...when you have perfectly good animals that are already made out of food?
Well, I'm a level ten carnivore, but if the taste and texture is good, I'll dump regular meat for artificial.
Both on a philosophical and practical basis. Meat is yummy, but the act of killing isn't all that pleasant. I'll note that there are some people who enjoy the killing part. I'm in the former, but anything can become my next meal in extremis.
Now for practicality, after becoming an industrialized process, meat can become very inexpensive. It can be virtually sterile. It can be of a huge variety. The exotic food oddballs can have pygmy hippo meat or salamander meat.
roughly 50% of chicks that are born are male, and they are useless to the egg industry, so they are killed usually by being ground up alive or by being suffocated using carbon dioxide, which is fairly slow and unpleasant process.
Third wave feminists are sponsoring research to see if the process can scale up to include human males.
What makes you think Google is taking extra effort to hide the competition?
In the shopping case, the EU has provided evidence.
Here are some more ways the EU can do whatever it is trying to do.
Force Amazon to supply results for Walmart and all other companies on Amazon search results. And since putting their own results ahead of their competition, force Amazon to put their options on the last page
Force shipping companies to aggregate all other companies shipping options, and likewise put their own at the end of the list.
After all, putting any information that a company has a pecuniary interest in as the first result is bad somehow.
The problem is that here in EU, the local google search does not return mapquest, yahoo, bing, iOS, or openstreetmaps at all, or only after 10+ pages of other search results. It's perfectly fine if Google is on top because it's the most popular. It's not fine if Google takes extra effort to hide all the competition.
Okay. Are you not alloed to use any other search engine? DuckDuckGo is illegal in the EU, along with Bing?
Perhaps this is just my Stupid American approach. I don't like Google as a search engine. Not at all. I search for something, and the hits are largely irrelevant, trying to sell me something when I'm trying to do research. I used it to see what was upsetting the Europeans so much that Google must be bitchslapped, and it's the same old Google it's been for many years.
So in stupid American fashion, I don't use it. I don't even give it a second thought. Perhaps in Europe there is a different and better outlook that I just don't understand.
But if I want to use google search to find out about other map providers, I'd like to see them show up in a fair way, and not have google pretend it's the only map provider there is.
I hope that is a hypothetical situation with a really gullible person living under a rock who hasn't used a computer before.
When dealing with actual sexual intercourse, alternative consent rules the day.
When dealing with something like asking a woman if she wants to get some lunch, or catch a movie, affirmative consent becomes a bit more of an issue. Because for many of today's women, the act of asking those questions may or may not be harassment, depending on if she wishes to be asked to lunch or dinner.
The problem isn't with all - or even most - women. But the repercussions - if you hit the reverse lottery, and the woman interprets "I like your earrings" as you saying "Let's go fuck" - are pretty dire for the earring rapist.
And by the way, in our sexual harassment reeducation meetings, the woman teaching the session used the earring example as something that men needed to avoid.
There's your line. No yes, no consent. No consent, line crossed.
Honestly I don't understand why this is so complicated for so many guys. If getting an audible "yes" is really that hard to get (women like fooling around too), maybe you need to start asking yourself some hard questions about whether or not the advice you get from your bros on Reddit and Slashdot are really worth listening to.
Because not every male interaction with a woman consists of a guy wanting to have sex with her.
Not knowing if you are male or female, I'll note that your commentary was pretty much focussed on sexual intercourse. That's a big part of the problem.
The problem is, you don't know who is going to interpret "I like your dress" or Your new hair style looks great." of my sexual harassment class "Nice earrings." As " I really want to screw you!"
My career is simply much more important than any interaction with any particular employee or co worker. That's not complicated at all. If I stand a good chance of getting in trouble or losing my job because of telling a lady she looks nice today, I'll simply not do that.
Seems pretty simple to me.
And if you don't see normal guys avoiding normal interactions with women as bizarre, well, okay, have your opinion. That also seems bizarre to me. I suspect your entire post which seems to equate every interaction as sexual intercourse oriented might be your issue.
And do we really want a solution that requires constant intervention?
Yes, we do -- because the fact that it requires constant intervention invalidates all of your fears.
And who will pay for the constant production of the huge amount of aerosols and delivery system needed to constantly alter the planet's average temperature?
Because we did such a great job of that already? Everything in life is a roll of the dice. The best we can do is calculate a probability and probabilities are not certain. There is no such thing as certainty in life.
A really rapid shedding of many terawatts of radiative forcing over a short time is hardly a roll of the dice. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to know that will be really disruptive weather wise.
Please don't trust that you understand all of the ways this might go wrong.
It reminds me of the kid's song, "The old Lady that swallowed the fly", where a woman kept swallowing larger and large animals to catch the animal she swallowed earlier.
This is a bad idea on several levels. First is that the aerosols that work best create acid rain. Do we wish to acidify the oceans more than is already going to happen?
Second, if we do this on a global scale, it will destabilize the atmosphere all over again. The world has been working to stabilize weather since we've altered the composition of the atmosphere. Given that we are near the end of the large scale CO2 emissions era, we are a little closer to better stability. The concept of rapidly shedding a lot of that radiative forcing will make for terribly unstable weather.
And do we really want a solution that requires constant intervention? Aerosols precipitate out of the atmosphere, so we gotta put more into it constantly.
Third is what happens if there is a miscalculation? An already unstable atmosphere shedding a lot of radiative forcing over a short time - it will be years of disruption before a "new normal" is reached, and if they are low by a few degrees, well, now you have a new ice age, and we've cured the population problem most unpleasantly.
It's not bizarre. It's the work place, not a pick up bar.
Remember some/many of those situations in this instance were also social, so given the cold ware between the sexes here, and my admonition here that men simply avoid any unnecessary interactions with women in the workplace, we're not so far apart.
That I think it is bizarre is my opinion. In what was a more normal world before it was "fixed", normal men and women in a work environment might engage in flirty talk with no intention of engaging in sex. The creeps? Oh yeah, they were there, and all of the ladies and men knew who they were.
Now? All men are considered creeps. Now a male/female hug in the workplace is considered a sexual advance (on the part of the male) I've had a some lady co-workers who are "touchy" - when they talk to you, they like to touch you. The type of touch is part of the communication. Part of the reading. As an example, a co-worker who was touchy would do a single hand on my arm just as a regular communication, lean into to me if she was sharing something confidential, use a two hand on the arm if I really needed to pay attention because she was upset about something, and some times a full on hug if she was in a good mood. I'm not personally a touchy person, in fact I had to get used to her interaction method. But I never interpreted it as her wanting anything other than a hug.
But the idea that I might do the reverse is completely unthinkable.
And over time, and as the third wave feminists entrenched their privilege, I avoided touchy ladies. I was friends with this woman before men were all evil, so with her it wasn't a big deal. Women I didn't know already were LWA.
If something does pick up at work and some romance blooms, it's because of mutual attraction and both people sending off signals.
Not a wise move at all, and I would advise strongly against that. If the relationship sours, it might intrude into the workplace, and is a minefield for both the woman and the man. If the relationship thrives, there is a good chance of the office grapevine getting gossipy about promotions, moves and the like. Danger, Will Robinson!!
I think a lot of guys don't read the signals correctly, they see a woman talking to them and they assume there's a chance because no one ever talks to them outside of work.
You're exactly right on that. There are a fair number of men who fall in love with any woman who is nice to them. It is terribly sad. In most cases, it's more annoying than anything else. Occasionally a friend or relative has to be called in to disabuse the guy. But most of these shy guys will just suffer in silence.
And I think that the workplace cold war and gender wars are approaching this the wrong way. Women are trained from an early age that everyone wants to lay them, and approach everything with the idea that the man who says hello is actually trying to get them in bed, and the shy guy thinks that any woman who smiles at him wants to spend their lives together. I think its the two sides of a coin, one revulsion, and the other attraction. And the rest of normal men just figure the situation is not a good one, and rationally disengage. And the jerks and creeps? They haven't changed a thing.
This sort of relationship between the sexes isn't healthy in the least.
But bizarre? All I can say is that normal guys who believe that any sort of relationship with female co-workers is best avoided with great prejudice is serving what the ladies say they want. And well, you can have your way, and you win. But if they think that thinking the weird situation in what is slowly becoming apartheid of the sexes is not allowed, well, sorry - you can't have every single thing you want.
I've worked with women, some as my superior, some as subordinates, virtually my entire working life, and I've never been accused of making unwanted advances, because I haven't.
Neither have I. On the other hand, I have had a few ladies making "unwanted" advances toward me.
But somewhere in there is a difference. I just said - "no thanks", we laughed about it, and that was it.
For the reverse, it is a crime, unless she likes the idea. So it's like that guy who went to live with the Grizzly bears. Ended up being lunch one day.
I view coworkers, superiors, equals or subordinates, as off limits, and all the women I have worked with have had the same policy. There are plenty of people outside of work if you're looking for love or one night stands, so why piss in your swimming pool by hitting on women at work?
While I share your avoidance technique - and that is what it is - even where I worked, they recognized that many professional people don't have much of a life outside of work, might actually want a romantic relationship, and you can't dictate to people who they associate with. The fraternization rules kind of got messed up when they purposely hired husband and wife both.
If a supervisor/subordinate relationship happened, they would move one or the other to a different department.
But yeah, I would not ever consider expressing interest in a woman at work. In the interest of full disclosure, I wasn't in the market, so I'm not certain how I would react if a woman expressed interest in me if I was single.
Don't know if he stepped out of line? Did you even read the summary, much less follow the links? He apologized in a way that strongly hints that the allegations were true.
There is a pretty good chance that he did what they accused him of doing.
But have men not learned? Don't look, don't touch, and for gawd's sake, don't socialize. A few beers, and you might be feeling warm and fuzzy, but remember, if she's had a few as well, she can't give legal consent, and if she isn't interested in you, any romantic overtures you make can be legal sexual assault.
Ouch. Ok. That confirms what my friends are always telling me: "Chill. You are too serious. Lighten up!"
We all fall prey at times. For me the repairable issue is where it stops at. Least common denominator stuff. I'm pretty good at repairing things like smartphones and imacs. Some folks are better than me, some worse, and some shouldn't be allowed to use hand tools. And the software side is tricky as well - I certainly like restoring older computers with Linux, and wouldn't mind that approach with phones. But then there are the aging batteries. Not a simple thing this concept.
But the hour is late, and if I don't stop typing, my stuff will be incomprehensible.
now if a resistor on the charge circuit on your apple board goes bad you're much more screwed over since there is no schematic available and apple is actively trying all it can to hide what is broken with it and is trying to make it so that if it has an unauthorized fix it will brick itself.
Well fortunately, Android phones are all fixable, and have been since the first phone.
It is a question of what you want. And the solution is illustrated by my silly example of the Atwater Kent.
The Atwater Kent uses seriously large components, and if hard pressed, I can make a lot of them - there are even some intrepid makers who are producing vacuum tubes in their shops.
But there is a big catch in there. The Atwater Kent is pretty big. A large part of that is because of those big replaceable parts.
So if we are to make that iPhone or Android smartphone repairable, we're going to have to do something about the construction. Not all that many folks are equipped with SMT repair setups, and even though I have the microscope and super tiny soldering devices, the component size and density in a phone makes the job so daunting I would only attempt it if my life depended on it.
Next up is troubleshooting. If we are going to find and repair these things at the component level, it will take time. Which is charged out. We are decades into the concept of swapping out whole assemblies because it's less expensive than the repair process. So now we have one board in a phone and many other modern devices.
So with making the modern smartphone at best the size of the old bag phones, and the extremely limited number of people who are going to repair individual components at the SMT level, yeah, I'd just as soon get a new phone.
You can probably find the parts or reasonable substitutes. Mechanical parts would be the most troublesome, but even a lot of that can be minted fresh by a machinist for a modest fee.
In fact, it is probably easier to fix your 1925 Atwater Kent than it is to fix your Samsung TV or iPhone.
Right - but you do know I'm just having a bit of fun here.
Your vaunted system which you use as a bludgeon to express the inadequacies of your enemy, the US, and your superiority?
is completely arbitrary. No more accurate or inaccurate than any other.
Oddly enough, some of us can operate just as accurately and reproducibly in whatever arbitrary measurement system we are handed, and do not need to be tied to one arbitrary measurement system to the exclusion of all others. I even have a metric mill and lathe that I can produce English parts on. I can make things in fractions, decimal inch, Whitworth, and metric. Perhaps you cannot.
And thank you to the folks who proved me correct. -1 Flamebait. Not a cogent argument to be had.
While I don't care for the use of "Horrific", that isn't a particularly encouraging map. Interestingly, Greenland shows a pretty high amount of methane over the glaciated land, which I find troubling.
I see the metric warriors are out in full force today. I'm at 0 and you are at -1.
You posted bullshit and you got moderated down for it, so the system is working as intended...
Mod me down Metric warriors, let no opposing thoughts spoil the purity of your unquestionable truths!
Did ever stop to think people might be moderating you down because your posts make you look like a trolling asshole?
No, I believe that there are people in here who think that they are somehow "winning" if they attack something they don't believe in, and have a religion-like fervor that any disagreement must be crushed and terminated with extreme prejudice. The metric warriors make linux zealots look like the very model of accepting of different views. And I love Linux.
If you are seeing a "trolling asshole", consider that you are almost certainly looking in the mirror, and seeing your reflection in all of it's glory.
Because if you are doing your life's work by ruthlessly standing in full dudgeon, angry beyond rationality over metric versus English, so righteous in your indignation they you find some fellow who is simply posting something you disagree with, yet you are fully justified in calling him a "trolling asshole", well then thank your deity for your sheltered and relatively problem free life.
Live long and prosper, friend. Noli nothis permittere te terere.
Slashdot Mirror
...when you have perfectly good animals that are already made out of food?
Well, I'm a level ten carnivore, but if the taste and texture is good, I'll dump regular meat for artificial.
Both on a philosophical and practical basis. Meat is yummy, but the act of killing isn't all that pleasant. I'll note that there are some people who enjoy the killing part. I'm in the former, but anything can become my next meal in extremis.
Now for practicality, after becoming an industrialized process, meat can become very inexpensive. It can be virtually sterile. It can be of a huge variety. The exotic food oddballs can have pygmy hippo meat or salamander meat.
It will be an interesting ride.
roughly 50% of chicks that are born are male, and they are useless to the egg industry, so they are killed usually by being ground up alive or by being suffocated using carbon dioxide, which is fairly slow and unpleasant process.
Third wave feminists are sponsoring research to see if the process can scale up to include human males.
FTFY
t the Sun if they don't pray hard and give me a lot of money.
3. Prophet!
Dear sir, you have just won the internet!
Is this a Captain Obvious commercial?
What makes you think Google is taking extra effort to hide the competition?
In the shopping case, the EU has provided evidence.
Here are some more ways the EU can do whatever it is trying to do.
Force Amazon to supply results for Walmart and all other companies on Amazon search results. And since putting their own results ahead of their competition, force Amazon to put their options on the last page
Force shipping companies to aggregate all other companies shipping options, and likewise put their own at the end of the list.
After all, putting any information that a company has a pecuniary interest in as the first result is bad somehow.
Just trying to understnd my betters.
The problem is that here in EU, the local google search does not return mapquest, yahoo, bing, iOS, or openstreetmaps at all, or only after 10+ pages of other search results. It's perfectly fine if Google is on top because it's the most popular. It's not fine if Google takes extra effort to hide all the competition.
Okay. Are you not alloed to use any other search engine? DuckDuckGo is illegal in the EU, along with Bing?
Perhaps this is just my Stupid American approach. I don't like Google as a search engine. Not at all. I search for something, and the hits are largely irrelevant, trying to sell me something when I'm trying to do research. I used it to see what was upsetting the Europeans so much that Google must be bitchslapped, and it's the same old Google it's been for many years.
So in stupid American fashion, I don't use it. I don't even give it a second thought. Perhaps in Europe there is a different and better outlook that I just don't understand.
I'm talking about searching for the word "maps".
I usually use DDG, so I opened up a page with Google - on a Chromebook even, and typed in "maps".
Top hit was Google maps.
Second hit was Android apps maps, so still Google.
Third was Mapquest
Fourth was Yahoo Maps
Fifth was iOS maps
Then an iTunes store for Google maps
Then maps.com for actual hardcopy maps
I don't get it - what's the problem? Are you demanding that Google put everyone else above their own hits?
But if I want to use google search to find out about other map providers, I'd like to see them show up in a fair way, and not have google pretend it's the only map provider there is.
I hope that is a hypothetical situation with a really gullible person living under a rock who hasn't used a computer before.
Affirmative consent = bizarre?
When dealing with actual sexual intercourse, alternative consent rules the day.
When dealing with something like asking a woman if she wants to get some lunch, or catch a movie, affirmative consent becomes a bit more of an issue. Because for many of today's women, the act of asking those questions may or may not be harassment, depending on if she wishes to be asked to lunch or dinner.
The problem isn't with all - or even most - women. But the repercussions - if you hit the reverse lottery, and the woman interprets "I like your earrings" as you saying "Let's go fuck" - are pretty dire for the earring rapist.
And by the way, in our sexual harassment reeducation meetings, the woman teaching the session used the earring example as something that men needed to avoid.
There's your line. No yes, no consent. No consent, line crossed.
Honestly I don't understand why this is so complicated for so many guys. If getting an audible "yes" is really that hard to get (women like fooling around too), maybe you need to start asking yourself some hard questions about whether or not the advice you get from your bros on Reddit and Slashdot are really worth listening to.
Because not every male interaction with a woman consists of a guy wanting to have sex with her.
Not knowing if you are male or female, I'll note that your commentary was pretty much focussed on sexual intercourse. That's a big part of the problem.
The problem is, you don't know who is going to interpret "I like your dress" or Your new hair style looks great." of my sexual harassment class "Nice earrings." As " I really want to screw you!"
My career is simply much more important than any interaction with any particular employee or co worker. That's not complicated at all. If I stand a good chance of getting in trouble or losing my job because of telling a lady she looks nice today, I'll simply not do that.
Seems pretty simple to me.
And if you don't see normal guys avoiding normal interactions with women as bizarre, well, okay, have your opinion. That also seems bizarre to me. I suspect your entire post which seems to equate every interaction as sexual intercourse oriented might be your issue.
Yes, we do -- because the fact that it requires constant intervention invalidates all of your fears.
And who will pay for the constant production of the huge amount of aerosols and delivery system needed to constantly alter the planet's average temperature?
Because we did such a great job of that already? Everything in life is a roll of the dice. The best we can do is calculate a probability and probabilities are not certain. There is no such thing as certainty in life.
A really rapid shedding of many terawatts of radiative forcing over a short time is hardly a roll of the dice. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to know that will be really disruptive weather wise.
Please don't trust that you understand all of the ways this might go wrong.
It reminds me of the kid's song, "The old Lady that swallowed the fly", where a woman kept swallowing larger and large animals to catch the animal she swallowed earlier.
This is a bad idea on several levels. First is that the aerosols that work best create acid rain. Do we wish to acidify the oceans more than is already going to happen?
Second, if we do this on a global scale, it will destabilize the atmosphere all over again. The world has been working to stabilize weather since we've altered the composition of the atmosphere. Given that we are near the end of the large scale CO2 emissions era, we are a little closer to better stability. The concept of rapidly shedding a lot of that radiative forcing will make for terribly unstable weather.
And do we really want a solution that requires constant intervention? Aerosols precipitate out of the atmosphere, so we gotta put more into it constantly.
Third is what happens if there is a miscalculation? An already unstable atmosphere shedding a lot of radiative forcing over a short time - it will be years of disruption before a "new normal" is reached, and if they are low by a few degrees, well, now you have a new ice age, and we've cured the population problem most unpleasantly.
It's not bizarre. It's the work place, not a pick up bar.
Remember some/many of those situations in this instance were also social, so given the cold ware between the sexes here, and my admonition here that men simply avoid any unnecessary interactions with women in the workplace, we're not so far apart.
That I think it is bizarre is my opinion. In what was a more normal world before it was "fixed", normal men and women in a work environment might engage in flirty talk with no intention of engaging in sex. The creeps? Oh yeah, they were there, and all of the ladies and men knew who they were.
Now? All men are considered creeps. Now a male/female hug in the workplace is considered a sexual advance (on the part of the male) I've had a some lady co-workers who are "touchy" - when they talk to you, they like to touch you. The type of touch is part of the communication. Part of the reading. As an example, a co-worker who was touchy would do a single hand on my arm just as a regular communication, lean into to me if she was sharing something confidential, use a two hand on the arm if I really needed to pay attention because she was upset about something, and some times a full on hug if she was in a good mood. I'm not personally a touchy person, in fact I had to get used to her interaction method. But I never interpreted it as her wanting anything other than a hug.
But the idea that I might do the reverse is completely unthinkable.
And over time, and as the third wave feminists entrenched their privilege, I avoided touchy ladies. I was friends with this woman before men were all evil, so with her it wasn't a big deal. Women I didn't know already were LWA.
If something does pick up at work and some romance blooms, it's because of mutual attraction and both people sending off signals.
Not a wise move at all, and I would advise strongly against that. If the relationship sours, it might intrude into the workplace, and is a minefield for both the woman and the man. If the relationship thrives, there is a good chance of the office grapevine getting gossipy about promotions, moves and the like. Danger, Will Robinson!!
I think a lot of guys don't read the signals correctly, they see a woman talking to them and they assume there's a chance because no one ever talks to them outside of work.
You're exactly right on that. There are a fair number of men who fall in love with any woman who is nice to them. It is terribly sad. In most cases, it's more annoying than anything else. Occasionally a friend or relative has to be called in to disabuse the guy. But most of these shy guys will just suffer in silence.
And I think that the workplace cold war and gender wars are approaching this the wrong way. Women are trained from an early age that everyone wants to lay them, and approach everything with the idea that the man who says hello is actually trying to get them in bed, and the shy guy thinks that any woman who smiles at him wants to spend their lives together. I think its the two sides of a coin, one revulsion, and the other attraction. And the rest of normal men just figure the situation is not a good one, and rationally disengage. And the jerks and creeps? They haven't changed a thing.
This sort of relationship between the sexes isn't healthy in the least.
But bizarre? All I can say is that normal guys who believe that any sort of relationship with female co-workers is best avoided with great prejudice is serving what the ladies say they want. And well, you can have your way, and you win. But if they think that thinking the weird situation in what is slowly becoming apartheid of the sexes is not allowed, well, sorry - you can't have every single thing you want.
I've worked with women, some as my superior, some as subordinates, virtually my entire working life, and I've never been accused of making unwanted advances, because I haven't.
Neither have I. On the other hand, I have had a few ladies making "unwanted" advances toward me.
But somewhere in there is a difference. I just said - "no thanks", we laughed about it, and that was it.
For the reverse, it is a crime, unless she likes the idea. So it's like that guy who went to live with the Grizzly bears. Ended up being lunch one day.
I view coworkers, superiors, equals or subordinates, as off limits, and all the women I have worked with have had the same policy. There are plenty of people outside of work if you're looking for love or one night stands, so why piss in your swimming pool by hitting on women at work?
While I share your avoidance technique - and that is what it is - even where I worked, they recognized that many professional people don't have much of a life outside of work, might actually want a romantic relationship, and you can't dictate to people who they associate with. The fraternization rules kind of got messed up when they purposely hired husband and wife both.
If a supervisor/subordinate relationship happened, they would move one or the other to a different department.
But yeah, I would not ever consider expressing interest in a woman at work. In the interest of full disclosure, I wasn't in the market, so I'm not certain how I would react if a woman expressed interest in me if I was single.
Don't know if he stepped out of line? Did you even read the summary, much less follow the links? He apologized in a way that strongly hints that the allegations were true.
There is a pretty good chance that he did what they accused him of doing.
But have men not learned? Don't look, don't touch, and for gawd's sake, don't socialize. A few beers, and you might be feeling warm and fuzzy, but remember, if she's had a few as well, she can't give legal consent, and if she isn't interested in you, any romantic overtures you make can be legal sexual assault.
It does seem bizarre, but it is where we are at.
Ouch. Ok. That confirms what my friends are always telling me: "Chill. You are too serious. Lighten up!"
We all fall prey at times. For me the repairable issue is where it stops at. Least common denominator stuff. I'm pretty good at repairing things like smartphones and imacs. Some folks are better than me, some worse, and some shouldn't be allowed to use hand tools. And the software side is tricky as well - I certainly like restoring older computers with Linux, and wouldn't mind that approach with phones. But then there are the aging batteries. Not a simple thing this concept.
But the hour is late, and if I don't stop typing, my stuff will be incomprehensible.
Yawn. Which one of us is rubber and which one of us is glue?
Good lord! Sorry, I dpn't argue with 5th graders. Come back when you can talk like an adult.
now if a resistor on the charge circuit on your apple board goes bad you're much more screwed over since there is no schematic available and apple is actively trying all it can to hide what is broken with it and is trying to make it so that if it has an unauthorized fix it will brick itself.
Well fortunately, Android phones are all fixable, and have been since the first phone.
It is a question of what you want. And the solution is illustrated by my silly example of the Atwater Kent.
The Atwater Kent uses seriously large components, and if hard pressed, I can make a lot of them - there are even some intrepid makers who are producing vacuum tubes in their shops.
But there is a big catch in there. The Atwater Kent is pretty big. A large part of that is because of those big replaceable parts.
So if we are to make that iPhone or Android smartphone repairable, we're going to have to do something about the construction. Not all that many folks are equipped with SMT repair setups, and even though I have the microscope and super tiny soldering devices, the component size and density in a phone makes the job so daunting I would only attempt it if my life depended on it.
Next up is troubleshooting. If we are going to find and repair these things at the component level, it will take time. Which is charged out. We are decades into the concept of swapping out whole assemblies because it's less expensive than the repair process. So now we have one board in a phone and many other modern devices.
So with making the modern smartphone at best the size of the old bag phones, and the extremely limited number of people who are going to repair individual components at the SMT level, yeah, I'd just as soon get a new phone.
You can probably find the parts or reasonable substitutes. Mechanical parts would be the most troublesome, but even a lot of that can be minted fresh by a machinist for a modest fee.
In fact, it is probably easier to fix your 1925 Atwater Kent than it is to fix your Samsung TV or iPhone.
Right - but you do know I'm just having a bit of fun here.
No one has said spare parts need to be made available forever
Fucking liberals are preventing me from fixing my Atwater Kent! We need those aprea parts and we need them now!
Ummm, okay. What are those jobs?
Maybe everyone will be bosses.
I can hardly wait to buy all of the new parts to restore my 1925 Atwater Kent Tube Radio.
Some information for the Metric uber alles crowd.
Your vaunted system which you use as a bludgeon to express the inadequacies of your enemy, the US, and your superiority?
is completely arbitrary. No more accurate or inaccurate than any other.
Oddly enough, some of us can operate just as accurately and reproducibly in whatever arbitrary measurement system we are handed, and do not need to be tied to one arbitrary measurement system to the exclusion of all others. I even have a metric mill and lathe that I can produce English parts on. I can make things in fractions, decimal inch, Whitworth, and metric. Perhaps you cannot.
And thank you to the folks who proved me correct. -1 Flamebait. Not a cogent argument to be had.
"But there is a lot of that stuff in the ocean. Ice with a lot of methane trapped in it. Hopefully the stuff in the ocean is stable."
four words which should give you the answer you need "Laptev Sea Methane emissions"
There's somewhere between 1 and 5GT in that area and the keyword for probable effects is "Storegga"
Yeah, that's not good. http://arctic-news.blogspot.co...
While I don't care for the use of "Horrific", that isn't a particularly encouraging map. Interestingly, Greenland shows a pretty high amount of methane over the glaciated land, which I find troubling.
I see the metric warriors are out in full force today. I'm at 0 and you are at -1.
You posted bullshit and you got moderated down for it, so the system is working as intended...
Mod me down Metric warriors, let no opposing thoughts spoil the purity of your unquestionable truths!
Did ever stop to think people might be moderating you down because your posts make you look like a trolling asshole?
No, I believe that there are people in here who think that they are somehow "winning" if they attack something they don't believe in, and have a religion-like fervor that any disagreement must be crushed and terminated with extreme prejudice. The metric warriors make linux zealots look like the very model of accepting of different views. And I love Linux.
If you are seeing a "trolling asshole", consider that you are almost certainly looking in the mirror, and seeing your reflection in all of it's glory.
Because if you are doing your life's work by ruthlessly standing in full dudgeon, angry beyond rationality over metric versus English, so righteous in your indignation they you find some fellow who is simply posting something you disagree with, yet you are fully justified in calling him a "trolling asshole", well then thank your deity for your sheltered and relatively problem free life.
Live long and prosper, friend. Noli nothis permittere te terere.