https://books.google.com/books...
"According to official Chinese statistics, by the middle of the 18 century, population density was already over 500 people per cultivated sq. km (see Liang 1980: 400, 546). While these numbers are undoubtedly exaggerated owning to under-registration of cultivated acreage (ho 1995), the contrast with 18th-cent. Europe, where 1 sq. km of cultivated acreage supported 70 people, is quite extreme (see Braudel 1981a: 56-64)."

Much of China is just not that cultivated because of mountains and deserts and such (especially in the West).

Organic agriculture is indeed information and labor intensive -- which is why robotics will revolutionize it -- including robots to pick specific insects off of plants.

On fertilizer loss, see:
http://www.wri.org/our-work/pr...
"Between 1960 and 1990, global use of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer increased more than sevenfold, while phosphorus use more than tripled. Studies have shown that fertilizers are often applied in excess of crop needs (MA 2005). The excess nutrients are lost through volatilization (when nitrogen vaporizes in the atmosphere in the form of ammonia), surface runoff (Figure 2), and leaching to groundwater. On average, about 20 percent of nitrogen fertilizer is lost through surface runoff or leaching into groundwater (MA 2005). Synthetic nitrogen fertilizer and nitrogen in manure that is spread on fields is also subject to volatilization. Under some conditions, up to 60 percent of the nitrogen applied to crops can be lost to the atmosphere by volatilization (University of Delaware Cooperative Extension 2009); more commonly, volatilization losses are 40 percent or less (MA 2005). A portion of the volatilized ammonia is redeposited in waterways through atmospheric deposition. Phosphorus, which binds to the soil, is generally lost through soil erosion from agricultural lands."

Comparisons to medicine... Don't get me started. :-) Doctors typically have only a few hours of education about nutrition over the course of several years of study, yet poor nutrition is the root of most Western disease. So, the whole medical community is (profitably for itself) misdirecting its efforts as far as priorities. Sure there is much alternative medicine that is bogus, but the parts based on nutritional research (e.g. Dr. Fuhrman's work) is quite good overall. Yet it is not mainstream. What is mainstream is stuff like "stents", which studies actually show are mostly worthless. For example:
http://www.drfuhrman.com/libra...
"The sad thing is surgical interventions and medications are the foundation of modern cardiology and both are relatively ineffective compared to nutritional excellence. My patients routinely reverse their heart disease, and no longer have vulnerable plaque or high blood pressure, so they do not need medical care, hospitals or cardiologists anymore. The problem is that in the real world cardiac patients are not even informed that heart disease is predictably reversed with nutritional excellence. They are not given the opportunity to choose and just corralled into these surgical interventions. Trying to figure out how to pay for ineffective and expensive medicine by politicians will never be a real solution. People need to know they do not have to have heart disease to begin with, and if they get it, aggressive

Hint: "environmentalist" billionaire Steyer made his billions off coal,...

He is a hedge fund guy. Yes, I am making an Ad Hominem attack on him.

And the /tards rant about Fox News and the Kochs...

Huh?

Fox News is a "news" channel with a history of lieing and was founded to be a "conservative" media outlet because of the erroneous notion that other media outlets are "liberal".

The Koch bothers - actually one brother mostly - have never misled anyone about their motives. They are Libertarian with a capital 'L'. They have no problem with Gay marriage and think it's none of Government's business. Same goes for abortion and other "liberal" social topics.

They are all for free markets (as much as a billionaire can be) and treat their employees quite well. They may not be the most environmentally friendly guys on the planet, but they are not really hypocrites - like most Republicans and Fox News viewers.

As a "Libtard", I cannot help but respect the Kochs even though I disagree with most of what they stand for.

China has been doing it for Millennia; see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
"In 1909, American agronomist F.H. King toured China, Korea and Japan, studying traditional fertilization, tillage and general farming practices. He wrote his observations and findings in Farmers of Forty Centuries, Or Permanent Agriculture in China, Korea, and Japan (1911, published shortly after his death by his wife, Carrie Baker King; numerous facsimile reprintings, including Courier Dover Publications, ISBN 0-486-43609-8, and Rodale Press, ISBN 0-87857-867-6). King lived in an era preceding synthetic nitrogen fertilizer production and before the use of the internal combustion engine for farm machinery, yet he was profoundly interested in the challenge of farming the same soils in a 'permanent' manner, hence his interest in the agricultural practices of ancient cultures. In recent years, his book became an important organic farming reference."

"Night soil" was part of the answer -- recycling human waste back to the fields. We have modern versions of composting toilets like the Clivus Multrum that can do much the same in a more sanitary way.

Conventional "slow release" fertilizers are generally different than ground up rock dust. See this site for what is possible:
http://remineralize.org/

On micronutrients, most people in agriculture don't understand this, so it is not a surprise you don't either. I'd suggest you read Widdowson's book. It is basic chemistry. Essentially, the clay and organic matter in soil has only so much holding capacity for nutrients released by the slow decay of rocks and the faster decay of organic matter. If you flood that capacity with nitrogenous compounds, statistically you end up with a lot of nitrogen and very little of everything else. There is another process that also goes on related to reducing the soil's holding capacity as the pH drops and clay particles change their electric charge. Thus your plants don't have access to micronutrients they need to make plant defense compounds and so they are weak and sickly and need additional protection like by synthetic pesticides and such. If Haber had spent more time studying agricultural chemistry instead of figuring out how to kill people, he might have learned this and then come up with better solutions. See this diagram on page 11 of Widdowson's book for more details:
http://books.google.com/books?...

That many official published charts of "warming" temperature started in 1979 is an objective fact.

It has to do with the fact that satellite temperature measurements, favoured by denialists because it shows the least warming, started that year. That's why most charts you get to see on your favourite disinformation sources start that year. Most charts actually start about a century before that.

Unless they've changed and not updated their documentation it still looks like its the case. https://support.google.com/wal...

https://www.google.com/#q=corp...