Captain Hunt: America, override privacy mode.
Beka: Hold on. You can just override privacy mode just like that?
Captain Hunt: Yeah. America's at war. We can't afford secrets.
I don't use the SysRq key too often, but when I'm working with a kernel that's having issues those magic system request combos become really useful.
I've also become aware that the Pause/Break key is used in the windows command prompt. (I recently had the unfortunate experience of creating a python/django application on windows...)
...but is this something that should be sued over? It's not like the bloatware is harming anyone; it's just freaking annoying.
I feel a company should have the right to choose whether or not to put bloatware on its devices, just like I have a right to avoid purchasing from that company because they're being retarded.
It seems to me that this would either kill or severely wound Google. I'd assume that all of Google's services work hand in hand (search, apps, etc) to generate revenue or information needed for Google to generate more services / better the existing services.
Disclaimer: I say the above not really knowing about Google's revenue stream or any specifics really, so it's possible there's something going on that I completely missed, or don't understand.
The article says Apple should restrict its bans to apps that have terrible functionality or a poor UI, and 'get out of the business of censorship.'
TFA explains the difference between quality control and censorship, but isn't it kindof the same thing? I understand that yes, there are differences, but why ban an app with a bad UI? Who decides whether it's good or bad?
It seems that if they're against censorship, they'd be against apple banning a third-party app (with no affiliation to apple other than being sold on an Apple market) just because it's not "quality".
Personally, I think apple should let the consumers decide what's good or bad, but it's their company, and it's their prerogative to make that decision.
The concept of having people go to their local Best Buy to "try" out a product, then going home and ordering it online, only to receive it from a local warehouse is kindof humorous.
I still have the ability to choose to drive a car. Yes, if I want to drive a car, I need to do certain things, like pay for insurance.
If I don't drive a car, I shouldn't have to pay a tax for not doing so, to help with the people who get into accidents that can't pay for it. Same principle.
Bullshit. The tax is only on those who refuse to get insurance. That will be an infinitisimally small number of Americans.
While I agree that not having health insurance is really risky and dumb, taxing someone for not buying / wanting something goes against freedom.
The government does has the right to tax, but that should only apply for the things that the government should take care of, which is 1) providing national defense and 2) the legal system, not telling us which insurances to get.
Not saying that Google doesn't want money, but it doesn't seem to be all that matters to them.
Playing devil's advocate, you could also say "Not saying that Microsoft isn't technical, but it doesn't seem to be all that matters to them".
To be fair, a lot of companies underestimate the ability for tech people to have good communication skills, for both inside the company and without. When you have big companies like Microsoft and Google, to have a good infrastructure, you need good communication. This just shows that, for one reason or another, Microsoft has chosen to focus on this in their current hiring process.
Honestly, they both want / need money and tech to stay in business.
Pirk: Mr Fukov, twist factor 1000. Just pick a direction
Fukov: It doesn't go to 1000....
Spook: It would be logical to avoid the direction we just came from. The station commander would hardly appreciate it.
Pirk: Hmph. Engage...
Russia and Iran propose new rules to measure Internet traffic along national borders and bill the originator of the traffic, as with international phone calls.
That is a good point, because it exists. That being said, at least for me, I see a lot of value in Linux already, and a lot of improvements actually being implemented, where as Microsoft promises a lot more than it delivers.
Also, I'm sure the whole open source thing helps as well. If someone really, _really_ doesn't like something they could do something about it themselves.
The government has to be very careful with opinions as a whole though, since they are really there to represent the people.
There's a difference between Joe the representative voicing an opinion and the government body applying resources (given to them by the tax payers) to voice an opinion.
I happen to be one who think that there is enough evidence to say at the very least that global warming is possibly non-existent. If the government starts spending my tax money to at best argue global warming or at worst silence people who don't think there's enough evidence to support it, I'd feel both ripped off / used and controlled. These are not good things.
I mean, I don't care about people who think the moon landing is fake. Let them spend their time thinking that. It doesn't hurt me. What does hurt me is _my_ hard earned money being used for a useless cause.
It even states in TFA that "some conspiracy theories, under [their] definition, have turned out to be true." So why spend time and energy arguing potentially the wrong side?
Well from the very limited amount of screenshots and the 9 second video clip, it seems to look a lot like it does in Warcraft 3, so while it does look pretty awesome and fun, I'm not sure what they'll be able to do that wouldn't be possible using Warcraft 3.
I'd think the main things this game could have to offer is better graphics and more options (more heroes / the ability to build and repair structures / etc). Plus, it might be cool if they allowed mods, kindof how World of Warcraft does, so that players could customize the interface and whatnot (however I say that not knowing specifics about this game, so that might not be possible).
Then again, just the simple fact that it's "DOTA on Linux" does have appeal in-and-of itself.
Slashdot Mirror
To paraphrase Andromeda:
Captain Hunt: America, override privacy mode.
Beka: Hold on. You can just override privacy mode just like that?
Captain Hunt: Yeah. America's at war. We can't afford secrets.
Yup. In Outlook, in order to export data, you first go to "Open" then "Import".
Gotta love window navigation!
When I first read the title I thought it was going to be along the lines of how to not overuse emojis. I guess that's just my wishful thinking.
I don't use the SysRq key too often, but when I'm working with a kernel that's having issues those magic system request combos become really useful.
I've also become aware that the Pause/Break key is used in the windows command prompt. (I recently had the unfortunate experience of creating a python/django application on windows...)
...but is this something that should be sued over? It's not like the bloatware is harming anyone; it's just freaking annoying.
I feel a company should have the right to choose whether or not to put bloatware on its devices, just like I have a right to avoid purchasing from that company because they're being retarded.
"Products are for people who don't have presentations"
-Veronica from Better off Ted
It seems to me that this would either kill or severely wound Google. I'd assume that all of Google's services work hand in hand (search, apps, etc) to generate revenue or information needed for Google to generate more services / better the existing services.
Disclaimer: I say the above not really knowing about Google's revenue stream or any specifics really, so it's possible there's something going on that I completely missed, or don't understand.
I won't be happy until I get my LCARS display. Just imagine controlling a car like that.
Heck, "car" is already included in the acronym!
...American right-wing radio and TV clown Glenn Beck...
Now, I'm not commenting on whether he's right or wrong, but this in an accepted summary? Seems a bit much even by Slashdot standards.
The article says Apple should restrict its bans to apps that have terrible functionality or a poor UI, and 'get out of the business of censorship.'
TFA explains the difference between quality control and censorship, but isn't it kindof the same thing? I understand that yes, there are differences, but why ban an app with a bad UI? Who decides whether it's good or bad?
It seems that if they're against censorship, they'd be against apple banning a third-party app (with no affiliation to apple other than being sold on an Apple market) just because it's not "quality".
Personally, I think apple should let the consumers decide what's good or bad, but it's their company, and it's their prerogative to make that decision.
"It must have took around 5 minutes in paint to come up with that design..."
"I can't help but think of windows 3.11 for some reason."
"Does my monitor need calibrating again, or do those four colours in the panes look curiously sickly?"
5. I... I have no idea how to fix #5.
Simple! Don't let them eat anything!
The concept of having people go to their local Best Buy to "try" out a product, then going home and ordering it online, only to receive it from a local warehouse is kindof humorous.
I still have the ability to choose to drive a car. Yes, if I want to drive a car, I need to do certain things, like pay for insurance.
If I don't drive a car, I shouldn't have to pay a tax for not doing so, to help with the people who get into accidents that can't pay for it. Same principle.
Bullshit. The tax is only on those who refuse to get insurance. That will be an infinitisimally small number of Americans.
While I agree that not having health insurance is really risky and dumb, taxing someone for not buying / wanting something goes against freedom.
The government does has the right to tax, but that should only apply for the things that the government should take care of, which is 1) providing national defense and 2) the legal system, not telling us which insurances to get.
Not saying that Google doesn't want money, but it doesn't seem to be all that matters to them.
Playing devil's advocate, you could also say "Not saying that Microsoft isn't technical, but it doesn't seem to be all that matters to them".
To be fair, a lot of companies underestimate the ability for tech people to have good communication skills, for both inside the company and without. When you have big companies like Microsoft and Google, to have a good infrastructure, you need good communication. This just shows that, for one reason or another, Microsoft has chosen to focus on this in their current hiring process.
Honestly, they both want / need money and tech to stay in business.
Pirk: Mr Fukov, twist factor 1000. Just pick a direction
Fukov: It doesn't go to 1000....
Spook: It would be logical to avoid the direction we just came from. The station commander would hardly appreciate it.
Pirk: Hmph. Engage...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPglc3z6r_A
Russia and Iran propose new rules to measure Internet traffic along national borders and bill the originator of the traffic, as with international phone calls.
http://bash.org/?142934
Remember when we used to joke about these things?
I'm not a big fan of this UI, but it does remind me of the fairly recent UI change that I've seen in gmail. Yeah... not a big fan of that either.
Is this just some kind of "natural" progression we're going with?
That is a good point, because it exists. That being said, at least for me, I see a lot of value in Linux already, and a lot of improvements actually being implemented, where as Microsoft promises a lot more than it delivers.
Also, I'm sure the whole open source thing helps as well. If someone really, _really_ doesn't like something they could do something about it themselves.
Why is our tax money being used for this?
It isn't. The article is about an academic paper written by the appointee, prior to being appointed. It's not an actual policy or proposal.
Excuse me. You're correct. I should have phrased it slightly different, such as "Why should our tax money ever be used for something like this?"
Heh, I caught that right after I submitted it, and wondered if anyone would comment on it.
The government has to be very careful with opinions as a whole though, since they are really there to represent the people.
There's a difference between Joe the representative voicing an opinion and the government body applying resources (given to them by the tax payers) to voice an opinion.
I happen to be one who think that there is enough evidence to say at the very least that global warming is possibly non-existent. If the government starts spending my tax money to at best argue global warming or at worst silence people who don't think there's enough evidence to support it, I'd feel both ripped off / used and controlled. These are not good things.
Why is our tax money being used for this?
I mean, I don't care about people who think the moon landing is fake. Let them spend their time thinking that. It doesn't hurt me. What does hurt me is _my_ hard earned money being used for a useless cause.
It even states in TFA that "some conspiracy theories, under [their] definition, have turned out to be true." So why spend time and energy arguing potentially the wrong side?
But it's still better than not voting.
Well from the very limited amount of screenshots and the 9 second video clip, it seems to look a lot like it does in Warcraft 3, so while it does look pretty awesome and fun, I'm not sure what they'll be able to do that wouldn't be possible using Warcraft 3.
I'd think the main things this game could have to offer is better graphics and more options (more heroes / the ability to build and repair structures / etc). Plus, it might be cool if they allowed mods, kindof how World of Warcraft does, so that players could customize the interface and whatnot (however I say that not knowing specifics about this game, so that might not be possible).
Then again, just the simple fact that it's "DOTA on Linux" does have appeal in-and-of itself.