Most grasses used for lawns don't reach 3+ feet in height. Bermuda, fescue (the varieties that are used for lawns, anyway), St. Augustine grass, Kentucky bluegrass, etc. all top out at anywhere from four inches to about a foot and a half if left uncut. And although the stuff towards the taller end of that spectrum is tall enough to be a pain, it is at least feasible to mow it without a brush hog towed behind a tractor....
1) Systems that don't need a lot of storage and space/power are a premium. The Air is a good example. If you can live with 64GB of storage, then flash is ok price wise. Still expensive per GB, but since you have few GBs it isn't bad. If all you are doing is running basic apps then that works fine. You can't hold much media or large games or whatnot, but not all systems need that.
I think you are forgetting that mobile devices are a freaking disaster where hard drive reliability is concerned. Flash is just orders of magnitude more reliable over the typical life of a laptop.
For this reason, I suspect that within 2-3 years, most laptop models will use flash exclusively, and the rest will offer hard drives only in a high-end built-to-order configuration---not because SSDs are comparable in terms of price/capacity, but because the average laptop user doesn't use nearly the full capacity of the largest laptop hard drives, and the price of SSDs has dropped enough that the price of a "big enough" SSD is cheap enough to include. In two or three years, you'll be able to get 512 GB of flash for a couple hundred bucks. At that point, there really won't be any reason to continue using spinning laptop hard drives at all for 99.999% of users. Odds are, if you're using more than that, you're doing video editing or something similar and are tethered to a desk anyway, making an external hard drive a more reasonable choice.
A JVM would never be part of an app store anyway. It isn't a double-clickable end user application. The app store doesn't sell command-line tools, runtime environments, plug-ins, or any number of other things. That just isn't its purpose.
You do realize that the app store is only for double-clickable apps, right. I know that in theory you can build a Flash-based app for Mac OS X, but in all my years of downloading free apps from Versiontracker et al, I've never encountered even one single Flash-based app in Mac OS X ever. And I can count the number of Java apps I've run into over the years on one hand, and both were utter abominations, buggy as you-know-what, and generally represented a poor user experience all around. So I guess the question I have to ask is why do you care about either of those technologies going into the app store? Or are you just looking for a reason to whine?
Look at the apps shown in Launchpad in the demo. Notice Mail, iChat, iCal, Time Machine, Dictionary, DVD Player, Automator, the entire Microsoft Office Suite, etc. I can't imagine that any of those are in there because they were downloaded from the App Store....
First, I've never said nor implied that Android copied iPhone in any way.
Second, Android may have existed in house back in 2005, but there was no hardware until *years* later. The first consumer hardware based on Android didn't come onto the market until several months after the iPhone app store came into existence. Go look it up.
So that leaves RIM and Nokia, both of which have app approval processes, AFAIK.
You see, this is what I don't like about most Linux distros. There's way too much crap turned on by default. This protocol is basically useful only in a cluster computing environment, which represents maybe one, maybe two percent of the installed base of even a frequently clustered OS like Linux (and only because each admin runs thousands of usually identical boxes). Sure, security may ultimately be the responsibility of the users, but it's downright reckless and irresponsible to have esoteric protocols that all of three dozen people on the entire planet care about enabled by default in your kernel. Okay, that's a slight exaggeration. It's probably more like a few hundred people. The point is that for every one person who cares, there are probably thousands who don't, and possibly even millions who don't.
A proper, secure OS distro should provide the bare minimum by default, and should provide a means for the user to easily add features, not the other way around. Every thousand lines of code you add, statistically speaking, you add anywhere from 1-6 security bugs. The Linux kernel has over ten million lines of code, so statistically, it probably contains somewhere on the order of 10,000 to 60,000 security bugs. That number should make your jaw drop. Admittedly, about 95% of that code is architecture-specific or device-specific code, but the fact remains that even 500,000 lines of code means you'd expect on the order of 500-3,000 security bugs just in the core kernel alone. Every module you add is increasing your attack surface for vulnerabilities beyond an already staggering baseline.
Linux distros should, by default, ship without anything enabled except what a grandmother running a web browser on a single hardware configuration would need. If it's too hard to go from there to a fully usable configuration for the average geek, then that's a problem that needs to be solved in a reasonable way, which does NOT mean turning a whole bunch of other crap on by default.
The act of reading a web page on his computer that shows him that he is screwed could simultaneously make it "knowingly" and constitute a violation of the agreement, so... yeah. I maintain my original choice of words.
I can only think of one instance, Skype, where a telco has influenced the Android Market.
Possible responses:
...that you know about.
...yet.
Also, bear in mind that prior to iPhone, things were a lot more locked down. One might reasonably argue that Apple's success paved the way for more open handsets that would have been soundly rejected by the telcos previously, including Android. Just saying.
He better not use a computer that has a web browser installed. Oh, and he can't run Windows or Mac OS X because they come with a web browser embedded as part of the OS. Oh, and he can't run Linux because there's crypto in the kernel.
Bottom line is that if this kid knows anything about computers, he would know that the judge created a ruling that guarantees he cannot legally use any computer or any smart phone or an iPad, or... well, pretty much any piece of modern electronics built after the mid 1980s. Sorry, kid, that DVD player contains a computer with built-in crypto technology, too, and so does every TV set with HDMI inputs.
Either the judge is a technological neophyte or this is entrapment.
What free market? Cell phones? Surely you jest. The cell phone market was and still is *entirely* controlled by the approval of the telcos that provide cell service. You can't usefully sell products in that space without getting sign off from the telcos, so in effect, a small oligopoly in each country gets to dictate what devices can and can't do.
When regular computer ISPs become more fascist than Mussolini's wildest wet dream, you might have a point. Until then, the two markets are not comparable.
He interposed himself into an ongoing, polite conversation between a person who was several feet from any other member of the crowd and another police officer. He was talking to the "crowd" in much the same way as I'm talking to the "Internet" right now.
Also,, even in Canada, truth is an absolute defense, as is opinion. Slander/libel requires stating something as a fact that is not true, at least under English common law and bodies of law derived from it.
Oh, yeah, and Canada does have an anti-SLAPP law, the Protection of Public Participation Act.
I think it's pretty clear from the video that he wasn't talking to the mob. He was talking one-on-one to a single individual.
It took all of two seconds to find a copy of the video in question here. Not sure why the officer's lawyer thinks they got it taken down successfully unless I'm missing something....
I just love the look of shock on the female cop's face when this guy suddenly butted into a polite conversation between her and the completely peaceful, friendly female protester and threatened to arrest her for assault if one of the bubbles touched him. The "tell" was that her jaw dropped *very* visibly. So even other cops on scene thought his behavior was out of line. Based on that, it's hard to believe anyone could defend his behavior.
This guy was seriously power tripping in the video. Why should anybody be surprised to find that he responds similarly to criticism? I suspect that even the officer next to him thinks he's a jackass, judging by how hard it looked like she was struggling to bite her tongue.
Congrats, "Officer Bubbles". In my opinion, and that of most of the Internet viewing public, you just proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you do not belong in uniform. Cops who are incapable of treating others with courtesy have no business interacting with the public. Give that guy a desk job, make him a crime scene investigator, whatever, but take him the heck off of any sort of duty where he interacts with the public on a regular basis.
P.S. To "Officer Bubbles", I hope the people you are suing hit you with a SLAPP-back suit so fast it makes your LAWYER shit his pants... followed by having your sorry ass brought up on barratry charges.
Welcome to the real world, where criticism is protected speech (unless it is threatening or libelous in nature, which opinions almost by definition cannot be).
Because if they're not famous, their parents always have a picture of them in the tub as an infant, and if they are famous, there's always a sex tape. Unless it's an under-18 female, in which case it is
$UNDERAGE_RACY_PICTURES_SENT_TO_HER_EX_BOYFRIEND
instead.
By the way, how did you get past the lameness filter with that much in all caps?
All of the characters except River and the Preacher could've been fed to the wraiths and the show would've been better for it.
Well, one of them turned into a wraith.... Is that close enough for you? (And then, she did a stint as a human doctor after the death of Carson Beckett, but....)
No, libre is not a Latin word. Be careful making assumptions about Latin based on French or Spanish. Those languages have diverged significantly from Latin in both spellings and pronunciations. The modern language that is closest to Latin is Italian, and its word is "libero".
With regard to the meaning of liber, you're both right, and those aren't the only two meanings for the word, either. The word liber has different meanings in Latin depending on context and usage. As a noun, it is a form of the word for "book" (liber, genitive libri, etc.) from the Proto-Indo-European language. As an adjective, it means "free", from Greek. (The adverb form of this is "libere", hence the French/Spanish word "libre" came from dropping the first "e" from the adverb form. The noun form of this word is libertas.) As a verb, liber is an inflected form of the word libo, meaning "to spill".
And you thought English was a messy language.
Fitting, though, that the same Latin word can mean both "book" and "free". The pen is mightier and all that.
Slashdot Mirror
Most grasses used for lawns don't reach 3+ feet in height. Bermuda, fescue (the varieties that are used for lawns, anyway), St. Augustine grass, Kentucky bluegrass, etc. all top out at anywhere from four inches to about a foot and a half if left uncut. And although the stuff towards the taller end of that spectrum is tall enough to be a pain, it is at least feasible to mow it without a brush hog towed behind a tractor....
Man, I'd hate to have to mow your lawn....
I think you are forgetting that mobile devices are a freaking disaster where hard drive reliability is concerned. Flash is just orders of magnitude more reliable over the typical life of a laptop.
For this reason, I suspect that within 2-3 years, most laptop models will use flash exclusively, and the rest will offer hard drives only in a high-end built-to-order configuration---not because SSDs are comparable in terms of price/capacity, but because the average laptop user doesn't use nearly the full capacity of the largest laptop hard drives, and the price of SSDs has dropped enough that the price of a "big enough" SSD is cheap enough to include. In two or three years, you'll be able to get 512 GB of flash for a couple hundred bucks. At that point, there really won't be any reason to continue using spinning laptop hard drives at all for 99.999% of users. Odds are, if you're using more than that, you're doing video editing or something similar and are tethered to a desk anyway, making an external hard drive a more reasonable choice.
You're close. It's actually Cali-speak. It's just missing some commas to indicate the right pauses.
A JVM would never be part of an app store anyway. It isn't a double-clickable end user application. The app store doesn't sell command-line tools, runtime environments, plug-ins, or any number of other things. That just isn't its purpose.
You do realize that the app store is only for double-clickable apps, right. I know that in theory you can build a Flash-based app for Mac OS X, but in all my years of downloading free apps from Versiontracker et al, I've never encountered even one single Flash-based app in Mac OS X ever. And I can count the number of Java apps I've run into over the years on one hand, and both were utter abominations, buggy as you-know-what, and generally represented a poor user experience all around. So I guess the question I have to ask is why do you care about either of those technologies going into the app store? Or are you just looking for a reason to whine?
When you're a Mac,
you're a Mac all the way
from your first Mac SE
to your last dying day.
When you're a Mac,
if your app hits the fan,
you got geniuses 'round,
You're a Macintosh man!
You're never offline!
You're never disconnected!
No viruses found,
no spyware was detected.
You're well protected!
Then you are set
with a capital A
which you'll never forget
'til they cart you away.
When you're a Mac,
you stay a Mac!
With apologies to Leonard Bernstein et al.
Look at the apps shown in Launchpad in the demo. Notice Mail, iChat, iCal, Time Machine, Dictionary, DVD Player, Automator, the entire Microsoft Office Suite, etc. I can't imagine that any of those are in there because they were downloaded from the App Store....
First, I've never said nor implied that Android copied iPhone in any way.
Second, Android may have existed in house back in 2005, but there was no hardware until *years* later. The first consumer hardware based on Android didn't come onto the market until several months after the iPhone app store came into existence. Go look it up.
So that leaves RIM and Nokia, both of which have app approval processes, AFAIK.
Just saying.
You see, this is what I don't like about most Linux distros. There's way too much crap turned on by default. This protocol is basically useful only in a cluster computing environment, which represents maybe one, maybe two percent of the installed base of even a frequently clustered OS like Linux (and only because each admin runs thousands of usually identical boxes). Sure, security may ultimately be the responsibility of the users, but it's downright reckless and irresponsible to have esoteric protocols that all of three dozen people on the entire planet care about enabled by default in your kernel. Okay, that's a slight exaggeration. It's probably more like a few hundred people. The point is that for every one person who cares, there are probably thousands who don't, and possibly even millions who don't.
A proper, secure OS distro should provide the bare minimum by default, and should provide a means for the user to easily add features, not the other way around. Every thousand lines of code you add, statistically speaking, you add anywhere from 1-6 security bugs. The Linux kernel has over ten million lines of code, so statistically, it probably contains somewhere on the order of 10,000 to 60,000 security bugs. That number should make your jaw drop. Admittedly, about 95% of that code is architecture-specific or device-specific code, but the fact remains that even 500,000 lines of code means you'd expect on the order of 500-3,000 security bugs just in the core kernel alone. Every module you add is increasing your attack surface for vulnerabilities beyond an already staggering baseline.
Linux distros should, by default, ship without anything enabled except what a grandmother running a web browser on a single hardware configuration would need. If it's too hard to go from there to a fully usable configuration for the average geek, then that's a problem that needs to be solved in a reasonable way, which does NOT mean turning a whole bunch of other crap on by default.
The act of reading a web page on his computer that shows him that he is screwed could simultaneously make it "knowingly" and constitute a violation of the agreement, so... yeah. I maintain my original choice of words.
Possible responses:
Also, bear in mind that prior to iPhone, things were a lot more locked down. One might reasonably argue that Apple's success paved the way for more open handsets that would have been soundly rejected by the telcos previously, including Android. Just saying.
He better not use a computer that has a web browser installed. Oh, and he can't run Windows or Mac OS X because they come with a web browser embedded as part of the OS. Oh, and he can't run Linux because there's crypto in the kernel.
Bottom line is that if this kid knows anything about computers, he would know that the judge created a ruling that guarantees he cannot legally use any computer or any smart phone or an iPad, or... well, pretty much any piece of modern electronics built after the mid 1980s. Sorry, kid, that DVD player contains a computer with built-in crypto technology, too, and so does every TV set with HDMI inputs.
Either the judge is a technological neophyte or this is entrapment.
Particularly appropriate if you were born after 1945.
What free market? Cell phones? Surely you jest. The cell phone market was and still is *entirely* controlled by the approval of the telcos that provide cell service. You can't usefully sell products in that space without getting sign off from the telcos, so in effect, a small oligopoly in each country gets to dictate what devices can and can't do.
When regular computer ISPs become more fascist than Mussolini's wildest wet dream, you might have a point. Until then, the two markets are not comparable.
What about FireWire? It's on every current Mac model except the MacBook Air and the non-pro MacBook.
Or are you still whining about iPods?
He interposed himself into an ongoing, polite conversation between a person who was several feet from any other member of the crowd and another police officer. He was talking to the "crowd" in much the same way as I'm talking to the "Internet" right now.
Also,, even in Canada, truth is an absolute defense, as is opinion. Slander/libel requires stating something as a fact that is not true, at least under English common law and bodies of law derived from it.
Oh, yeah, and Canada does have an anti-SLAPP law, the Protection of Public Participation Act.
That really only matters if the person being sued is in Canada.... :-)
I think it's pretty clear from the video that he wasn't talking to the mob. He was talking one-on-one to a single individual.
It took all of two seconds to find a copy of the video in question here. Not sure why the officer's lawyer thinks they got it taken down successfully unless I'm missing something....
I just love the look of shock on the female cop's face when this guy suddenly butted into a polite conversation between her and the completely peaceful, friendly female protester and threatened to arrest her for assault if one of the bubbles touched him. The "tell" was that her jaw dropped *very* visibly. So even other cops on scene thought his behavior was out of line. Based on that, it's hard to believe anyone could defend his behavior.
Streisand effect.
This guy was seriously power tripping in the video. Why should anybody be surprised to find that he responds similarly to criticism? I suspect that even the officer next to him thinks he's a jackass, judging by how hard it looked like she was struggling to bite her tongue.
Congrats, "Officer Bubbles". In my opinion, and that of most of the Internet viewing public, you just proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you do not belong in uniform. Cops who are incapable of treating others with courtesy have no business interacting with the public. Give that guy a desk job, make him a crime scene investigator, whatever, but take him the heck off of any sort of duty where he interacts with the public on a regular basis.
P.S. To "Officer Bubbles", I hope the people you are suing hit you with a SLAPP-back suit so fast it makes your LAWYER shit his pants... followed by having your sorry ass brought up on barratry charges.
Welcome to the real world, where criticism is protected speech (unless it is threatening or libelous in nature, which opinions almost by definition cannot be).
Well, you're close, but you forgot four:
$EMBARRASSING_NICKNAME_CALLED_IN_ELEMENTARY_SCHOOL
$IS_CELEBRITY
And then, depending on whether $IS_CELEBRITY is true or not, one of the following:
$NAKED_CHILDHOOD_PICTURE_IN_BATHTUB
$CELEBRITY_SEX_TAPE_URL
Because if they're not famous, their parents always have a picture of them in the tub as an infant, and if they are famous, there's always a sex tape. Unless it's an under-18 female, in which case it is
$UNDERAGE_RACY_PICTURES_SENT_TO_HER_EX_BOYFRIEND
instead.
By the way, how did you get past the lameness filter with that much in all caps?
Well, one of them turned into a wraith.... Is that close enough for you? (And then, she did a stint as a human doctor after the death of Carson Beckett, but....)
Sorry, misread your last sentence there. Libre is a Latin-derived word, but is not a Latin word.
No, libre is not a Latin word. Be careful making assumptions about Latin based on French or Spanish. Those languages have diverged significantly from Latin in both spellings and pronunciations. The modern language that is closest to Latin is Italian, and its word is "libero".
With regard to the meaning of liber, you're both right, and those aren't the only two meanings for the word, either. The word liber has different meanings in Latin depending on context and usage. As a noun, it is a form of the word for "book" (liber, genitive libri, etc.) from the Proto-Indo-European language. As an adjective, it means "free", from Greek. (The adverb form of this is "libere", hence the French/Spanish word "libre" came from dropping the first "e" from the adverb form. The noun form of this word is libertas.) As a verb, liber is an inflected form of the word libo, meaning "to spill".
And you thought English was a messy language.
Fitting, though, that the same Latin word can mean both "book" and "free". The pen is mightier and all that.