Your mistake is looking at this from a "you" perspective. Frankly no one cares about what's good enough for YOU. I want 1000000000000000Tbps. It doesn't exist yet...but that's MY personal speed threshold and I'd be willing to pay the carrier who is closest to that number my dollars. So it matters, maybe not to you, but honestly you don't matter in the grand scheme of things. Neither do I really.
None of those you posted are just guys with peashooters. They were organizations that were funded, trained, and equipped by other nations. Taliban/ISIS were all US special forces/CIA trained with tons of money going into the country by way of a blind eye on the opium trade (towards Taliban, money network strategies learned there were applied to ISIS). The Viet Cong were supported heavily by the Soviet Union and China.
You've not given one semi-modern example of a people that was able to overpower a well organized/funded/equipped nationstate with ARs/AKs and pistols. It simply doesn't happen and your average retard Libertarian/Conservative doesn't have the capital to sustain any significant navy/air force or ballistic missile installation. This is basic fucking logic and I get tired of seeing moronic retards posting examples that are entirely apples and oranges because you have some dumbass belief that your fucking semi-automatic 30rnd AR15 is going to jack shit to say an Apache attack helicopter armed with hellfire missiles and a 50cal on the front. Quit being stupid. You buy guns for fun and to shoot robbers/"bad guys". You ain't overthrowing or fighting any sort of revolution. You never will. You cannot. You will 100% totally fail.
It'd be a war to help a US ally illegally invaded by Russia and as a check on recent Russian aggression including the use of nerve gas on British (an ally of ours) citizens. Your hostility and attempt to deflect the underlying reason for military action suggests you're politically motivated. Tell me, do you like Vodka and beating women and driving on your nation's sidewalks?
Huh. Is that why wages for the vast majority of the middle and lower class people have stagnated over the last 40some odd years while the value of the dollar has gone down?
> "intellectual property" is a crime scheme to get money without working for it.
Based on what? Are you saying that if I do the work of launching satellites, taking photographs, catalogue and index them, and then build the earth-based infrastructure to load and display them to end users while simultaneously building an interface that a user can then put origination and destination points and get accurate directions to those points that all of that is not considered work? I don't deserve to be paid? Pray tell, where do you live? I'll be taking your possessions - you didn't work for them. You didn't earn them in my eyes. You fucking retarded motherfucker.
> If Apple and other smartphone manufacturers were truly sincere about doing the right thing, they would make models with user replaceable batteries. Rather than shaving off another 0.5 mm from an already thin device
But that's the problem. You're conflating what YOU want with what the majority of consumers have proven they want. The frank matter is that probably 90+% of the market doesn't care about replacing batteries. Probably 80-90% of the market WANTS to replace their phone each year and why is that? The phone has become a status symbol. The general public WANTS to be the guy with the latest and greatest phone with all of the latest snapinstagramvr-cool feature. Personally I don't mind paying, what, $80 for a new battery from Apple. Why? Because I don't have to deal with it AND I get a thinner device. But hell I paid for the extended Apple Care plan and that makes it possible for me to NOT care and by the time the phone comes out of warranty in 2 years, it'll be time for an upgrade (for me) anyways. And with the Apple upgrade plan I can upgrade next year if I want. I (and really anyone else) has a ton of options - user replaceable batteries just don't serve me/us.
Why? I have money. I work for a living in the IT sector and not even I care to do this kind of crap anymore. It's not *worth* my time. It's limited and valuable and I'm hardly gaming these days. I can pay Apple money, get a well supported *NIX system, get access to certain applications (like MS Office) that don't run well on Linux, and if something breaks I can take it in to a store and get it fixed. I have the Applecare plan too so if some liquid gets spilled - no biggie. A few bucks and it's fixed. Peace of mind. I no longer care to go out and research whole desktop builds or go scouring the web for that ONE compatible motherboard that works with the rest of my laptop components. That's probably what 80-85% of the population does.
And anything extra would be done with hobby machines and definitely not my main one. Ones whom I can afford to leave in a dust pile until I have the inclination to pick back up the work.
Why are you buying an appliance at an "electronics" store? Why not go to an actual appliance store who specifically staff people who actually know more information beyond the marketing pamphlet they've memorized about any specific appliance they stock?
Generally I assume it's because most people bought online. And online they sold out within 30 seconds and this included ship times of 3+ weeks out from the desired "day 1" ship day. Personally I like my iPhone and so far, unlike my Samsung 7 Edge, it hasn't gotten slower and slower with each update. And each update isn't making weird shit bug out. Maybe it's not a performance powerhouse - I don't know, I don't play video games on a tiny phone. That's what god gave us computers and consoles for.
Because it's FreeBSD. They're not a real player and they can be butthurt, but gosh darn it I rolled my own experimental kernel and I sure wasn't notified either.
>... then at least people who really care could go about fixing things themselves, and the rest of you consumer nitwits could at least benefit from their hard work, too.
I wasn't going to go into the whole concept of "if you're good at something, never do it for free." There's no financial incentive to just go out and analyze FOSS out of the kindness of one's heart.
> But... this statement is self defeating! In the first half you say the source code doesn't help security but then in the next breath you say it could if it could be inspected... but that's what it means to have the source code: you can inspect it! Do you even hear yourself?!
What's being said - clearly you have problems with basic reading comprehension - is that FOSS isn't inherently better. Why? Because while you could inspect the source, the reality is that it's just not being done. Hell back in Feb Linux just closed an 11 year old security flaw. It took 11 years. That was only a few months after CVE-2016-5195 which was present for 9 years itself. The argument I'm making is that FOSS isn't inherently more security because the source code is visible BECAUSE there's not enough seriously investment in security-minded code review. Holy moley - are you stupid or something? None of this is hard to understand and you shouldn't have to be told it.
Right, because FOSS has never had 20 year old bugs/security flaws. You cannot just implicitly trust ANY software unless YOU validate it. The problem is that 99.999999% of the population has no idea how to analyze software for security flaws. You either have to inherently distrust everything and base your technology around the concepts of lack of trust (such as the devs of Qubes do) or you accept the risk.
Having the source code doesn't make an application anymore trustworthy from a security standpoint, unless you can use that source code to prove the software is secure. 99.999999% of FOSS doesn't do that.
They "respectfully disagree" with the ASA's claim that the ad is misleading in its claim of being a "scientifically proven matching system" (it actually uses that phrase on the ad), but they're unable to show any documentation that their claim is truthful? So they're respectfully disagreeing to being called out for lying when they're outright lying?
I switched back in I think May to an iPhone SE. It was my first Apple product and I switched because I grew pissed at the battery sucking, slow as shit Samsung 7 Edge. I bought that device on launch day with my wife getting one as well. For the first 3 months it was great, but as updates came down the pipeline the phone slowed down. Not even a year later it couldn't hold a charge through a full day. Yes I had Outlook installed, yes apps ran. It was still unacceptable. There were tons and tons of posts on XDA and the subreddits for the S7E that confirmed - Samsung's updates broke this shit.
So when I got my iPhone SE, I was surprised at how fluid and smooth it felt. The setup process was far easier and shit really did work. I received a handful of updates and my battery life not got impacted, my phone never seemed to slow down. I bought a Macbook Pro - I'd always been interested in a *NIX device with good hardware support/setup. I got AirPods, I got an Apple TV, Apple Watch Series 3, and now I have an iPhone X. All of my stuff is updated to the latest and greatest releases. No problems have been found. I haven't had these bugs - sure the UI for the Apple TV seems a bit stupid, but it works. And pairing my stuff together - making it work seamlessly has been a treat.
This isn't meant to be a cheap shot, but it's reflective of my experiences. Look, I love Linux - I loved Ubuntu and Fedora. But I wanted a *NIX environment that was nice to use when I wanted it to be nice - and able to do heavy lifting when I wanted to get dirty. I used to love Android's customization, but as I hit into my 30s, got married, got a job, have plenty of disposable income, and left college I found I don't have time to piss around. I find I just want to spend money and not worry about the details. Now this article proclaims Apple is doing really shitty at that - and indeed for enterprises they are. For me - no problem. Maybe I'm special or unique in my experiences, but I'll admit I'm a believer.
> Please, tell me friend, if allowing cities to grow upwards isn't the solution to the problems that are impoverishing the people of the valley and is such a truly awful idea then what might a better one be?
I already told you. Quit requiring offices for workers to come into. WFH. That opens up a lot of commercial land that can be subsequently built with houses. Google, for instance, doesn't require such a large campus. Nor Apple. That land could easily be re-purposed into housing. Additionally I suggested that Silicon Valley spread out to a further distance - increase its footprint. And perhaps if the lesser paying McDonald's and grocery stores and the like paid a living wage, their employees would not be feeling the pinch so much. A large part of this is employers who setup business in extremely high cost of living areas and want to pay Midwest salaries. It's not sustainable and it's unfair to remove their role in causing this problem.
> Over regulation by government is choking these people.
> the region had been allowed to grow like our current major cities life would be far better for the bottom half of that region.
As you probably don't seem to have noticed: this is local government. This IS what the people want...and what - you wish to deny them their voice? You're mad because the region swings a different way? The simple fact is that people who live in the Valley area don't want it to look like NYC or Chicago. They like their views and nature areas.
> We are talking about very simple supply and demand concepts here
You're trying to simplify municipal planning - specifically housing planning - to simple supply and demand? You're right - your brain isn't tiny, it's non-existent. If you can't acknowledge that there are other concepts/concerns/factors that enter into housing construction, especially with your stupid ass 20 story tower statement, then you're one of the dumbest people I've ever met.
> You speak like some one who either still lives with their parents or rolled from parents to parents funding college to nice job with no concept of what real labor means for a lot of people.
I'm from a farming family from the Midwest. I moved out at 18. If you're talking manual labor son I've done and seen more than my fair share.
> It makes me sick that so many valley residents are willing to vote against proper growth while looking in the eye the people who sell them their food who live four families per single family home just to make things work. This is the reality of Silicon Valley and is increasingly the reality of other Leftist communities who find their affluent partners are no better than far right conservatives.
Chief, those valley residents feel the housing pinch as much as anyone. Secondly I was arguing that your proposed solution of building nothing but 20 story tall skyscrapers goes against what ANY Valley resident wants. Why? The view, the atmosphere, the fact that the city isn't choking like Manhattan is? You've yet to propose anything other than your 20 story skyscraper metropolis. My concept would actually result in more land being develop-able into apartment complexes that don't need to span 20 stories tall.
Communities vote these people in and by the laws of Republics they're getting what they want. You can disagree with it, but the frank matter is that there are great reasons to NOT want 200000 20 story buildings. Manhattan isn't a "beautiful" city in the same way San Jose or Cupertino is. Does this solve the housing problem? No - but on the same token a lot of their population boom happened very, very quickly and it makes sense (considering the fallout of the last tech bubble) that people don't want to build massive buildings only for a single pop to empty most of them out.
The solution? I don't know, perhaps work on spreading out Silicon Valley across a larger area. Embrace work-from-home strategies - because in this day and age there's no reason to require an office for ANY technical job and data centers don't need to be 20 stories tall. I know, I know, this doesn't fit your liberal bashing narrative and god forbid any solution other than BUILD MASSIVE SKYSCRAPERS be viable in your tiny little brain.
> By and large, it's older and more wealthy than the Android customer base.It's less tech savvy...
Or even some of us who simply want a smartphone to work - who don't really do much in the way of "configuration". Plenty of tech savvy people use iPhones an Apple products simply because the integration of Apple's walled garden is in and of itself very, very good. I also work supporting other people all day long and sometimes when I come home I just want to do a bit of coding and not have to worry about some sort of configuration setting blowing my device's performance.
> Also, Samsung Pay wouldn't necessarily register as a contactless transaction since it can also mimic the magnetic stripe (in addition to doing the NFC).
3 years ago I'd have sided with you and stated MST is all the rage.But with the credit card companies shifting burden off of them in exchange for chip cards. it changed the landscape. Most places that take the chip have an NFC terminal as well.
Yes, yes, DOS and Windows 95 were the glorious days of security. The Blackberry was unhackable and IE 6 was teh gratest web browber ever!! Napster still lives on in my heart.
Slashdot Mirror
I can go to their coverage maps and see the difference.
Your mistake is looking at this from a "you" perspective. Frankly no one cares about what's good enough for YOU. I want 1000000000000000Tbps. It doesn't exist yet...but that's MY personal speed threshold and I'd be willing to pay the carrier who is closest to that number my dollars. So it matters, maybe not to you, but honestly you don't matter in the grand scheme of things. Neither do I really.
It's also coverage. T-Mobile has poor coverage in terms of sq miles covered. Verizon wins on both speed and sq miles covered.
None of those you posted are just guys with peashooters. They were organizations that were funded, trained, and equipped by other nations. Taliban/ISIS were all US special forces/CIA trained with tons of money going into the country by way of a blind eye on the opium trade (towards Taliban, money network strategies learned there were applied to ISIS). The Viet Cong were supported heavily by the Soviet Union and China.
You've not given one semi-modern example of a people that was able to overpower a well organized/funded/equipped nationstate with ARs/AKs and pistols. It simply doesn't happen and your average retard Libertarian/Conservative doesn't have the capital to sustain any significant navy/air force or ballistic missile installation. This is basic fucking logic and I get tired of seeing moronic retards posting examples that are entirely apples and oranges because you have some dumbass belief that your fucking semi-automatic 30rnd AR15 is going to jack shit to say an Apache attack helicopter armed with hellfire missiles and a 50cal on the front. Quit being stupid. You buy guns for fun and to shoot robbers/"bad guys". You ain't overthrowing or fighting any sort of revolution. You never will. You cannot. You will 100% totally fail.
It'd be a war to help a US ally illegally invaded by Russia and as a check on recent Russian aggression including the use of nerve gas on British (an ally of ours) citizens. Your hostility and attempt to deflect the underlying reason for military action suggests you're politically motivated. Tell me, do you like Vodka and beating women and driving on your nation's sidewalks?
Huh. Is that why wages for the vast majority of the middle and lower class people have stagnated over the last 40some odd years while the value of the dollar has gone down?
> "intellectual property" is a crime scheme to get money without working for it.
Based on what? Are you saying that if I do the work of launching satellites, taking photographs, catalogue and index them, and then build the earth-based infrastructure to load and display them to end users while simultaneously building an interface that a user can then put origination and destination points and get accurate directions to those points that all of that is not considered work? I don't deserve to be paid? Pray tell, where do you live? I'll be taking your possessions - you didn't work for them. You didn't earn them in my eyes. You fucking retarded motherfucker.
> If Apple and other smartphone manufacturers were truly sincere about doing the right thing, they would make models with user replaceable batteries. Rather than shaving off another 0.5 mm from an already thin device
But that's the problem. You're conflating what YOU want with what the majority of consumers have proven they want. The frank matter is that probably 90+% of the market doesn't care about replacing batteries. Probably 80-90% of the market WANTS to replace their phone each year and why is that? The phone has become a status symbol. The general public WANTS to be the guy with the latest and greatest phone with all of the latest snapinstagramvr-cool feature. Personally I don't mind paying, what, $80 for a new battery from Apple. Why? Because I don't have to deal with it AND I get a thinner device. But hell I paid for the extended Apple Care plan and that makes it possible for me to NOT care and by the time the phone comes out of warranty in 2 years, it'll be time for an upgrade (for me) anyways. And with the Apple upgrade plan I can upgrade next year if I want. I (and really anyone else) has a ton of options - user replaceable batteries just don't serve me/us.
Why? I have money. I work for a living in the IT sector and not even I care to do this kind of crap anymore. It's not *worth* my time. It's limited and valuable and I'm hardly gaming these days. I can pay Apple money, get a well supported *NIX system, get access to certain applications (like MS Office) that don't run well on Linux, and if something breaks I can take it in to a store and get it fixed. I have the Applecare plan too so if some liquid gets spilled - no biggie. A few bucks and it's fixed. Peace of mind. I no longer care to go out and research whole desktop builds or go scouring the web for that ONE compatible motherboard that works with the rest of my laptop components. That's probably what 80-85% of the population does.
And anything extra would be done with hobby machines and definitely not my main one. Ones whom I can afford to leave in a dust pile until I have the inclination to pick back up the work.
Why are you buying an appliance at an "electronics" store? Why not go to an actual appliance store who specifically staff people who actually know more information beyond the marketing pamphlet they've memorized about any specific appliance they stock?
Generally I assume it's because most people bought online. And online they sold out within 30 seconds and this included ship times of 3+ weeks out from the desired "day 1" ship day. Personally I like my iPhone and so far, unlike my Samsung 7 Edge, it hasn't gotten slower and slower with each update. And each update isn't making weird shit bug out. Maybe it's not a performance powerhouse - I don't know, I don't play video games on a tiny phone. That's what god gave us computers and consoles for.
Because it's FreeBSD. They're not a real player and they can be butthurt, but gosh darn it I rolled my own experimental kernel and I sure wasn't notified either.
> Holy moley! Are you low on sleep or are you illiterate or both?
... then at least people who really care could go about fixing things themselves, and the rest of you consumer nitwits could at least benefit from their hard work, too.
Take your own advice, chief: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.c...
>
I wasn't going to go into the whole concept of "if you're good at something, never do it for free." There's no financial incentive to just go out and analyze FOSS out of the kindness of one's heart.
> But... this statement is self defeating! In the first half you say the source code doesn't help security but then in the next breath you say it could if it could be inspected... but that's what it means to have the source code: you can inspect it! Do you even hear yourself?!
What's being said - clearly you have problems with basic reading comprehension - is that FOSS isn't inherently better. Why? Because while you could inspect the source, the reality is that it's just not being done. Hell back in Feb Linux just closed an 11 year old security flaw. It took 11 years. That was only a few months after CVE-2016-5195 which was present for 9 years itself. The argument I'm making is that FOSS isn't inherently more security because the source code is visible BECAUSE there's not enough seriously investment in security-minded code review. Holy moley - are you stupid or something? None of this is hard to understand and you shouldn't have to be told it.
Right, because FOSS has never had 20 year old bugs/security flaws. You cannot just implicitly trust ANY software unless YOU validate it. The problem is that 99.999999% of the population has no idea how to analyze software for security flaws. You either have to inherently distrust everything and base your technology around the concepts of lack of trust (such as the devs of Qubes do) or you accept the risk.
Having the source code doesn't make an application anymore trustworthy from a security standpoint, unless you can use that source code to prove the software is secure. 99.999999% of FOSS doesn't do that.
They "respectfully disagree" with the ASA's claim that the ad is misleading in its claim of being a "scientifically proven matching system" (it actually uses that phrase on the ad), but they're unable to show any documentation that their claim is truthful? So they're respectfully disagreeing to being called out for lying when they're outright lying?
You - you cared enough to comment. Thank you for caring.
I switched back in I think May to an iPhone SE. It was my first Apple product and I switched because I grew pissed at the battery sucking, slow as shit Samsung 7 Edge. I bought that device on launch day with my wife getting one as well. For the first 3 months it was great, but as updates came down the pipeline the phone slowed down. Not even a year later it couldn't hold a charge through a full day. Yes I had Outlook installed, yes apps ran. It was still unacceptable. There were tons and tons of posts on XDA and the subreddits for the S7E that confirmed - Samsung's updates broke this shit.
So when I got my iPhone SE, I was surprised at how fluid and smooth it felt. The setup process was far easier and shit really did work. I received a handful of updates and my battery life not got impacted, my phone never seemed to slow down. I bought a Macbook Pro - I'd always been interested in a *NIX device with good hardware support/setup. I got AirPods, I got an Apple TV, Apple Watch Series 3, and now I have an iPhone X. All of my stuff is updated to the latest and greatest releases. No problems have been found. I haven't had these bugs - sure the UI for the Apple TV seems a bit stupid, but it works. And pairing my stuff together - making it work seamlessly has been a treat.
This isn't meant to be a cheap shot, but it's reflective of my experiences. Look, I love Linux - I loved Ubuntu and Fedora. But I wanted a *NIX environment that was nice to use when I wanted it to be nice - and able to do heavy lifting when I wanted to get dirty. I used to love Android's customization, but as I hit into my 30s, got married, got a job, have plenty of disposable income, and left college I found I don't have time to piss around. I find I just want to spend money and not worry about the details. Now this article proclaims Apple is doing really shitty at that - and indeed for enterprises they are. For me - no problem. Maybe I'm special or unique in my experiences, but I'll admit I'm a believer.
Republican snowflakes melt at mildly inflammatory things.
> Please, tell me friend, if allowing cities to grow upwards isn't the solution to the problems that are impoverishing the people of the valley and is such a truly awful idea then what might a better one be?
I already told you. Quit requiring offices for workers to come into. WFH. That opens up a lot of commercial land that can be subsequently built with houses. Google, for instance, doesn't require such a large campus. Nor Apple. That land could easily be re-purposed into housing. Additionally I suggested that Silicon Valley spread out to a further distance - increase its footprint. And perhaps if the lesser paying McDonald's and grocery stores and the like paid a living wage, their employees would not be feeling the pinch so much. A large part of this is employers who setup business in extremely high cost of living areas and want to pay Midwest salaries. It's not sustainable and it's unfair to remove their role in causing this problem.
> Over regulation by government is choking these people.
> the region had been allowed to grow like our current major cities life would be far better for the bottom half of that region.
As you probably don't seem to have noticed: this is local government. This IS what the people want...and what - you wish to deny them their voice? You're mad because the region swings a different way? The simple fact is that people who live in the Valley area don't want it to look like NYC or Chicago. They like their views and nature areas.
> We are talking about very simple supply and demand concepts here
You're trying to simplify municipal planning - specifically housing planning - to simple supply and demand? You're right - your brain isn't tiny, it's non-existent. If you can't acknowledge that there are other concepts/concerns/factors that enter into housing construction, especially with your stupid ass 20 story tower statement, then you're one of the dumbest people I've ever met.
> You speak like some one who either still lives with their parents or rolled from parents to parents funding college to nice job with no concept of what real labor means for a lot of people.
I'm from a farming family from the Midwest. I moved out at 18. If you're talking manual labor son I've done and seen more than my fair share.
> It makes me sick that so many valley residents are willing to vote against proper growth while looking in the eye the people who sell them their food who live four families per single family home just to make things work. This is the reality of Silicon Valley and is increasingly the reality of other Leftist communities who find their affluent partners are no better than far right conservatives.
Chief, those valley residents feel the housing pinch as much as anyone. Secondly I was arguing that your proposed solution of building nothing but 20 story tall skyscrapers goes against what ANY Valley resident wants. Why? The view, the atmosphere, the fact that the city isn't choking like Manhattan is? You've yet to propose anything other than your 20 story skyscraper metropolis. My concept would actually result in more land being develop-able into apartment complexes that don't need to span 20 stories tall.
Communities vote these people in and by the laws of Republics they're getting what they want. You can disagree with it, but the frank matter is that there are great reasons to NOT want 200000 20 story buildings. Manhattan isn't a "beautiful" city in the same way San Jose or Cupertino is. Does this solve the housing problem? No - but on the same token a lot of their population boom happened very, very quickly and it makes sense (considering the fallout of the last tech bubble) that people don't want to build massive buildings only for a single pop to empty most of them out.
The solution? I don't know, perhaps work on spreading out Silicon Valley across a larger area. Embrace work-from-home strategies - because in this day and age there's no reason to require an office for ANY technical job and data centers don't need to be 20 stories tall. I know, I know, this doesn't fit your liberal bashing narrative and god forbid any solution other than BUILD MASSIVE SKYSCRAPERS be viable in your tiny little brain.
> By and large, it's older and more wealthy than the Android customer base.It's less tech savvy...
Or even some of us who simply want a smartphone to work - who don't really do much in the way of "configuration". Plenty of tech savvy people use iPhones an Apple products simply because the integration of Apple's walled garden is in and of itself very, very good. I also work supporting other people all day long and sometimes when I come home I just want to do a bit of coding and not have to worry about some sort of configuration setting blowing my device's performance.
Yes, but why would you want an Apple Watch and not Apple's ecosystem?
> Also, Samsung Pay wouldn't necessarily register as a contactless transaction since it can also mimic the magnetic stripe (in addition to doing the NFC).
3 years ago I'd have sided with you and stated MST is all the rage.But with the credit card companies shifting burden off of them in exchange for chip cards. it changed the landscape. Most places that take the chip have an NFC terminal as well.
Yes, yes, DOS and Windows 95 were the glorious days of security. The Blackberry was unhackable and IE 6 was teh gratest web browber ever!! Napster still lives on in my heart.