Apple only became the profitable monster it is today after coming back from the brink of extinction and dominating mobile / music. That's the source of it's "making lots of money."
However, once it loses mobile, as it is surely poised to do, it will no longer be making lots of money... at least, not by current standards. Unless they figure out how to resurrect Jobs so he can resurrect the company again.
Companies like Apple and Blackberry need to learn that no matter how dominantly they control a market, they are only a few quarterly cycles away from completely losing their market position.
It automatically informs the other user if it detects a screenshot. I've tried multiple screenshot apps as well as the screenshot feature native to CM to test this. Of course, it's still completely pointless since someone properly motivated can simply take a photograph of the phone while the photo is being displayed. People need to realize that nothing that you send to another person can ever be guaranteed to "self-destruct".
The only thing missing from this news article is a hyperlink embedded with an affiliate code. That, and anything news worthy. Product releases are generally not news.
Well, unlike many of you, I don't work in the tech industry. But it is pretty damn easy to find updates for very old hardware. My Galaxy S Captivate, ancient by phone standards, is still enjoying support from a very vibrant homebrew community. I have my pick of a multitude of ROMs that I can easily browse and install through an app called ROM manager. As for bloatware, I have used Root Explorer to completely remove bloatware for many of my friends on their android phones. Rooting is trivial and unrooting for warranty purposes is equally trivial. By trivial, I mean typing the term into Google or XDA and clicking Download. This is not beyond the comprehension of an ordinary person. To be sure, you can be lazy or for other reasons, decide not to fully utilize your device. But the resources and the community and the constant stream of steady updates are always available. Android brought some choice and freedom to the phone market... but it is still up to the end user to exercise that choice and freedom. Or, just buy a new phone... much like it used to be anyway.
Very true. My old communications device was the most secure and I've yet to find something that rivals it. It was impossible to spoof, clone, or manipulate and all my data was secure. Sure it was hard to make long-distance calls, because finding large spools of string is difficult, but the fidelity of those tin cans was soooo pure. Plus, they never got any malware, not even once.
There are a stable M builds that work well for general users. Nightlies of anything will be unstable, because they are automatically built and untested.
If you want privacy, don't willing share information on a public forum, like Facebook. Users are on the one hand using the site and all of its features, which presumably they find useful, and on the other bemoaning that the actions in which they publicly engage can be either aggregated or used by the company to - gasp - make money. Facebook has consistently responded to user privacy demands, or paid severely when they haven't (Instagram lost half its traffic in one month). As far as I'm concerned, they are an example of a how to balance user demands for privacy with monetizing a free service.
Much of science is based on pseudo-intellectual waffle-gab. The experimental method, for example, empiricism, skepticism, many basic classificatory schemes, and actually even the groundwork for modern discoveries such as the atom.
But what am I doing tell you all of this stuff, obviously you know the value of pseudo-intellectual waffle-gab, because your signature quotes Voltaire and not Newton.
Very simple, actually. Capitalism with limits. You put a floating cap on profits, tied to measures such as the crime rate and the wealth gap; and put a cap on personal wealth. It doesn't have to be a low cap, say $20 million dollars. Or $50 million. Fuck, make it an even $100 million dollars and raise it every year with inflation.
Then watch society transform.
Any comment made behind the veil of anonymity is one which conveys not its manifest message, but rather, a latent one: I lack the constitutional fortitude to publicly make this argument.
What I'm trying to say, friend, is your words would have more weight if you took off the skirt.
I for one think this is a great idea. I mean, what could possible go wrong? Sure, corporations will be given access to an entire planet, but corporations are people too my friend. For example, don't think Ford, think Fred. GM? No, that's Jim. Sure, these people will work within the free market towards their own selfish gains, however, through the benevolent guidance of the Invisible Hand (which is an alpha version of the Invisible Man) they will reach a state of equilibrium which represents the best interests of all.
Re:Such systems have been proposed before
on
The Zuckerberg Tax
·
· Score: 1
Yes but at the core of the proposition is the definition of income. Tax loopholes consist primarily of the manipulation of definitions. The wealthier one is, the more one is indebted to the system which made that wealth possible. If Zuckerberg lived in Russia, he might be in prison for treason and Facebook now controlled by the US government. If Zuckerberg lived in Brazil, he might have been kidnapped or made to pay several ransoms. That he lives in a society which can afford him and his incredible wealth security of property and person, I'd say he should pay tax on everything, wouldn't you? At the very least, let's agree equally compelling arguments can be made on both sides and lets not write one off as an ideological hatred of wealth.
Slashdot Mirror
"pan-industry platform for online registration, e-identity and data services"... so, OpenID (http://openid.net/connect/faq/). Minus the open part.
Apple only became the profitable monster it is today after coming back from the brink of extinction and dominating mobile / music. That's the source of it's "making lots of money."
However, once it loses mobile, as it is surely poised to do, it will no longer be making lots of money... at least, not by current standards. Unless they figure out how to resurrect Jobs so he can resurrect the company again.
Companies like Apple and Blackberry need to learn that no matter how dominantly they control a market, they are only a few quarterly cycles away from completely losing their market position.
patents & lawyers
Root Explorer
It automatically informs the other user if it detects a screenshot. I've tried multiple screenshot apps as well as the screenshot feature native to CM to test this. Of course, it's still completely pointless since someone properly motivated can simply take a photograph of the phone while the photo is being displayed. People need to realize that nothing that you send to another person can ever be guaranteed to "self-destruct".
The only thing missing from this news article is a hyperlink embedded with an affiliate code. That, and anything news worthy. Product releases are generally not news.
I agree with most of this but you don't need to kill your hair, simply coloring it would be enough.
Well, unlike many of you, I don't work in the tech industry. But it is pretty damn easy to find updates for very old hardware. My Galaxy S Captivate, ancient by phone standards, is still enjoying support from a very vibrant homebrew community. I have my pick of a multitude of ROMs that I can easily browse and install through an app called ROM manager. As for bloatware, I have used Root Explorer to completely remove bloatware for many of my friends on their android phones. Rooting is trivial and unrooting for warranty purposes is equally trivial. By trivial, I mean typing the term into Google or XDA and clicking Download. This is not beyond the comprehension of an ordinary person. To be sure, you can be lazy or for other reasons, decide not to fully utilize your device. But the resources and the community and the constant stream of steady updates are always available. Android brought some choice and freedom to the phone market... but it is still up to the end user to exercise that choice and freedom. Or, just buy a new phone... much like it used to be anyway.
Did you hear the new iPhone 5 is out! It's.... taller?
Very true. My old communications device was the most secure and I've yet to find something that rivals it. It was impossible to spoof, clone, or manipulate and all my data was secure. Sure it was hard to make long-distance calls, because finding large spools of string is difficult, but the fidelity of those tin cans was soooo pure. Plus, they never got any malware, not even once.
There are a stable M builds that work well for general users. Nightlies of anything will be unstable, because they are automatically built and untested.
If you want privacy, don't willing share information on a public forum, like Facebook. Users are on the one hand using the site and all of its features, which presumably they find useful, and on the other bemoaning that the actions in which they publicly engage can be either aggregated or used by the company to - gasp - make money. Facebook has consistently responded to user privacy demands, or paid severely when they haven't (Instagram lost half its traffic in one month). As far as I'm concerned, they are an example of a how to balance user demands for privacy with monetizing a free service.
It was fun while it lasted.
Much of science is based on pseudo-intellectual waffle-gab. The experimental method, for example, empiricism, skepticism, many basic classificatory schemes, and actually even the groundwork for modern discoveries such as the atom. But what am I doing tell you all of this stuff, obviously you know the value of pseudo-intellectual waffle-gab, because your signature quotes Voltaire and not Newton.
History repeating itself? What kind of madness is that?
So true. Brb, checking my MySpace on Netscape Navigator. BTW, do you have an ICQ #? If not, just Yahoo! my Geocities page.
What could possibly go wrong?
Very simple, actually. Capitalism with limits. You put a floating cap on profits, tied to measures such as the crime rate and the wealth gap; and put a cap on personal wealth. It doesn't have to be a low cap, say $20 million dollars. Or $50 million. Fuck, make it an even $100 million dollars and raise it every year with inflation. Then watch society transform.
Hemp is band in many many countries
Not in Canada, or at least if they are, I've never heard of them. What genre?
free app + google ads, which seems to have been lost in the panicked summaries
Any comment made behind the veil of anonymity is one which conveys not its manifest message, but rather, a latent one: I lack the constitutional fortitude to publicly make this argument. What I'm trying to say, friend, is your words would have more weight if you took off the skirt.
Gifts from the West? How are people so oblivious to recent history? Do yourself (and the world) a favour, go to a library and read.
You're a moron.
I for one think this is a great idea. I mean, what could possible go wrong? Sure, corporations will be given access to an entire planet, but corporations are people too my friend. For example, don't think Ford, think Fred. GM? No, that's Jim. Sure, these people will work within the free market towards their own selfish gains, however, through the benevolent guidance of the Invisible Hand (which is an alpha version of the Invisible Man) they will reach a state of equilibrium which represents the best interests of all.
Yes but at the core of the proposition is the definition of income. Tax loopholes consist primarily of the manipulation of definitions. The wealthier one is, the more one is indebted to the system which made that wealth possible. If Zuckerberg lived in Russia, he might be in prison for treason and Facebook now controlled by the US government. If Zuckerberg lived in Brazil, he might have been kidnapped or made to pay several ransoms. That he lives in a society which can afford him and his incredible wealth security of property and person, I'd say he should pay tax on everything, wouldn't you? At the very least, let's agree equally compelling arguments can be made on both sides and lets not write one off as an ideological hatred of wealth.