Except you typical American Freeway does not have a speed limit of 70 mph
You're right. Most of France's Freeway equivalents (Autoroutes) are 130kph = 80mph. Were you trying to imply that 70mph is somehow fast? When I was living there, I'd constantly do 140-160kph when no one else was on the road, and have pushed easily over 200 on bare stretches when I had access to a nicer rental. I wasn't the only one.
I don't mind the trackpads, they could be alright. Maybe. But the fact that they expect you to alternately press buttons with either hand makes me feel like it could be hard to simultaneously move and act in a game.(This must be how lefties feel all the time)
Looking at the controller images, I'd be worried about triggering the touchpad while my hand is traveling to a button. WHy not put the buttons to the side?
The hackable nature of the controller sounds pretty cool, though and the haptic "speaker surface" like touchpads sound like they'd make some very awesome interfaces to play around with.
Not the parent, but I feel like the quality of Google search has gone down in a few ways.
Google feels they're good enough. Now it's time for them to become more profitable. Sorry, but that's the single driving factor I feel has directed every move since Larry Page has become CEO. Perhaps this is for the best - there were times I wondered how sustainable Google was, given their seemingly un-matched altruistic aims (in the mega-corp space).
Someone made a lot of money by being a very productive member of society. He was in fact too productive, thus breaking several productivity laws set in place to give an illusion of productivity being fairly distributed and productive.
Transform to translate to ethical human speak: s/productive/corrupt/g
I don't even trust those guys with a browser cookie, much less a credit card.
Two notes:
1) It's their cookie:-)
It's my browser and computer. I (and Greyfox) just don't let them store it here.
2) I don't think the facebook guys need your credit card to buy shit:-) Of course from the credit card number they can tell which bank you use, which I'm sure they can leverage somehow.
3rd party apps need your CC info so they can bill you for what they're forced to give you for free now or beg you to buy FB credits. Facebook just wants to act like a middleman/bank at this point.
What you're saying outlines the "repeating the past" problem that Facebook has. Myspace was invincible and going to last for all eternity and because of that, they pissed off their users daily with awful updates and horrible page layouts. Facebook came out and was slightly better so tada, everyone bailed. Now Facebook put themselves in exactly the same place and the only thing that is necessary is for a slightly less annoying and evil one to come along. So in other words, not Google+. Isn't there some open source style non-profit social networking site out there? Let's all go there.
This prompts the question - is a "Social Network" something that lends itself to a viable business plan that doesn't involve selling out their users? Many folks I know are convinved this is *not* possible. The FB folks think you don't care that you're being sold out. Google figures you won't have a choice (what no google search? are you even competitive anymore, mr. coder?). The folks at App.Net think you're willing to front the money for a no-compromise account.
Me, being a raving socialist, think this should be something that's regulated and publicly owned such that I can a) opt out of social network data collection and b) there is no profit motive to cash in on data you've marked as private (esp. with slimy moves like randomly changing your preferences to "open" or having a convenient privacy leak so 3rd parties have a window to collect a bunch of information). If FB can't exist under these conditions, then I guess I'd rather it didn't exist.
s/M/B/ but my point still stands. This is paltry compared to the money you and I are pouring into keeping the fossil fuel provider profits' still at record levels every new quarter. Think of the tax credit as a "catalyst" to get over the activation level so the reaction of new tech can more quickly lead us to a more efficient future. It's not even ongoing like oil subsidies.
If they were doing everything right then why the need for the tax credit?
It's a mere pittance compared to the decades-old infrastructure that a fossil-fuel powered car gets for "free" because we essentially subsidize the entire petroleum fuel supply chain at a federal level [1] to the tune of $10s of billions of dollars. Yes, that's for mega-corporations who are making record profits every quarter [2].
So 200k models qualify for the credit at $7500 a piece. That's a neat $1.5M for each car manufacturer - how does that compare to the $Billions in yearly subsidies that the petro infrastructure gets that's passed on to each gas/diesel guzzling car/truck on the road?
Quit whining about the tiny tax credit. Instead start complaining about how the big three auto manufacturers and Big oil are bending us over a barrel.
That's because exposure to shrapnel is pretty unlikely. Exposure to women will happen. Women are not fantasy and we interact with them every day and it would be nice if they weren't treated like objects of desire 24/7 rather than the between 9pm-3am that it is supposed to be.
You're conflating the exposure of nipples with objectification of women. Sorry, at this point, you're agreeing with fundamentalists/puritans. There is a huge coninuum between explicit sexual intercourse and say, national geographic displaying tribeswomen in their native attire.
Europe is a lot saner than the USA when it comes to allowing some nudity in public spaces, without it necessarily being over-sexualized.
One could easily have said the same thing about Microsoft Word. It was a copycat and it sucked compared to Word Perfect when it first came out. But slowly they kept making it better and it won the market. [...]
Reminds me of a movie [1]...
King of Swamp Castle: When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up. And that's what you're going to get, Lad, the strongest castle in all of England.
Sony did this back in the 90s and may have been the template for Microsoft's success.
Sony stumbled their way into the market because Nintendo were dumbasses [1].
I'd hardly say Microsoft's "success" in console gaming is something anyone should replicate. They haven't posted a net profit. Their new console is being hailed as either an NSA or advertiser's wet dream, AND costs more.
They might be able to power through this by sheer might, but what company wants to burn that amount of capital and goodwill just for marketshare?
So you are going to make the flight attendants know if someone is reading an ebook and not sending an email? Seems ridiculous, they have a lot to do on take off and landing already.
I'm assuming to make this easier, services like gogoinflight will also be disabled during this period - so laptops aren't the issue. It's the cell radios that carriers don't want you using because you move too fast and spam too many cell towers in a plane.
They just ask if your device is in airplane mode (or Android/Win equivalent). If the plane has issues during that period, and they find your device is *not* in airplane mode, you get fined/sued/put on no-fly list.
Hell, the tinpot-fascist that works in TSA will love this ruling, as it'll allow them to find a nice scapegoat at some point in the future that'll help make this country more scared and cowering. Planes crash, now just search wreckage for a surviving tablet/phone/laptop that just happens to have radios running.
>>>> who is still buying Apple >> you're experiencing...cognitive dissonance
Nah - I know individuals are buying, but I really I want to know which demographics are buying: existing Apple customers, new customers, age groups (seems like Harleys and iPhones are becoming Baby Boomer staples), income levels, etc.
I'm sure the information has been collated out there. Maybe you should pay the $X thousand to subscribe to a study (or commission one) and find out. Maybe you can crowdfund it.
Or, someone bought 30 iPhones and hoped to sell them for a premium once Apple ran out.
I'm not denying that Apple made money, merely pointing out that "9 million units sold" does not mean 9 million people got one.
Unless you intend to apply that rule to the other smartphone manufacturers (ahem, Samsung) - oh yeah, those manufacturers don't even tell you what the sell through is, because they don't know (or want us to know). They only tell you what's shipped or is lining retail stores' shelves. Not what has been bought either.
Of course, this is Apple, where we have to invent newer, more rigorous criteria for determining success and let everyone else slide.
The iPhone 5S is the 2nd fast phone on the market.
Educate yourself with the fact that, for now, it's the fastest [1]. The entry beating the A7 in many of those tests is a latest-gen desktop processing chip from Intel.
I got my cables from Monoprice, they're MFI certified and only cost $12 [1]. I have a half dozen iOS devices with lightning ports laying around my house so no I can't pay $20 for a cable and I don't. $30 is for the charger - if you're whining about that, just get a USB powered hub and/or one of these [2].
That's ridiculous. Germany isn't paying/subsidizing people to break windows or other net-negative value endeavors
No, but what they -are- doing is replacing a cheaper form of power with a much more expensive form of power.
You do realize that almost ALL power generation is subsidized, right? Nothing in this space is instantly profitable - there's lots of government loan-backing and outright subsidies to make any of it cheap enough for individuals. Germany just happens to subsidize solar more than other countries. Here in the US, we subsidize coal and gasoline far more. Theoretically, the government makes it all back in taxes on economy generated by the power made available (ie, business, stores, residents).
I don't have numbers handy, but I'd also estimate that a larger percentage of that money is sent out of the country, making it a loss from a different economic model as well.
Yeah, show us those numbers. I have a feeling you don't have them nor is your assertion anything but a wild guess.
You're saying that Germany subsidizing solar panels is equivalent to the broken window fallacy?
That's ridiculous. Germany isn't paying/subsidizing people to break windows or other net-negative value endeavors. They're not even paying people to just keep them working (which some WPA projects in the 1930s effectively did). They're creating wealth. All those solar panels (even ones that are 20 years old) generate power. This is a net positive.
In most cases the web server would receive two requests from two different IP addresses, one per path, with the same session cookies. Let's say one request for the HTML and one for the CSS. That would be enough to serve the right content without any modification to the code on the web server. But I bet that some webapps will be extremely confused by those two addresses. Time to start designing them without the assumption of one-IP-per-session, even inside the same burst of requests?
Isn't this ripe for security issues (ie, a FireSheep style cookie-jacker could theoreticlly playback the cookie on a different IP and hijack your session)? Of course, nonces [1] would eliminate this problem, but that's not a server-level setting and requires the applications (or framework) to support it.
Does he have a donation box? I've donated to causes much less worthy.
Count me in. I want to see Dovden hunted down and made an example of. Perhaps, if Dunkelman doesn't want to solicit external funds, the next worthy Troll Slayer should seek funds on Kickstarter or similar website for the express purpose of making an example of the troll in particular.
autopilot for cars so like all the cost of the auto drive system with no real benefits?
unlike a plane you need to ready to to take over on the fly all the time with little thinking time to work out why the system kicked out of auto drive mode. I hope the person who get's hit sues Tesla in that case.
Speak for yourself. I'd love to more thoroughly pay attention to calls and texts when commuting and would love a service where it goes auto-pilot for 90% of my commute which is in the left-most lane of an interstate (going whatever is the safe max for that stretch of the road).
What it does. This is not easy to explain to women and the mechanically innocent....
You do realize that the link you posted is simply an early cruise control? The "auto-pilot" does not handle turns or anticipate braking and definitely, is no Johnny Cab.
Slashdot Mirror
Except you typical American Freeway does not have a speed limit of 70 mph
You're right. Most of France's Freeway equivalents (Autoroutes) are 130kph = 80mph. Were you trying to imply that 70mph is somehow fast? When I was living there, I'd constantly do 140-160kph when no one else was on the road, and have pushed easily over 200 on bare stretches when I had access to a nicer rental. I wasn't the only one.
I don't mind the trackpads, they could be alright. Maybe. But the fact that they expect you to alternately press buttons with either hand makes me feel like it could be hard to simultaneously move and act in a game.(This must be how lefties feel all the time)
Looking at the controller images, I'd be worried about triggering the touchpad while my hand is traveling to a button. WHy not put the buttons to the side?
The hackable nature of the controller sounds pretty cool, though and the haptic "speaker surface" like touchpads sound like they'd make some very awesome interfaces to play around with.
Not the parent, but I feel like the quality of Google search has gone down in a few ways.
Google feels they're good enough. Now it's time for them to become more profitable. Sorry, but that's the single driving factor I feel has directed every move since Larry Page has become CEO. Perhaps this is for the best - there were times I wondered how sustainable Google was, given their seemingly un-matched altruistic aims (in the mega-corp space).
Someone made a lot of money by being a very productive member of society. He was in fact too productive, thus breaking several productivity laws set in place to give an illusion of productivity being fairly distributed and productive.
Transform to translate to ethical human speak:
s/productive/corrupt/g
I don't even trust those guys with a browser cookie, much less a credit card.
Two notes:
1) It's their cookie :-)
It's my browser and computer. I (and Greyfox) just don't let them store it here.
2) I don't think the facebook guys need your credit card to buy shit :-) Of course from the credit card number they can tell which bank you use, which I'm sure they can leverage somehow.
3rd party apps need your CC info so they can bill you for what they're forced to give you for free now or beg you to buy FB credits. Facebook just wants to act like a middleman/bank at this point.
What you're saying outlines the "repeating the past" problem that Facebook has. Myspace was invincible and going to last for all eternity and because of that, they pissed off their users daily with awful updates and horrible page layouts. Facebook came out and was slightly better so tada, everyone bailed. Now Facebook put themselves in exactly the same place and the only thing that is necessary is for a slightly less annoying and evil one to come along. So in other words, not Google+. Isn't there some open source style non-profit social networking site out there? Let's all go there.
This prompts the question - is a "Social Network" something that lends itself to a viable business plan that doesn't involve selling out their users? Many folks I know are convinved this is *not* possible. The FB folks think you don't care that you're being sold out. Google figures you won't have a choice (what no google search? are you even competitive anymore, mr. coder?). The folks at App.Net think you're willing to front the money for a no-compromise account.
Me, being a raving socialist, think this should be something that's regulated and publicly owned such that I can a) opt out of social network data collection and b) there is no profit motive to cash in on data you've marked as private (esp. with slimy moves like randomly changing your preferences to "open" or having a convenient privacy leak so 3rd parties have a window to collect a bunch of information). If FB can't exist under these conditions, then I guess I'd rather it didn't exist.
https://www.discover.com/credit-cards/member-benefits/security/secure-online-account-number.html
200,000 x $7,500 != $1.5M
s/M/B/ but my point still stands. This is paltry compared to the money you and I are pouring into keeping the fossil fuel provider profits' still at record levels every new quarter. Think of the tax credit as a "catalyst" to get over the activation level so the reaction of new tech can more quickly lead us to a more efficient future. It's not even ongoing like oil subsidies.
If they were doing everything right then why the need for the tax credit?
It's a mere pittance compared to the decades-old infrastructure that a fossil-fuel powered car gets for "free" because we essentially subsidize the entire petroleum fuel supply chain at a federal level [1] to the tune of $10s of billions of dollars. Yes, that's for mega-corporations who are making record profits every quarter [2].
So 200k models qualify for the credit at $7500 a piece. That's a neat $1.5M for each car manufacturer - how does that compare to the $Billions in yearly subsidies that the petro infrastructure gets that's passed on to each gas/diesel guzzling car/truck on the road?
Quit whining about the tiny tax credit. Instead start complaining about how the big three auto manufacturers and Big oil are bending us over a barrel.
[1] http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/
[2] http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=5503955&page=1
working together. There's a word for that.
I think Benito Mussolini said it best.
That's because exposure to shrapnel is pretty unlikely. Exposure to women will happen. Women are not fantasy and we interact with them every day and it would be nice if they weren't treated like objects of desire 24/7 rather than the between 9pm-3am that it is supposed to be.
You're conflating the exposure of nipples with objectification of women. Sorry, at this point, you're agreeing with fundamentalists/puritans. There is a huge coninuum between explicit sexual intercourse and say, national geographic displaying tribeswomen in their native attire.
Europe is a lot saner than the USA when it comes to allowing some nudity in public spaces, without it necessarily being over-sexualized.
One could easily have said the same thing about Microsoft Word. It was a copycat and it sucked compared to Word Perfect when it first came out. But slowly they kept making it better and it won the market. [...]
Reminds me of a movie [1] ...
King of Swamp Castle: When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up. And that's what you're going to get, Lad, the strongest castle in all of England.
[1] http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0091186/quotes
Sony did this back in the 90s and may have been the template for Microsoft's success.
Sony stumbled their way into the market because Nintendo were dumbasses [1].
I'd hardly say Microsoft's "success" in console gaming is something anyone should replicate. They haven't posted a net profit. Their new console is being hailed as either an NSA or advertiser's wet dream, AND costs more.
They might be able to power through this by sheer might, but what company wants to burn that amount of capital and goodwill just for marketshare?
[1] http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bl_playstation.htm
So you are going to make the flight attendants know if someone is reading an ebook and not sending an email? Seems ridiculous, they have a lot to do on take off and landing already.
I'm assuming to make this easier, services like gogoinflight will also be disabled during this period - so laptops aren't the issue. It's the cell radios that carriers don't want you using because you move too fast and spam too many cell towers in a plane.
They just ask if your device is in airplane mode (or Android/Win equivalent). If the plane has issues during that period, and they find your device is *not* in airplane mode, you get fined/sued/put on no-fly list.
Hell, the tinpot-fascist that works in TSA will love this ruling, as it'll allow them to find a nice scapegoat at some point in the future that'll help make this country more scared and cowering. Planes crash, now just search wreckage for a surviving tablet/phone/laptop that just happens to have radios running.
>>>> who is still buying Apple
>> you're experiencing...cognitive dissonance
Nah - I know individuals are buying, but I really I want to know which demographics are buying: existing Apple customers, new customers, age groups (seems like Harleys and iPhones are becoming Baby Boomer staples), income levels, etc.
I'm sure the information has been collated out there. Maybe you should pay the $X thousand to subscribe to a study (or commission one) and find out. Maybe you can crowdfund it.
Or, someone bought 30 iPhones and hoped to sell them for a premium once Apple ran out.
I'm not denying that Apple made money, merely pointing out that "9 million units sold" does not mean 9 million people got one.
Unless you intend to apply that rule to the other smartphone manufacturers (ahem, Samsung) - oh yeah, those manufacturers don't even tell you what the sell through is, because they don't know (or want us to know). They only tell you what's shipped or is lining retail stores' shelves. Not what has been bought either.
Of course, this is Apple, where we have to invent newer, more rigorous criteria for determining success and let everyone else slide.
The iPhone 5S is the 2nd fast phone on the market.
Educate yourself with the fact that, for now, it's the fastest [1]. The entry beating the A7 in many of those tests is a latest-gen desktop processing chip from Intel.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review
They want ~$29 USD for their chargers
I got my cables from Monoprice, they're MFI certified and only cost $12 [1]. I have a half dozen iOS devices with lightning ports laying around my house so no I can't pay $20 for a cable and I don't. $30 is for the charger - if you're whining about that, just get a USB powered hub and/or one of these [2].
[1] http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=112&cp_id=11213&cs_id=1083101&p_id=10374&seq=1&format=2
[2] http://www.amazon.com/Belkin-BST300-SurgePlus-3-Outlet-Protector/dp/B00ATZJ5YS
That's ridiculous. Germany isn't paying/subsidizing people to break windows or other net-negative value endeavors
No, but what they -are- doing is replacing a cheaper form of power with a much more expensive form of power.
You do realize that almost ALL power generation is subsidized, right? Nothing in this space is instantly profitable - there's lots of government loan-backing and outright subsidies to make any of it cheap enough for individuals. Germany just happens to subsidize solar more than other countries. Here in the US, we subsidize coal and gasoline far more. Theoretically, the government makes it all back in taxes on economy generated by the power made available (ie, business, stores, residents).
I don't have numbers handy, but I'd also estimate that a larger percentage of that money is sent out of the country, making it a loss from a different economic model as well.
Yeah, show us those numbers. I have a feeling you don't have them nor is your assertion anything but a wild guess.
You're saying that Germany subsidizing solar panels is equivalent to the broken window fallacy?
That's ridiculous. Germany isn't paying/subsidizing people to break windows or other net-negative value endeavors. They're not even paying people to just keep them working (which some WPA projects in the 1930s effectively did). They're creating wealth. All those solar panels (even ones that are 20 years old) generate power. This is a net positive.
Your analogy is flawed.
I also cannot replicate the problem with iOS 7.0 (11A465) on my iPhone 3GS.
If you don't mind me asking - how'd you get that installed - isn't iOS7 not supposed to be compatible for 3GS.
(Anonymous to preserve modding)
In most cases the web server would receive two requests from two different IP addresses, one per path, with the same session cookies. Let's say one request for the HTML and one for the CSS. That would be enough to serve the right content without any modification to the code on the web server. But I bet that some webapps will be extremely confused by those two addresses. Time to start designing them without the assumption of one-IP-per-session, even inside the same burst of requests?
Isn't this ripe for security issues (ie, a FireSheep style cookie-jacker could theoreticlly playback the cookie on a different IP and hijack your session)? Of course, nonces [1] would eliminate this problem, but that's not a server-level setting and requires the applications (or framework) to support it.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptographic_nonce
Does he have a donation box? I've donated to causes much less worthy.
Count me in. I want to see Dovden hunted down and made an example of. Perhaps, if Dunkelman doesn't want to solicit external funds, the next worthy Troll Slayer should seek funds on Kickstarter or similar website for the express purpose of making an example of the troll in particular.
autopilot for cars so like all the cost of the auto drive system with no real benefits?
unlike a plane you need to ready to to take over on the fly all the time with little thinking time to work out why the system kicked out of auto drive mode. I hope the person who get's hit sues Tesla in that case.
Speak for yourself. I'd love to more thoroughly pay attention to calls and texts when commuting and would love a service where it goes auto-pilot for 90% of my commute which is in the left-most lane of an interstate (going whatever is the safe max for that stretch of the road).
You sir are wrong. I'll just direct your to this introduction of the 'Auto Pilot' feature on the new 1958 Imperials
Specifically, this section:
You do realize that the link you posted is simply an early cruise control? The "auto-pilot" does not handle turns or anticipate braking and definitely, is no Johnny Cab.