Apparently one of the justifications for spending space on such a ridiculously specialized task, is that in the rare event that it's being used, some of the other stuff (e.g. the general-purpose parts) might have a brief opportunity to cool off a bit. Your bigger cache wouldn't have that advantage, because you'd be using it so often.
Your wife sees your email address in the dump, and throws a glass of wine at you. $40 shirt: totally ruined. Oh, and she won't have sex with you anymore, ever. And Johnson in Accounting (who keeps his johnson in his pants, whereas you're obviously a total poon-hound) got that $10k/yr promotion instead of you (and the boss admits that you-being-in-the-dump was a factor in his decision). How much does the CEO of AM owe you?
I basically agree with your idea of holding them responsible, but if I'm on the jury, my damages award (so far; feel free to continue the story) is $0.
Without copyright, there's no reason for them to keep having city council meetings. I hope you pirates are happy with the literal anarchy you've caused!
What are they supposed to do? Just sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion, and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids?
Excellent. Now, which one of the things you just mentioned, doesn't completely suck in such an overwhelmingly over-the-top hysterical comedy of disgrace, that it didn't make what you had a decade earlier, look like so-much-higher tech that it was indistinguishable from magic? Your entertainment system in 2005 shouldn't be nicer than your 2015 one. But unless you're a pirate, it is, and you look back on the old days with a tear in your eye.
As long as you are happy with Netflix's selection, its best-case upper bound, is that its quality (if Netflix is very nice and always makes all the UI decisions that you also would have made) can approach what you can do with local playback. Throw in one single exception (e.g. say you're into an Amazon Prime show, or an HBO show) then everything goes to shit and now you're using different tools for different contents.
"I've got it in alphabetical order," she says, "but see? No 'All My Circuits' in the As."
"Oh," you explain, "that show is on a different list, and you use a different player for it. Here, give me the other remote, and I'll just set the monitor to that input (or I'll alt-tab to that other window) (or I'll click to that other browser tab)."
"WTF, it's showing an ad, and I can't skip. I wanted to watch the show, not the ads."
"Oh, that other player let you skip, but this one doesn't."
"Even my Tivo fifteen years ago could fast forward. My grandparents VCR could fast-forward. Whatever. Ok. Why is the window so small?"
"You clicked the wrong thing. This player's full-window control is the square, not the arrows."
"Screw this, I'll watch 'All My Circuits' some other time. Let's watch a show where we can skip ads."
"Ok, let's watch 'Everybody Loves Hypnotoad' because its player works better."
"Yay!"
"Click. Click. Ok, here we go. E. E. So many Es to scroll through."
"Just do a keyword search. There can't be many hypnotoads."
"You're thinking of that other player. This one doesn't have as good of searching and indexing. ER. ET. EU. Everybody. Here we go. The hypnotoad. Play. Oh. Ignore that, just wait."
"Buffering? Is this a joke? You subscribed to this one months ago. Surely it has downloaded by now!"
"No, this is streaming, not local. You don't cache things quite so aggr--"
"We've been talking about this for seconds! Why isn't it done yet?"
"I guess I have a lot of activity right now. Don't worry, it won't take too l-- see? Here we go."
"We already saw this episode."
"Oh, yeah, I guess the current episode isn't out in our region yet. I know, let's watch 'The Sound of Nazis.'"
"Ok. They say that one is funny."
"Just a minute. Ok, good, I already have that tab open over here. Oh, it was playing an ad. Maybe that's why Hyponotoad was slow. Doesn't matter. Sound of Nazis. Sound of Nazis. Here we go."
"Ooooh, pretty! This one is fast! And no ads!"
"Yeah, I guess you could say we finally have the perfect player here, and nothing could possibly go wrong in any sort of embarrassing way at this point."
"Yep. Hey, wait. 'Sauerkraut in my lederhosen?' I think I misunderstood that. Can you make the subtitles English? My German's not so good."
"Uhhh.."
"I know you can get subs for this movie. I saw them online."
"Maybe so, but I don't think I can load subs into the player. It only plays whatever content is on the remote server."
"Ok, let's watch 'Death Blow'!"
"Death Blow! When someone tries to blow you up, not because of who you are, but for other reasons altogether!"
"Muahaha! Yeah! Let's watch it!"
"Oh. They removed it last month," you say. But then the world goes grey and YOG-SOTHOTH appears.
YOG-SOTHOTH: "You are now merely complaining about a miscellaneous service limitation, not a problem with players and services being tied together. Even with standard players, a service
Uh.. are you suggesting that your kitchen has lax documentation for its ingredient rights licensing? Shhh! Good thing you posted as AC, or else the Business Food Alliance would know whom to audit next.
Create a video of you doing that and put it up in YouTube.
WTF. Did you really bring a camera into my restaurant? I'm calling the cops. BTW, how did you make it past security with that thing? The head waiter should have found it when he patted you down. Needless to say, no, you won't be putting this on youtube, because the waiter's uniform and my chef hat are copyrighted. You'll at least have to crop those out. Oh, and my barber says you need to blur out my moustache if you use this conversation in your video, too. (No, your video can't have my restaurant's tables and chairs in it; the supply company was very clear about their IP.) Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out, and obviously I don't need to tell you why you can't show the door, because even if the door itself weren't copyrighted, it also happens to have our business-hours sign on it...
Yeah, what incentive will chefs have to put food on plates, if the government takes away their God-granted monopoly, so that other chefs will then be able to do the same thing? Getting paid for the meal by the diners?! Pfffft!
8 dollars isn't the problem. It's the fact that I would need some trade secrets (and it'd probably also involve a DMCA violation) in order to write a player for Netflix, which is the problem.
You don't ever want to be in a situation where the people you buy a service (or media) from, are also in control of the software that you use. Think back and see if you can ever remember a situation where that happened, and the result was anything better than terrible. (And to answer your retort, NO, horrible isn't better than terrible!)
In particular, having to repaginate and tweak a number of documents due to a lack of compatibility between the proprietary and the open source systems translated into a considerable waste of time and productivity. The management estimates that every day roughly 300 employees had to spend up to 15 minutes each sorting out such issues.
This is unsurprising. As you may recall, in his "3rd Treatise on Government," John Locke wrote:
Reader, thou has endured my discourse on how government shalle answer to the people, and I praise three for thy patience. Let us now broach the particulars of the responsibilities of government.
Chief among these, is pagination.
Take the state of significant size, Italy, as one example. While I can only hope that some day the grace of God shalle grant us sufficient meanes for pagination to no longer be one of man's undying labors, today in 1694 Italy has sixteen thousand workers who must tirelessly check page numbers. Yet our author can envision a future where a mere three hundred workers, paid from public coffers, have daily duties requiring precise pagination.
If their tech is correctly compatible with their legacy uber-shitty database and proprietary spreadsheet, which are apparently not capable of writing standard-format files, this will take mere seconds. On the other hand, if their software cannot make sense of the undocumented inputs, our author can imagine this taking up to fifteen minutes per day. Yet whichever the case, at least three hundred of them will be relying on pagination every day. Even in the ultimate society with fully responsible government, it is the law of nature that we shall never go back to scrolls where nobody gives a fuck about page numbers.
How he foresaw this, I cannot imagine. But you have to admit, he was right on target. Most people who are familiar with late 20th century technology would never even think of this, since in day-to-life you rarely care about pagination, or especially if your page breaks match someone else's -- indeed you probably only rarely think in terms of "pages" at all. Yet Locke had the distant objectivity, in order to see that pagination would some day return to being an important topic, worthy of peoples' -- nay, The People's -- attention.
There is no evidence that encryption was used to protect the emails.
Not everyone who communicates with one another can ever actually meet and exchange key ids, so they need trusted introducers (and even then, that's usually not so bad). But it's hard to believe that for all the people that she was talking to, she never met any of them (which would make a key exchange easy). They ought to have at least pretty-well-verified (and usually very-well-verified) keys for one another other.
The usual "business" reasons for why people blow off security ("I never actually met the customer in person and all the people in between are fuckwitted technophobes") wouldn't seem to apply. I would really like to hear her excuse for why this stuff wasn't encrypted. It's too easy to not do.
I'd say that's comparable level of ownership to owning the DVD's, which is about as much as one can own something like a video.
What the fuck?!
Look here for a real example of "about as much as one can own something like a video." You can literally buy files here, and you aren't breaking any laws, or contract terms, if create or use your own player, or any player of your choice.
It's sickening that anyone would think the iTunes store (or DVDs) are "about as much" as the real thing.
Some people want one master switch, some people want multiple switches and some people want one switch with multiple settings, huh? I've got a solution to all this.
Just have it be software-controlled, and then people can choose whether to use "basic" or "advanced" GUI. Everyone wins, and it's mechanically simpler, too!
Imagine that happening on a computer that didn't fit in your pocket. "I can't upgrade my desktop from 12.04 to 14.04 because Comcast won't let me." It would almost be enough to make you stop buying PCs from your ISP!
Does anyone remember the time when software just WORKED? When you didn't have an update of something every single day?
You mean back before it was networked (or otherwise shared data with potentially-hostile parties) so that the bugs didn't matter? And before people really started looking very hard for the bugs?
Sure, I remember then. You had shitloads of bugs, but you didn't know about most of them, and when you did know about one ("if you type too long of an answer in this char[40] blank, it makes weird things happen, so make sure to keep your answer 40, oops, I mean 39 characters or less"), you had little reason to care about them. (And if a bug is unmanifested, is it really a bug? 1985 answer: no. 1995 answer: yes.)
How is it censorship if a person wants to have information about themselves not be in search results?
I didn't mean to imply that wanting something could possibly be censorship. Censorship is something you might do in order to get want: do you rebut the false information (or pollute/dilute the true information) or do you point a gun at someone's face?
And escalating to violence is not always necessarily the dumbest move. Like I said, "loose lips sink ships." But c'mon, own up to censorship label whenever you do it, and understand the sword-beats-pen outlook that you're helping to re-popularize.
But more importantly: think about whether or not a policy of forceful response can work or if it really is expedient. Go through the thought experiments, where someone says something you don't like and you respond by whacking a few moles. (Or in this case, whacking an unrelated mole who is pointing at another mole.) Does this lead to a winning scenario, Ms Streisand?
If swords-over-pens still completely loses, then yes: I do think "suck it up and take it" is a superior strategy, since it's no worse for the person being maligned and has significantly less collateral damage. That doesn't mean it's the only option, but if we're going to pretend that we have only a mere two options, then it's the better of the two.
That's why, when I (soon!) become a genocidal conqueror, I will be asking people for their voting records before I line them up against the wall.
Curses! WTF is this "secret ballot" my advisors are bringing up? *sigh* There goes my invasion plan. (If I can't have the executions, then I don't see why to bother.)
And let's also hope that nobody ever actually commits rape and gets caught and convicted.
Censorship is always a two-edged sword. I have never heard of any form of censorship where you couldn't rightly cite some examples where it's a good idea, but freedom-lovers can play the examples game too.
Loose lips sink ships, but the king is taxing us unfairly. Which side are you on?
On a desktop personal computer, it would never occur to you to think "Oh, I just assume I'll get software maintenance from my ISP," and if anyone ever actually said that then you would point your finger at them and laugh and their over-the-top stupidity.
But change the form factor of the personal computer to handheld and suddenly we don't do the pointing and laughing. On the very face of it, it's JUST AS STUPID. So WTF?
Users are not exercising their common sense. They simply aren't. You can make excuses for not using common sense and explain why we did this very obviously stupid thing, but don't pretend it's not happening. Every morning you're getting up and putting a "kick me" sign on your back. You know that you're doing it and you know what consequences will invariably flow from it.
"I don't have any other signs to put on my back! All the signs on the market say 'kick me!'"
"Just because I wear a 'kick me' sign that doesn't mean anyone really has license to kick me! They shouldn't be doing that to me!"
Ok, go on and say those things. You even have some valid points, and the things you're saying might even be technically correct. But that doesn't mean you don't sound stupid, because you don't have not getting kicked in your requirements! WTF, people?!
Stop thinking of handhelds as some weird special case where ALL your experiences with software maintenance magically don't apply! THAT'S STUPID! So yeah, I'm a victim-blamer. You know when you buy your PC from your ISP or from a manufacturer who has a history of preventing maintenance, what's going to happen. And when people pretend they don't know the invariable consequences of buying PCs from ISPs, the stupidity takes on a flavor of dishonesty. Mmmm, yum!
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently one of the justifications for spending space on such a ridiculously specialized task, is that in the rare event that it's being used, some of the other stuff (e.g. the general-purpose parts) might have a brief opportunity to cool off a bit. Your bigger cache wouldn't have that advantage, because you'd be using it so often.
Some say often-dark silicon will be a growing trend.
Let's say your law is enacted.
Your wife sees your email address in the dump, and throws a glass of wine at you. $40 shirt: totally ruined. Oh, and she won't have sex with you anymore, ever. And Johnson in Accounting (who keeps his johnson in his pants, whereas you're obviously a total poon-hound) got that $10k/yr promotion instead of you (and the boss admits that you-being-in-the-dump was a factor in his decision). How much does the CEO of AM owe you?
I basically agree with your idea of holding them responsible, but if I'm on the jury, my damages award (so far; feel free to continue the story) is $0.
Without copyright, there's no reason for them to keep having city council meetings. I hope you pirates are happy with the literal anarchy you've caused!
What are they supposed to do? Just sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion, and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids?
They should also send their interns to debates. Then they'd get to the use same excuse there too!
I, for one, am delighted that UPSs have become expected built-in features for PCs. Keep raisin' that bar, buyers!
Excellent. Now, which one of the things you just mentioned, doesn't completely suck in such an overwhelmingly over-the-top hysterical comedy of disgrace, that it didn't make what you had a decade earlier, look like so-much-higher tech that it was indistinguishable from magic? Your entertainment system in 2005 shouldn't be nicer than your 2015 one. But unless you're a pirate, it is, and you look back on the old days with a tear in your eye.
As long as you are happy with Netflix's selection, its best-case upper bound, is that its quality (if Netflix is very nice and always makes all the UI decisions that you also would have made) can approach what you can do with local playback. Throw in one single exception (e.g. say you're into an Amazon Prime show, or an HBO show) then everything goes to shit and now you're using different tools for different contents.
"I've got it in alphabetical order," she says, "but see? No 'All My Circuits' in the As."
"Oh," you explain, "that show is on a different list, and you use a different player for it. Here, give me the other remote, and I'll just set the monitor to that input (or I'll alt-tab to that other window) (or I'll click to that other browser tab)."
"WTF, it's showing an ad, and I can't skip. I wanted to watch the show, not the ads."
"Oh, that other player let you skip, but this one doesn't."
"Even my Tivo fifteen years ago could fast forward. My grandparents VCR could fast-forward. Whatever. Ok. Why is the window so small?"
"You clicked the wrong thing. This player's full-window control is the square, not the arrows."
"Screw this, I'll watch 'All My Circuits' some other time. Let's watch a show where we can skip ads."
"Ok, let's watch 'Everybody Loves Hypnotoad' because its player works better."
"Yay!"
"Click. Click. Ok, here we go. E. E. So many Es to scroll through."
"Just do a keyword search. There can't be many hypnotoads."
"You're thinking of that other player. This one doesn't have as good of searching and indexing. ER. ET. EU. Everybody. Here we go. The hypnotoad. Play. Oh. Ignore that, just wait."
"Buffering? Is this a joke? You subscribed to this one months ago. Surely it has downloaded by now!"
"No, this is streaming, not local. You don't cache things quite so aggr--"
"We've been talking about this for seconds! Why isn't it done yet?"
"I guess I have a lot of activity right now. Don't worry, it won't take too l-- see? Here we go."
"We already saw this episode."
"Oh, yeah, I guess the current episode isn't out in our region yet. I know, let's watch 'The Sound of Nazis.'"
"Ok. They say that one is funny."
"Just a minute. Ok, good, I already have that tab open over here. Oh, it was playing an ad. Maybe that's why Hyponotoad was slow. Doesn't matter. Sound of Nazis. Sound of Nazis. Here we go."
"Ooooh, pretty! This one is fast! And no ads!"
"Yeah, I guess you could say we finally have the perfect player here, and nothing could possibly go wrong in any sort of embarrassing way at this point."
"Yep. Hey, wait. 'Sauerkraut in my lederhosen?' I think I misunderstood that. Can you make the subtitles English? My German's not so good."
"Uhhh.."
"I know you can get subs for this movie. I saw them online."
"Maybe so, but I don't think I can load subs into the player. It only plays whatever content is on the remote server."
"Ok, let's watch 'Death Blow'!"
"Death Blow! When someone tries to blow you up, not because of who you are, but for other reasons altogether!"
"Muahaha! Yeah! Let's watch it!"
"Oh. They removed it last month," you say. But then the world goes grey and YOG-SOTHOTH appears.
YOG-SOTHOTH: "You are now merely complaining about a miscellaneous service limitation, not a problem with players and services being tied together. Even with standard players, a service
Uh.. are you suggesting that your kitchen has lax documentation for its ingredient rights licensing? Shhh! Good thing you posted as AC, or else the Business Food Alliance would know whom to audit next.
WTF. Did you really bring a camera into my restaurant? I'm calling the cops. BTW, how did you make it past security with that thing? The head waiter should have found it when he patted you down. Needless to say, no, you won't be putting this on youtube, because the waiter's uniform and my chef hat are copyrighted. You'll at least have to crop those out. Oh, and my barber says you need to blur out my moustache if you use this conversation in your video, too. (No, your video can't have my restaurant's tables and chairs in it; the supply company was very clear about their IP.) Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out, and obviously I don't need to tell you why you can't show the door, because even if the door itself weren't copyrighted, it also happens to have our business-hours sign on it...
Yeah, what incentive will chefs have to put food on plates, if the government takes away their God-granted monopoly, so that other chefs will then be able to do the same thing? Getting paid for the meal by the diners?! Pfffft!
I know! Sheesh. I usually try to phrase it as, "you people."
"Cap'n! They hacked the ship's transporter! And then they hacked it again, even worse!"
8 dollars isn't the problem. It's the fact that I would need some trade secrets (and it'd probably also involve a DMCA violation) in order to write a player for Netflix, which is the problem.
You don't ever want to be in a situation where the people you buy a service (or media) from, are also in control of the software that you use. Think back and see if you can ever remember a situation where that happened, and the result was anything better than terrible. (And to answer your retort, NO, horrible isn't better than terrible!)
This is unsurprising. As you may recall, in his "3rd Treatise on Government," John Locke wrote:
How he foresaw this, I cannot imagine. But you have to admit, he was right on target. Most people who are familiar with late 20th century technology would never even think of this, since in day-to-life you rarely care about pagination, or especially if your page breaks match someone else's -- indeed you probably only rarely think in terms of "pages" at all. Yet Locke had the distant objectivity, in order to see that pagination would some day return to being an important topic, worthy of peoples' -- nay, The People's -- attention.
Android's total history has reached the half-way point, unless you know the name of something sugary that starts with a left bracket.
Not everyone who communicates with one another can ever actually meet and exchange key ids, so they need trusted introducers (and even then, that's usually not so bad). But it's hard to believe that for all the people that she was talking to, she never met any of them (which would make a key exchange easy). They ought to have at least pretty-well-verified (and usually very-well-verified) keys for one another other.
The usual "business" reasons for why people blow off security ("I never actually met the customer in person and all the people in between are fuckwitted technophobes") wouldn't seem to apply. I would really like to hear her excuse for why this stuff wasn't encrypted. It's too easy to not do.
What the fuck?!
Look here for a real example of "about as much as one can own something like a video." You can literally buy files here, and you aren't breaking any laws, or contract terms, if create or use your own player, or any player of your choice.
It's sickening that anyone would think the iTunes store (or DVDs) are "about as much" as the real thing.
Some people want one master switch, some people want multiple switches and some people want one switch with multiple settings, huh? I've got a solution to all this.
Just have it be software-controlled, and then people can choose whether to use "basic" or "advanced" GUI. Everyone wins, and it's mechanically simpler, too!
Dear New Yorker,
Your English dialect uses the word "want" in a way that sounds very amusing to people in the western United States. HTH.
Imagine that happening on a computer that didn't fit in your pocket. "I can't upgrade my desktop from 12.04 to 14.04 because Comcast won't let me." It would almost be enough to make you stop buying PCs from your ISP!
You mean back before it was networked (or otherwise shared data with potentially-hostile parties) so that the bugs didn't matter? And before people really started looking very hard for the bugs?
Sure, I remember then. You had shitloads of bugs, but you didn't know about most of them, and when you did know about one ("if you type too long of an answer in this char[40] blank, it makes weird things happen, so make sure to keep your answer 40, oops, I mean 39 characters or less"), you had little reason to care about them. (And if a bug is unmanifested, is it really a bug? 1985 answer: no. 1995 answer: yes.)
I didn't mean to imply that wanting something could possibly be censorship. Censorship is something you might do in order to get want: do you rebut the false information (or pollute/dilute the true information) or do you point a gun at someone's face?
And escalating to violence is not always necessarily the dumbest move. Like I said, "loose lips sink ships." But c'mon, own up to censorship label whenever you do it, and understand the sword-beats-pen outlook that you're helping to re-popularize.
But more importantly: think about whether or not a policy of forceful response can work or if it really is expedient. Go through the thought experiments, where someone says something you don't like and you respond by whacking a few moles. (Or in this case, whacking an unrelated mole who is pointing at another mole.) Does this lead to a winning scenario, Ms Streisand?
If swords-over-pens still completely loses, then yes: I do think "suck it up and take it" is a superior strategy, since it's no worse for the person being maligned and has significantly less collateral damage. That doesn't mean it's the only option, but if we're going to pretend that we have only a mere two options, then it's the better of the two.
That's why, when I (soon!) become a genocidal conqueror, I will be asking people for their voting records before I line them up against the wall.
Curses! WTF is this "secret ballot" my advisors are bringing up? *sigh* There goes my invasion plan. (If I can't have the executions, then I don't see why to bother.)
And let's also hope that nobody ever actually commits rape and gets caught and convicted.
Censorship is always a two-edged sword. I have never heard of any form of censorship where you couldn't rightly cite some examples where it's a good idea, but freedom-lovers can play the examples game too.
Loose lips sink ships, but the king is taxing us unfairly. Which side are you on?
As usual, I prefer to blame the victims (us).
On a desktop personal computer, it would never occur to you to think "Oh, I just assume I'll get software maintenance from my ISP," and if anyone ever actually said that then you would point your finger at them and laugh and their over-the-top stupidity.
But change the form factor of the personal computer to handheld and suddenly we don't do the pointing and laughing. On the very face of it, it's JUST AS STUPID. So WTF?
Users are not exercising their common sense. They simply aren't. You can make excuses for not using common sense and explain why we did this very obviously stupid thing, but don't pretend it's not happening. Every morning you're getting up and putting a "kick me" sign on your back. You know that you're doing it and you know what consequences will invariably flow from it.
"I don't have any other signs to put on my back! All the signs on the market say 'kick me!'"
"Just because I wear a 'kick me' sign that doesn't mean anyone really has license to kick me! They shouldn't be doing that to me!"
Ok, go on and say those things. You even have some valid points, and the things you're saying might even be technically correct. But that doesn't mean you don't sound stupid, because you don't have not getting kicked in your requirements! WTF, people?!
Stop thinking of handhelds as some weird special case where ALL your experiences with software maintenance magically don't apply! THAT'S STUPID! So yeah, I'm a victim-blamer. You know when you buy your PC from your ISP or from a manufacturer who has a history of preventing maintenance, what's going to happen. And when people pretend they don't know the invariable consequences of buying PCs from ISPs, the stupidity takes on a flavor of dishonesty. Mmmm, yum!