Then there's the claim that 34% of these murderers were prohibited from possessing a firearm. Here's a question, why were these people not in prison? I mean, if these people cannot be trusted with a firearm then why would we release them from prison? Are they barred from other dangerous items as well? People get stabbed, run over by trucks, beaten with baseball bats, and so on and so on. Why focus just on the firearms?
Anyone with a felony conviction in the US is barred from owning a gun (unless they are pardoned). This includes non-violent offenders. People who commit white collar crimes are usually not dangerous, but they are still not allowed to own a gun. And while guns can be used for recreational purposes, they are quite proficient at killing living creatures. Even if you're an ex-convict, you might need a car, a truck, a knife, or a baseball bat to perform your job. No one would hire an ex-convict to perform the kind of job that would require you to possess a firearm, however. It would be completely unreasonable to let someone out of prison only to prevent them from ever having any chance at gainful employment. You might as well keep them incarcerated.
Your argument that the focus is unfairly on guns here makes you sound like you're bat-shit insane. My father has been a lifetime member of the NRA for almost 60 years and I'll guarantee you that he would never be okay with an ex-felon owning a gun. I think it would be difficult to find a reasonable person who believed otherwise.
The Every Town admits that "only" 10% of mass shooting deaths happen in "gun free zones". Is this supposed to make me feel better? Is that not still an epic fail of the "gun free zone" to protect the people within it? That number should not be 10%, or 5%, or 1%, it should be 0% or it's a failure.
There is no way you'll have 0% gun crime in ANY location without completely removing all guns from any population that could possibly enter that location. No one who is consuming alcohol at a bar has any business possessing a gun while they are drinking. Alcohol and firearms do not mix. Ever. Anyone who tells you otherwise has no business owning a gun, in my opinion. Even if you're drunk and being robbed you probably ought to keep the gun put away unless you know for certain you're going to be killed or seriously injured. A drunk person is not going to be a very accurate shot and is likely to kill someone by accident.
You also mention "mass shootings" as a metric, why is it important that people are shot? Don't having people get run over by a truck count? Why compare the USA to Europe? Why not Mexico? Why not anywhere else in the world? Why compare the entire USA when the laws on gun ownership vary widely from state to state? Murder rates vary widely from state to state as well. The "murderous" USA is still far safer than so many places in the world. Is this safety from owning guns? Maybe we should pick nations of similar area and population, like Brazil.
We don't compare ourselves with Brazil because the socioeconomic standards of this country are entirely different than Brazil. People typically resort to crime when they feel like they have no other choice in life. The first crime committed is often a crime of desperation rather than for the sheer thrill of being a criminal. I would also argue that anyone who is willing to kill a random group of people, with whom they have no connection whatsoever, likely has some very serious mental health issues. Since we have a higher standard of living in the US, one should assume that we ought to have a higher standard of mental healthcare in the US as well.
>with automatic bots reverting changes like that how would I trust that other details can get fixed?
You need to apply one more level of effort before giving up - report the bots' bad behaviour and see if you can get the account they're using blocked by Wikipedia.
I wouldn't necessarily expect success... but if you care enough to contribute in the first place, you should try before you throw up your arms and walk away.
You sound like part of the problem and not the solution. If someone makes an edit, with source material, and has it automatically reverted why should they make the effort of reporting those bots? Such effort is useless. They'll create a new sock puppet and the bot will go right back to work again reverting everything anyone actually tries to contribute. There has to be a cultural change at the foundation for anything meaningful to happen. I suspect that the only way that will happen is if people stop contributing to the website. You should be encouraging people to take useful action if you actually want change.
I love my Apple stuff, but sometimes it really feels like nobody tried to use it out in the street before shipping it.
Sometimes? Just about every single issue in the past few years could have easily been spotted by any QA or dev who just used their own tool. Even the calculator issue in iOS 11 shows that no one at Apple has bothered to use the calculator on their phone in the year or so that Apple has been working on the release.
Following iOS 11/11.1 install, 3 years old iPhones have camera and GPS problems (iPhone 6/6+) ; not saying Apple intentionally crippled a 3 yo perfectly working hardware to force users to upgrade, but that's quite suspicious...
I don't believe it's anything malicious. I believe that Apple software quality is rapidly approaching 0.
And what the hell is up with the native Podcast app. It is all but worthless now. I guess the Apple QA folks don't use it or have switched to an AppStore replacement.
My experience with iOS 11 suggests that Apple does not have any QA staff anymore. Certainly no QA staff that does something as silly as type the word "I" anywhere.
The Note 8 was released 6 weeks before the iPhone X. Samsung maintains multiple lines of "flagship phone". The S8 was released in March.
The Note 8 is NOT a flagship phone. Just go ahead and Google "Samsung Flagship phone" and you'll see that people are all talking about the S8 and the upcoming S9. No one mentions the Note 8. And you know Samsung is not going to take risks with the Note 8 after the absolute bath they took on the Note 7
It would mean that you are saying Samsung doesn't always use the best parts.
I can guarantee you that they don't. I can also guarantee that Apple does not, either. See the way it works in a business is that stakeholders for a project sit down and figure out the specifications needed to make that product successful. Once they have made those decisions, they build the product according to those specifications. They do not seek out parts and suppliers that are able to grossly exceed those specifications if it causes an increase in cost. Even if the cost increase is only $0.10 they would not pay for the most expensive part when they're planning on using millions of units of those parts. If every company used the absolute best parts they could get their hands on, you would not be able to afford the products they're selling. It would greatly limit your choices and purchasing power. It could also greatly decrease their profit margins.
That's not even taking into consideration the fact that they were probably able to stick the R&D costs of this display on Apple and will be able to use that R&D money to enhance their own products in the future.
Also you are not taking into consideration the fact that Samsung's flagship phone went into production almost a year ago so that they could meet their March release date. It's quite possible that this screen technology was not ready when Samsung started production in 2016.
I've gone to a small physical therapy clinic and have ran into another patient that started physical therapy on the exact same day that I started with my exact full name and exact same date of birth. That was at just one (independent) clinic in one city.
Define "exact full name", as in "spelled identically"?
Your claim is you met someone with the same first and last name (ignoring middle name, which is part of your legal name on your birth certificate and voter record, which is what we are talking about in the case of the Indiana law),
Typically "exact full name" means first, middle, last (and any other name parts you may have), spelled identically. There are hundreds of adults meeting this requirement that I've seen in the State of California based on an unclaimed property search from the State Controller's website.
and who not only shared your birthday (mm/dd), but was also born in the year as you? I find that doubtful - possible, yes, but very unlikely when birth year is considered.
You do realize that names go into and out of fashion, correct? For instance, I know someone who named a baby Noah one year and five other acquaintances used the exact same boy's name that year. I've never met any other Noah's any other year. Obviously that is a very small sample size, but pop culture has a huge influence on how common a specific name is in a given year. Obviously, pop-culture has no control over surnames. For instance, in 2015 there supposedly 20,355 girls named Emma born (Today). If they were distributed evenly throughout the year, that means that there were 55 girls named Emma born every single day. Names are typically paired based on how they sound together. So, I'd be willing to bet that there is a very short list of middle names used in conjunction with Emma. Now, that has been the most popular first name for a girl for 5 or 6 years straight. This means you've had the chance for one of those 55 girls to be given the exact same name every single day for almost 2000 days at this point.
If we include the city of birth, the likelihood of a false match drops even further.
In what state are you required to provide city or state of birth when registering? I don't recall ever providing such information when registering to vote.
The first name Michael is shared by 180,000 Americans, the last name Bolton is shared by 32,000 Americans, but how many Michael Boltons have you met - ignoring birthday/birthdate?
Why would you even consider using those two names when Bolton is one of the lowest ranking last names on your own links provided? I would consider that to be a bit disingenuous on your part. You also have to consider the fact that neither one of these people has to be born in the US to fall afoul of this program. They just have to have immigrated to the US at some point in their life.
There are hundreds of people with my exact full name in the state of California. I do not know how many share a date of birth with me, but I'd be surprised if the answer was 0.
I wouldn't be surprised - sharing a birthday (Like October 31st) is trivial, sharing a birth date (October 31st, 1972) is exceptionally rare. The odds of you ever meeting someone with exactly your same birth date (mm/dd/yyyy) - ignoring their name - is extremely unusual; factor in that their name has to match also and it will likely never happen.
In the United States, there are about 10,829 births per day - and out of those 10,829 births the odds of two mothers, both named "Smith", with both deliver male children and both will name their children "John" (neither choosing "Jon" or "Johnathan") seems pretty small to me - not zero, but pretty small.
There are lots of people named "Smith" - tons of them.
There are a large number of people named "John Smith" - lots of them.
There are likely a fair number of people named "John Smith" with birthdays of October 31st.
But do you really think there are that many people named "John Smith" that celebrate their birthdays on October 31st and are EXACTLY the same age (in other words they share a birth DATE, not just a birth DAY)?
The surname smith accounts for about 1% of the population, the first name James accounts for about 3.318% of the population, so that gives us a one out of 100 chance that a child will be have a surname of "Smith", and a 1 out of thirty chance that that child with the smith surname will have a first name of "James". I defer to statisticians to do the math.
Ah but I stated in the sentence before that that I have already encountered someone with my exact same full name and date of birth. It was not in the state of California, however. We both started physical therapy for two different injuries on the exact same day and they had to use our injury to identify which chart went with which patient, since it was our first day.
And I had to deal with DHS redress because there is someone with an Interpol warrant with my exact full name and a date of birth within just a few days of me. I was automatically flagged every time I went through immigration. So I have personal experience with the fact that such coincidences DO happen.
How many of those Jose Garciaâ(TM)s in 27 states share the EXACT SAME BIRTH DATE (not just same year, same month, or same date of month, but all three EXACTLY the same?) - That is required to be a candidate to be kicked from the voting polls...
My name is less common than Jose Garcia, but still incredibly common. I've gone to a small physical therapy clinic and have ran into another patient that started physical therapy on the exact same day that I started with my exact full name and exact same date of birth. That was at just one (independent) clinic in one city. There are hundreds of people with my exact full name in the state of California. I do not know how many share a date of birth with me, but I'd be surprised if the answer was 0.
We had Mark Swedlund, a database expert whose clients include eBay and American Express, look at the data from Georgia and Virginia, and he was shocked by Crosscheck's "childish methodology." He added, "God forbid your name is Garcia, of which there are 858,000 in the U.S., and your first name is Joseph or Jose. You're probably suspected of voting in 27 states."
I've got the most 'basic bitch' white boy name in the world, I swear. There are hundreds of people with my exact same first and last name in every state of this nation. Even if you add my middle name, you'll still find dozens of matches in a state like California or Florida. Add date of birth? I've had at least one exact match (first, middle, last, DOB) like that while going to physical therapy. Now I'm going to have to double check that I am properly registered to vote, even though I do not live in Indiana.
It's pretty funny really, because Apple makes a big deal about how app developers are not supposed to block UI, and about how to make animations interruptible. The fix will probably be pretty simple...
The calculator issue is really bad though. Even just moderately fast pressing of buttons yields input blocking depending on what you are doing.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was an OS level bug causing this issue. I feel like iOS 11 animations are incredibly slow. The UI is slow in general. I have an iPhone 7 and I find my UI locks up completely about 15 times a day. I have to actually restart my phone (or wait about 5-6 minutes) before I can do anything. It happens a lot more frequently if I am streaming audio over bluetooth. Since this is basically the only way to listen to audio while charging an iPhone 7, Apple has really screwed up. They've gotten worse and worse about cherry-picking code fixes from the last iOS version into the latest. Their QA and development quality has really fallen flat on its face.
I also have an Apple TV. Whatever the latest (non-4K) version is. The newest software cannot stream video over Wi-Fi. After about 30-60 minutes, the stream pauses, network fails, and I have to reboot the device to get it to work properly. However, if I watch the same stream on my iPhone and AirPlay it to the Apple TV, it can play forever without problem. It did not used to behave that way at all. The current state of Apple is just downright awful.
After a basic hello world intro, I had to write a calculator to add subtract multiply and divide in the first week of college. Had mine worked like apples Iâ(TM)d have likely failed. How does this happen?
Based on my experience with iOS 11, I suspect that only 1 in 10 or maybe 1 in 20 of the people working on the release have even implemented a Hello World function. Worst release ever. I have to restart my device about 15 times a day because the UI locks up completely and I can't do anything. And it starts doing that about a week after installing the update / factory resetting the device.
"What have I created that will be used and enjoyed by others even after I'm gone?"
I feel his pain. I write drivers for embedded devices in the financial world and, while I love working with hardware, often wonder if I am doing anything that makes the world a better place. Most of the time I feel like I am just working to improve a bank's balance sheet at the expense of those who are on the consuming end of my hardware. I don't feel the need to build a legacy, but I would like to make the world better than it is now.
So why go to the trouble of vaping when it doesn't hide anything?
You are attributing a level of logic and forethought to a group that just doesn't possess those faculties.
It sounds like you're a bit prejudiced to me. I've known some very intelligent, articulate, and well organized individuals who enjoy smoking weed every now and then. There are plenty of people who do not use drugs that lack the faculties to use logic and forethought. I do not think that marijuana use has a significant impact on those particular capabilities.
As someone who dabbles in urban photography as a hobby... *FUCK*THEM*
Running into the middle of the cross walk when the little person on the sign turns white, something that is perfectly legal, becomes ILLEGAL all of a sudden if you stop, take a pic, and continue on while still during the safe crossing time!?
Ahh but if you stop walking, you're no longer crossing the street;)
I live in Honolulu and walk everywhere. Honolulu has terrible stats for pedestrian-car accidents, so the solution obviously seems to be to crack down on--- pedestrians.
When the pedestrians are the ones causing the terrible stats, it makes sense to crack down on them.
running red lights and ignoring crosswalks is a huge problem
Both of which have been "cracked down on" in the fact that to do so is to commit a crime.
Pedestrians ought to obey the laws. They ought not to text while crossing. But ignoring a major problem on the part of motorists--- running lights and ignoring crosswalks--- isn't the way to reduce fatalities.
Pointing out that Jane needs to pay attention just as much as doesn't mean that we're ignoring Jack's mistakes, you know.
What are you trying to argue here, anyway? That states shouldn't pass laws regarding how pedestrians should conduct themselves when crossing a public street?
I think he's advocating that you enforce the rules against the people in the 1500kg death machine over those who are walking and at most might give someone a bruise if they aren't being careful. My personal experience is pretty similar to the GP. I have to actively prevent motorists from hitting me, even when there is a law enforcement officer. I was in a cross walk, with a walk signal, when someone ran a light that had been red for 10+ seconds and narrowly missed me. I yelled angrily. A cop there looked up at me and then did absolutely nothing to the driver. Not even a warning. I walk in a highly metropolitan area with hundreds of pedestrians. Cops are everywhere and the traffic is slow enough that I generally outpace cars when you take into consideration red lights. But these idiots slam on the gas and fly through pedestrians only to brake hard at the red light where I proceed to catch up to them. And what does law enforcement do? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
A lot of the push back against e-cigs is because they are becoming a (not well hidden) means of getting high in public.
When someone is vaping THC, it smells just like it does when someone smokes a joint. It is less intense, and does not hang in the air as long, but the smell is the same. If you want to get high in public without being obvious, you would use an edible. Those are legal in WA, CO, CA, and other states that allow marijuana, right? So why go to the trouble of vaping when it doesn't hide anything?
There probably are few to no issues from second hand vape.
I'm glad you see it that way.
The problem is likely those folks who like to tinker with their vape pens to create monstrous clouds of vapor. They're every where and it's incredibly rude and annoying.
Are we really outlawing rudeness now?
It already is outlawed in many ways: noise ordinances, loitering rules, public intoxication, indecent exposure, I am sure I could keep going here. The fact of the matter is that no one would know that someone were vaping if they weren't sending out a giant cloud of vapor with each exhalation. People just do not care to walk into a billowing cloud of anything they do not recognize. I saw a tow truck driving down the road belching a noxious cloud of diesel fumes. The truck was obviously in disrepair and I thought that it was quite rude that they were making everyone on the street walk through a cloud of their exhaust. Obviously diesel exhaust has harmful chemicals in it, but you can't just look at a cloud of vapor and know whether or not said cloud of vapor is safe to inhale. Honestly, I think it's quite sad that people are so inconsiderate that they would even want to blow such clouds. I have an uncle who loves to do it, but he only does so in places where it does not inconvenience others (to my knowledge). Like on his balcony, or at an empty beach/park/street. But I see people do it in restaurants, subway stations, and even movie theaters.
The problem is: How is it your problem? I could see passive smoke in traditional cigarettes, but I'm still waiting for the "passive smoke" studies of vaping.
There probably are few to no issues from second hand vape. The problem is likely those folks who like to tinker with their vape pens to create monstrous clouds of vapor. They're every where and it's incredibly rude and annoying.
Several were deemed classified after the fact, but that is not, as you say, how classification works.
That's exactly how it works as this information is born classified. If Hillary was emailing the ambassador to South Korea about North Korea's nuclear arsenal, do you think that conversation had to be stamped "classified" before it would be considered as such?
That would depend on the content of the information she sent to the ambassador of South Korea. She could still be convicted of espionage, as the secretary of state, if she sent information to South Korea that she did not have the proper authorization to release. And you can bet that the information would have some sort of classification on it when it went out to indicate to the ambassador of South Korea how sensitive the US considered the information.
Our third Subaru needed gaskets at 63,000. The one before at 105,000. The '98 went over 150,000 without needing any.
I'm driving a Honda now.
Mine needed gaskets at about 100,000. Well, actually long before. It started making a funny noise and leaking oil at about 5,000 miles but they insisted that was normal. After my car was out of warranty (by time) they recalled it and offered free head gasket replacement for anyone with my car that was still under warranty. For a known defect in their head gasket. A defect that existed for 15 years before they even contemplated manufacturing my car.
C) Hanlon’s razor would suggest it’s more likely that this was a simple mistake than a case of malice. After all, it’s hardly unreasonable that an entirely unsupported hardware configuration would accidentally get broken by a major OS update. Were this a case of malice, it wouldn’t be getting fixed at all, let alone as quickly as it was.
This is actually an example of Apple's serious decline in software quality. Apple rolled this out as a security feature in iOS 10 (I think it was 10). It only occurs on devices with Touch ID. The issue is that the fingerprint hardware is replaced with the screen and Apple does not allow third party screens to become authorized on Touch ID. The Touch ID chip in the display has to register with hardware on the main board in order to allow it to unlock the phone. Apple decided that it was not secure to even allow someone to use a 3rd party display because the police, CIA, FSB, G5, whoever, could replace your display without your knowledge with one that allowed any fingerprint to authenticate. Thus they stopped allowing 3rd party displays to work. They received a lot of grief for this and released a new update that allowed you to use the 3rd party displays again, but with Touch ID disabled.
The reason that I consider this an example of Apple's serious decline in software quality is that Apple has consistently been getting worse and worse at cherry-picking security updates and other fixes into new code releases. This is the case for iOS and Mac OS. They fix an issue and never bother to move it into the next release that is already under development. It's not until after a production release where people re-encounter these issues that Apple actually bothers to do any of that work that is important for a quality software product. For instance, there was a bug in Mac OS that broke gmail accounts for the built in mail and calendar apps. I believe this bug was encountered very early in 10.8. It took Apple about a month after release to provide a patch for this. When 10.9 rolled out a year later, it had the exact same flaw and it took Apple over a week to apply the previous year's fix into the new OS. I can't tell if it's a problem with poor management, unrealistic expectations, or a serious decline in the software development talent that they employ. They have a lot more projects going on concurrently these days, it would be very difficult to find enough top notch talent to have great developers across the board. I know of one person they hired recently that is phenomenal when it comes to understanding the language he's using and all the capabilities it provides but would make a "Hello, World" program so complex that it would be easier to start over from scratch than to fix what he creates. He would probably ace any interview he sat down for but thinks so highly of himself that he won't accept mentoring from anyone. Since he's so intelligent, I really hope someone at Apple has been able to get him under control and willing to accept mentoring. If not, I expect a serious decline in the quality of the project he's working on as well.
...and this is how it knows who you associate with. In later versions of Android (and perhaps in iOS), you can deny permissions to read your contacts, but the app will likely work hard to get around that.
If you have contacts on your phone that you don't want Facebook to know about, then you must not load their app
- only access them through a dedicated, privacy-focused web browser (or an equivalent sandboxing app).
I like FaceSlim on F-Droid. I would never, ever run their app. That thing is a monster.
This is not the only way that Facebook divines this info, first of all. Secondly, I know I am relatively new here in comparison to you but did you even RTFS? She uses a different number for these people, likely a different phone all together. I can't imagine anyone who goes to the lengths that this woman is going to would be foolish enough to use the same phone to live both her personal and professional life. I know from personal experience that Facebook has suggested that I might know neighbors that I definitely did not know. I would run into them walking my dog. Some I knew their first names, others I did not even know that much. But I saw them every day and recognized their faces. I did not know their phone numbers, they did not know mine. Yet one day Facebook suggested multiple neighbors that I wouldn't have even considered acquaintances. Unless these neighbors were going through my locked mailbox, they had no way of knowing my info in order to search for me on Facebook. I had no way of searching for them either.
Why not? Its done in a lot of places in europe.
How deep is the water table?
What might they be drilling through? Dirt, or rock?
Just saying...the easy assumption to bury might not be as easy as "Just do it".
During/after Hurricane Isabel a few years ago, my neighborhood was the only one in the area with power. But is not always 'the answer'.
Most coastal areas in Florida have also switched to buried power lines. Even in areas where the water table is, according to the map I am looking at, zero to five feet, or five feet to ten feet. But the soil in Florida is very soft and sandy. My dog once dug a 4 or a 5 foot deep hole in a matter of hours.
Slashdot Mirror
Then there's the claim that 34% of these murderers were prohibited from possessing a firearm. Here's a question, why were these people not in prison? I mean, if these people cannot be trusted with a firearm then why would we release them from prison? Are they barred from other dangerous items as well? People get stabbed, run over by trucks, beaten with baseball bats, and so on and so on. Why focus just on the firearms?
Anyone with a felony conviction in the US is barred from owning a gun (unless they are pardoned). This includes non-violent offenders. People who commit white collar crimes are usually not dangerous, but they are still not allowed to own a gun. And while guns can be used for recreational purposes, they are quite proficient at killing living creatures. Even if you're an ex-convict, you might need a car, a truck, a knife, or a baseball bat to perform your job. No one would hire an ex-convict to perform the kind of job that would require you to possess a firearm, however. It would be completely unreasonable to let someone out of prison only to prevent them from ever having any chance at gainful employment. You might as well keep them incarcerated.
Your argument that the focus is unfairly on guns here makes you sound like you're bat-shit insane. My father has been a lifetime member of the NRA for almost 60 years and I'll guarantee you that he would never be okay with an ex-felon owning a gun. I think it would be difficult to find a reasonable person who believed otherwise.
The Every Town admits that "only" 10% of mass shooting deaths happen in "gun free zones". Is this supposed to make me feel better? Is that not still an epic fail of the "gun free zone" to protect the people within it? That number should not be 10%, or 5%, or 1%, it should be 0% or it's a failure.
There is no way you'll have 0% gun crime in ANY location without completely removing all guns from any population that could possibly enter that location. No one who is consuming alcohol at a bar has any business possessing a gun while they are drinking. Alcohol and firearms do not mix. Ever. Anyone who tells you otherwise has no business owning a gun, in my opinion. Even if you're drunk and being robbed you probably ought to keep the gun put away unless you know for certain you're going to be killed or seriously injured. A drunk person is not going to be a very accurate shot and is likely to kill someone by accident.
You also mention "mass shootings" as a metric, why is it important that people are shot? Don't having people get run over by a truck count? Why compare the USA to Europe? Why not Mexico? Why not anywhere else in the world? Why compare the entire USA when the laws on gun ownership vary widely from state to state? Murder rates vary widely from state to state as well. The "murderous" USA is still far safer than so many places in the world. Is this safety from owning guns? Maybe we should pick nations of similar area and population, like Brazil.
We don't compare ourselves with Brazil because the socioeconomic standards of this country are entirely different than Brazil. People typically resort to crime when they feel like they have no other choice in life. The first crime committed is often a crime of desperation rather than for the sheer thrill of being a criminal. I would also argue that anyone who is willing to kill a random group of people, with whom they have no connection whatsoever, likely has some very serious mental health issues. Since we have a higher standard of living in the US, one should assume that we ought to have a higher standard of mental healthcare in the US as well.
>with automatic bots reverting changes like that how would I trust that other details can get fixed?
You need to apply one more level of effort before giving up - report the bots' bad behaviour and see if you can get the account they're using blocked by Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I wouldn't necessarily expect success... but if you care enough to contribute in the first place, you should try before you throw up your arms and walk away.
You sound like part of the problem and not the solution. If someone makes an edit, with source material, and has it automatically reverted why should they make the effort of reporting those bots? Such effort is useless. They'll create a new sock puppet and the bot will go right back to work again reverting everything anyone actually tries to contribute. There has to be a cultural change at the foundation for anything meaningful to happen. I suspect that the only way that will happen is if people stop contributing to the website. You should be encouraging people to take useful action if you actually want change.
I love my Apple stuff, but sometimes it really feels like nobody tried to use it out in the street before shipping it.
Sometimes? Just about every single issue in the past few years could have easily been spotted by any QA or dev who just used their own tool. Even the calculator issue in iOS 11 shows that no one at Apple has bothered to use the calculator on their phone in the year or so that Apple has been working on the release.
Following iOS 11/11.1 install, 3 years old iPhones have camera and GPS problems (iPhone 6/6+) ; not saying Apple intentionally crippled a 3 yo perfectly working hardware to force users to upgrade, but that's quite suspicious...
I don't believe it's anything malicious. I believe that Apple software quality is rapidly approaching 0.
And what the hell is up with the native Podcast app. It is all but worthless now. I guess the Apple QA folks don't use it or have switched to an AppStore replacement.
My experience with iOS 11 suggests that Apple does not have any QA staff anymore. Certainly no QA staff that does something as silly as type the word "I" anywhere.
The Note 8 was released 6 weeks before the iPhone X. Samsung maintains multiple lines of "flagship phone". The S8 was released in March.
The Note 8 is NOT a flagship phone. Just go ahead and Google "Samsung Flagship phone" and you'll see that people are all talking about the S8 and the upcoming S9. No one mentions the Note 8. And you know Samsung is not going to take risks with the Note 8 after the absolute bath they took on the Note 7
It would mean that you are saying Samsung doesn't always use the best parts.
I can guarantee you that they don't. I can also guarantee that Apple does not, either. See the way it works in a business is that stakeholders for a project sit down and figure out the specifications needed to make that product successful. Once they have made those decisions, they build the product according to those specifications. They do not seek out parts and suppliers that are able to grossly exceed those specifications if it causes an increase in cost. Even if the cost increase is only $0.10 they would not pay for the most expensive part when they're planning on using millions of units of those parts. If every company used the absolute best parts they could get their hands on, you would not be able to afford the products they're selling. It would greatly limit your choices and purchasing power. It could also greatly decrease their profit margins.
That's not even taking into consideration the fact that they were probably able to stick the R&D costs of this display on Apple and will be able to use that R&D money to enhance their own products in the future.
Also you are not taking into consideration the fact that Samsung's flagship phone went into production almost a year ago so that they could meet their March release date. It's quite possible that this screen technology was not ready when Samsung started production in 2016.
I've gone to a small physical therapy clinic and have ran into another patient that started physical therapy on the exact same day that I started with my exact full name and exact same date of birth. That was at just one (independent) clinic in one city.
Define "exact full name", as in "spelled identically"?
Your claim is you met someone with the same first and last name (ignoring middle name, which is part of your legal name on your birth certificate and voter record, which is what we are talking about in the case of the Indiana law),
Typically "exact full name" means first, middle, last (and any other name parts you may have), spelled identically. There are hundreds of adults meeting this requirement that I've seen in the State of California based on an unclaimed property search from the State Controller's website.
and who not only shared your birthday (mm/dd), but was also born in the year as you? I find that doubtful - possible, yes, but very unlikely when birth year is considered.
You do realize that names go into and out of fashion, correct? For instance, I know someone who named a baby Noah one year and five other acquaintances used the exact same boy's name that year. I've never met any other Noah's any other year. Obviously that is a very small sample size, but pop culture has a huge influence on how common a specific name is in a given year. Obviously, pop-culture has no control over surnames. For instance, in 2015 there supposedly 20,355 girls named Emma born (Today). If they were distributed evenly throughout the year, that means that there were 55 girls named Emma born every single day. Names are typically paired based on how they sound together. So, I'd be willing to bet that there is a very short list of middle names used in conjunction with Emma. Now, that has been the most popular first name for a girl for 5 or 6 years straight. This means you've had the chance for one of those 55 girls to be given the exact same name every single day for almost 2000 days at this point.
If we include the city of birth, the likelihood of a false match drops even further.
In what state are you required to provide city or state of birth when registering? I don't recall ever providing such information when registering to vote.
The first name Michael is shared by 180,000 Americans, the last name Bolton is shared by 32,000 Americans, but how many Michael Boltons have you met - ignoring birthday/birthdate?
Why would you even consider using those two names when Bolton is one of the lowest ranking last names on your own links provided? I would consider that to be a bit disingenuous on your part. You also have to consider the fact that neither one of these people has to be born in the US to fall afoul of this program. They just have to have immigrated to the US at some point in their life.
There are hundreds of people with my exact full name in the state of California. I do not know how many share a date of birth with me, but I'd be surprised if the answer was 0.
I wouldn't be surprised - sharing a birthday (Like October 31st) is trivial, sharing a birth date (October 31st, 1972) is exceptionally rare. The odds of you ever meeting someone with exactly your same birth date (mm/dd/yyyy) - ignoring their name - is extremely unusual; factor in that their name has to match also and it will likely never happen.
In the United States, there are about 10,829 births per day - and out of those 10,829 births the odds of two mothers, both named "Smith", with both deliver male children and both will name their children "John" (neither choosing "Jon" or "Johnathan") seems pretty small to me - not zero, but pretty small.
There are lots of people named "Smith" - tons of them. There are a large number of people named "John Smith" - lots of them. There are likely a fair number of people named "John Smith" with birthdays of October 31st. But do you really think there are that many people named "John Smith" that celebrate their birthdays on October 31st and are EXACTLY the same age (in other words they share a birth DATE, not just a birth DAY)?
The surname smith accounts for about 1% of the population, the first name James accounts for about 3.318% of the population, so that gives us a one out of 100 chance that a child will be have a surname of "Smith", and a 1 out of thirty chance that that child with the smith surname will have a first name of "James". I defer to statisticians to do the math.
Ah but I stated in the sentence before that that I have already encountered someone with my exact same full name and date of birth. It was not in the state of California, however. We both started physical therapy for two different injuries on the exact same day and they had to use our injury to identify which chart went with which patient, since it was our first day.
And I had to deal with DHS redress because there is someone with an Interpol warrant with my exact full name and a date of birth within just a few days of me. I was automatically flagged every time I went through immigration. So I have personal experience with the fact that such coincidences DO happen.
How many of those Jose Garciaâ(TM)s in 27 states share the EXACT SAME BIRTH DATE (not just same year, same month, or same date of month, but all three EXACTLY the same?) - That is required to be a candidate to be kicked from the voting polls...
My name is less common than Jose Garcia, but still incredibly common. I've gone to a small physical therapy clinic and have ran into another patient that started physical therapy on the exact same day that I started with my exact full name and exact same date of birth. That was at just one (independent) clinic in one city. There are hundreds of people with my exact full name in the state of California. I do not know how many share a date of birth with me, but I'd be surprised if the answer was 0.
I've got the most 'basic bitch' white boy name in the world, I swear. There are hundreds of people with my exact same first and last name in every state of this nation. Even if you add my middle name, you'll still find dozens of matches in a state like California or Florida. Add date of birth? I've had at least one exact match (first, middle, last, DOB) like that while going to physical therapy. Now I'm going to have to double check that I am properly registered to vote, even though I do not live in Indiana.
It's pretty funny really, because Apple makes a big deal about how app developers are not supposed to block UI, and about how to make animations interruptible. The fix will probably be pretty simple...
The calculator issue is really bad though. Even just moderately fast pressing of buttons yields input blocking depending on what you are doing.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was an OS level bug causing this issue. I feel like iOS 11 animations are incredibly slow. The UI is slow in general. I have an iPhone 7 and I find my UI locks up completely about 15 times a day. I have to actually restart my phone (or wait about 5-6 minutes) before I can do anything. It happens a lot more frequently if I am streaming audio over bluetooth. Since this is basically the only way to listen to audio while charging an iPhone 7, Apple has really screwed up. They've gotten worse and worse about cherry-picking code fixes from the last iOS version into the latest. Their QA and development quality has really fallen flat on its face.
I also have an Apple TV. Whatever the latest (non-4K) version is. The newest software cannot stream video over Wi-Fi. After about 30-60 minutes, the stream pauses, network fails, and I have to reboot the device to get it to work properly. However, if I watch the same stream on my iPhone and AirPlay it to the Apple TV, it can play forever without problem. It did not used to behave that way at all. The current state of Apple is just downright awful.
After a basic hello world intro, I had to write a calculator to add subtract multiply and divide in the first week of college. Had mine worked like apples Iâ(TM)d have likely failed. How does this happen?
Based on my experience with iOS 11, I suspect that only 1 in 10 or maybe 1 in 20 of the people working on the release have even implemented a Hello World function. Worst release ever. I have to restart my device about 15 times a day because the UI locks up completely and I can't do anything. And it starts doing that about a week after installing the update / factory resetting the device.
"What have I created that will be used and enjoyed by others even after I'm gone?"
I feel his pain. I write drivers for embedded devices in the financial world and, while I love working with hardware, often wonder if I am doing anything that makes the world a better place. Most of the time I feel like I am just working to improve a bank's balance sheet at the expense of those who are on the consuming end of my hardware. I don't feel the need to build a legacy, but I would like to make the world better than it is now.
So why go to the trouble of vaping when it doesn't hide anything?
You are attributing a level of logic and forethought to a group that just doesn't possess those faculties.
It sounds like you're a bit prejudiced to me. I've known some very intelligent, articulate, and well organized individuals who enjoy smoking weed every now and then. There are plenty of people who do not use drugs that lack the faculties to use logic and forethought. I do not think that marijuana use has a significant impact on those particular capabilities.
As someone who dabbles in urban photography as a hobby... *FUCK*THEM*
Running into the middle of the cross walk when the little person on the sign turns white, something that is perfectly legal, becomes ILLEGAL all of a sudden if you stop, take a pic, and continue on while still during the safe crossing time!?
Ahh but if you stop walking, you're no longer crossing the street ;)
I live in Honolulu and walk everywhere. Honolulu has terrible stats for pedestrian-car accidents, so the solution obviously seems to be to crack down on--- pedestrians.
When the pedestrians are the ones causing the terrible stats, it makes sense to crack down on them.
running red lights and ignoring crosswalks is a huge problem
Both of which have been "cracked down on" in the fact that to do so is to commit a crime.
Pedestrians ought to obey the laws. They ought not to text while crossing. But ignoring a major problem on the part of motorists--- running lights and ignoring crosswalks--- isn't the way to reduce fatalities.
Pointing out that Jane needs to pay attention just as much as doesn't mean that we're ignoring Jack's mistakes, you know.
What are you trying to argue here, anyway? That states shouldn't pass laws regarding how pedestrians should conduct themselves when crossing a public street?
I think he's advocating that you enforce the rules against the people in the 1500kg death machine over those who are walking and at most might give someone a bruise if they aren't being careful. My personal experience is pretty similar to the GP. I have to actively prevent motorists from hitting me, even when there is a law enforcement officer. I was in a cross walk, with a walk signal, when someone ran a light that had been red for 10+ seconds and narrowly missed me. I yelled angrily. A cop there looked up at me and then did absolutely nothing to the driver. Not even a warning. I walk in a highly metropolitan area with hundreds of pedestrians. Cops are everywhere and the traffic is slow enough that I generally outpace cars when you take into consideration red lights. But these idiots slam on the gas and fly through pedestrians only to brake hard at the red light where I proceed to catch up to them. And what does law enforcement do? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
A lot of the push back against e-cigs is because they are becoming a (not well hidden) means of getting high in public.
When someone is vaping THC, it smells just like it does when someone smokes a joint. It is less intense, and does not hang in the air as long, but the smell is the same. If you want to get high in public without being obvious, you would use an edible. Those are legal in WA, CO, CA, and other states that allow marijuana, right? So why go to the trouble of vaping when it doesn't hide anything?
There probably are few to no issues from second hand vape.
I'm glad you see it that way.
The problem is likely those folks who like to tinker with their vape pens to create monstrous clouds of vapor. They're every where and it's incredibly rude and annoying.
Are we really outlawing rudeness now?
It already is outlawed in many ways: noise ordinances, loitering rules, public intoxication, indecent exposure, I am sure I could keep going here. The fact of the matter is that no one would know that someone were vaping if they weren't sending out a giant cloud of vapor with each exhalation. People just do not care to walk into a billowing cloud of anything they do not recognize. I saw a tow truck driving down the road belching a noxious cloud of diesel fumes. The truck was obviously in disrepair and I thought that it was quite rude that they were making everyone on the street walk through a cloud of their exhaust. Obviously diesel exhaust has harmful chemicals in it, but you can't just look at a cloud of vapor and know whether or not said cloud of vapor is safe to inhale. Honestly, I think it's quite sad that people are so inconsiderate that they would even want to blow such clouds. I have an uncle who loves to do it, but he only does so in places where it does not inconvenience others (to my knowledge). Like on his balcony, or at an empty beach/park/street. But I see people do it in restaurants, subway stations, and even movie theaters.
The problem is: How is it your problem? I could see passive smoke in traditional cigarettes, but I'm still waiting for the "passive smoke" studies of vaping.
There probably are few to no issues from second hand vape. The problem is likely those folks who like to tinker with their vape pens to create monstrous clouds of vapor. They're every where and it's incredibly rude and annoying.
That's exactly how it works as this information is born classified. If Hillary was emailing the ambassador to South Korea about North Korea's nuclear arsenal, do you think that conversation had to be stamped "classified" before it would be considered as such?
That would depend on the content of the information she sent to the ambassador of South Korea. She could still be convicted of espionage, as the secretary of state, if she sent information to South Korea that she did not have the proper authorization to release. And you can bet that the information would have some sort of classification on it when it went out to indicate to the ambassador of South Korea how sensitive the US considered the information.
Our third Subaru needed gaskets at 63,000. The one before at 105,000. The '98 went over 150,000 without needing any.
I'm driving a Honda now.
Mine needed gaskets at about 100,000. Well, actually long before. It started making a funny noise and leaking oil at about 5,000 miles but they insisted that was normal. After my car was out of warranty (by time) they recalled it and offered free head gasket replacement for anyone with my car that was still under warranty. For a known defect in their head gasket. A defect that existed for 15 years before they even contemplated manufacturing my car.
C) Hanlon’s razor would suggest it’s more likely that this was a simple mistake than a case of malice. After all, it’s hardly unreasonable that an entirely unsupported hardware configuration would accidentally get broken by a major OS update. Were this a case of malice, it wouldn’t be getting fixed at all, let alone as quickly as it was.
This is actually an example of Apple's serious decline in software quality. Apple rolled this out as a security feature in iOS 10 (I think it was 10). It only occurs on devices with Touch ID. The issue is that the fingerprint hardware is replaced with the screen and Apple does not allow third party screens to become authorized on Touch ID. The Touch ID chip in the display has to register with hardware on the main board in order to allow it to unlock the phone. Apple decided that it was not secure to even allow someone to use a 3rd party display because the police, CIA, FSB, G5, whoever, could replace your display without your knowledge with one that allowed any fingerprint to authenticate. Thus they stopped allowing 3rd party displays to work. They received a lot of grief for this and released a new update that allowed you to use the 3rd party displays again, but with Touch ID disabled.
The reason that I consider this an example of Apple's serious decline in software quality is that Apple has consistently been getting worse and worse at cherry-picking security updates and other fixes into new code releases. This is the case for iOS and Mac OS. They fix an issue and never bother to move it into the next release that is already under development. It's not until after a production release where people re-encounter these issues that Apple actually bothers to do any of that work that is important for a quality software product. For instance, there was a bug in Mac OS that broke gmail accounts for the built in mail and calendar apps. I believe this bug was encountered very early in 10.8. It took Apple about a month after release to provide a patch for this. When 10.9 rolled out a year later, it had the exact same flaw and it took Apple over a week to apply the previous year's fix into the new OS. I can't tell if it's a problem with poor management, unrealistic expectations, or a serious decline in the software development talent that they employ. They have a lot more projects going on concurrently these days, it would be very difficult to find enough top notch talent to have great developers across the board. I know of one person they hired recently that is phenomenal when it comes to understanding the language he's using and all the capabilities it provides but would make a "Hello, World" program so complex that it would be easier to start over from scratch than to fix what he creates. He would probably ace any interview he sat down for but thinks so highly of himself that he won't accept mentoring from anyone. Since he's so intelligent, I really hope someone at Apple has been able to get him under control and willing to accept mentoring. If not, I expect a serious decline in the quality of the project he's working on as well.
...and this is how it knows who you associate with. In later versions of Android (and perhaps in iOS), you can deny permissions to read your contacts, but the app will likely work hard to get around that.
If you have contacts on your phone that you don't want Facebook to know about, then you must not load their app
- only access them through a dedicated, privacy-focused web browser (or an equivalent sandboxing app).
I like FaceSlim on F-Droid. I would never, ever run their app. That thing is a monster.
This is not the only way that Facebook divines this info, first of all. Secondly, I know I am relatively new here in comparison to you but did you even RTFS? She uses a different number for these people, likely a different phone all together. I can't imagine anyone who goes to the lengths that this woman is going to would be foolish enough to use the same phone to live both her personal and professional life. I know from personal experience that Facebook has suggested that I might know neighbors that I definitely did not know. I would run into them walking my dog. Some I knew their first names, others I did not even know that much. But I saw them every day and recognized their faces. I did not know their phone numbers, they did not know mine. Yet one day Facebook suggested multiple neighbors that I wouldn't have even considered acquaintances. Unless these neighbors were going through my locked mailbox, they had no way of knowing my info in order to search for me on Facebook. I had no way of searching for them either.
Why not? Its done in a lot of places in europe. How deep is the water table? What might they be drilling through? Dirt, or rock? Just saying...the easy assumption to bury might not be as easy as "Just do it". During/after Hurricane Isabel a few years ago, my neighborhood was the only one in the area with power. But is not always 'the answer'.
Most coastal areas in Florida have also switched to buried power lines. Even in areas where the water table is, according to the map I am looking at, zero to five feet, or five feet to ten feet. But the soil in Florida is very soft and sandy. My dog once dug a 4 or a 5 foot deep hole in a matter of hours.