On the iPhone, while yes, it's a choice, people simply aren't adverse to upgrading because it's an efforless process. Even when you had to plug it in, that was all you had to do, plug it in and click the OK button. Androids certainly aren't that straight forward, and no, most times, after release, the device is abandoned by the manufacturer. You can't deny that. That users are daunted by the upgrade process speaks to their comfortability with the OS - yes, its their fault for not updating when it is available, but if the process isn't simple enough, apparent enough or advertised enough, they simply won't do it - as we see now.
Android should not be getting the free pass from so many slashdotters as it does. Neither should google, for that matter. But they both certainly seem to be.
At least it's voluntary, and the vast majority of info is info you provided knowingly. Maybe not knowing every way it could be used, but knowingly none the less. Google on the other hand, you can't escape no matter how hard you try.
If everyone but you is posting real information,and referring to you occasionally by name, your online persona is cracked. And really, that last bit if minutiae, your name, is insignificant compared to everything else. Your name is not the keying field, so it's not like lacking a real name for you they haven't had a way to aggregate other info band you can say you work at Goldman Sachs, but if the ip youre logging into during the day resolves to a college ip, they know better. Just as if you say you own the federal reserve, but they spot you logging in at night from a slum and constantly logging in along bus routes, they know better. And logging in isn't even logging in, it's just visiting a site with a like button embedded in it.
How tricky you were. I'll give you credit for at least trying, though!
Last I read, tor is useless for bit torrent. Not only is. It horrendously slow, but bit torrent clients go ahead and publish their users real ips in the process.
I really like my Mac, worlds better than windows. But I just installed a linux computer at home that I've been using more and more, and news like this makes me want to use it more. I'm not a programmer, but I feel reasonably safe that the many eyes of you programmers will catch this code should it ever be inserted into a distribution. Only question is, with rhel essentially being closed off to all of you - if they were to adopt software like this. Would it be caught and removed in centos (the distro I settled on?) or will they faithfully include that "feature" as well? Otherwise, I'll have to go to openbsd, which would suck, because as much as I admire the is and theo, I'm very excited about the possibilities afforded by virtualization, which he doesn't seem inclined to support thus far.
novel solution. Either go out of business by pulling yourself from search listings or go out of business because google is poaching your content.
Useless conversation, everyone here thinks everything should be free save for whatever activity it is that provides them money. Been that way ever since Napster. At least I get a good laugh when I see all your jobs going to India.
If someone was searching for a photo of a rose, and google gives it to them, it still had value, its just that google stole that value from the creator.
>> Browsers only pulling images use less bandwidth that browsers pulling the entire page.
Someone visiting a page on your site downloads the HTML which is, say, 3kb, and the image which is say 500kb. So yes, 503kb vs 500kb.
Now someone just googled your images and pulls 10 through googles image search - you now have 5 MB of bandwidth used, and no visitors. And that visitor number might have been useful for selling add space, hoping for add clicks, or maybe you were hoping to sell them something. End result, someone looking for one of your pictures who had come to your site directly would pull 503K, whereas through google, they might just pull up all your pics that show up on the front page and potentially hit you up for 5 or 10 MB of bandwidth.
Oh well you're right, google does no evil. People better adapt to providing google free content and stop thinking that they should have an attempt to make money off of it even though that's what google will be doing.
My office is all dell. Server died a few Fridays ago. Never saw anything like it before - start up, get to "applying computer settings", flash bluescreen, restart and do the same thing again. After not to long on the phone, running some diagnostics which didn't include asking for the error code, or acting at all interested when I tried to tell them what it was, they resolved to send a new motherboard and raid controller. Forgot to tell you, but i was clear to them, the situation was repeatable booting from the cd. Tuesday arrived, the tech installed it, same thing. Resolved that it must be software, never mind that it was blue screening from the cd, formatted the drive and same thing. Called again, after hours where you knew the tech was trying to get me to hang up, he offered new ram and CPU. I said maybe they should send new drives too, since that would be all that hadn't been replaced. At that point, he had me go in the raid bios, destroy the raid and create a new one, and that fixed it. I stayed til 6 in the morning restoring the thing and couldn't help but think that they must not track error codes at all - they never asked for them and didn't wan them when offered. Can't help but think hat if they did such simple things my office wouldn't have been dead in the water for three days. I mean, im paying for support, not just a tech to mindlessly send replacement parts that won't fix the issue.
So, no, no mor dell for me. I'll try my chances elsewhere.
Browsers only pulling images from the pages = Increase in bandwidth
Once again, google screwing everyone who isn't google. But at least they "do no evil"' right?
How would they feel if we setup search engines that proxies their results, so they're having to serve all that traffic without theabilityto place ads, track clicks or build user profiles? Not good at all, I bet. It shouldn't be hard fora copyright holder to sue,after all they'll be be serving up full resolution versions of infringing material.
But aren't the early windows versions extremely tied to x86? So running them via wine on an android will involve emulating a pentium or 486 on the arm chip? That sounds like a recipe for horrendously slow to me...
Do you think the only work they do is in the studio? Really? Writing songs isn't work? Practicing isn't work? Rehearsing isn't? Apparently it's just plunking away on their instruments?
Why should you be paid for anything besides the number of keys you press during the day? Your a coder, your product is code, your company and its customers shouldn't have to pay you for meeting with coworkers, project planning and the like. And how dare you charge for support? If you did your job right in the first place, people wouldn't need to call you. If anything each support call the company recieves should be directly deducted from your key stroke count.
I really don't get why programmers are so greedy. First they change an arm and a leg just to wire gibberish band then they have the gall to charge more when their product doesn't work.
That's the problem with customers dictating to their vendors what they think something should be worth. The customer is always going to try to minimize the vendors value. Always. Remember that when your job goes to India.
Back to reality: when you buy the cd, she doesn't have to wait for you to play it hundreds of times to make her money.
You buy the cd, she makes a buck.
You paying her a half a penny every time you listen to one of her songs, that clearly isn't a dollar. Maybe it'll turn out to be more in the long run, but maybe not. But up front, it's 7.5 cents if you listen to the whole thing. It's not like she can sell you a support contract to make up for it or anything...
I was going to say the same, people merely placed there orders a couple hours later, not dropped the order altogether or decided to drop amazon altogether. Just a small glitch that won't even be noticed when their earnings come out. As pitiful as those earnings are, given the company's market cap
Yes. The list is too long to even bother to post. But I'd wager most of what we take for granted, generally and technologically specifically, has its roots in public spending. If it wasn't publicly funded research projects that brought the technology to a state usable by private enterprise, or public money creating a market and demand for products that no one else could afford, our world would be vastly different today, and lacking in a lot. This is why I shudder at people who say that our government spending is the problem. Couldn't be further from the truth.
Actually, Steve lived a lot longer than would have been expected. His cancer was not an easily treatable type at all. Guess you can make stuff up and feel all pompous, "I know better than Steve jobs" and you feel better. Good for you.
It wasn't for sale to the public, so going rate is meaningless. Xerox e executives obviously saw enough promise in them that they were willing to invest a million dollars in them and share their technology with them. Because that's actually the gist of the transaction. Apple didn't sell any goods or services - they took an investment.
Xerox cashed out following iPo. Should they have held, that million would be worth 365 million now.
Yes, parc employees weren't happy about it, but management makes the decisions for better or for worse.
Why point at Apple when Microsoft is the grandfather of all this mantra of "hey, great idea! oh look, we built that into windows now!"
And then of course, one could say the same thing of Linux - free Linux did away with the market for SCO Unix, severely damaged Solaris, did worse to IRIX. All rendered obsolete or near obsolete because of Linux. With KVM in the kernel and Xen available free as well, eventually VMWare might find itself killed off as well.
No, operating systems these days are bundles of programs that the developer or distributors choose to provide their users, that they think those users will benefit from. Third party products will be rendered obsolete here and there, or we wouldn't see progress.
There's no more discrimination there than there is by not charging California residents income tax on the income they generate from municipal bonds issued by the state of California, but going ahead and charging that tax against interest income investors derive from municipal bonds issued by other states. Which is the case.
But by making odd binds more attractive, it makes it easier for California to run up its debt, knowing that there are plenty of captive lenders on hand. Allowing a break for investors has no "plus" side for the treasury, just tax dollars that they could have gotten but didn't get. Guess it makes sense, but the retroactive idea is horrible. I'm not one that buys into all the uncertainty that republicans were espousing regarding taxes, but truly how can anyone in California (or anywhere else for that matter) feel comfortable with any financial decision - even if they spend considerable time energy and money researching it, if the government can retroactively make changes that go back to periods when your taxes have already been filed and paid?
Why do you need infrastructure? Almost everything can be done by connecting directly with the caller on the other end. Bandwidth needed per call is also so minimal, it could be done in a p2p manner without degrading communication, except that would only add a few extra hops for the packets to go through.
If you insisted on functionality through telephone wires, yes, a central point might be needed, but I'd bet that most Skype traffic is just one user using Skype to cha with another Skype user. But with not to much retraining, I bet most users could be made to live without functionality through phone circuits. It would require opening firewall ports, though, and that means that developers would need to be extremely watchful about security.
I'm not concerned with other actors, I'm concerned with google. When will they release a setting that allows us to prevent them from gathering information on us? Shouldn't be too hard to dish out results without logging them. But yeah, I'd say google is the biggest privacy threat, not "other actors"
Slashdot Mirror
On the iPhone, while yes, it's a choice, people simply aren't adverse to upgrading because it's an efforless process. Even when you had to plug it in, that was all you had to do, plug it in and click the OK button. Androids certainly aren't that straight forward, and no, most times, after release, the device is abandoned by the manufacturer. You can't deny that. That users are daunted by the upgrade process speaks to their comfortability with the OS - yes, its their fault for not updating when it is available, but if the process isn't simple enough, apparent enough or advertised enough, they simply won't do it - as we see now.
Android should not be getting the free pass from so many slashdotters as it does. Neither should google, for that matter. But they both certainly seem to be.
Your missing the point. Users aren't failing to update, they're not provided with any updates at all.
At least it's voluntary, and the vast majority of info is info you provided knowingly. Maybe not knowing every way it could be used, but knowingly none the less. Google on the other hand, you can't escape no matter how hard you try.
If everyone but you is posting real information,and referring to you occasionally by name, your online persona is cracked. And really, that last bit if minutiae, your name, is insignificant compared to everything else. Your name is not the keying field, so it's not like lacking a real name for you they haven't had a way to aggregate other info band you can say you work at Goldman Sachs, but if the ip youre logging into during the day resolves to a college ip, they know better. Just as if you say you own the federal reserve, but they spot you logging in at night from a slum and constantly logging in along bus routes, they know better. And logging in isn't even logging in, it's just visiting a site with a like button embedded in it.
How tricky you were. I'll give you credit for at least trying, though!
Last I read, tor is useless for bit torrent. Not only is. It horrendously slow, but bit torrent clients go ahead and publish their users real ips in the process.
I really like my Mac, worlds better than windows. But I just installed a linux computer at home that I've been using more and more, and news like this makes me want to use it more. I'm not a programmer, but I feel reasonably safe that the many eyes of you programmers will catch this code should it ever be inserted into a distribution. Only question is, with rhel essentially being closed off to all of you - if they were to adopt software like this. Would it be caught and removed in centos (the distro I settled on?) or will they faithfully include that "feature" as well? Otherwise, I'll have to go to openbsd, which would suck, because as much as I admire the is and theo, I'm very excited about the possibilities afforded by virtualization, which he doesn't seem inclined to support thus far.
They make billions of billions dollars. Google is hardly a charity.
And if any other company did what they do, you guys would all be up in arms. But since they're google, they get a free pass. This simply amazes me.
novel solution. Either go out of business by pulling yourself from search listings or go out of business because google is poaching your content.
Useless conversation, everyone here thinks everything should be free save for whatever activity it is that provides them money. Been that way ever since Napster. At least I get a good laugh when I see all your jobs going to India.
If someone was searching for a photo of a rose, and google gives it to them, it still had value, its just that google stole that value from the creator.
>> Browsers only pulling images use less bandwidth that browsers pulling the entire page.
Someone visiting a page on your site downloads the HTML which is, say, 3kb, and the image which is say 500kb. So yes, 503kb vs 500kb.
Now someone just googled your images and pulls 10 through googles image search - you now have 5 MB of bandwidth used, and no visitors. And that visitor number might have been useful for selling add space, hoping for add clicks, or maybe you were hoping to sell them something. End result, someone looking for one of your pictures who had come to your site directly would pull 503K, whereas through google, they might just pull up all your pics that show up on the front page and potentially hit you up for 5 or 10 MB of bandwidth.
Oh well you're right, google does no evil. People better adapt to providing google free content and stop thinking that they should have an attempt to make money off of it even though that's what google will be doing.
My office is all dell. Server died a few Fridays ago. Never saw anything like it before - start up, get to "applying computer settings", flash bluescreen, restart and do the same thing again. After not to long on the phone, running some diagnostics which didn't include asking for the error code, or acting at all interested when I tried to tell them what it was, they resolved to send a new motherboard and raid controller. Forgot to tell you, but i was clear to them, the situation was repeatable booting from the cd. Tuesday arrived, the tech installed it, same thing. Resolved that it must be software, never mind that it was blue screening from the cd, formatted the drive and same thing. Called again, after hours where you knew the tech was trying to get me to hang up, he offered new ram and CPU. I said maybe they should send new drives too, since that would be all that hadn't been replaced. At that point, he had me go in the raid bios, destroy the raid and create a new one, and that fixed it. I stayed til 6 in the morning restoring the thing and couldn't help but think that they must not track error codes at all - they never asked for them and didn't wan them when offered. Can't help but think hat if they did such simple things my office wouldn't have been dead in the water for three days. I mean, im paying for support, not just a tech to mindlessly send replacement parts that won't fix the issue.
So, no, no mor dell for me. I'll try my chances elsewhere.
Really?
Less people visiting the pages = less traffic
Browsers only pulling images from the pages = Increase in bandwidth
Once again, google screwing everyone who isn't google. But at least they "do no evil"' right?
How would they feel if we setup search engines that proxies their results, so they're having to serve all that traffic without theabilityto place ads, track clicks or build user profiles? Not good at all, I bet. It shouldn't be hard fora copyright holder to sue,after all they'll be be serving up full resolution versions of infringing material.
But aren't the early windows versions extremely tied to x86? So running them via wine on an android will involve emulating a pentium or 486 on the arm chip? That sounds like a recipe for horrendously slow to me...
They're relying on contract law. If that's not lawful evil, I don't know what it.
Do you think the only work they do is in the studio? Really? Writing songs isn't work? Practicing isn't work? Rehearsing isn't? Apparently it's just plunking away on their instruments?
Why should you be paid for anything besides the number of keys you press during the day? Your a coder, your product is code, your company and its customers shouldn't have to pay you for meeting with coworkers, project planning and the like. And how dare you charge for support? If you did your job right in the first place, people wouldn't need to call you. If anything each support call the company recieves should be directly deducted from your key stroke count.
I really don't get why programmers are so greedy. First they change an arm and a leg just to wire gibberish band then they have the gall to charge more when their product doesn't work.
That's the problem with customers dictating to their vendors what they think something should be worth. The customer is always going to try to minimize the vendors value. Always. Remember that when your job goes to India.
Back to reality: when you buy the cd, she doesn't have to wait for you to play it hundreds of times to make her money.
You buy the cd, she makes a buck.
You paying her a half a penny every time you listen to one of her songs, that clearly isn't a dollar. Maybe it'll turn out to be more in the long run, but maybe not. But up front, it's 7.5 cents if you listen to the whole thing. It's not like she can sell you a support contract to make up for it or anything...
I was going to say the same, people merely placed there orders a couple hours later, not dropped the order altogether or decided to drop amazon altogether. Just a small glitch that won't even be noticed when their earnings come out. As pitiful as those earnings are, given the company's market cap
Yes. The list is too long to even bother to post. But I'd wager most of what we take for granted, generally and technologically specifically, has its roots in public spending. If it wasn't publicly funded research projects that brought the technology to a state usable by private enterprise, or public money creating a market and demand for products that no one else could afford, our world would be vastly different today, and lacking in a lot. This is why I shudder at people who say that our government spending is the problem. Couldn't be further from the truth.
Actually, Steve lived a lot longer than would have been expected. His cancer was not an easily treatable type at all. Guess you can make stuff up and feel all pompous, "I know better than Steve jobs" and you feel better. Good for you.
It wasn't for sale to the public, so going rate is meaningless. Xerox e executives obviously saw enough promise in them that they were willing to invest a million dollars in them and share their technology with them. Because that's actually the gist of the transaction. Apple didn't sell any goods or services - they took an investment.
Xerox cashed out following iPo. Should they have held, that million would be worth 365 million now.
Yes, parc employees weren't happy about it, but management makes the decisions for better or for worse.
Why point at Apple when Microsoft is the grandfather of all this mantra of "hey, great idea! oh look, we built that into windows now!"
And then of course, one could say the same thing of Linux - free Linux did away with the market for SCO Unix, severely damaged Solaris, did worse to IRIX. All rendered obsolete or near obsolete because of Linux. With KVM in the kernel and Xen available free as well, eventually VMWare might find itself killed off as well.
No, operating systems these days are bundles of programs that the developer or distributors choose to provide their users, that they think those users will benefit from. Third party products will be rendered obsolete here and there, or we wouldn't see progress.
There's no more discrimination there than there is by not charging California residents income tax on the income they generate from municipal bonds issued by the state of California, but going ahead and charging that tax against interest income investors derive from municipal bonds issued by other states. Which is the case.
But by making odd binds more attractive, it makes it easier for California to run up its debt, knowing that there are plenty of captive lenders on hand. Allowing a break for investors has no "plus" side for the treasury, just tax dollars that they could have gotten but didn't get. Guess it makes sense, but the retroactive idea is horrible. I'm not one that buys into all the uncertainty that republicans were espousing regarding taxes, but truly how can anyone in California (or anywhere else for that matter) feel comfortable with any financial decision - even if they spend considerable time energy and money researching it, if the government can retroactively make changes that go back to periods when your taxes have already been filed and paid?
Why do you need infrastructure? Almost everything can be done by connecting directly with the caller on the other end. Bandwidth needed per call is also so minimal, it could be done in a p2p manner without degrading communication, except that would only add a few extra hops for the packets to go through.
If you insisted on functionality through telephone wires, yes, a central point might be needed, but I'd bet that most Skype traffic is just one user using Skype to cha with another Skype user. But with not to much retraining, I bet most users could be made to live without functionality through phone circuits. It would require opening firewall ports, though, and that means that developers would need to be extremely watchful about security.
Oh wait, I see why that couldn't happen now....
I'm not concerned with other actors, I'm concerned with google. When will they release a setting that allows us to prevent them from gathering information on us? Shouldn't be too hard to dish out results without logging them. But yeah, I'd say google is the biggest privacy threat, not "other actors"
If the phone is in your pocket (or purse) how can the phone determine if the lights have gone down? Does is see through cloth and leather?
What if microsofts location information turns out to be as accurate as Apple Maps? Will phones randomly go silent?