I see it as a way for them to get people into their chips. Buy our chips, we give you this custom designed Linux mobile OS.
If it works it would suck for MS. Bonus. Windows Mobile is so outdated and MS has shown no signs of pushing out something new. Intel is offering more options in the mobile OS front. Never a bad thing. I guarantee their goal is somewhere in the area I mentioned, sell the hardware, give away some tailored software.
Meaning, assuming these are legit issues for this user, you fixed them on his system? Or you just offered your experiences on your own machines and consider that enough to call it a day and say these issues are taken care of?
Stop posting conjecture by "market analysts". No matter how you spin it, this is not news for nerds or stuff that matters. It's someone trying to rally interest in Apple stock.
i don't think anyone around here has it out for technology. it's a beautiful thing. but these stupid ass decisions are just publicity garnering political stunts.
how about spending the 90 million on more outreach programs, bettering the shit hole ghetto schools and neighborhoods? it won't stop terrorism because you never WILL stop terrorism. there are always going to be cracks in any system. some are just, IMO, more worthwhile than others as a whole.
i see this is only going into effect in Manhattan. sweet way to help the upper class feel safer without real effort. this is still another a quick and dirty way to make a few people sleep more comfortably at night than real effective social policy.
I repaired phones for a wireless carrier. Sales reps would come into the back to give me a phone, but already have gone through msot of the media files. Especially if it was some hot chick.
I did what I could to maintain some integrity of the work place, but when even the store manager is sneaking a peak I was pretty much destined to failure.
Ok then we'll regulate everything up the ass and make life a series of multiple choice decisions with a list of options that some cause heads think are good enough to please everyone. Oh and because it "worked in New York." I'm glad people are more comfortably able to get their drink on. *phew*
The 90's are over, can we ditch this political correct bullshit? How many times is an argument made on here about voting with your dollar? Or about no expectation of privacy in public? Then a story like this, or my favorite, the cellphone flame wars, get posted and the consensus does a 180. Oh my rights are being infringed! You have a right to choose, not a right to want the world to fit your expectations at every turn.
I'd think a better law would not be an outright ban on smoking, but perhaps a mandate that you have to say on the front of the place "Smoking Allowed." Then you can decide and the market will determine whether non-smoking and smoking places stay in business.
I guess no one wants to make decisions for themselves though. It's easier if we're given one option.
I may be talking a bit dramatically over this particular topic, but it is indicative of a much broader mindset. I'm worried what laws they'll be passing in 10 or 15 years if we give them Carte Blanche over even the things we see as "minor."
I thought about that argument and then I realized "Well, they could always goto a pub that doesn't allow smoking."
Just because you *feel* entitled to go out in the world and have it be a warm and fuzzy place that lives up to your every expectation and personal choice, doesn't mean you are.
If a pub owner person wants to allow smoking and attracts those clients, then they shouldn't be legally prohibited. You're more than welcome to use the one across the street that has a no smoking sign in the window.
The thing that strikes me, with this T-Mobile deal at least, is that you basically get to help them ease the traffic on their network by using your cable/dsl Internet connection. All while paying T-Mobile for the feature.
I have a hard time accepting the solution should be Congress essentially hard coding every variable into do's and do not's with no incentive to review it down the road.
Especially when it comes to legislating technology, which it is incredibly obvious they know jack shit about. As someone else has pointed out there some legit, albeit probably minor, uses of ID spoofing. It also pointed out this could be fix by lazy corporations not being so lazy and building a proper system. Whatever I guess. More laws+more prisons+more thinking of the children = happy voters.
That's the damn thing. Last I checked we already had laws against fraud. So why make a law specifically towards something like this? I can understand the disabilities act, but really, go after spoofers for fraud and if the penalty isn't high enough ADJUST the penalty for fraud across the board. We're making every damn little thing a frickin' crime in this country anymore.
I don't get these comparisons to banks. Inside WoW every piece of loot, gold, and the odds of attaining it are configured by Blizzard. It's a bunch of scripts and databases sitting there saying "If $player performs $action x amount of times, he earns y."
Blizzard paid people to sit and create every piece of art and the logic that dictates how it's doled out. Blizzard OWNS that as intellectual property. You pay to basically run around their maze finding their hidden treasure.
This has nothing to do with banks. In the real world who the hell would deal with a bank with these kinds of rules?
Murderous enemy? When's the last time the Cuban government killed thousands of civilians in a war started under false pretenses? Or kidnapped and sent persons of interest in a bullshit "War on Terror" to other countries in order to torture them?
What's your definition of national security? From what I hear, we're still as vulnerable to another 9/11 attack as we were on 9/10/01 and prior. We hear about Gitmo, we know about the NSA wiretapping, we know the CIA is still doing some messed up sh_t. What do we not know about because it was classified in the interests of "national security." It's just another catch phrase for the masses. Like "war on terror."
The only things that should be classified are things like nuke launch codes, agent identities, troop movements/orders... Stuff that would directly put people in harms way. As it stands our government has a "classify everything first just in case there is a dirty little secret in there" mentality. That's not promoting national security. That's stuffing their skeletons in a closet. They found a way to "destroy" evidence without being held accountable.
You forget the point that Verizon declined to carry it. So pretty much they had 4 choices, Sprint, Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile in order to be "national". They started with the two biggest and just went down the list
I dunno it seems a little silly to me that you'd pay to use DDC (at least I seem to remember it being "owned" by someone). I don't have much problem finding a book I want at a book store without it. Is this really that big a deal, I would expect the actual book you want to be more important than a 100+ year old catalog method.
Well obviously they don't need to watch Granny Goodness bake pies and muffins all day, so that gives them more than 198$ to spend on watching people that "May possibly some day pose a potential threat of some kind."
The point I'm trying to make is, they aren't watching EVERYONE, so your 198$ per person isn't all that relevant. I would imagine they have more than enough to watch whoever they want.
*sigh* my butthole. Don't read web forums if you're so put out by difference of opinion. Sorry if I don't seem as *enlightened* as you.
Blaming Take-Two/Rockstar for the stupid things people do that happen to be in their video games... Whatever happened to correlation != causation. You put a gun in my hand, does that mean I automatically go shoot someone? A woman dresses provocatively, does that mean she should be sexually assaulted?
A video game allows you to steal a car (oh by the way if you get caught by the cops in the game you goto jail, just like real life. HUH!). Does that mean you should run out and do it?
No, it means you're an idiot. And it means that you are either biologically incapable of knowing right from wrong or your parents were *more than likely* crappy parents. That's not to say your parents should be strung up alongside you in court, but it has nothing to do with a video game.
There were some kids that stole cars after playing GTA because they thought it was cool.
So it's GTA's fault these kids were never properly raised? Hm so what happens if they watch on the news that more soldiers in Iraq were hurt/killed by a roadside bomb, decide it sounds cool and took a stab at that action.
Truth is, this had nothing to do with the game and everything to do with them being irresponsible idiots with irresponsible idiot parents. We have to quit blaming everyone else for our failures otherwise we keep perpetuating the need for a nanny state.
the developer of a delayed, but bad game, at least forever is a bit shorted once it *is* released. Less time for people to remember it sucking so much.
how does that make sense in this case though? if anything you'd think they'd unload these on biz IT types. it's the "home user" that i would expect to require more technical support for Ubuntu based computers.
what's more, how many IT shops do you think call Dell when Windows gets hosed? i know we don't at my company. i'm only on the phone with them when we need hardware replaced. do businesses with IT departments really rely on phone support for OS issues that much?
Slashdot Mirror
I see it as a way for them to get people into their chips. Buy our chips, we give you this custom designed Linux mobile OS.
If it works it would suck for MS. Bonus. Windows Mobile is so outdated and MS has shown no signs of pushing out something new. Intel is offering more options in the mobile OS front. Never a bad thing. I guarantee their goal is somewhere in the area I mentioned, sell the hardware, give away some tailored software.
I would think Slashdot would be all over it.
Worked on, got any more?
Meaning, assuming these are legit issues for this user, you fixed them on his system? Or you just offered your experiences on your own machines and consider that enough to call it a day and say these issues are taken care of?
Stop posting conjecture by "market analysts". No matter how you spin it, this is not news for nerds or stuff that matters. It's someone trying to rally interest in Apple stock.
i don't think anyone around here has it out for technology. it's a beautiful thing. but these stupid ass decisions are just publicity garnering political stunts.
how about spending the 90 million on more outreach programs, bettering the shit hole ghetto schools and neighborhoods? it won't stop terrorism because you never WILL stop terrorism. there are always going to be cracks in any system. some are just, IMO, more worthwhile than others as a whole.
i see this is only going into effect in Manhattan. sweet way to help the upper class feel safer without real effort. this is still another a quick and dirty way to make a few people sleep more comfortably at night than real effective social policy.
"No one likes a burning feeling from their hummer."
Nice. Subtle but relevant to your discussion. I give it a 9
I repaired phones for a wireless carrier. Sales reps would come into the back to give me a phone, but already have gone through msot of the media files. Especially if it was some hot chick.
I did what I could to maintain some integrity of the work place, but when even the store manager is sneaking a peak I was pretty much destined to failure.
Ok then we'll regulate everything up the ass and make life a series of multiple choice decisions with a list of options that some cause heads think are good enough to please everyone. Oh and because it "worked in New York." I'm glad people are more comfortably able to get their drink on. *phew*
The 90's are over, can we ditch this political correct bullshit? How many times is an argument made on here about voting with your dollar? Or about no expectation of privacy in public? Then a story like this, or my favorite, the cellphone flame wars, get posted and the consensus does a 180. Oh my rights are being infringed! You have a right to choose, not a right to want the world to fit your expectations at every turn.
I'd think a better law would not be an outright ban on smoking, but perhaps a mandate that you have to say on the front of the place "Smoking Allowed." Then you can decide and the market will determine whether non-smoking and smoking places stay in business.
I guess no one wants to make decisions for themselves though. It's easier if we're given one option.
I may be talking a bit dramatically over this particular topic, but it is indicative of a much broader mindset. I'm worried what laws they'll be passing in 10 or 15 years if we give them Carte Blanche over even the things we see as "minor."
I thought about that argument and then I realized "Well, they could always goto a pub that doesn't allow smoking."
Just because you *feel* entitled to go out in the world and have it be a warm and fuzzy place that lives up to your every expectation and personal choice, doesn't mean you are.
If a pub owner person wants to allow smoking and attracts those clients, then they shouldn't be legally prohibited. You're more than welcome to use the one across the street that has a no smoking sign in the window.
When I was workin' there.
The thing that strikes me, with this T-Mobile deal at least, is that you basically get to help them ease the traffic on their network by using your cable/dsl Internet connection. All while paying T-Mobile for the feature.
How awesome of them.
I have a hard time accepting the solution should be Congress essentially hard coding every variable into do's and do not's with no incentive to review it down the road.
Especially when it comes to legislating technology, which it is incredibly obvious they know jack shit about. As someone else has pointed out there some legit, albeit probably minor, uses of ID spoofing. It also pointed out this could be fix by lazy corporations not being so lazy and building a proper system. Whatever I guess. More laws+more prisons+more thinking of the children = happy voters.
That's the damn thing. Last I checked we already had laws against fraud. So why make a law specifically towards something like this? I can understand the disabilities act, but really, go after spoofers for fraud and if the penalty isn't high enough ADJUST the penalty for fraud across the board. We're making every damn little thing a frickin' crime in this country anymore.
I don't get these comparisons to banks. Inside WoW every piece of loot, gold, and the odds of attaining it are configured by Blizzard. It's a bunch of scripts and databases sitting there saying "If $player performs $action x amount of times, he earns y."
Blizzard paid people to sit and create every piece of art and the logic that dictates how it's doled out. Blizzard OWNS that as intellectual property. You pay to basically run around their maze finding their hidden treasure.
This has nothing to do with banks. In the real world who the hell would deal with a bank with these kinds of rules?
Murderous enemy? When's the last time the Cuban government killed thousands of civilians in a war started under false pretenses? Or kidnapped and sent persons of interest in a bullshit "War on Terror" to other countries in order to torture them?
So you were talking about Cuba or the US?
What's your definition of national security? From what I hear, we're still as vulnerable to another 9/11 attack as we were on 9/10/01 and prior. We hear about Gitmo, we know about the NSA wiretapping, we know the CIA is still doing some messed up sh_t. What do we not know about because it was classified in the interests of "national security." It's just another catch phrase for the masses. Like "war on terror."
The only things that should be classified are things like nuke launch codes, agent identities, troop movements/orders... Stuff that would directly put people in harms way. As it stands our government has a "classify everything first just in case there is a dirty little secret in there" mentality. That's not promoting national security. That's stuffing their skeletons in a closet. They found a way to "destroy" evidence without being held accountable.
You forget the point that Verizon declined to carry it. So pretty much they had 4 choices, Sprint, Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile in order to be "national". They started with the two biggest and just went down the list
I dunno it seems a little silly to me that you'd pay to use DDC (at least I seem to remember it being "owned" by someone). I don't have much problem finding a book I want at a book store without it. Is this really that big a deal, I would expect the actual book you want to be more important than a 100+ year old catalog method.
Well obviously they don't need to watch Granny Goodness bake pies and muffins all day, so that gives them more than 198$ to spend on watching people that "May possibly some day pose a potential threat of some kind."
The point I'm trying to make is, they aren't watching EVERYONE, so your 198$ per person isn't all that relevant. I would imagine they have more than enough to watch whoever they want.
*sigh* my butthole. Don't read web forums if you're so put out by difference of opinion. Sorry if I don't seem as *enlightened* as you.
Blaming Take-Two/Rockstar for the stupid things people do that happen to be in their video games... Whatever happened to correlation != causation. You put a gun in my hand, does that mean I automatically go shoot someone? A woman dresses provocatively, does that mean she should be sexually assaulted?
A video game allows you to steal a car (oh by the way if you get caught by the cops in the game you goto jail, just like real life. HUH!). Does that mean you should run out and do it?
No, it means you're an idiot. And it means that you are either biologically incapable of knowing right from wrong or your parents were *more than likely* crappy parents. That's not to say your parents should be strung up alongside you in court, but it has nothing to do with a video game.
You completely missed the point of my comment. The article is all about the *potential* of PITA work arounds to escape DRM. Why put up with that crap?
Want DRM free computing???
www.ubuntu.com
There were some kids that stole cars after playing GTA because they thought it was cool.
So it's GTA's fault these kids were never properly raised? Hm so what happens if they watch on the news that more soldiers in Iraq were hurt/killed by a roadside bomb, decide it sounds cool and took a stab at that action.
Truth is, this had nothing to do with the game and everything to do with them being irresponsible idiots with irresponsible idiot parents. We have to quit blaming everyone else for our failures otherwise we keep perpetuating the need for a nanny state.
Police Man: Sir, would you please recite the 802.11 specifications backwards? Oh and what each ones primary goal is?
Inebriated Driver: Yeah, just give me a ticket.
Put it on PC. I will buy 2
the developer of a delayed, but bad game, at least forever is a bit shorted once it *is* released. Less time for people to remember it sucking so much.
how does that make sense in this case though? if anything you'd think they'd unload these on biz IT types. it's the "home user" that i would expect to require more technical support for Ubuntu based computers.
what's more, how many IT shops do you think call Dell when Windows gets hosed? i know we don't at my company. i'm only on the phone with them when we need hardware replaced. do businesses with IT departments really rely on phone support for OS issues that much?