I don't think this bug was in Android. I said that Google distributes Android. Totally separate pieces of information. I then added my opinion that Epic is for their own enrichment opening up additional security holes in a very irresponsible fashion.
If Epic used the app store, the vulnerability never would have existed. It's because they're sidestepping the security there that the problem came to be.
Google doesn't distribute Android? When did that happen?
Regardless, anyone with two brain cells to rub together could see this shitshow (and more in future) coming the second Epic announced that in order to install their software you'd have to allow uncertified install packs on Android. Many many people do not have the technical acumen to understand the full ramifications of that, and will probably forget to flip the switch when they're done, so a whole host of malware providers are even as we speak licking their chops waiting to take advantage of the holes in the devices Epic has just convinced their users to open.
Does Google charge too much on the Play Store? Probably. But it's their store and they can set any price they think the market will bear, just like anyone else. That's the deal for using Android. Epic is being very irresponsible.
> If this really were as wide-spread a phenomenon, you would've cited examples. You didn't. Ergo, you are wrong. And you knew — or should've known — you are wrong. Ergo, you lied. Remember to logout, liar.
Wow. I expected your/. account number to have an extra digit, as this behavior is what I'd expect from a just graduated Republican edgelord. Guess you're one of those old narrowminded MAGA hatters instead.
If I'm a liar, then you must be too. You haven't provided a single example to support your position. Liar. Remember to logout. Liar.
"If a player wants the privilege of making millions of dollars in the NFL,or other leagues, he or she should not be allowed to disrespect.......our Great American Flag (or Country) and should stand for the National Anthem. If not, YOU'RE FIRED. Find something else to do!"
> If there were better jobs available to these workers you think they'd be there? > No one would be, where they are, if a better alternative were available. No one.
It happens all the damn time. You need to pull your head out of your ass, but you won't so further discussion with you is pointless.
Can you point to a Trump policy that fostered that growth? If you want him taking the credit for it, show his work. All the rest of us see is any time he tries anything on money policy or trade, there are stories in the paper a few weeks later about the sector he touched tanking or offshoring. Like Carrier, Harley Davidson, GE, various appliance makers, Coors raising prices because of aluminum tariffs, soybean farmers, tourism down, auto manufacturers in the Carolinas having slumps because of China's reverse tariffs, etc.
So maybe the economy as a whole is shambling along on momemtum like an oil tanker whose engine cut out an hour ago and is still cruising at 15mph, but many sectors of the economy sure do sound like they're getting hit with enormous unnecessary pain as a result of someone's mouth...
Oh bullshit. If there were better jobs available to these workers you think they'd be there? People who are scraping by don't have the luxury of easy job mobility, so stop with the "they like it if they work there" crap.
Companies are forcing shitty work conditions on people and paying the less and less. This is a problem that DOES affect all of society, ESPECIALLY when there are thousands of these Amazon workers who are being paid so shittily that they're on food stamps:
So you know what? That DOES make it everyone's business because public tax dollars are going to subsidize corporate profits. Or another way to state it: Corporate Welfare. For one of the richest companies on the face of the Earth.
> Many of us work in jobs today that simply didn't exist when we were born. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to think that there will be jobs 20 years from now that don't exist today.
That's because when jobs of old were automated, they were automated by job specific processes and machines. Today's jobs are going to get eaten by AI and quick learning systems. Which will open some more jobs, and some of those jobs will ALSO get eaten by the AI and quick learning systems before a human even has a chance to plant their ass in the chair.
This industrial revolution will not be like the others. And even if it was, people tend to gloss over the fact that the previous ones were devastating to entire generations.
> AI is going to EAT the white-collar class of people who have boring repetitive jobs.
Going to? It already is. Hell, even "smart" jobs like investment portfolio management are in the sights now. One of the banks in Canada laid off hundreds of investment advisers recently and replaced them with a piece of software and an automated phone tree.
You know those service packs are essentially bugfixes and security patches, right? No real enhancement of functionality?
Do you even understand what we're discussing? I don't think you do, so let me break it down for you. If you buy an app from the Apple or Play store right now, you get full updates on it for life. Even if that life is 20 years long and adds enough features to in any other sales method justify 8 or 10 major releases. That's the app equivalent of buying Windows 95 when it came out and getting free updates to Win98, ME, XP, 7 and Windows 10. Do you think that's reasonable? I don't.
> And I think the confidence that the sim experience gave me was instrumental (no pun intended) in helping me succeed at that initial flight and through the entire flight training process.
Totally agree. I would expect people who have played flight sims, or even just sim-ish games would have a good understanding of most of the basics and even know basic procedures to get out of simple problems. For example if you push the stick or yoke forward and pitch the nose down, someone with flight sim experience knows exactly what's happening and what needs to be done to correct that and get back to level flight. A complete novice on the other hand might have the plane pitch down due to that input and think "ohmygod we're crashing" and then proceed to lose their mind to panic and lose the aircraft as a result. Similar for a stall. I'd expect someone who has played flight sims to understand what was happening and also know the basics of what to do to recover a stall (push the nose down a bit and add throttle until the wings recover lift), but a novice on their own would almost certainly be toast.
Flight sims give you the chance to make a lot of mistakes and learn from them, the real world can and will kill you on the first one if it's a big enough mistake.
That only gets you so far. I've flown in a few different varieties of light aircraft and had a chance to "take the controls" several times and have been able to manage to keep the plane level, do basic turns, etc with no issue. One of the people who took me up for one of the flights remarked that I was doing better than the expected for a full novice and I mentioned that I'd used a lot of flight sims/sim-ish games and the basic skills seemed to translate fine.
That said - these flights were in a small aircraft with basic controls, at relatively low speed in uncrowded airspace, and on days with calm, near perfect weather. Under those conditions I would expect anyone who can drive a car could fly those types of plane in a straight line or a gentle turn with very little coaching. I would NOT expect that they would be able to land easily without someone experienced sitting idle at the controls right next to them talking them through the process. Also on flying in a straight line, add any inclement weather or heavy turbulence to the mix and the novice will probably commit some sort of fatal mistake not long after.
So yeah, getting the plane in the air under good conditions isn't really hard. It's the stuff that comes after getting it up there that is where the issue lies.
It was a modern version of exactly this concept that would go 100KM on a litre of diesel, hence the name - Euro "mileage" is expressed as liters of fuel used per 100km so 1l/100km. This is an equivalent US mileage of 240mpg.
The car itself had modern safety standards and good visibility, but was never mass produced, due in no small part to the cost, though the per unit costs would have fallen considerably if it was mass produced.
> The US can not even agree with the rest of the world what 'capitalism' actually means.
Well, when the US Right's primary source of propag H^H^H^H^H^H news - Fox - has hosts on it do crap like equating Denmark to Venezuela, I'm not surprised that they have difficulty with concepts like nuance:
Which Western Values are you talking about? The ones that say if you don't have any money you'll be left to die of cancer by the for profit healthcare system? Or the at-will employment at 31.5 hours per week so SuperMegaCorp with 10 billion dollars in profit per quarter doesn't have to give benefits (or a living wage)? Or living in a city where wages are lowballed and housing costs more than half your paycheck? And at the same time shouldering an enormous student loan debt that will take decades to square up?
You mean those values? Yeah, can't see any reason at all that young people would turn away from that when they're exposed to it... especially when they see "socialist" places like France and Sweden, or even Canada and talk to people from there and hear how life is over there.
Really? Because I worked at a boxed software company up until the year 2000 and we didn't give free updates. Point releases yes, as in from v5.6 to v5.7, but next major version on release 6.0? You pay if you want it.
Oh and there's this little boxed software that you might have heard of called Microsoft Office. Last I looked, within the last 20 years was the 2000, 2003, 2007 and 2010 version releases. And if you bought Office 2000 you didn't get 2003, 2007, or 2010 for free... But you do get updates with Microsoft Office 365... because it's a subscription. Sort of exactly what we're talking about.
On and then there's the Adobe software suites...
What rock have you been hiding under that you haven't seen these major boxed softwares that you need to purchase upgrades to?
> What's different is there's a group of lunatics deliberate causing violence in order to fight them, claiming to be be on "the right side of history". They aren't. They only making the situation worse.
Totally right, the Chamberlain approach to appeasement works wonders. That Churchill bastard fucked it all up.
> So in 2017 they spent around 350m less on R&D. Pretty much what the OP was saying.
Again you're cherry picking. OP said "4.5 years ago, Intel announced it was cutting $350 million from it's R&D budget and putting $350 million into diversity programs."
4.5 years ago is 2013/2014, not 2017.
> They are spending less and less on R&D and more and more on bullshit that DOESNT make them money.
Like the nearly 1 billion they spent on marketing?
And you're also wrong there, because if you would again accurately report what was written in that quote, you'd see it says "a slowdown from the $612 million INCREASE... during 2016". So instead of they are spending less and less, you mean to say "they are spending less, then more, then less". Companies adjust their spending all the time. Intel can spend its money the way it feels is most productive, and there are people counting beans over there that know way more about the internal workings than either of us. If they think the money on diversity is a good spend, that's why they've done it.
> Why do application developers need recurring revenue from the application?
One reason is that the application developers are constantly improving the application. In "boxed software" if I release an application, you buy that version and that's it. If I release BoxApp 2.0 next year, you have to buy an upgrade. App store/Play Store apps don't work that way. You buy in on the ground floor once and then updates are free for life, the only way around that is for the app developer to abandon the current app and release an update under a different name, which would not be good for business.
So if in the old days of boxed software everyone paid for updates and was fine with it, why should app purchasers get updates for life for free?
> 4.5 years ago, Intel announced it was cutting $350 million from it's R&D budget and putting $350 million into diversity programs. Just a coincidence of course.
You know, if you're gonna lie about things, you should pick something that a quick Google search or two won't show to be a porker:
First of all, it's $300 M for diversity programs, to be spent from 2015 to 2020, so they have not spent $350M on it, and the 300 M hasn't had more than 70% spent.
Secondly on the R&D, they've been ADDING to the R&D budget year over year:
"During the year, Intel's research and development (R&D) spending grew by just $358 million, a slowdown from the $612 million increase that it saw there during 2016."
I get it, you think diversity programs are a waste of time because Western society is 100% perfect and we totally didn't have racists and Nazis parading this weekend, but don't blame a company going into the toilet on them spending $60m a year on a program when their income for that same year was almost 70 Billion with a B. That's like saying you weren't able to make your $1000 rent this month because you spent a buck on coffee.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think this bug was in Android. I said that Google distributes Android. Totally separate pieces of information. I then added my opinion that Epic is for their own enrichment opening up additional security holes in a very irresponsible fashion.
If Epic used the app store, the vulnerability never would have existed. It's because they're sidestepping the security there that the problem came to be.
Google doesn't distribute Android? When did that happen?
Regardless, anyone with two brain cells to rub together could see this shitshow (and more in future) coming the second Epic announced that in order to install their software you'd have to allow uncertified install packs on Android. Many many people do not have the technical acumen to understand the full ramifications of that, and will probably forget to flip the switch when they're done, so a whole host of malware providers are even as we speak licking their chops waiting to take advantage of the holes in the devices Epic has just convinced their users to open.
Does Google charge too much on the Play Store? Probably. But it's their store and they can set any price they think the market will bear, just like anyone else. That's the deal for using Android. Epic is being very irresponsible.
> So you lied.
Bullshit. I never once said it was a quote. You know these things " ?
THOSE are for quotes. It's not my fault you're an idiot and don't get nuance.
> If this really were as wide-spread a phenomenon, you would've cited examples. You didn't. Ergo, you are wrong. And you knew — or should've known — you are wrong. Ergo, you lied. Remember to logout, liar.
Wow. I expected your /. account number to have an extra digit, as this behavior is what I'd expect from a just graduated Republican edgelord. Guess you're one of those old narrowminded MAGA hatters instead.
If I'm a liar, then you must be too. You haven't provided a single example to support your position. Liar. Remember to logout. Liar.
I wasn't quoting him, only mentioning his invective, but here is one example:
https://mashable.com/2017/09/23/donald-trump-nfl-tweets-youre-fired/#gEmC9..VFaqY
"If a player wants the privilege of making millions of dollars in the NFL,or other leagues, he or she should not be allowed to disrespect.... ...our Great American Flag (or Country) and should stand for the National Anthem. If not, YOU'RE FIRED. Find something else to do!"
> If there were better jobs available to these workers you think they'd be there?
> No one would be, where they are, if a better alternative were available. No one.
It happens all the damn time. You need to pull your head out of your ass, but you won't so further discussion with you is pointless.
Can you point to a Trump policy that fostered that growth? If you want him taking the credit for it, show his work. All the rest of us see is any time he tries anything on money policy or trade, there are stories in the paper a few weeks later about the sector he touched tanking or offshoring. Like Carrier, Harley Davidson, GE, various appliance makers, Coors raising prices because of aluminum tariffs, soybean farmers, tourism down, auto manufacturers in the Carolinas having slumps because of China's reverse tariffs, etc.
So maybe the economy as a whole is shambling along on momemtum like an oil tanker whose engine cut out an hour ago and is still cruising at 15mph, but many sectors of the economy sure do sound like they're getting hit with enormous unnecessary pain as a result of someone's mouth...
Trump: People should be able to say whatever they want on private platforms that have no connection to the government.
Also Trump: Football players should be fined and fired for daring to take a knee.
So in one case he wants the First Amendment to apply to private companies, and in the second wants to force silence on non-govermental employees.
Oh bullshit. If there were better jobs available to these workers you think they'd be there? People who are scraping by don't have the luxury of easy job mobility, so stop with the "they like it if they work there" crap.
Companies are forcing shitty work conditions on people and paying the less and less. This is a problem that DOES affect all of society, ESPECIALLY when there are thousands of these Amazon workers who are being paid so shittily that they're on food stamps:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/thousands-of-amazon-workers-receive-food-stamps-and-bernie-sanders-wants-amazon-to-pay-up/ar-BBMnmJC
So you know what? That DOES make it everyone's business because public tax dollars are going to subsidize corporate profits. Or another way to state it: Corporate Welfare. For one of the richest companies on the face of the Earth.
Ah yes, servicemen/women, like Bradley/Chelsea Manning. How'd that work out for data security?
> Many of us work in jobs today that simply didn't exist when we were born. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to think that there will be jobs 20 years from now that don't exist today.
That's because when jobs of old were automated, they were automated by job specific processes and machines. Today's jobs are going to get eaten by AI and quick learning systems. Which will open some more jobs, and some of those jobs will ALSO get eaten by the AI and quick learning systems before a human even has a chance to plant their ass in the chair.
This industrial revolution will not be like the others. And even if it was, people tend to gloss over the fact that the previous ones were devastating to entire generations.
> AI is going to EAT the white-collar class of people who have boring repetitive jobs.
Going to? It already is. Hell, even "smart" jobs like investment portfolio management are in the sights now. One of the banks in Canada laid off hundreds of investment advisers recently and replaced them with a piece of software and an automated phone tree.
You know those service packs are essentially bugfixes and security patches, right? No real enhancement of functionality?
Do you even understand what we're discussing? I don't think you do, so let me break it down for you. If you buy an app from the Apple or Play store right now, you get full updates on it for life. Even if that life is 20 years long and adds enough features to in any other sales method justify 8 or 10 major releases. That's the app equivalent of buying Windows 95 when it came out and getting free updates to Win98, ME, XP, 7 and Windows 10. Do you think that's reasonable? I don't.
> And I think the confidence that the sim experience gave me was instrumental (no pun intended) in helping me succeed at that initial flight and through the entire flight training process.
Totally agree. I would expect people who have played flight sims, or even just sim-ish games would have a good understanding of most of the basics and even know basic procedures to get out of simple problems. For example if you push the stick or yoke forward and pitch the nose down, someone with flight sim experience knows exactly what's happening and what needs to be done to correct that and get back to level flight. A complete novice on the other hand might have the plane pitch down due to that input and think "ohmygod we're crashing" and then proceed to lose their mind to panic and lose the aircraft as a result. Similar for a stall. I'd expect someone who has played flight sims to understand what was happening and also know the basics of what to do to recover a stall (push the nose down a bit and add throttle until the wings recover lift), but a novice on their own would almost certainly be toast.
Flight sims give you the chance to make a lot of mistakes and learn from them, the real world can and will kill you on the first one if it's a big enough mistake.
That only gets you so far. I've flown in a few different varieties of light aircraft and had a chance to "take the controls" several times and have been able to manage to keep the plane level, do basic turns, etc with no issue. One of the people who took me up for one of the flights remarked that I was doing better than the expected for a full novice and I mentioned that I'd used a lot of flight sims/sim-ish games and the basic skills seemed to translate fine.
That said - these flights were in a small aircraft with basic controls, at relatively low speed in uncrowded airspace, and on days with calm, near perfect weather. Under those conditions I would expect anyone who can drive a car could fly those types of plane in a straight line or a gentle turn with very little coaching. I would NOT expect that they would be able to land easily without someone experienced sitting idle at the controls right next to them talking them through the process. Also on flying in a straight line, add any inclement weather or heavy turbulence to the mix and the novice will probably commit some sort of fatal mistake not long after.
So yeah, getting the plane in the air under good conditions isn't really hard. It's the stuff that comes after getting it up there that is where the issue lies.
Actually that was truthful. The emissions scandal if you recall focused on NOx emissions being greatly under-reported, not CO2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car
It was a modern version of exactly this concept that would go 100KM on a litre of diesel, hence the name - Euro "mileage" is expressed as liters of fuel used per 100km so 1l/100km. This is an equivalent US mileage of 240mpg.
The car itself had modern safety standards and good visibility, but was never mass produced, due in no small part to the cost, though the per unit costs would have fallen considerably if it was mass produced.
> The US can not even agree with the rest of the world what 'capitalism' actually means.
Well, when the US Right's primary source of propag H^H^H^H^H^H news - Fox - has hosts on it do crap like equating Denmark to Venezuela, I'm not surprised that they have difficulty with concepts like nuance:
http://fortune.com/2018/08/14/fox-host-denmark-venezuela-socialism/
I'd suggest they read more, but many of that group are proud to tell you how they have no use for reading...
Which Western Values are you talking about? The ones that say if you don't have any money you'll be left to die of cancer by the for profit healthcare system? Or the at-will employment at 31.5 hours per week so SuperMegaCorp with 10 billion dollars in profit per quarter doesn't have to give benefits (or a living wage)? Or living in a city where wages are lowballed and housing costs more than half your paycheck? And at the same time shouldering an enormous student loan debt that will take decades to square up?
You mean those values? Yeah, can't see any reason at all that young people would turn away from that when they're exposed to it... especially when they see "socialist" places like France and Sweden, or even Canada and talk to people from there and hear how life is over there.
Really? Because I worked at a boxed software company up until the year 2000 and we didn't give free updates. Point releases yes, as in from v5.6 to v5.7, but next major version on release 6.0? You pay if you want it.
Oh and there's this little boxed software that you might have heard of called Microsoft Office. Last I looked, within the last 20 years was the 2000, 2003, 2007 and 2010 version releases. And if you bought Office 2000 you didn't get 2003, 2007, or 2010 for free... But you do get updates with Microsoft Office 365... because it's a subscription. Sort of exactly what we're talking about.
On and then there's the Adobe software suites...
What rock have you been hiding under that you haven't seen these major boxed softwares that you need to purchase upgrades to?
> What's different is there's a group of lunatics deliberate causing violence in order to fight them, claiming to be be on "the right side of history". They aren't. They only making the situation worse.
Totally right, the Chamberlain approach to appeasement works wonders. That Churchill bastard fucked it all up.
> So in 2017 they spent around 350m less on R&D. Pretty much what the OP was saying.
Again you're cherry picking. OP said "4.5 years ago, Intel announced it was cutting $350 million from it's R&D budget and putting $350 million into diversity programs."
4.5 years ago is 2013/2014, not 2017.
> They are spending less and less on R&D and more and more on bullshit that DOESNT make them money.
Like the nearly 1 billion they spent on marketing?
And you're also wrong there, because if you would again accurately report what was written in that quote, you'd see it says "a slowdown from the $612 million INCREASE... during 2016". So instead of they are spending less and less, you mean to say "they are spending less, then more, then less". Companies adjust their spending all the time. Intel can spend its money the way it feels is most productive, and there are people counting beans over there that know way more about the internal workings than either of us. If they think the money on diversity is a good spend, that's why they've done it.
> Why do application developers need recurring revenue from the application?
One reason is that the application developers are constantly improving the application. In "boxed software" if I release an application, you buy that version and that's it. If I release BoxApp 2.0 next year, you have to buy an upgrade. App store/Play Store apps don't work that way. You buy in on the ground floor once and then updates are free for life, the only way around that is for the app developer to abandon the current app and release an update under a different name, which would not be good for business.
So if in the old days of boxed software everyone paid for updates and was fine with it, why should app purchasers get updates for life for free?
> 4.5 years ago, Intel announced it was cutting $350 million from it's R&D budget and putting $350 million into diversity programs. Just a coincidence of course.
You know, if you're gonna lie about things, you should pick something that a quick Google search or two won't show to be a porker:
First of all, it's $300 M for diversity programs, to be spent from 2015 to 2020, so they have not spent $350M on it, and the 300 M hasn't had more than 70% spent.
Secondly on the R&D, they've been ADDING to the R&D budget year over year:
https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/04/17/heres-how-intel-corp-cut-its-marketing-spending-by.aspx
"During the year, Intel's research and development (R&D) spending grew by just $358 million, a slowdown from the $612 million increase that it saw there during 2016."
I get it, you think diversity programs are a waste of time because Western society is 100% perfect and we totally didn't have racists and Nazis parading this weekend, but don't blame a company going into the toilet on them spending $60m a year on a program when their income for that same year was almost 70 Billion with a B. That's like saying you weren't able to make your $1000 rent this month because you spent a buck on coffee.