That was my impression too. This sounds like the equivalent of, "a company rented a van for a business trip that a family could have used for sight-seeing."
...it is a necessity to make smartphones and iPads smaller?
Yes, because it's profitable. And companies that are less profitable than their competitors are pushed out of the market and thus into extinction. Smaller equates to being more marketable to a portion of consumers large enough to detmine company life or death.
If we all agreed that there's no reason my phone has to be 50% slimmer, then no it would not be necessary. But most people just think, "his is thinner and therefore better - I want one too."
Exactly - If you give it away for nothing and people want it, it has value so essentially you are paying them. If you feel good doing it, you're essentially being paid. There's just no hard currency involved.
I would have if I'd bothered. New Mexico is full of "gearheads", which is why we don't bother with Yahoo. Wy wife uses Yahoo fanatically, but doesn't know the difference between a monitor and a computer. And trying to explain that CPU doesn't mean that big boxy thing would make her head explode.
Reminds me of a conversation I had a while back. "Why in the hell did they paint their building that bright-ass obnoxious yellow color?!?" "Do you know what they do there?" "Yeah - It's a title loans place." "See, you know what they do there. That's why they painted their building that bright-ass obnoxious yellow color."
I agree. I could be fired for bringing something as innocent as a pocket knife into work, but if I saw somebody get busted for one it would really make me want to smack security with my keyboard.
It was just an example. And it's hardly the most dangerous invention in history and not by the most aggressive civilization - even in their region. Should we go with "Who invented nuclear weapons?"
Depends on how you use it. [In my experience] Chrome does well with Netflix, but flakes out when my wife is trying to play FB games. FF will play her games, but cannibalizes itself on memory if she does it for long - IE does better (as dirty as I feel saying that.) Chrome and FF come out as about a wash for casual browsing but, for reasons that may be irrational, I've leaned toward Chrome ever since FF ticked me off for blowing out memory when my wife was gaming. [Damn you Candy Crush! I used to actually see my wife's FACE from time to time!]
...Chrome's addons are what keep me tied to the browser.
Why be tied to anything? At work, I only use 2, depending on what I'm doing. At home, I use 3. I used to be a FF aficionado, but have strayed as its memory hogging has bloated. Now, I typically stick to Chrome except when things don't work. Then I resort to IE or FF. Do we really have to decide whether we want burgers OR tacos for the rest of our lives, or just pick according to floating whims?
Agreed. Oh look! "It is his belief that the dangers of the Internet outweigh its benefits." Let's ban progress. Who the hell was reckless enough to invent gunpowder??
I'm curious as to what 'crime' he made by expressing himself this way.
I think the problem is a little more complicated than that. 1) Somebody got a phone call from an idiot saying that they believed someone was making a threat. 2) This person realizes that there is no threat, BUT, if the kid for some unrelated reason commits some act of violence and the media finds out that a warning was ignored, they'll have a field day and the person will be crucified. 3) So, the person who received the phone call passes along the fact that they got it and it's in somebody else's lap who, using the same logic, feels the need to at least make a show of taking some sort of action. 4) Spirals out of control and we get a ridiculous arrest over a stupid, but innocent, sarcastic comment.
If it's printed in a newspaper worldwide, how the hell are you supposed to know it's classified information?
Official stance is that, should you accidentally encounter classified information somewhere (e.g. Wikipedia), you neither confirm nor deny its accuracy. Then report it. Then the "powers that be" essentially nuke the computer from orbit.
Seems more logical to neither confirm nor deny, then proceed to ignore.
Anyone directly connects their home automation equipment to the internet is asking for trouble.
If you don't realize that there are security concerns, there are minor conveniences to be had. E.g. heating up the jacuzzi for when you get home, checking to make sure you turned the oven off, cancelling the A/C timer because you won't be home until much later than expected, etc. Minor, but "neat" enough to sell to somebody who wants to show it off.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep - Apparently, we're exactly 5 minutes from global warming destroying the planet. I guess "The Day After Tomorrow" was just too optimistic.
That was my impression too. This sounds like the equivalent of, "a company rented a van for a business trip that a family could have used for sight-seeing."
...it is a necessity to make smartphones and iPads smaller?
Yes, because it's profitable. And companies that are less profitable than their competitors are pushed out of the market and thus into extinction. Smaller equates to being more marketable to a portion of consumers large enough to detmine company life or death.
If we all agreed that there's no reason my phone has to be 50% slimmer, then no it would not be necessary. But most people just think, "his is thinner and therefore better - I want one too."
It's quite arrogant for we Americans to assume all the worlds events are all about us!
I'm assuming that most of the world's events are about money and power. Both jump borders like deer at a speed-bump.
You can kill people driving drunk, I don't understand why we punish guys who threaten profits more than guys who threaten lives.
Look at the motivation. Monetarily, which has more force behind it, one human life (or even a van full) or the sum of all Hollywood blockbusters?
...Do American corporations really have such reach? I doubt that...
Personally, I don't doubt that for a second... Either I'm paranoid, you're naive, or both.
I've seen evidence of organic matter there - Possibly even life at some point. This is definitely worth exploring.
Exactly - If you give it away for nothing and people want it, it has value so essentially you are paying them. If you feel good doing it, you're essentially being paid. There's just no hard currency involved.
Sure, if the time to write the software was worth nothing.
Of course, if he enjoyed doing it or got some sense of satisfaction, hell it's cheaper than a movie. Total cost could have been less than $0.
Be careful - The moon is a harsh mistress.
I would have if I'd bothered. New Mexico is full of "gearheads", which is why we don't bother with Yahoo. Wy wife uses Yahoo fanatically, but doesn't know the difference between a monitor and a computer. And trying to explain that CPU doesn't mean that big boxy thing would make her head explode.
Reminds me of a conversation I had a while back.
"Why in the hell did they paint their building that bright-ass obnoxious yellow color?!?"
"Do you know what they do there?"
"Yeah - It's a title loans place."
"See, you know what they do there. That's why they painted their building that bright-ass obnoxious yellow color."
The lasers pulse every 760 nanoseconds to induce red blood cells to emit sound waves with frequencies of more than 100MHz...
If blood emits sound waves, but they can't be heard, does it make a sound?
I agree. I could be fired for bringing something as innocent as a pocket knife into work, but if I saw somebody get busted for one it would really make me want to smack security with my keyboard.
Heck, the Nobel prize has been contributed to the inventor of dynamite (whatever his name was...)
It was just an example. And it's hardly the most dangerous invention in history and not by the most aggressive civilization - even in their region. Should we go with "Who invented nuclear weapons?"
Depends on how you use it. [In my experience] Chrome does well with Netflix, but flakes out when my wife is trying to play FB games. FF will play her games, but cannibalizes itself on memory if she does it for long - IE does better (as dirty as I feel saying that.) Chrome and FF come out as about a wash for casual browsing but, for reasons that may be irrational, I've leaned toward Chrome ever since FF ticked me off for blowing out memory when my wife was gaming. [Damn you Candy Crush! I used to actually see my wife's FACE from time to time!]
...Chrome's addons are what keep me tied to the browser.
Why be tied to anything? At work, I only use 2, depending on what I'm doing. At home, I use 3. I used to be a FF aficionado, but have strayed as its memory hogging has bloated. Now, I typically stick to Chrome except when things don't work. Then I resort to IE or FF. Do we really have to decide whether we want burgers OR tacos for the rest of our lives, or just pick according to floating whims?
ooh look at that, it goes 500mph!
Agreed. Oh look! "It is his belief that the dangers of the Internet outweigh its benefits." Let's ban progress. Who the hell was reckless enough to invent gunpowder??
Covering your ass is essential. Covering your ass by passing the buck, though, is equally as effective and much easier.
I'm curious as to what 'crime' he made by expressing himself this way.
I think the problem is a little more complicated than that.
1) Somebody got a phone call from an idiot saying that they believed someone was making a threat.
2) This person realizes that there is no threat, BUT, if the kid for some unrelated reason commits some act of violence and the media finds out that a warning was ignored, they'll have a field day and the person will be crucified.
3) So, the person who received the phone call passes along the fact that they got it and it's in somebody else's lap who, using the same logic, feels the need to at least make a show of taking some sort of action.
4) Spirals out of control and we get a ridiculous arrest over a stupid, but innocent, sarcastic comment.
Welcome to the modern age...
If it's printed in a newspaper worldwide, how the hell are you supposed to know it's classified information?
Official stance is that, should you accidentally encounter classified information somewhere (e.g. Wikipedia), you neither confirm nor deny its accuracy. Then report it. Then the "powers that be" essentially nuke the computer from orbit.
Seems more logical to neither confirm nor deny, then proceed to ignore.
Anyone directly connects their home automation equipment to the internet is asking for trouble.
If you don't realize that there are security concerns, there are minor conveniences to be had. E.g. heating up the jacuzzi for when you get home, checking to make sure you turned the oven off, cancelling the A/C timer because you won't be home until much later than expected, etc. Minor, but "neat" enough to sell to somebody who wants to show it off.
Careful brother. Sounds like you hating, my nigga.
But I don't think anyone goes to college to be coffee-handler or floor-sweeper.
You've never met a philosophy major have you?