designed to just piss everyone off because they can.
Well - it's designed to be cheaper and simpler to build for them. It's not designed to be servicable - we have been very used to having computers that we can build from components for years. We don't generally complain that we can't upgrade the RAM in a cellphone, but we sure moan about it in a laptop.
RTK GNSS (not just GPS, but GPS, Glonass, Baidu and the english one whose name I forget), using virtual reference stations over a cell network, can give you centimetre precision at greater than 20Hz. They don't have that in a TomTom though.
And we do need to consider that our money is being spent on people who choose their disease, of their own free will. I have sympathy for them, because we all make mistakes, but it is a choice they made, and at some level they have to accept some responsibility for it and that it has reduced their standard of living.
A quintessentially American attitude. Drug addiction is well correlated with mental illness, many people find their own personal spiral in addiction and crime begins with self-medicating as they struggle with their day-to-day lives. Further, one could build hundreds of drug abuse treatment clinics for the money that's thrown around as part of the so-called 'War on Drugs'. To have a safe and functioning society, there are costs that must be paid. One of those is looking after people who have messed up. We don't let people die on the side of the road because they drove too fast, or paid insufficient attention, we put them in a hospital and patch them up. Same thing.
I think it's pretty likely that under half of the population want to leave, but that the young people of England were too lazy to vote. If you're going to have a referendum on something as important at leaving the EU, mandatory voting is surely essential to establish a mandate.
Technically, the amount of time it takes for the radio waves to reach the receiver is very short. However, I have never used a bluetooth device with less than 500ms of latency, which is entirely unacceptable for anything other than just listening to music. I hear that specialised low-latency bluetooth hardware exists, with an advertised latency of 32ms, which is ok, but still much more than your 5ms, and too much for live audio.
If he had written "Higher profits for airlines from more expensive flights, additional charges for telecommunications, freedom to take a big dump on the environment in the name of profits, and a few good wars to sell guns into", well those would have been things that benefits corporations first and foremost.
Even if the only thing the EU accomplishes is fewer wars, that's a good enough reason for it.
Haha. Nice to know I'm just as bad. You scoff your popcorn, I'm not going to stop you. But yes, why not be strict about such things? Eat dinner at the table, never in front of the television. Avoid stuffing your face in the cinema. Be polite. Put your knife and fork together after a meal. You're a human being, and are capable of good manners, and will be thought of better generally if you can stick to them.
I'm not using logic to back up good manners, since they're clearly social constructs that differ from one society to the next. In some places, I assume, wearing one's shoes inside is considered the height of disrespect. Obviously, actually taking with a mouthful of food is fairly impolite, but normally when eating a meal one does not spent the entire time chewing. There are occasional breaks for breath, during which some conversation might occur.
Recently I hapenned to be in a theatre, and the family next to ours had brought with them enough food to spend the entire time eating. The. Entire. Time. Constant intake of food. That they were also fairly obese isn't material, and could be coincidence, but good lord they made alot of noise over it. Are you really so hungry that you can't fast for a couple of hours during a movie?
Yes, I've noticed it. It's how they make money. That doesn't make sitting in the dark eating food out of a bag civilised.
A fully-fledged restaurant with movie screens, preventing you from being able to pay proper attention to either, is just as bad. Come on man, sit around a table and eat and talk - then watch a movie in relative silence (ok, laugh at the funny bits.... not something you'd want to do with food in your mouth). It seems pretty reasonable to me.
Except those people who died because they were unable to call for help, for instance. Cellphone technology is great - one day it'll seem weird to call a person's house, instead of calling a person. Well, it already does seem kinda weird. Phones tied to the wall are a bit rude too, you can't normally turn them off, or put them on silent, and people often feel obligated to answer even if they're in the middle of something else. Cellphones, on the other hand, give you alot more control over your availability. This is a good thing in all respects.
And Alicia Keyes is being far too precious about her not very remarkable music.
Why do people feel unable to watch a movie, and actually concentrate on what's going on, without feeling the need to eat continuously? Do not eat in the Cinema, ever. It's rude, and it's uncivilised. If you're hungry, eat beforehand. Or, even better, eat afterwards in a proper restaurant, and find yourself able to enjoy the film undistracted, and be able to talk about the film (or something else, if it turned out to be a bad film) over dinner.
Eating in the cinema is a bad habit that people need to get out of. My kids think I'm mean for denying them popcorn - and perhaps I am - but it really isn't something that should be socially acceptable.
Because if the fingerprint sensor is replaced with a malicious one at some repair shop somewhere, and the user sets the system up again in good faith, the phone is now back-doored, and can be broken by associates of the people that built the malicious sensor. It's about how much security you want - Apple believe that you want as close to 100% bulletproof security as can be provided with today's technology. This type of issue is one of the prices that you must pay as a consumer to enjoy that security, and if that price is too high, many other devices are available with much reduced levels of security. They're normally alot cheaper too.
If the phone didn't disable itself when the fingerprint sensor was replaced, then you'd be able to replace it with a fake sensor that always unlocked the phone for you. This would be a very significant security hole, and you can bet slashdot would be all up in arms about it - and probably suggesting the exactly pairing protocol that you're complaining about.
No, it's not. Microsoft baked in Internet Explorer until a lawsuit forced them to backtrack. Apple probably took some shortcuts when building these 'built in' apps, but they seem to have enabled their removal without anyone forcing them to, or even really asking all that hard.
Even if there were advanced civilizations on only 1% of all the planets, that would still be millions or more.
This is the kind of logic that the marketing department use to justify products. "Even if only 1% of the people in the world buy this, we'll be millionaires, and 1% is hardly any, we can't lose!".
One percent is just as much a plucked-out-of-the-air number as any. There's no particular justification for one percent of planets to host intelligent life, it could just as easily be one millionth of one percent, and then there would be hardly any.
Slashdot Mirror
designed to just piss everyone off because they can.
Well - it's designed to be cheaper and simpler to build for them. It's not designed to be servicable - we have been very used to having computers that we can build from components for years. We don't generally complain that we can't upgrade the RAM in a cellphone, but we sure moan about it in a laptop.
You can do everything with HTML5 that you can do with flash, other than easily disable it.
Clever of them, don't you think?
And then, in case you really didn't get it, they play "Where is my mind" slowly on a piano on the second-to-last episode.
RTK GNSS (not just GPS, but GPS, Glonass, Baidu and the english one whose name I forget), using virtual reference stations over a cell network, can give you centimetre precision at greater than 20Hz. They don't have that in a TomTom though.
It still doesn't exist. In the limit, it's zero.
It's not ALL THAT MATTERS, you clown. There's also justice (considered distinct from revenge, I should hope).
At what point has police militarization gone too far?
About twenty years ago?
and that is not the role of police anywhere within the United States of America
You might like for that to be the case, but from the outside it really does look that way.
Rubbish. You could build a drone today, equipped with a firearm, and software enough to detect and fire upon human targets.
And we do need to consider that our money is being spent on people who choose their disease, of their own free will. I have sympathy for them, because we all make mistakes, but it is a choice they made, and at some level they have to accept some responsibility for it and that it has reduced their standard of living.
A quintessentially American attitude. Drug addiction is well correlated with mental illness, many people find their own personal spiral in addiction and crime begins with self-medicating as they struggle with their day-to-day lives. Further, one could build hundreds of drug abuse treatment clinics for the money that's thrown around as part of the so-called 'War on Drugs'. To have a safe and functioning society, there are costs that must be paid. One of those is looking after people who have messed up. We don't let people die on the side of the road because they drove too fast, or paid insufficient attention, we put them in a hospital and patch them up. Same thing.
I think it's pretty likely that under half of the population want to leave, but that the young people of England were too lazy to vote. If you're going to have a referendum on something as important at leaving the EU, mandatory voting is surely essential to establish a mandate.
Technically, the amount of time it takes for the radio waves to reach the receiver is very short. However, I have never used a bluetooth device with less than 500ms of latency, which is entirely unacceptable for anything other than just listening to music. I hear that specialised low-latency bluetooth hardware exists, with an advertised latency of 32ms, which is ok, but still much more than your 5ms, and too much for live audio.
If he had written "Higher profits for airlines from more expensive flights, additional charges for telecommunications, freedom to take a big dump on the environment in the name of profits, and a few good wars to sell guns into", well those would have been things that benefits corporations first and foremost.
Even if the only thing the EU accomplishes is fewer wars, that's a good enough reason for it.
To be fair, micro USB does suck pretty hard.
I'd say that he was probably about right.
Haha. Nice to know I'm just as bad. You scoff your popcorn, I'm not going to stop you. But yes, why not be strict about such things? Eat dinner at the table, never in front of the television. Avoid stuffing your face in the cinema. Be polite. Put your knife and fork together after a meal. You're a human being, and are capable of good manners, and will be thought of better generally if you can stick to them.
I'm not using logic to back up good manners, since they're clearly social constructs that differ from one society to the next. In some places, I assume, wearing one's shoes inside is considered the height of disrespect. Obviously, actually taking with a mouthful of food is fairly impolite, but normally when eating a meal one does not spent the entire time chewing. There are occasional breaks for breath, during which some conversation might occur.
Recently I hapenned to be in a theatre, and the family next to ours had brought with them enough food to spend the entire time eating. The. Entire. Time. Constant intake of food. That they were also fairly obese isn't material, and could be coincidence, but good lord they made alot of noise over it. Are you really so hungry that you can't fast for a couple of hours during a movie?
Yes, I've noticed it. It's how they make money. That doesn't make sitting in the dark eating food out of a bag civilised.
A fully-fledged restaurant with movie screens, preventing you from being able to pay proper attention to either, is just as bad. Come on man, sit around a table and eat and talk - then watch a movie in relative silence (ok, laugh at the funny bits.... not something you'd want to do with food in your mouth). It seems pretty reasonable to me.
We all survived just fine.
Except those people who died because they were unable to call for help, for instance. Cellphone technology is great - one day it'll seem weird to call a person's house, instead of calling a person. Well, it already does seem kinda weird. Phones tied to the wall are a bit rude too, you can't normally turn them off, or put them on silent, and people often feel obligated to answer even if they're in the middle of something else. Cellphones, on the other hand, give you alot more control over your availability. This is a good thing in all respects.
And Alicia Keyes is being far too precious about her not very remarkable music.
Why do people feel unable to watch a movie, and actually concentrate on what's going on, without feeling the need to eat continuously? Do not eat in the Cinema, ever. It's rude, and it's uncivilised. If you're hungry, eat beforehand. Or, even better, eat afterwards in a proper restaurant, and find yourself able to enjoy the film undistracted, and be able to talk about the film (or something else, if it turned out to be a bad film) over dinner.
Eating in the cinema is a bad habit that people need to get out of. My kids think I'm mean for denying them popcorn - and perhaps I am - but it really isn't something that should be socially acceptable.
and security cannot be compromised by replacing the sensor.
Except by replacing the fingerprint sensor with a malicious one.
Because if the fingerprint sensor is replaced with a malicious one at some repair shop somewhere, and the user sets the system up again in good faith, the phone is now back-doored, and can be broken by associates of the people that built the malicious sensor. It's about how much security you want - Apple believe that you want as close to 100% bulletproof security as can be provided with today's technology. This type of issue is one of the prices that you must pay as a consumer to enjoy that security, and if that price is too high, many other devices are available with much reduced levels of security. They're normally alot cheaper too.
If the phone didn't disable itself when the fingerprint sensor was replaced, then you'd be able to replace it with a fake sensor that always unlocked the phone for you. This would be a very significant security hole, and you can bet slashdot would be all up in arms about it - and probably suggesting the exactly pairing protocol that you're complaining about.
Text is surprisingly resilient.
Surprisingly?. Someone hasn't been paying attention to the last five thousand years of human history.
No, it's not. Microsoft baked in Internet Explorer until a lawsuit forced them to backtrack. Apple probably took some shortcuts when building these 'built in' apps, but they seem to have enabled their removal without anyone forcing them to, or even really asking all that hard.
Even if there were advanced civilizations on only 1% of all the planets, that would still be millions or more.
This is the kind of logic that the marketing department use to justify products. "Even if only 1% of the people in the world buy this, we'll be millionaires, and 1% is hardly any, we can't lose!".
One percent is just as much a plucked-out-of-the-air number as any. There's no particular justification for one percent of planets to host intelligent life, it could just as easily be one millionth of one percent, and then there would be hardly any.