Chrome has always maintained a stable extension API, and have largely stuck with it (I'm not aware of any deviations, but I don't discount the possibility that they've existed.) Also, because they never exposed a version number in a prominent way, we haven't had web developers targeting versions of Chrome.
Firefox maintained a stable extension API, but then they also hosted third-party extensions which used unstable interfaces. By hosting them, they gave legitimacy to the unstable interfaces. With every Firefox version update, a handful of my extensions would break. When they first started the accelerated versioning, it was horrible. Now things have stabilized a bit, so there's that. Additionally, I spread my annoyance to both Mozilla and to Web devs when there's a "target" version of Firefox and later versions won't work with a website. For the web devs, "Dammit, write to the standard!" For Moz, why are they changing their rendering engine so much that it breaks compatibility with existing webpages?
But mostly, I think people just gripe at change. They didn't (seem) to complain that Chrome doesn't prominently display the version number, but they balk when Firefox decides to start doing that. Some of that may have been because of the issues related to versioning in the past--I don't know.
Interesting. I'll admit that I just searched long enough to find the blogspot post that I originally saw.
That statement doesn't make it clear to me that they are supporting CalDAV for the future, though--just that they've worked with the developers responsible for 98% of their CalDAV traffic. This is consistent with their previous statement--that CalDAV developers can get whitelisted. It sounds like iCal probably won't be affected (surely Apple is in that 98%) but it looks like new applications will be unable to use that protocol.
The trick is that "innocents" can get caught in the blast. One of the reasons that we strive for herd immunity is because the vaccines aren't 100% effective.
Well if I understand it correctly, this will actually lead to less revenue for the U.S. Government. They are not instituting a federal Internet sales tax--they are forcing merchants to collect sales tax that is due to the individual state in which the purchaser resides. Aside from the problems this will cause for smaller businesses on the Internet, this will increase the Federal deduction that individuals can claim due to payment of state taxes. Higher federal deductions == less money for the feds (though almost certainly more for the individual states.)
I always wonder how people run across crazy sequences of button presses that trigger bugs while on live hardware. This reminds me of the various iPhone lock-screen bypasses.
With video poker, the house edge is built in to the device. The edge is that the payout schedule beats the odds of getting the hand.
In this case, the machine was defective, which generally voids all plays (this is usually written on the machines.)
The defect was that a player could trick the machine into thinking more money had been wagered than actually had been. This means that the payout schedule could be higher than the odds of getting the hand.
The guy shouldn't be charged with a crime, but the casino almost certainly has the right to demand the money back (unless they failed to post the warning about voiding plays.)
Do you blame the hacker who constructs the packet which causes the machine to operate in a way that it wasn't designed (deleting the database, giving higher level access than desired, etc?)
But what I want from an iWatch is the ability to access Siri, control music, and receive haptic alerts (since I often don't feel my phone vibrate in my pocket.) Two of those three are available on the Metawatch or Pebble, though the music control is really not great AFAICT.
I'll say this, though--at least they ask before taking you to the mobile front page.
I only go to Slashdot from RSS, so while I actually like the new mobile discussions more, they're useless to me until the deep linking/routing is complete. Until then, I'll continue to press the button which dismisses the popup.
Chrome on iOS 6.1. I've been asked over and over. Also, the cardinal sin of "redirecting from a deep link to the front page of the mobile site" was committed, apparently:(
I'm on a discussion page and I get redirected to the front page of m.slashdot.org. Horrible, horrible!
The system is fairly customizable. The only thing you can't change is the type of moderation that people use--but you can certainly adjust the values of that moderation. For example, I penalize 'funny' posts, because usually they aren't.
With a few hundred million iOS devices in the wild, an FBI list should have hundreds of millions of entries. AND it would be a hell of a lot more complete.
I have no reason to disbelieve the Blue Toad story, but your suggestion doesn't consider all of the quite reasonable possibilities.
First of all, it assumes collusion between Apple and the FBI, which isn't a requirement for the FBI to have 12million UUIDs. Even with collusion, the FBI could have requested only certain UUIDs.
More likely, the FBI has an app (Child ID.) The UUID database could have come from that. Or they could have other apps not branded with "FBI", or they could have colluded with an app developer.
The size of the database really isn't a relevant.
More to the point, though. is that the information in the leaked list isn't very useful. If they spent a lot of effort acquiring it, I feel like my tax dollars were wasted.
Regardless, the simplest, most likely explanation is that the list was stolen from Blue Toad.
Not a troll, but thanks for contributing to the conversation. I know it must be impossible to believe that someone could have found Android to be unenjoyable, but it does happen.
I know that some of the devices on that list infringed based on design, but others were based on software patents. For example, the spring-back (the way a document or page behaves when you try to drag past the end of the data) is patented.
Most don't fully get it or see the importance, but that doesn't matter either because they will easily get the fact that Android devices deliver a lot more value for the dollar and have a lot more good quality free stuff.
That's a matter of opinion.
I went from Palm to Windows Mobile to Apple to PalmOS to Android. Apple absolutely delivers the best experience, followed by PalmOS, then Android.
I hated Android. Seriously, with a passion. I loved the idea--a modern, open-source phone where I could install anything I wanted. In practice, I never found anything worth installing that wasn't in the market, the free apps were all ad-laden (taking up valuable screen real estate and slowing things down), the source was incomplete (drivers) and the phone vendor tried to lock the phone (and claimed that overriding it would void the warranty.) I couldn't even find paid versions of some classes of app that I wanted in order to avoid the ads because free apps are a race-to-the-bottom (on both platforms.) Paid apps seemingly have a hard time competing when there's any free version out there that isn't just a demo. The scrolling was horrible--I felt like I was using gestures to perform unrelated actions rather than directly controlling the on-screen elements. This probably sounds like a minor gripe, but UX is a rather important part of any design. I understand most of the UX is fixed in ICS. Maybe I'll give it a shot when my contract is up. Probably not, though--I'm practically locked into the ecosystem such that I the cost/benefit skews more in Apple's favor.
Regardless, due to the customizations, philosophical differences between vendors, and varying degrees of carrier influence, it's really not fair to compare Apples to Androids. You really need to compare specific phones (and specific OS versions). You might say Android is better, but I could show you phones being sold in stores today which offer a vastly worse experience and are as locked down as the phones being sold by Apple today. At the top end (best Android phone in all categories compared to best iPhone), things get tighter, but the price also get closer, if not exactly the same (16GB GS3 and the 16GB iPhone 4s cost the same.)
MS negotiated with the infringers and both parties came up with a deal to license the patents. Every. Single. Time.
Apple and Samsung couldn't come to an agreement. We can't know what Microsoft would have done at this point. Apple had three choices--ask for damages in the amount of the profits made by the infringing products, ask for an injunction, or drop the suit.
That's easy to say when you aren't being threatened with 15 years in prison. I'd imagine that innocent people plead guilty when they can't afford a good lawyer, or when they think that they are likely to be found guilty anyway and the plea deal is considerably better than the maximum sentence.
Slashdot Mirror
Chrome has always maintained a stable extension API, and have largely stuck with it (I'm not aware of any deviations, but I don't discount the possibility that they've existed.) Also, because they never exposed a version number in a prominent way, we haven't had web developers targeting versions of Chrome.
Firefox maintained a stable extension API, but then they also hosted third-party extensions which used unstable interfaces. By hosting them, they gave legitimacy to the unstable interfaces. With every Firefox version update, a handful of my extensions would break. When they first started the accelerated versioning, it was horrible. Now things have stabilized a bit, so there's that. Additionally, I spread my annoyance to both Mozilla and to Web devs when there's a "target" version of Firefox and later versions won't work with a website. For the web devs, "Dammit, write to the standard!" For Moz, why are they changing their rendering engine so much that it breaks compatibility with existing webpages?
But mostly, I think people just gripe at change. They didn't (seem) to complain that Chrome doesn't prominently display the version number, but they balk when Firefox decides to start doing that. Some of that may have been because of the issues related to versioning in the past--I don't know.
Newsblur has a mobile app for Android and iPhone. I'd rather just a good mobile site, but it's better than nothing.
Interesting. I'll admit that I just searched long enough to find the blogspot post that I originally saw.
That statement doesn't make it clear to me that they are supporting CalDAV for the future, though--just that they've worked with the developers responsible for 98% of their CalDAV traffic. This is consistent with their previous statement--that CalDAV developers can get whitelisted. It sounds like iCal probably won't be affected (surely Apple is in that 98%) but it looks like new applications will be unable to use that protocol.
Google's dropping support for CalDAV which I think was the primary supported way of syncing with iCal.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2013/03/a-second-spring-of-cleaning.html
The trick is that "innocents" can get caught in the blast. One of the reasons that we strive for herd immunity is because the vaccines aren't 100% effective.
Well if I understand it correctly, this will actually lead to less revenue for the U.S. Government. They are not instituting a federal Internet sales tax--they are forcing merchants to collect sales tax that is due to the individual state in which the purchaser resides. Aside from the problems this will cause for smaller businesses on the Internet, this will increase the Federal deduction that individuals can claim due to payment of state taxes. Higher federal deductions == less money for the feds (though almost certainly more for the individual states.)
I always wonder how people run across crazy sequences of button presses that trigger bugs while on live hardware. This reminds me of the various iPhone lock-screen bypasses.
With video poker, the house edge is built in to the device. The edge is that the payout schedule beats the odds of getting the hand.
In this case, the machine was defective, which generally voids all plays (this is usually written on the machines.)
The defect was that a player could trick the machine into thinking more money had been wagered than actually had been. This means that the payout schedule could be higher than the odds of getting the hand.
The guy shouldn't be charged with a crime, but the casino almost certainly has the right to demand the money back (unless they failed to post the warning about voiding plays.)
Do you blame the hacker who constructs the packet which causes the machine to operate in a way that it wasn't designed (deleting the database, giving higher level access than desired, etc?)
I don't know why it would, given that Apple devices in general are terrible at time.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/01/apple-iphone-4-alarm-problems-worldwide-clock-app-alarm-broken-3-days-in-a-row.html
But what I want from an iWatch is the ability to access Siri, control music, and receive haptic alerts (since I often don't feel my phone vibrate in my pocket.) Two of those three are available on the Metawatch or Pebble, though the music control is really not great AFAICT.
There are still hardware improvements to be made. The cameras, for example. The battery, too, though that will take an industry-wide tech improvement.
I'll say this, though--at least they ask before taking you to the mobile front page.
I only go to Slashdot from RSS, so while I actually like the new mobile discussions more, they're useless to me until the deep linking/routing is complete. Until then, I'll continue to press the button which dismisses the popup.
Chrome on iOS 6.1. I've been asked over and over. Also, the cardinal sin of "redirecting from a deep link to the front page of the mobile site" was committed, apparently :(
I'm on a discussion page and I get redirected to the front page of m.slashdot.org. Horrible, horrible!
You can edit? For the longest time, you couldn't.
Except that as many pointed out, he won the last game with no feed.
The system is fairly customizable. The only thing you can't change is the type of moderation that people use--but you can certainly adjust the values of that moderation. For example, I penalize 'funny' posts, because usually they aren't.
You should be able to approximate that using Match keywords in sshd_config.
As Patrick Gibson said,
Google is getting better at design faster than Apple is getting better at web services.
With a few hundred million iOS devices in the wild, an FBI list should have hundreds of millions of entries. AND it would be a hell of a lot more complete.
I have no reason to disbelieve the Blue Toad story, but your suggestion doesn't consider all of the quite reasonable possibilities.
First of all, it assumes collusion between Apple and the FBI, which isn't a requirement for the FBI to have 12million UUIDs. Even with collusion, the FBI could have requested only certain UUIDs.
More likely, the FBI has an app (Child ID.) The UUID database could have come from that. Or they could have other apps not branded with "FBI", or they could have colluded with an app developer.
The size of the database really isn't a relevant.
More to the point, though. is that the information in the leaked list isn't very useful. If they spent a lot of effort acquiring it, I feel like my tax dollars were wasted.
Regardless, the simplest, most likely explanation is that the list was stolen from Blue Toad.
Not a troll, but thanks for contributing to the conversation. I know it must be impossible to believe that someone could have found Android to be unenjoyable, but it does happen.
I know that some of the devices on that list infringed based on design, but others were based on software patents. For example, the spring-back (the way a document or page behaves when you try to drag past the end of the data) is patented.
Most don't fully get it or see the importance, but that doesn't matter either because they will easily get the fact that Android devices deliver a lot more value for the dollar and have a lot more good quality free stuff.
That's a matter of opinion.
I went from Palm to Windows Mobile to Apple to PalmOS to Android. Apple absolutely delivers the best experience, followed by PalmOS, then Android.
I hated Android. Seriously, with a passion. I loved the idea--a modern, open-source phone where I could install anything I wanted. In practice, I never found anything worth installing that wasn't in the market, the free apps were all ad-laden (taking up valuable screen real estate and slowing things down), the source was incomplete (drivers) and the phone vendor tried to lock the phone (and claimed that overriding it would void the warranty.) I couldn't even find paid versions of some classes of app that I wanted in order to avoid the ads because free apps are a race-to-the-bottom (on both platforms.) Paid apps seemingly have a hard time competing when there's any free version out there that isn't just a demo. The scrolling was horrible--I felt like I was using gestures to perform unrelated actions rather than directly controlling the on-screen elements. This probably sounds like a minor gripe, but UX is a rather important part of any design. I understand most of the UX is fixed in ICS. Maybe I'll give it a shot when my contract is up. Probably not, though--I'm practically locked into the ecosystem such that I the cost/benefit skews more in Apple's favor.
Regardless, due to the customizations, philosophical differences between vendors, and varying degrees of carrier influence, it's really not fair to compare Apples to Androids. You really need to compare specific phones (and specific OS versions). You might say Android is better, but I could show you phones being sold in stores today which offer a vastly worse experience and are as locked down as the phones being sold by Apple today. At the top end (best Android phone in all categories compared to best iPhone), things get tighter, but the price also get closer, if not exactly the same (16GB GS3 and the 16GB iPhone 4s cost the same.)
MS negotiated with the infringers and both parties came up with a deal to license the patents. Every. Single. Time.
Apple and Samsung couldn't come to an agreement. We can't know what Microsoft would have done at this point. Apple had three choices--ask for damages in the amount of the profits made by the infringing products, ask for an injunction, or drop the suit.
That's easy to say when you aren't being threatened with 15 years in prison. I'd imagine that innocent people plead guilty when they can't afford a good lawyer, or when they think that they are likely to be found guilty anyway and the plea deal is considerably better than the maximum sentence.
When I type "appropriate" into Google to get its definition, it doesn't say anything about depriving the original owner.