Perhaps you shouldn't talk about security, even if you're trying to be funny.
You're absolutely right. I've learned my lesson. Some subjects are just too serious to have anything remotely funny said about them. Having programs installed on your phone due to a hypothetical security flaw is one of those subjects. Are there any other purely hypothetical situations that should not be made light of, or should we treat all FUD with the same level of respect and dour consternation?
FUD affects everyone. If Apple is going to withstand the onslaught of Android, the FUD's going to have to fly fast and thick. Potential insecurity! Fragmentation! Beware!
The bigger security issue that aflicts all Android phones is that of pocket-based or belt-holder-based security. The vast majority of Android users falsely secure their devices by carrying them in their pockets or on belt holders. If a hacker were able to remove the phone from the pocket or belt, they could covertly install malicious apps, make phone calls, check call log, spam sms messages, etc.
Google needs to address this gaping hole in Android security.
When Wolfire Games released their animal martial arts games, 'Lugaru HD', on the Mac App store, shortly after they could be forgiven for thinking they were seeing double.
WTF does that sentence even mean?
That sentence means someone's pretending to be a high falutin' writer! Yee-haw the internet is the wild west and everyone's a Mark Twain!
You owe Apple every time you are entertained or productive using one of their devices. If it weren't for them, you wouldn't get anything done (in Steve Jobs' mind, anyways).
How is the native code in Android a bastardization? Most iOS game developers program all their functionality in native libraries in C or C++ using Objective-C for only those functions that are required. How is that any different from creating C or C++ native libraries for Android and using Java for the bare minimum functionality?
You puke a little bit because Objective-C was hot shit... in 1989. Programming for iOS is more annoying and backward than programming for PalmPilot circa 1997. Steve's tremendous ego at play here again. He's got to prove to everyone that he was right about Next, and the whole world was wrong/foolish to castigate him for producing over-priced, under-powered machines. He's a hack who's been a mediocre businessman for 30+ years now who finally stumbled into success by (surprise!) selling products customers want for a price they're barely willing to pay. Even with iPhones he had to be dragged kicking and screaming 'til he finally added 3G and included technology to allow games to be developed on that platform. I surmise he is still smarting from the fact that lots of people play games on his beloved iOS.
First, there are at least 5 different interfaces, none of which are consistent. There's the main web-based interface. There's a mobile web-based site. There's a touch web-based site. There's the Android app. There's the iOS app. There's a Blackberry app. I don't know how many other device specific interfaces there are, but they are legion.
Second, the data that is streamed to each of these interfaces is inconsistent, meaning if you log into the main web site, what you are displayed on your feed is going to be different than what you see on the mobile web site. And both of those may have data inconsistent with the phone app you're using.
Third, settings are different for each of the various interfaces you use. You may set a person to not show in your feed in the main site, and SURPRISE! they still show up on the touch web-site.
Fourth, the capabilities of each interface are vastly different. There are things that just can't be done from the multitude of cut rate interfaces that are available. You can't delete posts from some of the interfaces. You can't unfriend from some interfaces. You can't ignore friends from some interfaces.
Basically, the Facebooks is successful despite Zuckerberg, his MCF method of development, and his lack of vision, and his poor software design abilities. When something better comes along that works and doesn't give out everyone's personal information to anybody who floats through the transom, FB will be laying off half their staff, just like MySpace did.
As an old programmer I say that I don't like it, but if I don't keep my skills up, well f*** me.
Somebody might want to pay me more for my totally bitchin' Fortran skills, so I can't complain about people with particular skill sets being hired for better (or worse) rates.
IIRC the hacking part of the crime wasn't that big of a deal. Since he was not charged with identity theft, it was a simple misdemeanor. What got him in big trouble was his lame attempt to cover up his crime. Obstructing justice is a big no no.
In any case, I never want stock in the company I work for. That's like doubling down a bet: if the company collapses, I'm out both my stocks and my income!
I find your lack of faith disturbing. If your company shoots into the stratosphere, your salary will probably go up and your stock will be valuable, Mr. Glass-half-empty.:)
Yeah, you're right. The government was probably unaware of my relationship with my cat. If the Nazi's had this technology, they would have been able to round up all of the Jews cats, too. I see. Very dangerous.
Yeah, for fraud. I spent a ton of money on vaccinations hoping to catch autism. Now I guess I'll just have to practice playing the piano and learning how to count cards the old fashioned slow way.:(
Yeah, man, because the government is spying on those private pictures of your cat, just like the Nazis did. Good thinking. Isolate yourself for safety. You know, they could be watching Slashdot, too...
Everything I've read about "The King of Kong" indicates that it's more fiction than fact.
I've heard "victims" make the same complaints, that it was a hacked up character assassination of Billy Mitchell and his cronies. Then I watched the supposed unbiased documentary "Chasing Ghosts: Beyond the Arcade" and found out that, yes, in fact Billy Mitchell is a twat.
I have a tough time with the idea that I'm being immoral when I watch something that someone else tells me that I don't have the right to watch because I haven't paid them.
Is it stealing when you "take" something that does not deny its utility to another person? One could argue that by not paying, I'm denying it's creator the utility of the money that I should have paid, but that could be said of anything. In not buying a new t-shirt I'm denying the vendor the utility of the money that I didn't spend as well. Having never agreed to not be entertained by things I haven't paid for, I'm just not completely on the side of the media companies.
I understand that if I don't pay for anything I watch or read or listen to, those things will cease being available, but is it wrong to watch or read or listen without paying? When I go to my friends house to watch a movie I'm not paying, either (although I'm absolutely positive that if Comcast could, they'd charge a per user fee for viewing their content.)
It's easy to rationalize by saying that movie studios are still making tons of money, so in spite of my transgressions they are successful and the increment that they would be more successful would be infinitesimal if I were to pay for everything. On the other hand record companies are going down the tubes. But, record companies got greedy when CDs came out and tripled the price of music releases, making it far easier to rationalize copying music. That coupled with their aggressive legal tactics regarding music played in public places and their handling of alledged music downloaders makes their loss of prominence understandable.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps you shouldn't talk about security, even if you're trying to be funny.
You're absolutely right. I've learned my lesson. Some subjects are just too serious to have anything remotely funny said about them. Having programs installed on your phone due to a hypothetical security flaw is one of those subjects. Are there any other purely hypothetical situations that should not be made light of, or should we treat all FUD with the same level of respect and dour consternation?
FUD affects everyone. If Apple is going to withstand the onslaught of Android, the FUD's going to have to fly fast and thick. Potential insecurity! Fragmentation! Beware!
The bigger security issue that aflicts all Android phones is that of pocket-based or belt-holder-based security. The vast majority of Android users falsely secure their devices by carrying them in their pockets or on belt holders. If a hacker were able to remove the phone from the pocket or belt, they could covertly install malicious apps, make phone calls, check call log, spam sms messages, etc.
Google needs to address this gaping hole in Android security.
When Wolfire Games released their animal martial arts games, 'Lugaru HD', on the Mac App store, shortly after they could be forgiven for thinking they were seeing double.
WTF does that sentence even mean?
That sentence means someone's pretending to be a high falutin' writer! Yee-haw the internet is the wild west and everyone's a Mark Twain!
You owe Apple every time you are entertained or productive using one of their devices. If it weren't for them, you wouldn't get anything done (in Steve Jobs' mind, anyways).
How is the native code in Android a bastardization? Most iOS game developers program all their functionality in native libraries in C or C++ using Objective-C for only those functions that are required. How is that any different from creating C or C++ native libraries for Android and using Java for the bare minimum functionality?
You puke a little bit because Objective-C was hot shit... in 1989. Programming for iOS is more annoying and backward than programming for PalmPilot circa 1997. Steve's tremendous ego at play here again. He's got to prove to everyone that he was right about Next, and the whole world was wrong/foolish to castigate him for producing over-priced, under-powered machines. He's a hack who's been a mediocre businessman for 30+ years now who finally stumbled into success by (surprise!) selling products customers want for a price they're barely willing to pay. Even with iPhones he had to be dragged kicking and screaming 'til he finally added 3G and included technology to allow games to be developed on that platform. I surmise he is still smarting from the fact that lots of people play games on his beloved iOS.
"Carmack Says NGP Is a 'Generation Beyond' Smartphones"
Which means it probably has a price to match. Sadly.
Plus the generation beyond Smartphones don't apparently make any phone calls.
This generation doesn't make phone calls, if you've got an iPhone. Neither did the last two gens.
I was talking about Scamper_22 and myself.My bad.
Neat, my Slashdot number is a subset of yours!
And what is wrong with that?
Where to begin... where to begin.
First, there are at least 5 different interfaces, none of which are consistent. There's the main web-based interface. There's a mobile web-based site. There's a touch web-based site. There's the Android app. There's the iOS app. There's a Blackberry app. I don't know how many other device specific interfaces there are, but they are legion.
Second, the data that is streamed to each of these interfaces is inconsistent, meaning if you log into the main web site, what you are displayed on your feed is going to be different than what you see on the mobile web site. And both of those may have data inconsistent with the phone app you're using.
Third, settings are different for each of the various interfaces you use. You may set a person to not show in your feed in the main site, and SURPRISE! they still show up on the touch web-site.
Fourth, the capabilities of each interface are vastly different. There are things that just can't be done from the multitude of cut rate interfaces that are available. You can't delete posts from some of the interfaces. You can't unfriend from some interfaces. You can't ignore friends from some interfaces.
Basically, the Facebooks is successful despite Zuckerberg, his MCF method of development, and his lack of vision, and his poor software design abilities. When something better comes along that works and doesn't give out everyone's personal information to anybody who floats through the transom, FB will be laying off half their staff, just like MySpace did.
As an old programmer I say that I don't like it, but if I don't keep my skills up, well f*** me.
Somebody might want to pay me more for my totally bitchin' Fortran skills, so I can't complain about people with particular skill sets being hired for better (or worse) rates.
He hasn't, yet. But once this hits Wikipedia, it's truth.
IIRC the hacking part of the crime wasn't that big of a deal. Since he was not charged with identity theft, it was a simple misdemeanor. What got him in big trouble was his lame attempt to cover up his crime. Obstructing justice is a big no no.
Butthurt a little? Learn the big words like grown-ups do and people will treat you like one.
In any case, I never want stock in the company I work for. That's like doubling down a bet: if the company collapses, I'm out both my stocks and my income!
I find your lack of faith disturbing. If your company shoots into the stratosphere, your salary will probably go up and your stock will be valuable, Mr. Glass-half-empty. :)
I usually don't talk to people with numbers as high as yours, but my pedantry was completely relevant to the discussion.
Learn the difference between a stock option and a stock grant.
Yeah, you're right. The government was probably unaware of my relationship with my cat. If the Nazi's had this technology, they would have been able to round up all of the Jews cats, too. I see. Very dangerous.
Yeah, because everyone was calling their OS a Windows before Microsoft got that trademark. Mod parent +1 insightful. Perfect analogy.
Yeah, for fraud. I spent a ton of money on vaccinations hoping to catch autism. Now I guess I'll just have to practice playing the piano and learning how to count cards the old fashioned slow way. :(
Yeah, man, because the government is spying on those private pictures of your cat, just like the Nazis did. Good thinking. Isolate yourself for safety. You know, they could be watching Slashdot, too...
It sucks that the producers didn't create a time machine so that he could have been in a movie. "King of Kong" is a hacked up pack of lies.
Everything I've read about "The King of Kong" indicates that it's more fiction than fact.
I've heard "victims" make the same complaints, that it was a hacked up character assassination of Billy Mitchell and his cronies. Then I watched the supposed unbiased documentary "Chasing Ghosts: Beyond the Arcade" and found out that, yes, in fact Billy Mitchell is a twat.
I'm ambivalent.
I have a tough time with the idea that I'm being immoral when I watch something that someone else tells me that I don't have the right to watch because I haven't paid them.
Is it stealing when you "take" something that does not deny its utility to another person? One could argue that by not paying, I'm denying it's creator the utility of the money that I should have paid, but that could be said of anything. In not buying a new t-shirt I'm denying the vendor the utility of the money that I didn't spend as well. Having never agreed to not be entertained by things I haven't paid for, I'm just not completely on the side of the media companies.
I understand that if I don't pay for anything I watch or read or listen to, those things will cease being available, but is it wrong to watch or read or listen without paying? When I go to my friends house to watch a movie I'm not paying, either (although I'm absolutely positive that if Comcast could, they'd charge a per user fee for viewing their content.)
It's easy to rationalize by saying that movie studios are still making tons of money, so in spite of my transgressions they are successful and the increment that they would be more successful would be infinitesimal if I were to pay for everything. On the other hand record companies are going down the tubes. But, record companies got greedy when CDs came out and tripled the price of music releases, making it far easier to rationalize copying music. That coupled with their aggressive legal tactics regarding music played in public places and their handling of alledged music downloaders makes their loss of prominence understandable.