And of course, when a gay couple is joined by one of the many religious institutions (some christian, some not) who will happily perform marriages on any of God's children who love their partner, they will be "married" the exact same as the straight people who are married. Anyone who is not happy with that, that just tells me there are other motives involved.
Ok. So lets say in the perfect world you disable the device that was stolen. What's to prevent the thief from taking it apart and selling everything piece by piece on ebay? The digitizer, lcd, battery, frame, etc is all salvageable and can fetch a few hundred dollars. It's the electronic form of a chop shop.
I know. I mean, why require a key or electronic lock for your car? Someone could always come with a flatbed, pull it on, and chop-shop the car.
Or why have a law against murder? It won't stop 100% of all murders, so it's better to not even try.
(Yeah, I'm being snarky, but that was a truly idiotic complaint.)
The power adapter change is an interesting complaint, given how I've worked with three different Samsung laptops from three consecutive years which all needed different power adapters. Apple hangs on to connectors (like the old iPod/iPhone/iPad connecter) for far far longer than anyone else in the industry, and when they change they generally have a very functional reason (nowadays, usually size).
Round is tricky, but this is hardly Apple's first round device (remember the iMacs with a round base). Apple has always treated form as an equal to function. It's a refreshing change from the usual rush-to-the bottom, designed-by-idiot-wombats PC market.
Considering recent events, I bet that if the US passes one more gun control law, then the entire country will descend into a thousand years of tyranny and oppression. Thus I have proved that all gun laws are bad and unconstitutional.
The email list that came with the site was valued at over $2,000,000.
Yeah, a list of people gullible enough to believe the tripe that Ron Paul spouts would be very valuable to marketers.
It's fun watching the Paul fans running around trying to justify his actions. Much like Ayn Rand supporters justifying her actions. I mean, nobody's perfect, but to hear libertarians first heaping scorn upon people who use government services, and then go bawling to the government as soon as they need those services, is truly awesome. Welcome to the 47%!
You mean when Google stopped paying the Microsoft tax to provide Exchange services, and Microsoft decided not to implement CardDAV and CalDAV (despite helping create WebDAV) because they would get better PR if they could claim Google broke their phones?
That coupled with "zero tolerance" which equates to "no thinking by staff"
I agree, but some zero tolerance rules were put in place to avoid racism, where school official would harshly punish black kids while not punishing white kids for the same crimes.
You're missing the key issue in the BB gun case; the white boy (not girl) was clearly feeling threatened by his younger brother and thus merely stood his ground!
I think they're saying that anyone who mindlessly bashes the iPad is afraid of change. It is amazing how many frothing rants about X on slashdot are just a long way of yelling "I don't see what X is good for, so anyone who wants X is an idiot and a fashion-obsessed sheep."
You make a perfect point. I remember when "walkmen/boomboxes will destroy society since people will use them during movies and in public restrooms". Then the next generation (which never learns from the last one) cried "cell phones will destroy society since people will use them during movies and in public restrooms". Now the current generation (which never learns from the last one) is crying "wearable tech will destroy society since people will use them during movies and in restrooms." Somehow society will adapt, a few self-absorbed jerks will let the idiots crow "look, my prophesy has come true" while in general society adapts and the apocalypse fails to occur.
My only fear is that, since movie theaters are dying left and right, we need something else for idiots to obsess about. Restrooms should exist for a few more years, though, until Google Loo is released in 2017.
The NRA already defends the second amendment with far, far more money than the ACLU has. The ACLU defends the other nine amendments. Since you care about free speech I assume that you give as much money to the ACLU as the NRA. If not, well, you've shown exactly how much you care about free speech (on or off of airplanes).
But I agree that while I also like the complaint (and love the proposed remedies), this doesn't seem to be a civil liberty.
When 40% of your user base is on a 3 year old platform, you patch that platform. Google should do right by their customers and patch the old system versions because that's where their customers are.
I know, this is slashdot, but you can at least RTFS which states that carriers are not releasing any fixes for older devices (or, usually, newer devices). So your suggestion is that Google should produce patches which exactly zero people can install? Brilliant!
Your servers never need to reboot due to hardware failure or kernel updates? Your internet never goes down? Your power never goes down? Your DNS never gets hosed? You never have storms that knock down power and data lines? Sweet!
I run servers at my house too (for friends, non-commercially) and I'd guess that 100% of my users lose access to their email and web sites for ~8 hours a year, or about 3 9's of reliability. I bet that heads would roll at Google if they had that much unreliability.
I switched my personal mail off of my personal servers to a gmail-hosted domain before a three week trip to Europe, and see no reason to move it back. $10/month is chickenfeed compared to knowing that when an idiot crashes his car into a substation, I just switch from my computer to my cell phone and can still get my email.
And this is a governmental problem. Why are existing companies allowed to "derail" anyone who wants to compete with them?
I agree. When someone mugs me, I don't blame the mugger. I blame the police. Maybe we should put the police in prison?
While the government could do a lot better, let's point blame correctly. It takes two sides to sign an exclusivity contract; only blaming one side is odd. And since most cities had the option of either giving an exclusive contract or their citizens not getting cable, I sympathize with their dilemma.
A good solution is a build-out owned (and possibly run) by the city, which other ISPs can link into to sell their services. This rarely happens in the US since lobbyist dollars are common and very persuasive.
So you are saying that:
* cheap plans exist
* companies hide the existence of these plans
* people don't know about these plans and have no way to find out about these plans, and for some reason don't ask for these plans
And from this you decide that the people are the problem, not the companies? Sure, that makes perfect sense. In related news, it's my younger brother's fault that he keeps hitting himself.
Like rob here says, the ENTIRE PURPOSE is for Google to gather those ancillary images and sounds and sell ads to the highest bidder. You walk into a bar, what beer is advertized?
So if I wear these, I'll stop getting ads for Miller Lite and Bud, and start getting ads for Old Dominion Oak Barrel Stout? Where can I sign up?
Eliminating guns won't eliminate tragedy and mass murder, there's still chemicals, crazy cults (see Japan, Tokyo, Subways).
Eliminating smallpox and creating vaccines for the most deadly illnesses did not stop all deaths due to illness, so therefore vaccines are foolish and should never have been created? Airbags don't stop all deaths in cars so should not exist? I prefer a rational approach where the perfect solution does not stop good improvements, but you may think differently. (And chemical mass-murders are exceedingly difficult and rare; if we were to double their severity and halve gun-deaths then the world would be a fantastically better place).
Plus I'm confused about your word "eliminating". I have heard exactly nobody propose eliminating all guns, but I've seen that straw man brought up again and again. You will sound rather less insane if you debate the actual proposals rather than an imagined evil government imprisoning and torturing all people with gun permits. As far as I can tell, you are ruled by fear of your guns being taken away which is, well, crazy.
You make an excellent lack of point in your knee jerk rant. Odd that you refer to firearm owners as gun nuts, but if that is your preferred term then so be it.
It sounds like the GP's point was that a violent irrational person with a knife can hurt a person or two, but the victims can fight back or flee. That same person with a gun can cause much more harm. Given the number of wounds and deaths caused by firearms, this is not a theoretical exercise.
I await your carefully crafted and rational response, preferably one which addresses the argument rather than another frothing screed.
(It's gotta be annoying that year after year the constant prediction of US hyperinflation stubbornly refuses to come true. But look on the bright side: if time is infinite, you'll be right eventually.)
While it's tempting to recast the economy (something we cannot predict well) as energy (which we understand well these days), I'm dubious that the predictive abilities will be recast as well.
There are always single points of failure. Always. In this case, it was that x509 is poorly designed, but there are others.
The point of "the cloud" was never to have no single points of failure. It is to avoid any single points of failure it can, and hire smart people to avoid and fix the SPoFs it cannot, all at a far lower price than you could afford. And it works well (unless you choose to use an incompetent cloud provider). Most companies screw up certificate expirations at some point, then spend days rather than hours debugging and fixing the problem.
So you trade off an occasional screwup which you make yourself (and can try to avoid via effort, money, training) or n even more occasional screwup by your cloud provider (which you have little control over). It's a valid choice, and for those companies which will not pay for expert IT employees, a no brainer.
> Most I know are also completely okay with universal background checks since from what myself and others h
Now in many (most) states private individuals can sell a weapon without notification of transfer or a background check.
Wow, that system fails the Evil Overlord rule of "If an average six-year-old can see the flaw in that plan, do not implement it." I'd love to see stats on how many "private individuals" sell more guns than the average licensed dealer, but oh no, collecting such stats would be illegal. Go Team NRA!
Technically it can, legally it can't of course. In Canada we have a standard called Bringing the Justice system into Disrepute. That would be one of those instance, it's actually pretty serious. It's one of the very few charges that when laid will not only see you stripped of service, but can have you disbarred, or removed from the bench with remand to custody.
We need such rules to be better enforced in the US. The actions of police and prosecutors once they believe you are guilty are often disgraceful, but are rarely punished.
But no, such a list would be too long to be useful. Really, a better quality of court-appointed representation (and enough funding for same) would be another potential solution which would help solve both this and many other problems with the justice system.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with this.
And of course, when a gay couple is joined by one of the many religious institutions (some christian, some not) who will happily perform marriages on any of God's children who love their partner, they will be "married" the exact same as the straight people who are married. Anyone who is not happy with that, that just tells me there are other motives involved.
Ok. So lets say in the perfect world you disable the device that was stolen.
What's to prevent the thief from taking it apart and selling everything piece by piece on ebay? The digitizer, lcd, battery, frame, etc is all salvageable and can fetch a few hundred dollars. It's the electronic form of a chop shop.
I know. I mean, why require a key or electronic lock for your car? Someone could always come with a flatbed, pull it on, and chop-shop the car.
Or why have a law against murder? It won't stop 100% of all murders, so it's better to not even try.
(Yeah, I'm being snarky, but that was a truly idiotic complaint.)
The power adapter change is an interesting complaint, given how I've worked with three different Samsung laptops from three consecutive years which all needed different power adapters. Apple hangs on to connectors (like the old iPod/iPhone/iPad connecter) for far far longer than anyone else in the industry, and when they change they generally have a very functional reason (nowadays, usually size).
Round is tricky, but this is hardly Apple's first round device (remember the iMacs with a round base). Apple has always treated form as an equal to function. It's a refreshing change from the usual rush-to-the bottom, designed-by-idiot-wombats PC market.
Considering recent events, I bet that if the US passes one more gun control law, then the entire country will descend into a thousand years of tyranny and oppression. Thus I have proved that all gun laws are bad and unconstitutional.
Okay, your turn. This is fun!
I'm a free man, so mah GUN decides!
(Unless you have a bigger gun, then I'll go crying to the local government-formed organization. Boo hoo!)
The email list that came with the site was valued at over $2,000,000.
Yeah, a list of people gullible enough to believe the tripe that Ron Paul spouts would be very valuable to marketers.
It's fun watching the Paul fans running around trying to justify his actions. Much like Ayn Rand supporters justifying her actions. I mean, nobody's perfect, but to hear libertarians first heaping scorn upon people who use government services, and then go bawling to the government as soon as they need those services, is truly awesome. Welcome to the 47%!
You mean when Google stopped paying the Microsoft tax to provide Exchange services, and Microsoft decided not to implement CardDAV and CalDAV (despite helping create WebDAV) because they would get better PR if they could claim Google broke their phones?
Someone was playing political games, yes.
That coupled with "zero tolerance" which equates to "no thinking by staff"
I agree, but some zero tolerance rules were put in place to avoid racism, where school official would harshly punish black kids while not punishing white kids for the same crimes.
You're missing the key issue in the BB gun case; the white boy (not girl) was clearly feeling threatened by his younger brother and thus merely stood his ground!
I think they're saying that anyone who mindlessly bashes the iPad is afraid of change. It is amazing how many frothing rants about X on slashdot are just a long way of yelling "I don't see what X is good for, so anyone who wants X is an idiot and a fashion-obsessed sheep."
You make a perfect point. I remember when "walkmen/boomboxes will destroy society since people will use them during movies and in public restrooms". Then the next generation (which never learns from the last one) cried "cell phones will destroy society since people will use them during movies and in public restrooms". Now the current generation (which never learns from the last one) is crying "wearable tech will destroy society since people will use them during movies and in restrooms." Somehow society will adapt, a few self-absorbed jerks will let the idiots crow "look, my prophesy has come true" while in general society adapts and the apocalypse fails to occur.
My only fear is that, since movie theaters are dying left and right, we need something else for idiots to obsess about. Restrooms should exist for a few more years, though, until Google Loo is released in 2017.
The NRA already defends the second amendment with far, far more money than the ACLU has. The ACLU defends the other nine amendments. Since you care about free speech I assume that you give as much money to the ACLU as the NRA. If not, well, you've shown exactly how much you care about free speech (on or off of airplanes).
But I agree that while I also like the complaint (and love the proposed remedies), this doesn't seem to be a civil liberty.
When 40% of your user base is on a 3 year old platform, you patch that platform. Google should do right by their customers and patch the old system versions because that's where their customers are.
I know, this is slashdot, but you can at least RTFS which states that carriers are not releasing any fixes for older devices (or, usually, newer devices). So your suggestion is that Google should produce patches which exactly zero people can install? Brilliant!
Your servers never need to reboot due to hardware failure or kernel updates? Your internet never goes down? Your power never goes down? Your DNS never gets hosed? You never have storms that knock down power and data lines? Sweet!
I run servers at my house too (for friends, non-commercially) and I'd guess that 100% of my users lose access to their email and web sites for ~8 hours a year, or about 3 9's of reliability. I bet that heads would roll at Google if they had that much unreliability.
I switched my personal mail off of my personal servers to a gmail-hosted domain before a three week trip to Europe, and see no reason to move it back. $10/month is chickenfeed compared to knowing that when an idiot crashes his car into a substation, I just switch from my computer to my cell phone and can still get my email.
And this is a governmental problem. Why are existing companies allowed to "derail" anyone who wants to compete with them?
I agree. When someone mugs me, I don't blame the mugger. I blame the police. Maybe we should put the police in prison?
While the government could do a lot better, let's point blame correctly. It takes two sides to sign an exclusivity contract; only blaming one side is odd. And since most cities had the option of either giving an exclusive contract or their citizens not getting cable, I sympathize with their dilemma.
A good solution is a build-out owned (and possibly run) by the city, which other ISPs can link into to sell their services. This rarely happens in the US since lobbyist dollars are common and very persuasive.
So you are saying that:
* cheap plans exist
* companies hide the existence of these plans
* people don't know about these plans and have no way to find out about these plans, and for some reason don't ask for these plans
And from this you decide that the people are the problem, not the companies? Sure, that makes perfect sense. In related news, it's my younger brother's fault that he keeps hitting himself.
So it will sell poorly with 1% of users, and will only be popular with the remaining 99%? Truly a recipe for failure!
Like rob here says, the ENTIRE PURPOSE is for Google to gather those ancillary images and sounds and sell ads to the highest bidder. You walk into a bar, what beer is advertized?
So if I wear these, I'll stop getting ads for Miller Lite and Bud, and start getting ads for Old Dominion Oak Barrel Stout? Where can I sign up?
Eliminating guns won't eliminate tragedy and mass murder, there's still chemicals, crazy cults (see Japan, Tokyo, Subways).
Eliminating smallpox and creating vaccines for the most deadly illnesses did not stop all deaths due to illness, so therefore vaccines are foolish and should never have been created? Airbags don't stop all deaths in cars so should not exist? I prefer a rational approach where the perfect solution does not stop good improvements, but you may think differently. (And chemical mass-murders are exceedingly difficult and rare; if we were to double their severity and halve gun-deaths then the world would be a fantastically better place).
Plus I'm confused about your word "eliminating". I have heard exactly nobody propose eliminating all guns, but I've seen that straw man brought up again and again. You will sound rather less insane if you debate the actual proposals rather than an imagined evil government imprisoning and torturing all people with gun permits. As far as I can tell, you are ruled by fear of your guns being taken away which is, well, crazy.
You make an excellent lack of point in your knee jerk rant. Odd that you refer to firearm owners as gun nuts, but if that is your preferred term then so be it.
It sounds like the GP's point was that a violent irrational person with a knife can hurt a person or two, but the victims can fight back or flee. That same person with a gun can cause much more harm. Given the number of wounds and deaths caused by firearms, this is not a theoretical exercise.
I await your carefully crafted and rational response, preferably one which addresses the argument rather than another frothing screed.
(It's gotta be annoying that year after year the constant prediction of US hyperinflation stubbornly refuses to come true. But look on the bright side: if time is infinite, you'll be right eventually.)
While it's tempting to recast the economy (something we cannot predict well) as energy (which we understand well these days), I'm dubious that the predictive abilities will be recast as well.
There are always single points of failure. Always. In this case, it was that x509 is poorly designed, but there are others.
The point of "the cloud" was never to have no single points of failure. It is to avoid any single points of failure it can, and hire smart people to avoid and fix the SPoFs it cannot, all at a far lower price than you could afford. And it works well (unless you choose to use an incompetent cloud provider). Most companies screw up certificate expirations at some point, then spend days rather than hours debugging and fixing the problem.
So you trade off an occasional screwup which you make yourself (and can try to avoid via effort, money, training) or n even more occasional screwup by your cloud provider (which you have little control over). It's a valid choice, and for those companies which will not pay for expert IT employees, a no brainer.
For a chromebook, no. For Google Fiber, yes. And then you can buy a chromebook.
> Most I know are also completely okay with universal background checks since from what myself and others h
Now in many (most) states private individuals can sell a weapon without notification of transfer or a background check.
Wow, that system fails the Evil Overlord rule of "If an average six-year-old can see the flaw in that plan, do not implement it." I'd love to see stats on how many "private individuals" sell more guns than the average licensed dealer, but oh no, collecting such stats would be illegal. Go Team NRA!
Technically it can, legally it can't of course. In Canada we have a standard called Bringing the Justice system into Disrepute. That would be one of those instance, it's actually pretty serious. It's one of the very few charges that when laid will not only see you stripped of service, but can have you disbarred, or removed from the bench with remand to custody.
We need such rules to be better enforced in the US. The actions of police and prosecutors once they believe you are guilty are often disgraceful, but are rarely punished.
But no, such a list would be too long to be useful. Really, a better quality of court-appointed representation (and enough funding for same) would be another potential solution which would help solve both this and many other problems with the justice system.