So you're saying that Dodge should be obligated to release all intellectual property associated with, say, the Magnum. Even though that same technology is used in their other vehicles. Or Sony should release everything associated with the Playstation 3 and before. I don't think you've thought this through. If a product is ultimately superceded by a different product, and thus discontinued, the manufacturer should not be obligated to release anything.
So whenever a company discontinues a product, they relinquish all rights they had to that product? I don't think that's how copyright or patent law works.
In related news: the market share of christmas trees has plummeted significantly. Oh, and if you don't get that, you don't get marketshare (Hint: AUGUST 2013).
Are you suggesting that the market share of units sold changes for some reason 4 months before Christmas versus the rest of the year? Wouldn't the two OSs be sold in the same percentages both before and after Christmas? The price points aren't so different that something like that would happen.
Also, what is "the market share of Christmas trees"? Which market are you referring to there? In the Christmas tree market, the market share of Christmas trees stays roughly at 100% the entire year. Christmas trees don't have a lot of competition in the Christmas tree market. That's not a very good analogy.
http://tabtimes.com/resources/... [tabtimes.com] begs to differ
You're bad at reading statistics. Your sources show that in Q1 2013, iOS had a market share of 48.2%. Then in Q3 2013, six months later, the market share was 29.6%. That still sounds like lots more Android. Look at that table on the Wikipedia article also. In Q2-Q3 2013, according to units sold or units shipped, iOS was between 14.2% and 18.2%, and Android was between 74.4% and 79%.
In the smartphone market, the US still comprises a decently large slice of the pie
The US numbers show iOS at 42%, and Android at 51%. The worldwide numbers show iOS at 15.5%, and Android at 78.9%. So, there's your difference. Links stolen from above:
Those worldwide numbers are from 2013 though, so I expect that iOS would have continued to shrink over the past 4 months, there's no reason it would have gone up.
particularly at the high end of the market where the more valuable users tend to reside.
News flash: there are more high-end smartphones that run Android then there are that run iOS. Welcome to 2012.
Saying that more malware targets Android than does iOS is the same as saying more targets Windows than MacOS. It's a market share issue, again.
Are you willing to pay them more than the combined members of the Direct Marketing Association, who'll crush the USPS like insects if they allow you, the product, to opt out of their service?
That's a good question. As a start, it would be nice to know the number that the USPS is being paid to deliver junk mail to my house. I'm sure I could beat it for my house alone, I'm sure it comes out to cents per month, but we wouldn't know that without knowing the actual amount.
Regardless of how fast they're driving, I would be worried the most about the driver who took his eyes off the road to look at his phone and wonder why it stopped working.
Competing the procurement means anyone can come in with a low bid and provide some paperwork "proving" they have the expertise and resources to build the rocket.
First off, who are the good and bad guys in Syria?
The good ones are the ones not fighting. The bad ones are the ones fighting.
You can stage an intervention unless this is established, and it's way too blurred at this point to determine the best side to back.
The "side" you back is the large group of people who are getting killed, not fighting back, and waiting for help. Those are the only people fit to rule anything. Anyone who has ordered an attack, or who has participated in an attack, should be held accountable and disqualified from any position of leadership. Instead, what is actually happening is that a new presidential election is scheduled for June. Bashar shouldn't have a problem winning that since he keeps killing the people who would vote against him. The current government is not fit to rule, and the people fighting the government are not fit to rule.
What can the world realistically do with Syria? If the US directly intervenes, people will say they're trying to act as the "world police" again and it'll be seen as an Arab world vs USA proxy war, which the US doesn't really need at this point. The UN is useless because countries like Russia will veto any attempt at a UN-backed military intervention due to their interest in selling arms to the Syrian government.
Yes, see my statement above about the world not really caring what happens there. Russia wants business as usual, China would rather just completely ignore it, and most of the rest of the world seems to think that it is the responsibility or desire of the US to invade another country. It's not the responsibility of the US, it's not the responsibility of the UN. It's the responsibility of the whole world to stop things like this from happening. But the motivation isn't there, because there is money to be made, or intervening might cause uncomfortable questions at home, or people don't want to send their soldiers there, or whatever the case may be. Like I said, no one really cares. This war has been going on for 3 years. The war started before Obama got re-elected. If the world cared about stopping it, then it would be stopped by now. Here's a list of a few other things that happened the same month the Syrian war started:
There were protests in Iran, and protesters got gassed and shot at. There were protests in Jordan and Yemen. There was a civil war in Libya, which culminated in Gaddafi's death. Shahbaz Bhatti was assassinated in Pakistan. Pope Benedict XVI (remember him?) exonerates the Jewish people for the responsibility for the death of Jesus. Apple unveiled the iPad 2. 2 US airmen are shot and killed at Frankfurt Airport in Germany. Obama signs a bill to stall the government shutdown for another 2 weeks.
Remember all that stuff? That was from only the first 2 days in March. A couple weeks later, Syria attacks its citizens, and they have been fighting ever since without any serious effort to get them to stop and give Syria a government that will work for the people instead of against them.
Ultimately the world is tired with wars and conflict all the time and are tired with the Arab world's complete inability to keep their shit in check and in peace. Apparently no-one really wants peace over there so they keep finding ways to push for conflict. The world can't do shit at this point - all that can be done is to wait for the war to finish on its own. It will eventually, even if Syria itself is completely destroyed in the process. Such is the nature of man.
That I can agree with. War in the Middle East will eventually end once Iran develops nuclear weapons and someone gets nuked. That's the way the fighting will end. Or, at least, stop for a little while before one tribe realizes that they hate another tribe.
The US simply kill whoever they want, wherever they want.
Yeah, that's the beauty of the "Global War On Terror", right? The enemy is whoever the government says it is. They have no nation. The government can define "terrorist" however they want to define it in order to justify whatever they want to do. Oddly enough, most other countries seem to be (officially) ok with this. The US will only start to have a problem with it once other countries start using a definition of "terrorist" that includes a large group of Americans. But, as it is now, my government can call me a terrorist and kill me (or you), for reasons which they claim are classified. Hopefully this court order is the beginning of the end of that policy, although I doubt that. History shows that once our government gains a certain power or ability, they will do everything they can to keep it. If the policy is found to be illegal, then the solution will be to change the law to make it legal.
At least the next election with fix a hell of a lot.
I would put money down on the fact that this sentiment has been expressed ever since George Washington was in office.
Sorry, but whoever the president is doesn't really make a whole lot of difference. The same bullshit Congress is still going to be there, the same people playing the same game that has been played for decades. The only way to have any sort of lasting substantive change is to rewrite the rules for people in Congress, then remove everyone in there, ban them from being elected again, and put all new people in. Congress, not the president, makes the laws. All the president can do is reject them. If you want change and fixes then the problem is Congress, and the solution is to remove everyone there and replace them with people uninterested in playing the same game.
There is a difference, however subtle, between a government killing its own citizens versus other people. Governments kill citizens of other countries all the time, that's called war. When a government is using its military to attack its own citizens, regardless of which government it is, then that is a major problem. Those governments are typically not seen as very legitimate in modern times. Syria is a good example of that. Syria is an interesting case though, the world doesn't seem to really care what's happening there.
It would be interesting to see the US government declared illegitimate by its people. I would support that, I know that I am not represented in my own government. If I contact my representatives I get a boilerplate response. If I try to meet with one of my representatives I get ignored. This country is definitely not a representative democracy or really even much of a republic, it is an oligarchy. The elite and wealthy are the ones with the real power, not the people in general.
Well, Isaiah prayed and the widow's son was raised to life. And Jesus raised Lazarus, brother of Mary and Martha. And Peter prayed for Tabitha, who was raised. And Paul prayed for Eutychus, and he was raised.
When was the last time that someone was resurrected days after they died because of the power of prayer? Surely such a thing would be well documented if it happened within the last several hundred years.
God is concerned about a human being promising to be faithful to another human being, and then breaking that promise.
How come he doesn't come down on people who get divorced? Is everyone sentenced to an eternity of suffering who has ever fallen out of love with another and then moved on?
Also, how the hell do you know what God is concerned about? Do you have a direct line? Can you suggest that, if he is actually an omnipotent omnipresent ruler, then maybe it would be a good idea to show up every now and then where we can actually see him, hear him, speak to him, and receive answers? If you were living in a city, and everyone told you that there is this set of laws that you need to live by, but the government that made the laws hasn't been around for the past several thousand years, and if someone breaks a law then the government doesn't come in and punish them and apparently nothing happens, are you really going to be concerned with following all of the laws? Or would you make your own set of laws that make sense to you and actually enforce them?
The article claims that they check the antennas before and after each shift, so they would know as soon as one was missing, and give the bill to whoever had the car during that shift.
Not necessarily the worst PR so much as the worst customer relations. If a bank implemented some of the same business practices that EA was using for its customers then you would see a lot more financial problems and angry people.
It's also highly related to recent well-publicized incidents. You can see that with SeaWorld, for example. In 2012 I think EA won because of Mass Effect 3, and in 2013 it was because of SimCity. They haven't done anything lately to piss off a lot of people even though they're probably still using a lot of the same practices. Most of the banks seem to be keeping their heads down as well. Comcast, however, has been in the news.
You're referring to the civet, more like a cat than a rodent. If you search for "cat poop coffee" you'll find all kinds of information that you probably would rather not know.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe that is miles per gallon equivalent. The vehicle carries 0 gallons of gas, so that's the best comparison they have.
So you're saying that Dodge should be obligated to release all intellectual property associated with, say, the Magnum. Even though that same technology is used in their other vehicles. Or Sony should release everything associated with the Playstation 3 and before. I don't think you've thought this through. If a product is ultimately superceded by a different product, and thus discontinued, the manufacturer should not be obligated to release anything.
So whenever a company discontinues a product, they relinquish all rights they had to that product? I don't think that's how copyright or patent law works.
Market share and actual use are 2 different figures.
Yes, I know that. Which of those are we discussing in this thread? Hint: check the thread title.
In related news: the market share of christmas trees has plummeted significantly. Oh, and if you don't get that, you don't get marketshare (Hint: AUGUST 2013).
Are you suggesting that the market share of units sold changes for some reason 4 months before Christmas versus the rest of the year? Wouldn't the two OSs be sold in the same percentages both before and after Christmas? The price points aren't so different that something like that would happen.
Also, what is "the market share of Christmas trees"? Which market are you referring to there? In the Christmas tree market, the market share of Christmas trees stays roughly at 100% the entire year. Christmas trees don't have a lot of competition in the Christmas tree market. That's not a very good analogy.
http://tabtimes.com/resources/... [tabtimes.com] begs to differ
You're bad at reading statistics. Your sources show that in Q1 2013, iOS had a market share of 48.2%. Then in Q3 2013, six months later, the market share was 29.6%. That still sounds like lots more Android. Look at that table on the Wikipedia article also. In Q2-Q3 2013, according to units sold or units shipped, iOS was between 14.2% and 18.2%, and Android was between 74.4% and 79%.
In the smartphone market, the US still comprises a decently large slice of the pie
The US numbers show iOS at 42%, and Android at 51%. The worldwide numbers show iOS at 15.5%, and Android at 78.9%. So, there's your difference. Links stolen from above:
http://www.comscoredatamine.co...
http://www.engadget.com/2014/0...
Those worldwide numbers are from 2013 though, so I expect that iOS would have continued to shrink over the past 4 months, there's no reason it would have gone up.
particularly at the high end of the market where the more valuable users tend to reside.
News flash: there are more high-end smartphones that run Android then there are that run iOS. Welcome to 2012.
Saying that more malware targets Android than does iOS is the same as saying more targets Windows than MacOS. It's a market share issue, again.
Are you willing to pay them more than the combined members of the Direct Marketing Association, who'll crush the USPS like insects if they allow you, the product, to opt out of their service?
That's a good question. As a start, it would be nice to know the number that the USPS is being paid to deliver junk mail to my house. I'm sure I could beat it for my house alone, I'm sure it comes out to cents per month, but we wouldn't know that without knowing the actual amount.
But, sacdelta, you did have a comment when a government tried to act to address one of these safety issues:
I believe the proper response is:
Oh, snap!
Regardless of how fast they're driving, I would be worried the most about the driver who took his eyes off the road to look at his phone and wonder why it stopped working.
Competing the procurement means anyone can come in with a low bid and provide some paperwork "proving" they have the expertise and resources to build the rocket.
SpaceX has a bit more than paperwork.
First off, who are the good and bad guys in Syria?
The good ones are the ones not fighting. The bad ones are the ones fighting.
You can stage an intervention unless this is established, and it's way too blurred at this point to determine the best side to back.
The "side" you back is the large group of people who are getting killed, not fighting back, and waiting for help. Those are the only people fit to rule anything. Anyone who has ordered an attack, or who has participated in an attack, should be held accountable and disqualified from any position of leadership. Instead, what is actually happening is that a new presidential election is scheduled for June. Bashar shouldn't have a problem winning that since he keeps killing the people who would vote against him. The current government is not fit to rule, and the people fighting the government are not fit to rule.
What can the world realistically do with Syria? If the US directly intervenes, people will say they're trying to act as the "world police" again and it'll be seen as an Arab world vs USA proxy war, which the US doesn't really need at this point. The UN is useless because countries like Russia will veto any attempt at a UN-backed military intervention due to their interest in selling arms to the Syrian government.
Yes, see my statement above about the world not really caring what happens there. Russia wants business as usual, China would rather just completely ignore it, and most of the rest of the world seems to think that it is the responsibility or desire of the US to invade another country. It's not the responsibility of the US, it's not the responsibility of the UN. It's the responsibility of the whole world to stop things like this from happening. But the motivation isn't there, because there is money to be made, or intervening might cause uncomfortable questions at home, or people don't want to send their soldiers there, or whatever the case may be. Like I said, no one really cares. This war has been going on for 3 years. The war started before Obama got re-elected. If the world cared about stopping it, then it would be stopped by now. Here's a list of a few other things that happened the same month the Syrian war started:
There were protests in Iran, and protesters got gassed and shot at.
There were protests in Jordan and Yemen.
There was a civil war in Libya, which culminated in Gaddafi's death.
Shahbaz Bhatti was assassinated in Pakistan.
Pope Benedict XVI (remember him?) exonerates the Jewish people for the responsibility for the death of Jesus.
Apple unveiled the iPad 2.
2 US airmen are shot and killed at Frankfurt Airport in Germany.
Obama signs a bill to stall the government shutdown for another 2 weeks.
Remember all that stuff? That was from only the first 2 days in March. A couple weeks later, Syria attacks its citizens, and they have been fighting ever since without any serious effort to get them to stop and give Syria a government that will work for the people instead of against them.
Ultimately the world is tired with wars and conflict all the time and are tired with the Arab world's complete inability to keep their shit in check and in peace. Apparently no-one really wants peace over there so they keep finding ways to push for conflict. The world can't do shit at this point - all that can be done is to wait for the war to finish on its own. It will eventually, even if Syria itself is completely destroyed in the process. Such is the nature of man.
That I can agree with. War in the Middle East will eventually end once Iran develops nuclear weapons and someone gets nuked. That's the way the fighting will end. Or, at least, stop for a little while before one tribe realizes that they hate another tribe.
The US simply kill whoever they want, wherever they want.
Yeah, that's the beauty of the "Global War On Terror", right? The enemy is whoever the government says it is. They have no nation. The government can define "terrorist" however they want to define it in order to justify whatever they want to do. Oddly enough, most other countries seem to be (officially) ok with this. The US will only start to have a problem with it once other countries start using a definition of "terrorist" that includes a large group of Americans. But, as it is now, my government can call me a terrorist and kill me (or you), for reasons which they claim are classified. Hopefully this court order is the beginning of the end of that policy, although I doubt that. History shows that once our government gains a certain power or ability, they will do everything they can to keep it. If the policy is found to be illegal, then the solution will be to change the law to make it legal.
So there is a difference between citizens versus other people?
Yes. In every country, even those with no military.
Safety is less important than freedom and the constitution.
Myself and Ben Franklin agree with that statement.
At least the next election with fix a hell of a lot.
I would put money down on the fact that this sentiment has been expressed ever since George Washington was in office.
Sorry, but whoever the president is doesn't really make a whole lot of difference. The same bullshit Congress is still going to be there, the same people playing the same game that has been played for decades. The only way to have any sort of lasting substantive change is to rewrite the rules for people in Congress, then remove everyone in there, ban them from being elected again, and put all new people in. Congress, not the president, makes the laws. All the president can do is reject them. If you want change and fixes then the problem is Congress, and the solution is to remove everyone there and replace them with people uninterested in playing the same game.
There is a difference, however subtle, between a government killing its own citizens versus other people. Governments kill citizens of other countries all the time, that's called war. When a government is using its military to attack its own citizens, regardless of which government it is, then that is a major problem. Those governments are typically not seen as very legitimate in modern times. Syria is a good example of that. Syria is an interesting case though, the world doesn't seem to really care what's happening there.
It would be interesting to see the US government declared illegitimate by its people. I would support that, I know that I am not represented in my own government. If I contact my representatives I get a boilerplate response. If I try to meet with one of my representatives I get ignored. This country is definitely not a representative democracy or really even much of a republic, it is an oligarchy. The elite and wealthy are the ones with the real power, not the people in general.
Well, Isaiah prayed and the widow's son was raised to life. And Jesus raised Lazarus, brother of Mary and Martha. And Peter prayed for Tabitha, who was raised. And Paul prayed for Eutychus, and he was raised.
When was the last time that someone was resurrected days after they died because of the power of prayer? Surely such a thing would be well documented if it happened within the last several hundred years.
God is concerned about a human being promising to be faithful to another human being, and then breaking that promise.
How come he doesn't come down on people who get divorced? Is everyone sentenced to an eternity of suffering who has ever fallen out of love with another and then moved on?
Also, how the hell do you know what God is concerned about? Do you have a direct line? Can you suggest that, if he is actually an omnipotent omnipresent ruler, then maybe it would be a good idea to show up every now and then where we can actually see him, hear him, speak to him, and receive answers? If you were living in a city, and everyone told you that there is this set of laws that you need to live by, but the government that made the laws hasn't been around for the past several thousand years, and if someone breaks a law then the government doesn't come in and punish them and apparently nothing happens, are you really going to be concerned with following all of the laws? Or would you make your own set of laws that make sense to you and actually enforce them?
They list .NET separately so I don't think they mean ASP.NET, but they also don't include ASP in their list of "legacy" languages.
That's right, according to them ASP and Java are new, and PHP is legacy.
None of the 35 million Muslims in my city
Which city do you live in that has 35 million Muslims? Tokyo is not >95% Muslim.
The article claims that they check the antennas before and after each shift, so they would know as soon as one was missing, and give the bill to whoever had the car during that shift.
Not necessarily the worst PR so much as the worst customer relations. If a bank implemented some of the same business practices that EA was using for its customers then you would see a lot more financial problems and angry people.
It's also highly related to recent well-publicized incidents. You can see that with SeaWorld, for example. In 2012 I think EA won because of Mass Effect 3, and in 2013 it was because of SimCity. They haven't done anything lately to piss off a lot of people even though they're probably still using a lot of the same practices. Most of the banks seem to be keeping their heads down as well. Comcast, however, has been in the news.
A video game company that makes shitty games.
Giant banking and investment firms that literally rend the economy that results in massive layoffs.
Welcome to the same discussion about the Worst Company In America that has been going on for the last 3 years.
A majority of Californians recently voted against gay marriage.
That would be more accurate to say that a majority of people in California who voted supported a measure to ban gay marriage.
You're referring to the civet, more like a cat than a rodent. If you search for "cat poop coffee" you'll find all kinds of information that you probably would rather not know.