A "web-only" version is a non-exclusive statement considering that there can also be "install-only" versions. One can sign up for many "web-only" products yet still have an "install-only" version of the same software right now.
(I knew I shouldn't have mentioned SimCity, because it is obviously not a ChromeOS app, but it does fall into the category of apps that are heavily controlled by the hosting developers. Take or leave the "point" as you will. I won't touch it again.)
Agree very much that it is not Google that controls your apps, but whomever hosts them. The GGP (GGGP now?) parenthetically alluded to it not being just Google, but I agree with you that they didn't give enough credence to the fact that the vast *vast* majority of apps are well outside of Google's control.
Fair enough that both traditional and "hosted app" OS's can maintain the "feature" of the author controlling the current version of the app. But the model promoted by the ChromeOS does inherently *promote* the control of the app being in the author's hands. If the author chooses to maintain multiple versions of their apps on their servers, that is still the author controlling the app. Yes, I realize that *not* requiring an installed app to check with the mother ship is also in the author's hands, but it is less work for the author to *not* check in via installed app and *more* work for the author to maintain prior release in a hosted app. In this sense, it is inherent in the hosted model, even though it is not a requirement of the OS.
While I do like my Chromebook, I must inform you that you are mistaken. All of my ChromeOS apps are hosted, which means that they are very much controlled and maintained by the developer. All of my traditional OS apps (even in Android) are held on my device and I decide when I want to update them to what the developer has decided is "good". For example, I haven't updated my iTunes app on any of my devices for a couple of years now because I have heard bad things about the newer versions. "Not updating" is impossible in the Chrome OS model. I have a SimCity install that I can play with anytime I want whereas the new SimCity model is completely dependent on what the host decides is appropriate. It is very much a different model and the user loses a tremendous amount of control. But I would not always consider that a bad thing...
Hold on. Did you seriously just compare modelling at tech conferences to mining in underground caverns? Did you just compare death by noxious gas, cave-in, or suffocation to *models*not liking that they are *getting looked* at?
The job of a model is to make whatever is being modeled attractive to those that might be a consumer. If you feel that making items appear attractive is sexist, why the hell would you get into the modelling industry. Let's look at the very first quote from one of the models for some insight into exactly why:
"But the work is pretty relaxed and you don't have to do a lot in order to get paid."
Complaining about being stared at for these women is like a call center employee complaining about having to speak to so many damn callers. Any physical contact or lewd suggestions from the consumers is completely inappropriate and should be prosecuted if it falls in the realm of illegal. And doubly so for their employers. But for a model to complain about getting stared at it is ridiculous.
But is it possible that the desire to pirate an early version is driving up the monthly costs for those of us that are playing by the rules and paying for HBO?
Evidence that is not admissible in a court of law may very well be admissible in the court of common sense.
I do agree with the general position of listening to the courts to determine if someone is guilty or innocent, but that is not always the best place to look. The best example, IMHO, is the MLB steroids debacle. Nobody was convicted in a court of law of steroid use, but I know damn well that a large number of MLB players are guilty of that crime. And there are multiple reports to point out which ones.
With this, its just a matter of time before these "predicted" red light runners are ticketed for their "pre-crime".... We slide further down the slope that Huxley warned us about....
Or you could take off your tin foil hat and realize it could be used as a safety feature in cars. If you are sitting at an intersection, and the system detects a probable red light runner approaching, it could warn you to not enter the intersection too quickly.
CSI does a pretty good job of it (if you don't limit your query to engineers), but it is still all about getting an arrest. Eureka on SyFy comes close, but you are correct. The lead character is still a cop.
I am all for instant replay and using as much tech as possible to determine EXACTLY what happened at the plate and in the field of play.
But I don't believe that the foreseeable future holds any means of calling a balk.
It isn't the usual calls that are the problem. It is the infrequent ones. Balk. Infield-fly rule. Base runner interference. Batter interfering with the catcher's throw. Pitcher doctoring the ball. Batter using too much pine tar.
These little elements are rules just outside of what could be programmed, IMHO.
I would DEFINITELY care if a yeti was wearing a shirt!
That would mean that not only do Yeti exist, but that they potentially have an entire manufacturing/industrial/economic system that we can corrupt and destroy for our own profits!
Using your real identity or having a pseudonym that can easily be linked to your real identity makes people behave in a more cooperative and constructive way because they could be held accountable for their words.
It also means that my employer or potential employer can trace back to some posts I make regarding being an atheist and my disdain for both political parties.
Regardless of how intelligently or politely I may have spoken on these two topics and how little these topics have to do with my ability to perform well at my job, it could provide reasons for that potential employer to not hire me.
I like my being able to speak truthfully and respectfully without fearing retaliation from people that may or may not respect the message I am trying to deliver.
I bet we agree on a lot more than is coming across in this thread. What the biggest problem may be is that neither of us actually saw what happened. You describe her as losing her shit. TFA said that she had an attitude and used profanity.
Without end-to-end footage of the incident, we won't know. If she sternly stated to get the fuck away from her daughter, would you consider that disorderly conduct? I would not.
I bet that our differences might come down to just a couple of octaves...
Exactly when was this voted on? And why do you think this is a democracy?
They have a right to free speech - civil society still has norms that need to be obeyed.
So if someone doesn't follow social norms, you believe they should be arrested?
Presumably, you are talking about the right to free speech versus the power of the TSA to screen passengers using x-rays and/or a more invasive "pat-down". Unlike you, I don't see a conflict. Your free speech rights are only impinged if you think that free speech is equivalent to disorderly conduct.
Actually, I was talking about the right to petition government for redress of grievances without fear of punishment. The TSA is a government agency. It is her right to complain to them without being punished. The free speech aspect of the first ammendment is what would cover her (supposed) use of profanity.
But you really nailed it with the statement about "her right(s)...versus the power of the TSA". This is exactly where we disagree. I will never agree that the power of the TSA should supercede any individual's rights. And you also seem to have a lot more respect for the "disorderly conduct" charge than I do. I tend to view it as a LEO didn't like what you were doing but couldn't find any law being broken so he'll arrest you on a disorderly charge just to get you in the squad car knowing full well that it won't stick.
I appreciate and agree with your statements about the lunacy of the $10,000 fine.
but her behavior sounds pretty inappropriate for an airport.
And I would counter that groping citizens and taking nude pictures of them is inappropriate behavior in an airport.
The difference is that citizens definietly have the Right to yell and scream at governement figures guaranteed in the Constitution, while the TSA is trying to convince you that they have a Right to grope you...
Which Right do you believe is more important to protect?
The big difference between the gadget/cell phones situation and the Toyota situation is the results of the tests that have been conducted once blame was assigned.
Upon being reviewed by many non-Toyota related entities, the fault was determined to be driver-error instead of the many phantom problems that Toyota was being blamed for (with the exception of the floor mat not being ideal).
Yet, upon reviewing the impact of cell phones and other gadgets on driver awareness, there has beena steady and consistant result that a driver is impaired to a non-trivial degree when using these devices.
Perhaps the rate of accidents has not changed due to vehicles themselves being far safer contraptions that swerve, brake, and accelerate in a safer manner than their predecessors?
No optical drive means longer battery life and less weight. I've also found optical drives to be one of the easiest pieces on laptops to break. The drive won't stay shut, the drive won't stop checking for a disc being present, or it just breaks.
I've been using a netbook for just shy of four years and have only once "wished" I had an optical drive. I was able to find a work around then, and haven't needed to employ that workaround since.
Of course, I have a desktop for any heavy lifting, but that is not why I have a netbook. It has served it's purpose of couch surfing and travel tech perfectly. And you can get refurb'd ones for $200 all over the place...
Cheap. Light weight. Long battery life. These are what I care about in portable computers. If you are looking for something else...well...there aere plenty of options other then netbooks.
Slashdot Mirror
A "web-only" version is a non-exclusive statement considering that there can also be "install-only" versions. One can sign up for many "web-only" products yet still have an "install-only" version of the same software right now.
(I knew I shouldn't have mentioned SimCity, because it is obviously not a ChromeOS app, but it does fall into the category of apps that are heavily controlled by the hosting developers. Take or leave the "point" as you will. I won't touch it again.)
Agree very much that it is not Google that controls your apps, but whomever hosts them. The GGP (GGGP now?) parenthetically alluded to it not being just Google, but I agree with you that they didn't give enough credence to the fact that the vast *vast* majority of apps are well outside of Google's control.
Fair enough that both traditional and "hosted app" OS's can maintain the "feature" of the author controlling the current version of the app. But the model promoted by the ChromeOS does inherently *promote* the control of the app being in the author's hands. If the author chooses to maintain multiple versions of their apps on their servers, that is still the author controlling the app. Yes, I realize that *not* requiring an installed app to check with the mother ship is also in the author's hands, but it is less work for the author to *not* check in via installed app and *more* work for the author to maintain prior release in a hosted app. In this sense, it is inherent in the hosted model, even though it is not a requirement of the OS.
There is a monstrous difference between "stops shipping native apps" and "delivers a hosted app." What MORON doesn't see THAT difference?
I spent $90 on a 500GB ruggedized, water resistant, USB 3.0 drive to plug into my Chromebook ARM. Hard drive update completed...
While I do like my Chromebook, I must inform you that you are mistaken. All of my ChromeOS apps are hosted, which means that they are very much controlled and maintained by the developer. All of my traditional OS apps (even in Android) are held on my device and I decide when I want to update them to what the developer has decided is "good". For example, I haven't updated my iTunes app on any of my devices for a couple of years now because I have heard bad things about the newer versions. "Not updating" is impossible in the Chrome OS model. I have a SimCity install that I can play with anytime I want whereas the new SimCity model is completely dependent on what the host decides is appropriate. It is very much a different model and the user loses a tremendous amount of control. But I would not always consider that a bad thing...
Hold on. Did you seriously just compare modelling at tech conferences to mining in underground caverns? Did you just compare death by noxious gas, cave-in, or suffocation to *models*not liking that they are *getting looked* at?
The job of a model is to make whatever is being modeled attractive to those that might be a consumer. If you feel that making items appear attractive is sexist, why the hell would you get into the modelling industry. Let's look at the very first quote from one of the models for some insight into exactly why:
"But the work is pretty relaxed and you don't have to do a lot in order to get paid."
Complaining about being stared at for these women is like a call center employee complaining about having to speak to so many damn callers. Any physical contact or lewd suggestions from the consumers is completely inappropriate and should be prosecuted if it falls in the realm of illegal. And doubly so for their employers. But for a model to complain about getting stared at it is ridiculous.
But is it possible that the desire to pirate an early version is driving up the monthly costs for those of us that are playing by the rules and paying for HBO?
If their heads were in a bucket a water, why did they complain so much about being thirsty?
Evidence that is not admissible in a court of law may very well be admissible in the court of common sense.
I do agree with the general position of listening to the courts to determine if someone is guilty or innocent, but that is not always the best place to look. The best example, IMHO, is the MLB steroids debacle. Nobody was convicted in a court of law of steroid use, but I know damn well that a large number of MLB players are guilty of that crime. And there are multiple reports to point out which ones.
Bucking the trend, apparently.
My home page is 202 bytes.
The most used link points to a page that is 45 kilobytes. All data, no images, no css. There are 12 people that use it.
I believe my site design style could be considered Minimalist.
Please mod this one up! Cuts through the revenge impulse and gets to the practical aspects of what you are causing.
With this, its just a matter of time before these "predicted" red light runners are ticketed for their "pre-crime".... We slide further down the slope that Huxley warned us about....
Or you could take off your tin foil hat and realize it could be used as a safety feature in cars. If you are sitting at an intersection, and the system detects a probable red light runner approaching, it could warn you to not enter the intersection too quickly.
CSI does a pretty good job of it (if you don't limit your query to engineers), but it is still all about getting an arrest. Eureka on SyFy comes close, but you are correct. The lead character is still a cop.
This really should be modded up. Hysterical and original...
I am all for instant replay and using as much tech as possible to determine EXACTLY what happened at the plate and in the field of play.
But I don't believe that the foreseeable future holds any means of calling a balk.
It isn't the usual calls that are the problem. It is the infrequent ones. Balk. Infield-fly rule. Base runner interference. Batter interfering with the catcher's throw. Pitcher doctoring the ball. Batter using too much pine tar.
These little elements are rules just outside of what could be programmed, IMHO.
I would DEFINITELY care if a yeti was wearing a shirt!
That would mean that not only do Yeti exist, but that they potentially have an entire manufacturing/industrial/economic system that we can corrupt and destroy for our own profits!
Guilt free, even!
Actually, I find that whenever someone is telling you to give up your rights for your own good, it's not really safety they have in mind.
I really really like this line. Thank you.
Using your real identity or having a pseudonym that can easily be linked to your real identity makes people behave in a more cooperative and constructive way because they could be held accountable for their words.
It also means that my employer or potential employer can trace back to some posts I make regarding being an atheist and my disdain for both political parties.
Regardless of how intelligently or politely I may have spoken on these two topics and how little these topics have to do with my ability to perform well at my job, it could provide reasons for that potential employer to not hire me.
I like my being able to speak truthfully and respectfully without fearing retaliation from people that may or may not respect the message I am trying to deliver.
When I first saw this headline I thought it said "Senators Want Secret Warrantless Wiretap REMOVAL" and I was truly shocked...
But then I saw it was RENEWAL and realized that nothing had actually changed...
I bet we agree on a lot more than is coming across in this thread. What the biggest problem may be is that neither of us actually saw what happened. You describe her as losing her shit. TFA said that she had an attitude and used profanity.
Without end-to-end footage of the incident, we won't know. If she sternly stated to get the fuck away from her daughter, would you consider that disorderly conduct? I would not.
I bet that our differences might come down to just a couple of octaves...
But alas, you have been out-voted in a democracy.
Exactly when was this voted on? And why do you think this is a democracy?
They have a right to free speech - civil society still has norms that need to be obeyed.
So if someone doesn't follow social norms, you believe they should be arrested?
Presumably, you are talking about the right to free speech versus the power of the TSA to screen passengers using x-rays and/or a more invasive "pat-down". Unlike you, I don't see a conflict. Your free speech rights are only impinged if you think that free speech is equivalent to disorderly conduct.
Actually, I was talking about the right to petition government for redress of grievances without fear of punishment. The TSA is a government agency. It is her right to complain to them without being punished. The free speech aspect of the first ammendment is what would cover her (supposed) use of profanity.
But you really nailed it with the statement about "her right(s)...versus the power of the TSA". This is exactly where we disagree. I will never agree that the power of the TSA should supercede any individual's rights. And you also seem to have a lot more respect for the "disorderly conduct" charge than I do. I tend to view it as a LEO didn't like what you were doing but couldn't find any law being broken so he'll arrest you on a disorderly charge just to get you in the squad car knowing full well that it won't stick.
I appreciate and agree with your statements about the lunacy of the $10,000 fine.
but her behavior sounds pretty inappropriate for an airport.
And I would counter that groping citizens and taking nude pictures of them is inappropriate behavior in an airport.
The difference is that citizens definietly have the Right to yell and scream at governement figures guaranteed in the Constitution, while the TSA is trying to convince you that they have a Right to grope you...
Which Right do you believe is more important to protect?
The big difference between the gadget/cell phones situation and the Toyota situation is the results of the tests that have been conducted once blame was assigned.
Upon being reviewed by many non-Toyota related entities, the fault was determined to be driver-error instead of the many phantom problems that Toyota was being blamed for (with the exception of the floor mat not being ideal).
Yet, upon reviewing the impact of cell phones and other gadgets on driver awareness, there has beena steady and consistant result that a driver is impaired to a non-trivial degree when using these devices.
Perhaps the rate of accidents has not changed due to vehicles themselves being far safer contraptions that swerve, brake, and accelerate in a safer manner than their predecessors?
art cannot be the new terrorism for justfying anything.
I don't see the word "terrorism" any where in either TFA or TFS.
No optical drive means longer battery life and less weight. I've also found optical drives to be one of the easiest pieces on laptops to break. The drive won't stay shut, the drive won't stop checking for a disc being present, or it just breaks.
I've been using a netbook for just shy of four years and have only once "wished" I had an optical drive. I was able to find a work around then, and haven't needed to employ that workaround since.
Of course, I have a desktop for any heavy lifting, but that is not why I have a netbook. It has served it's purpose of couch surfing and travel tech perfectly. And you can get refurb'd ones for $200 all over the place...
Cheap. Light weight. Long battery life. These are what I care about in portable computers. If you are looking for something else...well...there aere plenty of options other then netbooks.