As a grumpy old bastard, is it possible for us to use our experience to help adopt new systems that benefit most people while harming few?
Or will you try to re-infuse life into the word whipersnappers in you response?
I'm just wondering... when you retire, will you stand on your own principle and turn down social security? After all, you'll take out 3-4 times more than you put in. And what's worse is that you had the benefit of baring a much lighter burden than these little bastards you rant about. Your mommy and daddy popped out kids in full litters. While they worked, supporting one old fogy that lived to be 80 was easy. These little shits were popped out at 2.4 kids per household and will bare the burden of keeping you in internet porn until you're 100.
Things have to change and you will live the last 30-40 years of your life for free... on welfare... because social security is precisely the same thing.
Apple and Google have now managed to wallpaper the planet with tablets. They're everywhere... and their app stores and their movie stores etc... are everywhere.
Amazon seems to be the oddball. They actually took the Google platform and managed to figure out how to capitalize off of the Google platform while mostly cutting Google out. Everyone else is basically screwed.
So in the end, Samsung, HTC, all those guys are all going to die from Nokia/Blackberry syndrome. They don't make any money unless people buy new phones and tablets. The people have no reason to buy new phones because the one they have is supported well enough and performs well enough that there's no profit in buying a new one.
You're a great person to invite to dinner aren't you?
"You are a fucking moron. If it was up to you, we wouldn't be driving cars because horse shoe makers needed jobs. Go kill yourself, idiot."
Edited :
"I disagree with you. By your logic, the automotive revolution would never have occurred as it would have endangered jobs at horse shoe factories and farriers alike"
Have you ever been to dinner with a nice girl and her friends and just blurted out for everyone to hear "Can we ditch your stupid fucking friends and go out back so I can slam my cock down your throat in the alley. Better yet, bring the blond, I can't stand the sound of her voice, but she won't be doing much talking".
"The lawsuit seeks $30 million in damages and asks a jury to weigh additional financial penalties against the retailer. Nashville Fire Department officials said a hoverboard caught fire on Jan. 9, destroying a 4,000-square-foot $1 million home on Radcliff Drive, near Edwin Warner Park."
Hmm... ok... from the pictures... I'm curious what justified a house with such a miserable kitchen to be worth a million bucks, but let's assume that a 4000ft.sq. house is worth something. It's Tennessee so the people there are part of the weird bible belt. There's probably a window with an impression of Jesus on it that got destroyed in the fire or something like that.
I'll assume that the $1,000,000 home already has fire insurance on it. I'll also assume that if you can afford to live in that house, then you've paid the deductible and the house as well as the sparkly Chinese crap like hoverboards filling the garage and everything else was paid for. This is why you have fire insurance to begin with. Even if Amazon pays the $30 million, the rest of the stuff is already covered by insurance either way. I'm sure if you have an insured million dollar home, you also have health insurance with a low deductible that covered medical and psychiatric treatment. Altogether, the cost of this to the family is likely in the ballpark of $20-$30,000 spread over a period of 5 years. That's peanuts.
So, now they want to sue Amazon for $30 million because of a fire they caused by buying a plastic piece of crap meant to move chubby children around those few times their chubby little asses may actually otherwise be used to peddle a bicycle or make scissor actions with their legs while standing causing them to move towards their destination.
"In addition to costly losses of all of the family's possessions, the lawsuit says the family should be compensated for physical injuries and emotional distress."
Their physical injuries are covered.
Emotional distress.... holy what the fucking fuck. Emotional distress. If my house... a $900,000 1,100sq.ft. townhouse burned down with all our crap in it, we'd live in a hotel or rent something while it was rebuilt, make a bunch of trips to Ikea and other places and use this as the excuse we've wanted for a while to remodel the kitchen.
If you're the kind of person that can actually afford to live in a house that costs $1,000,000 you're someone who should know how to adapt and see challenges not problems... and your family should be too.
So... what in the name of hell justifies paying $30,000,000 for this? Did they try to bring a case against the company who sold it and when they couldn't find that company, they immediately said "JACKPOT!!!!". There are probably 10,000 lawyers all over America screaming "I'll take the case... If it takes 10 years and 12 appeals, I'll take the case... 50%!!!!"
Organized boycotts are dead. If you need proof, consider the republican party in the US. They still support Trump and will push to have him elected because even with a gigantic marketing budget to work with and full access to the media, a boycott of Trump can't be organized.
The reason for this is that the nature of individuals today is to disagree on principal to exercise one's personal individualism and superiority. We live in a world of "I will gladly live with the gun shot wound in my foot as long as I can prove to you that you were wrong when you said shooting your own foot is stupid." Thanks to mass communication, the only thing we seem to be able to properly organize is our ability to disagree with each other. I believe this comment I'm making about your posting is an excellent example of this.
1) I'm speaking authoritatively as though I believe I'm write. Instead of offering my opinion as a suggestion, I'm attempting to dictate your opinion to you.
2) I am speaking down to you. While there's every chance you're more intelligent and better educated than me, I am speaking to you as if you weren't smart enough to advance your thoughts to my clearly more intelligent thoughts based upon the foundations of your statements.
3) I am writing in a way which doesn't welcome debate, as if you would be stupid to debate with me. You should clearly see that I want you to believe that probably any response you could possibly make to my statement other than outright agreement has been considered and prepared for and I am obviously ready to squash all such arguments and humiliate you publicly. The fact that I'm basically just puffing out my chest and very likely failing to do it well is irrelevant. What is relevant is that I'm willing to move this pawn on the chess board hoping you won't realize I actually have no idea how to win this game.
4) I attempt to persuade you to adopt my way of thinking. I do this by showing you my hand and letting you see I'm trying to persuade you. All along talking down to you and seeing if I can word it just right to make you part of the team... of course a pacifistic follower who bows to my clear superiority.
5) I know I'm really just pissing all over you and pissing you off and know that the end result is a stale mate.
a) you can't agree with me since agreeing with me would mean you are the loser I've described
b) you can't disagree with me since you know that we as a people have sadly evolved into prideful beings that will disagree simply to be our own person... not dominated by anyone else.
6) In reality, if we weren't in a position like this where we are likely to be measuring to see whose is longer, we probably could sit an enjoy a beer together and be friends.
I'll leave with this, boycotts are combative. They attract people who are naturally combative. The result is that some people will join on principal. Some people will specifically break the boycott in order to simply disagree with the people who started the boycott. The boycott will grow by adding many people who will have no clear understanding why there is a boycott, but either because they are sheep who follow the people in the boycott or because they are idiots who will boycotts something just because another idiot is against it.
Finally... if you believe I'm wrong about any of this... consider tuna fish.
I'm not an expert, but I think the opposition to the agreement is not an issue regarding being anti-trade. The issue is regarding the "ear marks" which give industry too much legal power and could be used to scare the governments into hurting the people of their countries in order to support profiteering.
The spirit of the agreement seems to be sound. I had to research it a bit to see why it was considered attractive to sign. After all, while there may be some... possibly many politicians who self-serve by garnering personal favor from industry and sign laws and agreements they clearly understand are against the best interest of their people, I would imagine for an agreement to appear to be passing so easily, it must have quite a bit of good in it.
The problem is, the parts which can clearly hurt us look very small and innocent, but are sadly the items most likely to be acted upon by the ratification of the agreement.
Nope.. pretty big in general. My children's school here in Norway is now at over 90% iPhone. The remaining 10% are kids who have parents who say things in nasal voices like "It's not important what kind of phone you use. I want you to learn you don't have to let peer pressure force you to make us by an iPhone. We're doing this to help you build character". As such, we give our older iPhones to kids who have parents like that.
I find that if mom or dad us Android and they prefer to buy themselves a new phone and hand down their old one instead of buying their kids their own phone, that's pretty common. On the other hand, if parents say "I'll buy you a phone", the kids will choose what their friends have. Many kids save up birthday and christmas money for iPhones as well. It's pretty reasonable for a 14 year old to be able to save $1000 US in a year.
I've seen similar iPhone madness in quite a few countries. Tokyo was iPhone crazy this summer.
It's pretty likely that what you see and what is real is based on where you spend your time. iMessage and iPhone is a major peer pressure thing among children. It'll change as they get older and have to pay for their own phones.
Do you use the iMessage features? Do you use the emojis? Do you do the meme thing? Do you insert sounds and music? Do you and your friends and coworkers sit in a circle learning new iPhone tricks that look really cool? Do you do the group thing?
Or do you send an occasional text and maybe when you're playing it dangerous, a picture?
Are you assessing how children and teenagers use a technology based on how a adult uses it?
I'm not about to say "iPhone is the only way and they can't change". But, it has absolutely nothing to do with what I have to say. I'm a 41 year old man with thinning hair. I have to remember to trim my nose hair and ear hair which I often forget to do. What matters is what the cool people say... and let's be honest, you're here commenting on Slashdot... you're definitely excluded from that category. If the cool people use iPhone, then the kids use iPhone. The question is... which cool people do your kids want to copy?
Also, iMessage looks really really wimpy and basic (or it did before they ruined it in IOS 10 by adding too much bling) but it really is very full featured. If you're used to using both iMessage and Hangouts, they're basically the same tool, but Hangouts looks and feels like something a guy in a crop top and parachute pants carrying a boom box from the 80's would use where iMessage has a little bit less of the brain shattering clash of design paradigms, clutters and color. It's much easier on iMessage to make sure the receiver sees what you want them to see compared to Hangouts which seems to just make that far too difficult.
It's really funny. iMessage actually... while looking a bit kindof "been done" these days is far more likely to attract a persons eyes than Hangouts... except on the Google iPhone clone at least. The color scheme is better, the shapes are smoother, the background is just the right shade of eggshell or something. Hangouts looks like some crack smoking WhatsApp user designed it.
iMessage doesn't "transparently" switch to SMS that well. It also REALLY doesn't do images, emojis, etc... all that well over SMS/MMS.
As an IT person for 30+ years, you should know better than to suggest that locking into Google as opposed to Apple isn't really a freedom. Of course you might be suggesting that you can buy phones from different vendors if you buy Android. I suppose that's true. As all the phones on the planet are basically the same design with minor variations right now, I just don't see the point. Cheap Android phones are damn near unusable and Android is completely unusable without a 5.5" or larger screen anymore and that's just WAY TOO BIG at least for me.
As far as I can tell on Android, you have as much choice as you want as long as you're willing to pay $600+ for your phone and you very carefully choose a screen between 5.5 and 5.7 inches and you make sure you get just the right.... just by the Google iPhone instead.
BTW, I do have a Samsung something or another for when I'm travelling. It's the T-Mobile version which is basically just short of a pre-installed virus. Thankfully, after 6 software update cycles, the base apps like Play, Phone, etc... almost don't crash anymore. I'm pretty sure T-Mobile is trying to convince you to come back and buy iPhones instead.
So back to the point. You have just as much lack of freedom on Google as you have on iPhone. The question is whether you are either willing to lie to yourself that the reason you don't use iPhone is because of a false sense of freedom or because you simply want freedom from Apple. I don't mind either way.
I actually probably am the opposite of you. I intentionally "spread the love". I use an iPhone with a Microsoft Office365 hosted e-mail account and make a real effort to properly exit Google apps when I'm not using them. I really don't care if Google tracks me everywhere, but I have personal anxiety at this time that one day, the Google board will replace the leadership of the company with someone focused on profits without a regard for morals... see HP, IBM, etc... At this time Google has more control over earth than nearly anyone else. They control more of the media stream than anyone else. They know where I am, what I look at, what I buy. They have my credit card numbers, my bank account numbers, my passwords, etc... they know what I'm looking at when I hold Mr. Happy in the palm of my hand.
One day when Google is either broken up by the government, is restructured, is simply taken over, etc... it would take one bad (malicious or accidental) decision from Google to literally destroy the entire world's economy or at least the lives of millions.
That said... using iPhone as it's the only alternative to Android gives me the sense that at least one tiny corner of my life isn't completely owned by a ticking time bomb.
And it's more important to take the next step of identifying what is and isn't mathematics. Chemistry applies extensive use of mathematics though I've often questioned the underlying principles underlying their means of representing objects and effects. I seem to feel as if there must be massive amount of contradicting methods to describe molecular behavior. This in itself is alright, but have we actually observed this behavior and have we corrected the chemical mathematics to properly represent these observations?
In addition, why is it that we use high school chemistry books today that are based on the same mathematics taught before the invention of the electron microscope. Did we actually understand molecular behavior so well that what we guessed before we had things like scanning tunneling microscopes was so accurate that we don't have to rewrite the books? Or are we just trying to observe only what will prove what we already know?
I think the mistake we often tend to make is to believe that it is either one side or the other. Computing a cure for cancer is very likely a hopeless approach. On the other hand if we can at some point understand enough about DNA to identify cancerous anomalies and target them through custom tailored retroviruses or nano-tech, I figure... sure why not?
That said, I have been "volunteering" from time to time at a university's biochem department with regards to code optimization. I do this in exchange for lab access so I can learn learn a little about biochemistry. At this point what I've learned is that we really don't know anything at all about biochemistry and instead of focusing all our attention into developing tools that could maybe allow us to actually learn about it, we prefer these insane studies of protein folding an such.
I don't necessarily agree with the original article or how it was written in such a way to sensationalize instead of inform. I think the whole Plato/Socrates conversational thing is entertaining a times, but has very little value outside of philosophy and Hollywood. I do however agree with the sentiment suggesting that there is great value in getting an education that would allow you to make valuable contributions to the study of medicine by taking a less traditional approach.
Of course, I could just be speaking out of the side of my own ass. I like the idea of making improvements to scanning tunneling technology to possibly allow full mapping of a human cell. Then focusing on observing all the molecular interactions that explain the purpose of each part of the cell. Biology labs are almost always completely full of pretty white equipment that looks really really expensive. They even have fancy looking centrifuges.... which is a machine which spins stuff.... around in circles... and it probably cost more than my car (a BMW i3). If I as a computer nerd needed such a thing, I would get a power supply, a mosfet, a motor, an arduino and maybe an IR transmitter/receiver for good luck. Total cost... $100. Biology labs should be located in the same building as machine shops and electronic and mechanical engineers.
Actually, the US is more socialist than capitalist. The US tax payer covers cost of living for employees of the largest companies like Walmart and McDonalds. The government creates jobs under the guise of protecting the nation and employs directly or indirectly (by my highly suspicious estimates) 20-25% of the working population (DoD, DoE, CIA, FBI, DHS, TSA, NASA, etc... Lockheed, Boeing mostly, etc... plus the infrastructure to support them). When a person needs a job, the government makes one for them.
The voters decide otherwise every single day. They vote all the time for what they believe will serve their own interests. What's worse is they have no idea what their own interests are. We make most of out decisions without any real information or education.
Suppose that this forum represents a class of voters. We read a headline posted by someone with an obvious bias. The people reading this site tend to take one of two positions "I love Tesla" or "I hate Tesla". They voice their opinions like "I for one believe in the rights Tesla is fighting to uphold." and someone responds about how they don't understand what they're actually saying. Of course, the response will make no impact and the Tesla lover will still love and vote "Tesla is good, I support people who support Tesla". He has no real idea why Tesla is good... all he knows is that they make "clean" electric cars. He overlooks that Elon Musk and Tesla have set some extremely dangerous precedents in the name of doing good things. We justify it by saying too good outweighs the bad, and while Musk is probably a really great guy, and while we really want him to do the things he's doing, he's basically leaving a wake behind him of sheer disaster and destruction which will be colonized by the bottom feeders under the pretense of "You told Elon Musk it was ok... it must be ok for us too!!!".
I love the idea of Elon Musk, he's a dreamer and when I pick up the newspaper each day, I look forward to the stories about him as much as I looked forward to the comics as a child. The newspaper is full of just utter shit. "This politician is a dick, that one is a dick. The world is coming to and end. 14 pages of articles about last night's killings and battlefield crap."... then there's an article about a guy who seems to be building the world of the Jetson's. He'll make us zoom around in tubes as the speed of "Holy shit my face is peeling off" and fly us to the stars. He'll build our houses out of batteries and my grandchildren will glow because of him. His popularity and the way the press treats him makes me feel like there's still room for good news and hope for the human race. He's a real life Tony Stark and I can't get enough of him.
He'll poison us with massive quantities of lithium. He'll build cars with limited life spans and no real plan for how to recycle them. He'll move from metals to plastics, polymers, etc... which have no future but land fill. He'll do lots of awesome things that will simply shit all over the planet. He'll make the environmental disaster left behind by the big three in Michigan look like child's play. Everything the guy touches is basically toxic by the time he walks past it. But holy shit, I hope he doesn't stop! I LOVE HIS STUFF!
I just bought a BMW i3... I really wanted a Tesla, but the car is too f-ing big and frankly, Tesla drivers are generally dicks and I don't want to become one. I actually drive in the normal traffic instead of the taxi/carpool lanes because I don't want to negatively impact the other drivers. Electric cars don't need those "perks" anymore since they were there for the crappy pre-Tesla cars which couldn't get to and from work on a charge in stop and go.
Because if she's put in jail, Trump becomes president almost by default.
It's sickening, she's going to become president and see no repercussions from this event because the alternative option is actually somehow worse.
Let's be fair... if you have to choose between two shit bags for president, wouldn't you prefer the shit bag who is at least... well not Trump?
What scares the ever living shit out of me is that people actually want him to be president. I don't mean because they think Hillary is worse or because he is the current choice of his team. I mean there are people who hear what he says and thinks he makes sense.
People!!!! This guy is a male Sarah Palin. Before you know it, he's going to import fucking polar bears to New York City so he can stand and shoot them from his balcony too. Maybe he'll claim diplomatic expertise because with a really big telescope he can see Canada from his living room window.
So... while it kills me to say it... Hillary Shitbag Clinton should just be let in free and clear... just forget all this legal shit and let her in. She'll be there 8 years and the republicans will spend their time trying to find a way to top even Trump. Let's face it...
1) Palin - A woman who can barely speak... I'm not kidding, she makes sounds but no one on this planet has any f-ing idea what she's actually saying and... well neither does she.
2) Romney - On 31 separate accounts during his campaign he said "The first thing I'll do when I get into office is...". And frankly, it was never the same thing twice. The guy couldn't remember from hour to hour what the first thing he was going to do was. Maybe he's like really super amazing and can do 31 different first things simultaneously. Maybe he can use some quantum physics magic and be in 31 places at once. He was a blathering idiot... and the bitch of it is, when he has prepared speeches, he's bloody brilliant. He just really sucks as using his own brain... well except for thinking things like "Wouldn't my car look great between the grand piano and the couch?". Who the f-ing hell puts a frigging car elevator into his living room?!?!?! It's like standing on your porch drinking a Schlitz and and shooting bears then bragging on TV about it.
3) Trump... well... come on... I just don't even need to say anything about him. He does it all by himself.
For the love of all that is holy (like pizza)... quit putting these fucking morons up for election or we'll never have a choice of who is president.
P.S. - You don't actually have to vote for one of these two shit bags... you can vote for another shitbag like Bernie the sellout Sanders.
Hillary is stupid, not malicious. Let's assume for the moment that neither Donald or Hillary are actually as evil as we make them out to be.
Let's also assume for the moment that Hillary wanted to have an e-mail address with a domain name the added to her marketing value and she asked some egg-head if he/she could make it happen. Now assume that the egghead recognizes that she's the secretary of state as well as the former first lady of a two term president.
Now the egghead hears her ask for this and he's like "Well, I can't put that on our internal servers... what else can I do to make it happen?" Of course the egghead isn't a lawyer and he/she doesn't want to be cock-blocked by some manager and then go back to Hillary and tell her/him (still not sure) that he screwed up and now her dreams of having a her marketing slogan as a domain name for her e-mail will not be possible.
So... what does he do? Well, not being a lawyer or understanding what it would mean, he sets up a new mail server that would allow her to send messages to Bill like "Make sure you leave your cigars at your intern's house before coming home... oh and buy milk." without them ending up as public record.
I honestly wonder if the e-mail is the best thing they can come up with. Hillary isn't particularly exciting, but she's pretty awful at her job... unless you consider her job as Secretary of State as a personal self-promotion, optimal for ladder climbing... where in that case, she's great at her job. She has to have incredible amounts of crap they can use on her without even digging too deep. And the e-mail thing which I'm damn near convinced is basically technical incompetence as opposed to intentional malicious deception of the country.
Let's also consider that there's absolutely nothing related to the e-mail that will cause Trump to win. He's like the golden goose or the gift that keeps giving to anyone who opposes him. After all, I think that even Dan Quayle could have won running against Trump. Al Gore could have creamed him. Instead, the country leaves Hillary as the opposition and while she looks like she has a landslide, you know you suck when it's months before election and people can still identify a possibility that Trump could possibly win.
Democrats... what the hell were you thinking when you supported Hillary? Republicans... what the hell were you thinking when you supported Trump?
You both had better candidates and you actually chose the most entertaining ones as opposed to someone you might actually want in office.
Odd... I tend to find that both are pretty awful and prefer to hire people with computer science education and programming experience with a solid understanding operating design, protocols and encryption. There are a lot of people out there with that skillset and what's best is that they generally don't care what language they are using for scripting but instead solve the problem, document the solution and develop deployment scripts for changes as well as rollback scripts and unit tests. Oh, and if there's a problem with the API they are calling, they write a bug report describing it and providing a reproducible test case to ensure MS can easily fix it.
Never hire IT guys if you can hire computer scientists instead.
While I'm not a huge fan of powershell, I've spent a considerable amount of time coding in it because there's simply no point to using stupid utils like puppet and chef when 90% of what you do is call powershell anyway. After all, install Windows... powershell... add user... powershell... install Hyper-V... powershell... install WDS.... powershell. So why the hell would I bother with something else when I have to use it anyway?
Now that I've figured out object orient programming, exception handling, type definitions, error management, etc... I think that PowerShell is pretty nice. It's an ugly language, but it's the only language I know of that is designed to handle automation so nicely. Whether I'm automating FreeBSD or Exchange Server, PowerShell is very capable. What's even better is that the help online is excellent. I almost never find myself wondering "Gee, I wonder how to do that" and that's been the truth since the first day of using it.
As for other shells... bash and other bournes are nice, but they handle data like shit and you spend most of your time coding new utilities for almost everything you need to accomplish.
I think that existing shell paradigms weren't good enough for handling these tasks. Most shells don't have the ability to call libraries without additional utilities. Most shells don't have the ability to employ data structures. PowerShell while somewhat grotesque to look at is really quite powerful in that sense.
I was thinking that Ford can't make the user interface of their car radios work (neither can GM) reliably. Mustangs are the only cars I've ever had to actually reboot. Shouldn't congress act quickly on behalf of the American people to stop this from happening?
The biggest problem with car companies making self driving vehicles is that they are car companies. I was just talking yesterday with some people about my BMW i3 which is an excellent example of the fall of a great company. While the things like the interior, motors and chassis are amazing in the vehicle. There are just SOOOOO many bugs in the design that they should hire Toyota (who has done electronics and software for decades) to fix it. Let's not even get into stuff like doors which don't properly close (checked the floor models too, design problem) or trunk covers which seem designed for a totally different car. And don't get me started on the touch sensor for the door lock. I drove a 2004 Prius for 11 years and the doors locked and unlocked instantly every time. The i3 requires touching, holding, rubbing... I swear, just to lock and unlock my car, I'm putting my marriage in jeopardy.
See, car companies have been more or less forced into modernizing with computers and technology. The problem is, they have absolutely no f-ing clue what they're doing. They could try and buy the tech but it wouldn't be integrated and would likely cost too much. They could develop the tech, but they have no idea how to build and maintain something that complex. You see it when the apps on the computers in the cars are the same ones a year later than they were when the car was first designed. You also see it when the API/SDKs for the computers are closed and require licensing. You see it when the computer needs to be reboot while driving down the road and it can't been done without stopping the car and powering it off. You see it when the iPhone app for the car needs 1-2 minutes to lock or unlock the doors.
I think that the real future for car companies is not to actually make their own cars anymore. I think that car companies will become manufacturing facilities for new companies with the skills required to design the next generation of transportation. I would much rather a Google, Apple or Microsoft vehicle drives me somewhere than a Ford or BMW. It's not that I believe that those three companies make good code. It's that I believe those three companies know how to maintain technology.
Oh... and so far as I know, the computer in my brand new, fully loaded BMW i3 is not able to be upgraded and likely will never be. So, while the vehicle chassis will likely never need changes, the computer which should improve and change with the times... won't. The developers will at some point decide they need a better CPU or graphics and that will be end of life for my car.
Slashdot Mirror
but not old enough to be mature.
There are at least 50 shades of gray I'm told.
As a grumpy old bastard, is it possible for us to use our experience to help adopt new systems that benefit most people while harming few?
Or will you try to re-infuse life into the word whipersnappers in you response?
I'm just wondering... when you retire, will you stand on your own principle and turn down social security? After all, you'll take out 3-4 times more than you put in. And what's worse is that you had the benefit of baring a much lighter burden than these little bastards you rant about. Your mommy and daddy popped out kids in full litters. While they worked, supporting one old fogy that lived to be 80 was easy. These little shits were popped out at 2.4 kids per household and will bare the burden of keeping you in internet porn until you're 100.
Things have to change and you will live the last 30-40 years of your life for free... on welfare... because social security is precisely the same thing.
So get over it.
Apple and Google have now managed to wallpaper the planet with tablets. They're everywhere... and their app stores and their movie stores etc... are everywhere.
Amazon seems to be the oddball. They actually took the Google platform and managed to figure out how to capitalize off of the Google platform while mostly cutting Google out. Everyone else is basically screwed.
So in the end, Samsung, HTC, all those guys are all going to die from Nokia/Blackberry syndrome. They don't make any money unless people buy new phones and tablets. The people have no reason to buy new phones because the one they have is supported well enough and performs well enough that there's no profit in buying a new one.
You're a great person to invite to dinner aren't you?
"You are a fucking moron. If it was up to you, we wouldn't be driving cars because horse shoe makers needed jobs. Go kill yourself, idiot."
Edited :
"I disagree with you. By your logic, the automotive revolution would never have occurred as it would have endangered jobs at horse shoe factories and farriers alike"
Have you ever been to dinner with a nice girl and her friends and just blurted out for everyone to hear "Can we ditch your stupid fucking friends and go out back so I can slam my cock down your throat in the alley. Better yet, bring the blond, I can't stand the sound of her voice, but she won't be doing much talking".
"The lawsuit seeks $30 million in damages and asks a jury to weigh additional financial penalties against the retailer. Nashville Fire Department officials said a hoverboard caught fire on Jan. 9, destroying a 4,000-square-foot $1 million home on Radcliff Drive, near Edwin Warner Park."
... a $900,000 1,100sq.ft. townhouse burned down with all our crap in it, we'd live in a hotel or rent something while it was rebuilt, make a bunch of trips to Ikea and other places and use this as the excuse we've wanted for a while to remodel the kitchen.
Hmm... ok... from the pictures... I'm curious what justified a house with such a miserable kitchen to be worth a million bucks, but let's assume that a 4000ft.sq. house is worth something. It's Tennessee so the people there are part of the weird bible belt. There's probably a window with an impression of Jesus on it that got destroyed in the fire or something like that.
I'll assume that the $1,000,000 home already has fire insurance on it. I'll also assume that if you can afford to live in that house, then you've paid the deductible and the house as well as the sparkly Chinese crap like hoverboards filling the garage and everything else was paid for. This is why you have fire insurance to begin with. Even if Amazon pays the $30 million, the rest of the stuff is already covered by insurance either way. I'm sure if you have an insured million dollar home, you also have health insurance with a low deductible that covered medical and psychiatric treatment. Altogether, the cost of this to the family is likely in the ballpark of $20-$30,000 spread over a period of 5 years. That's peanuts.
So, now they want to sue Amazon for $30 million because of a fire they caused by buying a plastic piece of crap meant to move chubby children around those few times their chubby little asses may actually otherwise be used to peddle a bicycle or make scissor actions with their legs while standing causing them to move towards their destination.
"In addition to costly losses of all of the family's possessions, the lawsuit says the family should be compensated for physical injuries and emotional distress."
Their physical injuries are covered.
Emotional distress.... holy what the fucking fuck. Emotional distress. If my house
If you're the kind of person that can actually afford to live in a house that costs $1,000,000 you're someone who should know how to adapt and see challenges not problems... and your family should be too.
So... what in the name of hell justifies paying $30,000,000 for this? Did they try to bring a case against the company who sold it and when they couldn't find that company, they immediately said "JACKPOT!!!!". There are probably 10,000 lawyers all over America screaming "I'll take the case... If it takes 10 years and 12 appeals, I'll take the case... 50%!!!!"
Organized boycotts are dead. If you need proof, consider the republican party in the US. They still support Trump and will push to have him elected because even with a gigantic marketing budget to work with and full access to the media, a boycott of Trump can't be organized.
The reason for this is that the nature of individuals today is to disagree on principal to exercise one's personal individualism and superiority. We live in a world of "I will gladly live with the gun shot wound in my foot as long as I can prove to you that you were wrong when you said shooting your own foot is stupid." Thanks to mass communication, the only thing we seem to be able to properly organize is our ability to disagree with each other. I believe this comment I'm making about your posting is an excellent example of this.
1) I'm speaking authoritatively as though I believe I'm write. Instead of offering my opinion as a suggestion, I'm attempting to dictate your opinion to you.
2) I am speaking down to you. While there's every chance you're more intelligent and better educated than me, I am speaking to you as if you weren't smart enough to advance your thoughts to my clearly more intelligent thoughts based upon the foundations of your statements.
3) I am writing in a way which doesn't welcome debate, as if you would be stupid to debate with me. You should clearly see that I want you to believe that probably any response you could possibly make to my statement other than outright agreement has been considered and prepared for and I am obviously ready to squash all such arguments and humiliate you publicly. The fact that I'm basically just puffing out my chest and very likely failing to do it well is irrelevant. What is relevant is that I'm willing to move this pawn on the chess board hoping you won't realize I actually have no idea how to win this game.
4) I attempt to persuade you to adopt my way of thinking. I do this by showing you my hand and letting you see I'm trying to persuade you. All along talking down to you and seeing if I can word it just right to make you part of the team... of course a pacifistic follower who bows to my clear superiority.
5) I know I'm really just pissing all over you and pissing you off and know that the end result is a stale mate.
a) you can't agree with me since agreeing with me would mean you are the loser I've described
b) you can't disagree with me since you know that we as a people have sadly evolved into prideful beings that will disagree simply to be our own person... not dominated by anyone else.
6) In reality, if we weren't in a position like this where we are likely to be measuring to see whose is longer, we probably could sit an enjoy a beer together and be friends.
I'll leave with this, boycotts are combative. They attract people who are naturally combative. The result is that some people will join on principal. Some people will specifically break the boycott in order to simply disagree with the people who started the boycott. The boycott will grow by adding many people who will have no clear understanding why there is a boycott, but either because they are sheep who follow the people in the boycott or because they are idiots who will boycotts something just because another idiot is against it.
Finally... if you believe I'm wrong about any of this... consider tuna fish.
I'm not an expert, but I think the opposition to the agreement is not an issue regarding being anti-trade. The issue is regarding the "ear marks" which give industry too much legal power and could be used to scare the governments into hurting the people of their countries in order to support profiteering.
The spirit of the agreement seems to be sound. I had to research it a bit to see why it was considered attractive to sign. After all, while there may be some... possibly many politicians who self-serve by garnering personal favor from industry and sign laws and agreements they clearly understand are against the best interest of their people, I would imagine for an agreement to appear to be passing so easily, it must have quite a bit of good in it.
The problem is, the parts which can clearly hurt us look very small and innocent, but are sadly the items most likely to be acted upon by the ratification of the agreement.
Nope.. pretty big in general. My children's school here in Norway is now at over 90% iPhone. The remaining 10% are kids who have parents who say things in nasal voices like "It's not important what kind of phone you use. I want you to learn you don't have to let peer pressure force you to make us by an iPhone. We're doing this to help you build character". As such, we give our older iPhones to kids who have parents like that.
I find that if mom or dad us Android and they prefer to buy themselves a new phone and hand down their old one instead of buying their kids their own phone, that's pretty common. On the other hand, if parents say "I'll buy you a phone", the kids will choose what their friends have. Many kids save up birthday and christmas money for iPhones as well. It's pretty reasonable for a 14 year old to be able to save $1000 US in a year.
I've seen similar iPhone madness in quite a few countries. Tokyo was iPhone crazy this summer.
It's pretty likely that what you see and what is real is based on where you spend your time. iMessage and iPhone is a major peer pressure thing among children. It'll change as they get older and have to pay for their own phones.
Don't forget the UI... the UI on Hangouts is blatantly offensive unless you have access to certain types of mushrooms.
Do you use the iMessage features? Do you use the emojis? Do you do the meme thing? Do you insert sounds and music? Do you and your friends and coworkers sit in a circle learning new iPhone tricks that look really cool? Do you do the group thing?
Or do you send an occasional text and maybe when you're playing it dangerous, a picture?
Are you assessing how children and teenagers use a technology based on how a adult uses it?
I'm not about to say "iPhone is the only way and they can't change". But, it has absolutely nothing to do with what I have to say. I'm a 41 year old man with thinning hair. I have to remember to trim my nose hair and ear hair which I often forget to do. What matters is what the cool people say... and let's be honest, you're here commenting on Slashdot... you're definitely excluded from that category. If the cool people use iPhone, then the kids use iPhone. The question is... which cool people do your kids want to copy?
It's the group messaging features.
Also, iMessage looks really really wimpy and basic (or it did before they ruined it in IOS 10 by adding too much bling) but it really is very full featured. If you're used to using both iMessage and Hangouts, they're basically the same tool, but Hangouts looks and feels like something a guy in a crop top and parachute pants carrying a boom box from the 80's would use where iMessage has a little bit less of the brain shattering clash of design paradigms, clutters and color. It's much easier on iMessage to make sure the receiver sees what you want them to see compared to Hangouts which seems to just make that far too difficult.
It's really funny. iMessage actually... while looking a bit kindof "been done" these days is far more likely to attract a persons eyes than Hangouts... except on the Google iPhone clone at least. The color scheme is better, the shapes are smoother, the background is just the right shade of eggshell or something. Hangouts looks like some crack smoking WhatsApp user designed it.
iMessage doesn't "transparently" switch to SMS that well. It also REALLY doesn't do images, emojis, etc... all that well over SMS/MMS.
As an IT person for 30+ years, you should know better than to suggest that locking into Google as opposed to Apple isn't really a freedom. Of course you might be suggesting that you can buy phones from different vendors if you buy Android. I suppose that's true. As all the phones on the planet are basically the same design with minor variations right now, I just don't see the point. Cheap Android phones are damn near unusable and Android is completely unusable without a 5.5" or larger screen anymore and that's just WAY TOO BIG at least for me.
As far as I can tell on Android, you have as much choice as you want as long as you're willing to pay $600+ for your phone and you very carefully choose a screen between 5.5 and 5.7 inches and you make sure you get just the right.... just by the Google iPhone instead.
BTW, I do have a Samsung something or another for when I'm travelling. It's the T-Mobile version which is basically just short of a pre-installed virus. Thankfully, after 6 software update cycles, the base apps like Play, Phone, etc... almost don't crash anymore. I'm pretty sure T-Mobile is trying to convince you to come back and buy iPhones instead.
So back to the point. You have just as much lack of freedom on Google as you have on iPhone. The question is whether you are either willing to lie to yourself that the reason you don't use iPhone is because of a false sense of freedom or because you simply want freedom from Apple. I don't mind either way.
I actually probably am the opposite of you. I intentionally "spread the love". I use an iPhone with a Microsoft Office365 hosted e-mail account and make a real effort to properly exit Google apps when I'm not using them. I really don't care if Google tracks me everywhere, but I have personal anxiety at this time that one day, the Google board will replace the leadership of the company with someone focused on profits without a regard for morals... see HP, IBM, etc... At this time Google has more control over earth than nearly anyone else. They control more of the media stream than anyone else. They know where I am, what I look at, what I buy. They have my credit card numbers, my bank account numbers, my passwords, etc... they know what I'm looking at when I hold Mr. Happy in the palm of my hand.
One day when Google is either broken up by the government, is restructured, is simply taken over, etc... it would take one bad (malicious or accidental) decision from Google to literally destroy the entire world's economy or at least the lives of millions.
That said... using iPhone as it's the only alternative to Android gives me the sense that at least one tiny corner of my life isn't completely owned by a ticking time bomb.
And it's more important to take the next step of identifying what is and isn't mathematics. Chemistry applies extensive use of mathematics though I've often questioned the underlying principles underlying their means of representing objects and effects. I seem to feel as if there must be massive amount of contradicting methods to describe molecular behavior. This in itself is alright, but have we actually observed this behavior and have we corrected the chemical mathematics to properly represent these observations?
In addition, why is it that we use high school chemistry books today that are based on the same mathematics taught before the invention of the electron microscope. Did we actually understand molecular behavior so well that what we guessed before we had things like scanning tunneling microscopes was so accurate that we don't have to rewrite the books? Or are we just trying to observe only what will prove what we already know?
I think the mistake we often tend to make is to believe that it is either one side or the other. Computing a cure for cancer is very likely a hopeless approach. On the other hand if we can at some point understand enough about DNA to identify cancerous anomalies and target them through custom tailored retroviruses or nano-tech, I figure... sure why not?
That said, I have been "volunteering" from time to time at a university's biochem department with regards to code optimization. I do this in exchange for lab access so I can learn learn a little about biochemistry. At this point what I've learned is that we really don't know anything at all about biochemistry and instead of focusing all our attention into developing tools that could maybe allow us to actually learn about it, we prefer these insane studies of protein folding an such.
I don't necessarily agree with the original article or how it was written in such a way to sensationalize instead of inform. I think the whole Plato/Socrates conversational thing is entertaining a times, but has very little value outside of philosophy and Hollywood. I do however agree with the sentiment suggesting that there is great value in getting an education that would allow you to make valuable contributions to the study of medicine by taking a less traditional approach.
Of course, I could just be speaking out of the side of my own ass. I like the idea of making improvements to scanning tunneling technology to possibly allow full mapping of a human cell. Then focusing on observing all the molecular interactions that explain the purpose of each part of the cell. Biology labs are almost always completely full of pretty white equipment that looks really really expensive. They even have fancy looking centrifuges.... which is a machine which spins stuff.... around in circles... and it probably cost more than my car (a BMW i3). If I as a computer nerd needed such a thing, I would get a power supply, a mosfet, a motor, an arduino and maybe an IR transmitter/receiver for good luck. Total cost... $100. Biology labs should be located in the same building as machine shops and electronic and mechanical engineers.
Have you actually met a women or are you basing this entirely on what you've seen on pornhub and xvidoes?
Actually, the US is more socialist than capitalist. The US tax payer covers cost of living for employees of the largest companies like Walmart and McDonalds. The government creates jobs under the guise of protecting the nation and employs directly or indirectly (by my highly suspicious estimates) 20-25% of the working population (DoD, DoE, CIA, FBI, DHS, TSA, NASA, etc... Lockheed, Boeing mostly, etc... plus the infrastructure to support them). When a person needs a job, the government makes one for them.
The voters decide otherwise every single day. They vote all the time for what they believe will serve their own interests. What's worse is they have no idea what their own interests are. We make most of out decisions without any real information or education.
Suppose that this forum represents a class of voters. We read a headline posted by someone with an obvious bias. The people reading this site tend to take one of two positions "I love Tesla" or "I hate Tesla". They voice their opinions like "I for one believe in the rights Tesla is fighting to uphold." and someone responds about how they don't understand what they're actually saying. Of course, the response will make no impact and the Tesla lover will still love and vote "Tesla is good, I support people who support Tesla". He has no real idea why Tesla is good... all he knows is that they make "clean" electric cars. He overlooks that Elon Musk and Tesla have set some extremely dangerous precedents in the name of doing good things. We justify it by saying too good outweighs the bad, and while Musk is probably a really great guy, and while we really want him to do the things he's doing, he's basically leaving a wake behind him of sheer disaster and destruction which will be colonized by the bottom feeders under the pretense of "You told Elon Musk it was ok... it must be ok for us too!!!".
I love the idea of Elon Musk, he's a dreamer and when I pick up the newspaper each day, I look forward to the stories about him as much as I looked forward to the comics as a child. The newspaper is full of just utter shit. "This politician is a dick, that one is a dick. The world is coming to and end. 14 pages of articles about last night's killings and battlefield crap."... then there's an article about a guy who seems to be building the world of the Jetson's. He'll make us zoom around in tubes as the speed of "Holy shit my face is peeling off" and fly us to the stars. He'll build our houses out of batteries and my grandchildren will glow because of him. His popularity and the way the press treats him makes me feel like there's still room for good news and hope for the human race. He's a real life Tony Stark and I can't get enough of him.
He'll poison us with massive quantities of lithium. He'll build cars with limited life spans and no real plan for how to recycle them. He'll move from metals to plastics, polymers, etc... which have no future but land fill. He'll do lots of awesome things that will simply shit all over the planet. He'll make the environmental disaster left behind by the big three in Michigan look like child's play. Everything the guy touches is basically toxic by the time he walks past it. But holy shit, I hope he doesn't stop! I LOVE HIS STUFF!
I just bought a BMW i3... I really wanted a Tesla, but the car is too f-ing big and frankly, Tesla drivers are generally dicks and I don't want to become one. I actually drive in the normal traffic instead of the taxi/carpool lanes because I don't want to negatively impact the other drivers. Electric cars don't need those "perks" anymore since they were there for the crappy pre-Tesla cars which couldn't get to and from work on a charge in stop and go.
Or configure your IPSEC properly with IKEv2. The best fix is to EOL v1
Because if she's put in jail, Trump becomes president almost by default.
... well not Trump?
... quit putting these fucking morons up for election or we'll never have a choice of who is president.
It's sickening, she's going to become president and see no repercussions from this event because the alternative option is actually somehow worse.
Let's be fair... if you have to choose between two shit bags for president, wouldn't you prefer the shit bag who is at least
What scares the ever living shit out of me is that people actually want him to be president. I don't mean because they think Hillary is worse or because he is the current choice of his team. I mean there are people who hear what he says and thinks he makes sense.
People!!!! This guy is a male Sarah Palin. Before you know it, he's going to import fucking polar bears to New York City so he can stand and shoot them from his balcony too. Maybe he'll claim diplomatic expertise because with a really big telescope he can see Canada from his living room window.
So... while it kills me to say it... Hillary Shitbag Clinton should just be let in free and clear... just forget all this legal shit and let her in. She'll be there 8 years and the republicans will spend their time trying to find a way to top even Trump. Let's face it...
1) Palin - A woman who can barely speak... I'm not kidding, she makes sounds but no one on this planet has any f-ing idea what she's actually saying and... well neither does she.
2) Romney - On 31 separate accounts during his campaign he said "The first thing I'll do when I get into office is...". And frankly, it was never the same thing twice. The guy couldn't remember from hour to hour what the first thing he was going to do was. Maybe he's like really super amazing and can do 31 different first things simultaneously. Maybe he can use some quantum physics magic and be in 31 places at once. He was a blathering idiot... and the bitch of it is, when he has prepared speeches, he's bloody brilliant. He just really sucks as using his own brain... well except for thinking things like "Wouldn't my car look great between the grand piano and the couch?". Who the f-ing hell puts a frigging car elevator into his living room?!?!?! It's like standing on your porch drinking a Schlitz and and shooting bears then bragging on TV about it.
3) Trump... well... come on... I just don't even need to say anything about him. He does it all by himself.
For the love of all that is holy (like pizza)
P.S. - You don't actually have to vote for one of these two shit bags... you can vote for another shitbag like Bernie the sellout Sanders.
I don't understand... did he say anything about your code and what you should do with it? You must be really awesome at interpreting work orders.
Hillary is stupid, not malicious. Let's assume for the moment that neither Donald or Hillary are actually as evil as we make them out to be.
Let's also assume for the moment that Hillary wanted to have an e-mail address with a domain name the added to her marketing value and she asked some egg-head if he/she could make it happen. Now assume that the egghead recognizes that she's the secretary of state as well as the former first lady of a two term president.
Now the egghead hears her ask for this and he's like "Well, I can't put that on our internal servers... what else can I do to make it happen?" Of course the egghead isn't a lawyer and he/she doesn't want to be cock-blocked by some manager and then go back to Hillary and tell her/him (still not sure) that he screwed up and now her dreams of having a her marketing slogan as a domain name for her e-mail will not be possible.
So... what does he do? Well, not being a lawyer or understanding what it would mean, he sets up a new mail server that would allow her to send messages to Bill like "Make sure you leave your cigars at your intern's house before coming home... oh and buy milk." without them ending up as public record.
I honestly wonder if the e-mail is the best thing they can come up with. Hillary isn't particularly exciting, but she's pretty awful at her job... unless you consider her job as Secretary of State as a personal self-promotion, optimal for ladder climbing... where in that case, she's great at her job. She has to have incredible amounts of crap they can use on her without even digging too deep. And the e-mail thing which I'm damn near convinced is basically technical incompetence as opposed to intentional malicious deception of the country.
Let's also consider that there's absolutely nothing related to the e-mail that will cause Trump to win. He's like the golden goose or the gift that keeps giving to anyone who opposes him. After all, I think that even Dan Quayle could have won running against Trump. Al Gore could have creamed him. Instead, the country leaves Hillary as the opposition and while she looks like she has a landslide, you know you suck when it's months before election and people can still identify a possibility that Trump could possibly win.
Democrats... what the hell were you thinking when you supported Hillary?
Republicans... what the hell were you thinking when you supported Trump?
You both had better candidates and you actually chose the most entertaining ones as opposed to someone you might actually want in office.
Automating Windows remotely via Powershell remoting which would localize error messages and exception handling?
Odd... I tend to find that both are pretty awful and prefer to hire people with computer science education and programming experience with a solid understanding operating design, protocols and encryption. There are a lot of people out there with that skillset and what's best is that they generally don't care what language they are using for scripting but instead solve the problem, document the solution and develop deployment scripts for changes as well as rollback scripts and unit tests. Oh, and if there's a problem with the API they are calling, they write a bug report describing it and providing a reproducible test case to ensure MS can easily fix it.
Never hire IT guys if you can hire computer scientists instead.
While I'm not a huge fan of powershell, I've spent a considerable amount of time coding in it because there's simply no point to using stupid utils like puppet and chef when 90% of what you do is call powershell anyway. After all, install Windows... powershell... add user... powershell... install Hyper-V... powershell... install WDS.... powershell. So why the hell would I bother with something else when I have to use it anyway?
Now that I've figured out object orient programming, exception handling, type definitions, error management, etc... I think that PowerShell is pretty nice. It's an ugly language, but it's the only language I know of that is designed to handle automation so nicely. Whether I'm automating FreeBSD or Exchange Server, PowerShell is very capable. What's even better is that the help online is excellent. I almost never find myself wondering "Gee, I wonder how to do that" and that's been the truth since the first day of using it.
As for other shells... bash and other bournes are nice, but they handle data like shit and you spend most of your time coding new utilities for almost everything you need to accomplish.
I think that existing shell paradigms weren't good enough for handling these tasks. Most shells don't have the ability to call libraries without additional utilities. Most shells don't have the ability to employ data structures. PowerShell while somewhat grotesque to look at is really quite powerful in that sense.
I'm looking forward to powershell remoting linux.
I was thinking that Ford can't make the user interface of their car radios work (neither can GM) reliably. Mustangs are the only cars I've ever had to actually reboot. Shouldn't congress act quickly on behalf of the American people to stop this from happening?
... won't. The developers will at some point decide they need a better CPU or graphics and that will be end of life for my car.
The biggest problem with car companies making self driving vehicles is that they are car companies. I was just talking yesterday with some people about my BMW i3 which is an excellent example of the fall of a great company. While the things like the interior, motors and chassis are amazing in the vehicle. There are just SOOOOO many bugs in the design that they should hire Toyota (who has done electronics and software for decades) to fix it. Let's not even get into stuff like doors which don't properly close (checked the floor models too, design problem) or trunk covers which seem designed for a totally different car. And don't get me started on the touch sensor for the door lock. I drove a 2004 Prius for 11 years and the doors locked and unlocked instantly every time. The i3 requires touching, holding, rubbing... I swear, just to lock and unlock my car, I'm putting my marriage in jeopardy.
See, car companies have been more or less forced into modernizing with computers and technology. The problem is, they have absolutely no f-ing clue what they're doing. They could try and buy the tech but it wouldn't be integrated and would likely cost too much. They could develop the tech, but they have no idea how to build and maintain something that complex. You see it when the apps on the computers in the cars are the same ones a year later than they were when the car was first designed. You also see it when the API/SDKs for the computers are closed and require licensing. You see it when the computer needs to be reboot while driving down the road and it can't been done without stopping the car and powering it off. You see it when the iPhone app for the car needs 1-2 minutes to lock or unlock the doors.
I think that the real future for car companies is not to actually make their own cars anymore. I think that car companies will become manufacturing facilities for new companies with the skills required to design the next generation of transportation. I would much rather a Google, Apple or Microsoft vehicle drives me somewhere than a Ford or BMW. It's not that I believe that those three companies make good code. It's that I believe those three companies know how to maintain technology.
Oh... and so far as I know, the computer in my brand new, fully loaded BMW i3 is not able to be upgraded and likely will never be. So, while the vehicle chassis will likely never need changes, the computer which should improve and change with the times
Have you heard of lobbyists?
Pretty sure Google and Apple have a few.
Cars on roads are a utility to provide transportation.
If you "want to drive" find a race track or lobby for Route 66 to be a place to cruise.
I shouldn't suffer because you think cars are play things.