You're both quite off the mark. He was a pretty awesome guy, and you shouldn't let the bullshit that Mittens pulls reflect on other players. He wasn't always in goonswarm.
All of the things you have mentioned are not censorship, but speech and visual actions which result in consequences. This is not the same as censorship, as you would have to have already put that material out into the world to be deemed in violation. This implies censorship has failed to prevent the dissemination of this material, game over.
So in your opinion you should be allowed to shout fire in a crowded theater, too?
Yes, yes you should. There's nothing to say you can't be charged with inciting a riot or reckless endangerment, but at the same time, they shouldn't be able to arrest you for the speech alone.
Basically, you're saying you think censorship is valid in some circumstances? Such as what? Anti-muslim hate videos? Electoral accusations? Videos that disagree with the state's point of view?
Who gets to decide these circumstances? The president, the king, you?
Can we bring back the guillotine and have a simultaneous American-Russian Revolution in which the people of both countries rise up against their own Ruling Class or Bourgoise. Nothing like blood in the streets to keep the bureaucrats in check.
Only if we can add China to that list. Seriously, fuck China.
Seriously, just use Sound Forge. It's cheaper and works better, on all versions of Windows. There is a good reason why things become 'industry standards'.
What money does it cost them? I still use a 7-year-old install disc, and download manual updates for offline machines. It's a little slower, but the only cost on MS's end is keeping that server turned on. Given that MS has one of the biggest web data presences, I hardly think keeping the XP updates on their update server(instead of just deleting a few entries on their end and saying 'not supported') is so terribly costly for them. I don't even think the automatic update server(if it's not the same server) costs them that much more - it just fields requests from the update program instead of a web browser - since I'm pretty sure it is based on IE at its core.
I would wager it will cost them MORE to phase out XP than it would to just stop producing new updates and leave it at whatever its end-of-life state is forever. If a user runs into a problem that can't be solved by XP, then and only then is it time to upsell them to a new version of the OS.
Microsoft should do a "Windows Classic" which is XP re-branded, and sell it as a subscription to finance future patches.
The only thing more evil than forced upgrades in the world of OS developers would be subscription-based OS. That right there is the biggest "fuck you, I'm using linux"-causing proposition I have ever heard. It is quite literally charging me over and over again for something I already purchased, for no added value whatsoever.
How about instead of charging a monthly fee for something I bought and paid for a decade ago, they just leave it alone? I don't require MS to support my XP install. I use XP because I like it, and I don't WANT to switch to 7 (don't need any of the features, and it has a much higher overhead on my older hardware). I have a 7 license, I just don't use it. I don't need Aero or more than a few gigs of RAM. I don't need advanced graphics shaders, which even game developers are not jumping on yet. Just let me use my computer in peace without trying to tell me what to do with it.
If MS really thinks they are going to corral people into a new OS by limiting browser access, I think they severely overestimate their browser's use on their machines, and have never heard of little things like Firefox and Chrome.
Fortunately, for those of us who only make less-complex software that isn't hardware dependent for these devices, we can just spend ~10 minutes recompiling for a new Android OS. This easily keeps a compatible copy of our app available for each version of Android, regardless of what the user chooses for their home device. My phone still runs Android 2.2, and I have no problems with apps.
They are not experimenting, they are taking Android, making it not compatible with Android apps, and then advertising it as Android. That is extremely harmful to the product and system image Google has spent so long developing, and is basically stealing Google's work to compete with Google.
If they want to release their fork of the code and a devkit for app developers to be able to make 'other android' compatible software, then they're experimenting.
So, basically, they are just stealing the concept and backbone of Android and molding it into their own competing product...
And this surprises anyone coming from China...how? Is it really that surprising from the plagiarism capital of the world?
China's economy is based in large part on copying and reselling other entities' IP for a lot less with far less quality in the physical products offered. The words "cheap plastic Chinese knockoff" come to mind.
Making Facebook exclusively a teenaged time waste instead of giving it a single redeeming quality for business or professionals was probably a bigger mistake. When the fad ends, Facebook will inevitably go the way of MySpace.
Everytime I think of that 'developers, developers, developers' video I crack up.
But...developers? It's Android. It's open source. Anyone who wants to develop, can develop for it. Without cert and months of acceptance testing by Google.
Success of the platform? It just surpassed iOS as the most used mobile OS. It has already started 'killing' the iPad, and will likely continue to do so unless Apple comes out with something significantly new or innovative to re-spike their sales. I don't think another iteration of the same old shit is going to work this time.
It's sort of dumb to say "Don't use this awesome new piece of technology because they bundled something I dislike with it". Just root it and install a ROM without the ads, problem solved at the cost of about an hour of time. The price is already exceedingly low for the product, just don't use it how they intended and all will be balanced and right in the world.
it's trivial to root Nexus devices and subsequently install ad-blockers across all applications. The same can't be said for all of Amazon's devices
Yes it can. Just to prove it, here goes: "It is trivial to root Amazon devices". I have rooted nearly every kindle since the first, and never once did it give me any significant trouble(onoes, folder access permissions, PH34R!). Most of them I could do with a clever file copied over to book storage, or using a specialized app/bin file combo on the newer ones(BurritoRoot/FireFireFire FTFW).
There is simply no reason to pay Amazon or complain about these ads, because an ad-free device with even more capabilities than it ships with is inevitably only a google search or two and about an hour of your time away. It may not be available the day the new product drops, but it always comes along.
We'll have to jailbreak our devices with illicit ad-blocking software.
It's Android - it is free and open-source. There is nothing illicit about 'jailbreaking' (which won't alone fix this issue - unless you're smart and just use a different ROM like CyanogenMod). You could compile your own version from scratch and it would run just fine, and it would never even have heard about these ads unless you told it. There is nothing inherently ad-based about the hardware, other than Amazon's flawed business model directed at the use-as-intended consumer market.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, clearly Apple is doing everything right and Microsoft has no idea. That's why the market share is so in favor of Apple over Microsoft.
http://www.bgr.com/2012/09/03/windows-os-x-market-share-august-2012/
Congratulations, they passed the one version of Windows even Microsoft can't recommend to anyone.
And this surprises you coming from a Gawker site, why? They wouldn't know real original reporting if it took down their site.
You're both quite off the mark. He was a pretty awesome guy, and you shouldn't let the bullshit that Mittens pulls reflect on other players. He wasn't always in goonswarm.
I flew with him several times, over many years, both with and against him. He was a good guy, even when he was the bad guy.
May his soul be free to visit every corner of space for real.
All of the things you have mentioned are not censorship, but speech and visual actions which result in consequences. This is not the same as censorship, as you would have to have already put that material out into the world to be deemed in violation. This implies censorship has failed to prevent the dissemination of this material, game over.
So in your opinion you should be allowed to shout fire in a crowded theater, too?
Yes, yes you should. There's nothing to say you can't be charged with inciting a riot or reckless endangerment, but at the same time, they shouldn't be able to arrest you for the speech alone.
Basically, you're saying you think censorship is valid in some circumstances? Such as what? Anti-muslim hate videos? Electoral accusations? Videos that disagree with the state's point of view?
Who gets to decide these circumstances? The president, the king, you?
Sounds like a dictatorship to me.
I'm just thinking of all the social benefits of this.
Less employes, more automation, and somehow it costs MORE with LESS effort on their part.
Seems legit. Score another one for Medi*** reform. Wake me up when they actually do something about campaign financing.
Can we bring back the guillotine and have a simultaneous American-Russian Revolution in which the people of both countries rise up against their own Ruling Class or Bourgoise. Nothing like blood in the streets to keep the bureaucrats in check.
Only if we can add China to that list. Seriously, fuck China.
Adobe Audition1 is a great product!
I would mod you funny for that one.
Seriously, just use Sound Forge. It's cheaper and works better, on all versions of Windows. There is a good reason why things become 'industry standards'.
What money does it cost them? I still use a 7-year-old install disc, and download manual updates for offline machines. It's a little slower, but the only cost on MS's end is keeping that server turned on. Given that MS has one of the biggest web data presences, I hardly think keeping the XP updates on their update server(instead of just deleting a few entries on their end and saying 'not supported') is so terribly costly for them. I don't even think the automatic update server(if it's not the same server) costs them that much more - it just fields requests from the update program instead of a web browser - since I'm pretty sure it is based on IE at its core.
I would wager it will cost them MORE to phase out XP than it would to just stop producing new updates and leave it at whatever its end-of-life state is forever. If a user runs into a problem that can't be solved by XP, then and only then is it time to upsell them to a new version of the OS.
Microsoft should do a "Windows Classic" which is XP re-branded, and sell it as a subscription to finance future patches.
The only thing more evil than forced upgrades in the world of OS developers would be subscription-based OS. That right there is the biggest "fuck you, I'm using linux"-causing proposition I have ever heard. It is quite literally charging me over and over again for something I already purchased, for no added value whatsoever.
How about instead of charging a monthly fee for something I bought and paid for a decade ago, they just leave it alone? I don't require MS to support my XP install. I use XP because I like it, and I don't WANT to switch to 7 (don't need any of the features, and it has a much higher overhead on my older hardware). I have a 7 license, I just don't use it. I don't need Aero or more than a few gigs of RAM. I don't need advanced graphics shaders, which even game developers are not jumping on yet. Just let me use my computer in peace without trying to tell me what to do with it.
If MS really thinks they are going to corral people into a new OS by limiting browser access, I think they severely overestimate their browser's use on their machines, and have never heard of little things like Firefox and Chrome.
Fortunately, for those of us who only make less-complex software that isn't hardware dependent for these devices, we can just spend ~10 minutes recompiling for a new Android OS. This easily keeps a compatible copy of our app available for each version of Android, regardless of what the user chooses for their home device. My phone still runs Android 2.2, and I have no problems with apps.
They are not experimenting, they are taking Android, making it not compatible with Android apps, and then advertising it as Android. That is extremely harmful to the product and system image Google has spent so long developing, and is basically stealing Google's work to compete with Google.
If they want to release their fork of the code and a devkit for app developers to be able to make 'other android' compatible software, then they're experimenting.
So, basically, they are just stealing the concept and backbone of Android and molding it into their own competing product...
And this surprises anyone coming from China...how? Is it really that surprising from the plagiarism capital of the world?
China's economy is based in large part on copying and reselling other entities' IP for a lot less with far less quality in the physical products offered. The words "cheap plastic Chinese knockoff" come to mind.
the only reason I can fathom why it's being upheld is because its merits are being judged by people who have been bribed immensely by Apple
FTFY...
Making Facebook exclusively a teenaged time waste instead of giving it a single redeeming quality for business or professionals was probably a bigger mistake. When the fad ends, Facebook will inevitably go the way of MySpace.
The font is too good on the TI- series calculators. It doesn't look the same as the 7-segment characters.
Everytime I think of that 'developers, developers, developers' video I crack up.
But...developers? It's Android. It's open source. Anyone who wants to develop, can develop for it. Without cert and months of acceptance testing by Google.
Success of the platform? It just surpassed iOS as the most used mobile OS. It has already started 'killing' the iPad, and will likely continue to do so unless Apple comes out with something significantly new or innovative to re-spike their sales. I don't think another iteration of the same old shit is going to work this time.
I spent $10 and have the same 'shock-absorbent soft-plastic bumper' on my Kindle Fire.
One word: Awesome.
I love stuff like this - it's doing to the GOP's constituents what the GOP does to the country on a regular basis.
It's sort of dumb to say "Don't use this awesome new piece of technology because they bundled something I dislike with it". Just root it and install a ROM without the ads, problem solved at the cost of about an hour of time. The price is already exceedingly low for the product, just don't use it how they intended and all will be balanced and right in the world.
That would be some awesome technology. Shit, I'd PAY for those chopsticks, even if they had lousy ads.
it's trivial to root Nexus devices and subsequently install ad-blockers across all applications. The same can't be said for all of Amazon's devices
Yes it can. Just to prove it, here goes: "It is trivial to root Amazon devices". I have rooted nearly every kindle since the first, and never once did it give me any significant trouble(onoes, folder access permissions, PH34R!). Most of them I could do with a clever file copied over to book storage, or using a specialized app/bin file combo on the newer ones(BurritoRoot/FireFireFire FTFW).
There is simply no reason to pay Amazon or complain about these ads, because an ad-free device with even more capabilities than it ships with is inevitably only a google search or two and about an hour of your time away. It may not be available the day the new product drops, but it always comes along.
We'll have to jailbreak our devices with illicit ad-blocking software.
It's Android - it is free and open-source. There is nothing illicit about 'jailbreaking' (which won't alone fix this issue - unless you're smart and just use a different ROM like CyanogenMod). You could compile your own version from scratch and it would run just fine, and it would never even have heard about these ads unless you told it. There is nothing inherently ad-based about the hardware, other than Amazon's flawed business model directed at the use-as-intended consumer market.