Or because they had plenty patents of their own and cross-licensed for peanuts. Or just got a good deal. Many patent trolls will give out the first licenses for next to nothing, then try to shake down the rest claiming the rest of the industry has licensed it. We'll see when it comes to court how real their claims are.
I guess it depends what you're doing too. Compared to all the time you're working on code, design, architecture, documentation, meetings and using cached compiled code, how often do you really make a full recompile and how long do you wait? Are you instead thinking ahead or are those minutes the usual slack people have to get a cup of coffee or something? I mean if you are working for a software giant on a huge project that takes forever to compile, I doubt you'd be stuck with 4GB of RAM. You just have to have a reasonable business case that getting a fast machine would save you X minutes a day.
Back in the day, you could recompile Linux in 4MB on a 386 in a few hours. (...) do all those parts really have to be compiled at the same time?
No, if you're willing to wait 5 hours for a single-threaded compile (like you say, Android is way more than just Linux) then you can with far less memory. But if you're paying anything like a western salary then 16GB RAM and 25 minute (hint: much shorter than "a few hours") compile time is recommended.
How about existing friends and family? A 5 hour drive is roughly the limit where you can go home a weekend for $MAJOR_EVENT. I've lived one year abroad where I went home exactly once for Christmas, it's a choice but I fully understand those that wouldn't. Both travel time and cost tends to get rather prohibitive unless both ends are right at a major airport.
Surely most people prefer to listen to the opposite sex, provided they do not suffer from sexual identity disorder or a similar crippling condition...
I'm guessing it's the same phenomenon as with magazines. The manly magazines are full of highly attractive women. The womanly magazines are also full of highly attractive women. Men like talking to a woman. Women like talking to another woman. It probably goes all the way back to our cavemen days where women were chatting at camp or out gathering, while the men were more rivals and out hunting pray, which obviously leads to less talking. So most everyone feels better talking to a woman, except when taking directions on where to drive. Which some say can also be traced back to our cavemen days...
And anytime I do try and generate interest in actual programming, it is hard to get past the "How do you program games?" point. Let's work past printf and scanf first, junior.
No, let's not. If you can create even a simple "whack-a-mole" game flipping an image, mouse click to whack and a high score you've given that kid 100x the interest rather than printf and scanf. Are you trying to scare them away or just really that stuck in the 1980s?
If that is a fact then the "right to bear arms" doesn't apply to modern weapons either.
Well if the US ever tried to actually summon the militia they have banned some of the most common assault rifles soldiers would have. Even in small arms fire they'd be seriously outgunned by a modern infantry. But then I don't think anyone seriously considers using them as a military unit anymore.
First, your example is about national politics, while collaborative governance is intended to start at the very small level and scale up as people get used to it and as the software and systems mature.
Considering I've seen excessive consensus-seeking fail in groups as small as ten, I have no idea how it could even work in a local council.
Second, if people can't find a consensus, then they shouldn't have a law. Period. Are you saying it is better to force rule onto people? That's called authoritarianism and/or tyranny.
So if everybody but the idiot who wants to play loud music at 3AM, then there shouldn't be a law because there's no consensus? Draw the line somewhere at 50, 75, 90 or 99% but yes, almost every law has to be forced upon some minority. And I don't mean just libertarian lack of laws, but NAMBLA blocking laws against child sex. What you call tyranny is what most others call civilized society and the rule of law. Total lack of forced rule is either anarchy or a fairy tale.
Third, consensus is much more possible when you take away the politicians and use a system which drives synthesis instead of conflict. See this earlier post, where this is discussed in more detail.
The formal representatives would go away, but you can bet the politics won't.
Fourth, you can't expect a Christian, Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist to "reach religious consensus" but you can get them to reach governance consensus by finding common ground. I'll bet you could get all four of them to agree that cold-blooded murder shouldn't be legal, for example.
There's probably some gun-toting Texan who feels vigilante justice would work just fine. But that consensus works when everybody agrees is obvious, it doesn't mean you can find consensus when they don't.
Somehow I suspect this has a lot of unpredictable side effects, like one person supertanking by turning it way down so everyone else can score XP. Unless it affects party drop rates, but then everyone would hate you. Not saying it couldn't be done, but it would be a lot more complicated than adding a slider...
That's certainly a concern for the rich but the working normally exceed the non-working. Just checking the numbers here for Norway about 2.5 of 3.7 million eligible voters (18+) are working. And all of those that work are rather interested in keeping their own income. If on the other hand there was 1.5 of 3.7 million people working, yes I'd worry more. Though there's also the public sector, who can also tend to vote for an even bigger public sector. But it's not really quite as flawed as he claims.
2. Collaborative governance, where actual decision-making is directly and solely controlled by a collaborative consensus process. (...) Because it is consensus-based, it avoids the pitfalls of mob rule.
You can talk and talk, but if people fundamentally disagree there's never going to be consensus. It's like putting a Christian, Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist in the same room and tell them to reach religious consensus. Beyond a certain point it just becomes pointless and futile, a war of attrition whose only purpose is to see who'll abandon their position first to at least get some decision made. Either then you have to push what 60% want, or you're going to let the 40% block it. In many decisions like deciding on a national budget "not reaching consensus" isn't even an option. You will have to decide on some budget, even if 51% approve and 49% are vehemently against. It's a good ideal to try making everybody happy and not just say fuck you the moment you have a majority but in practice I think you will find that many will not budge. And if you just say we've tried through our process and do it anyway, you've just wrapped the iron fist of mob rule in a velvet glove.
You jumped from 1TB to 9GB, but forgot the biggest one in between. The IBM DeskStar aka DeathStar was a huge scandal and probably lead to them selling off the division.
Supposedly the fixed one BSOD bug a few days ago. That wouldn't be with this controller anyway, but their record isn't spotless. Then again, Intel managed a SSD blemish too so... you're seeing an industry moving at breakneck speed, just make sure yours isn't on the line.
You'd be surprised how many people are keen on this idea. A friend of mine, very smart guy is strongly for this and I can see his reasons. He's very frustrated with all the people and companies that cheat on their taxes, I know with myself several fast food stops that have permanently broken payment terminals - cash only please. Also benefit fraud through working off the record and getting paid in cash and various other ways.
I must admit that about 95% of my payments go through my online bank, but no money would seriously mean no money. I can't just hand a friend gas money, it must be recorded in the bank. You can't give kids money for ice cream without making an electronic transfer to their card - for their allowance of course, remember there's absolutely no cash. Pray that you never get in the situation where you legitimately paid someone who also sold drugs on the side, you're now a suspected customer.
But I only don't feel that one is half as insulting as the fact that as of next year everyone here in Norway has been radio tagged, thanks to EUs Data Storage Directive and a spineless parliament. And unlike a cashless system where people would find other things of value to trade, there's not many other alternatives to turning off your cell phone. In fact I suspect the first country to ban cash would quickly adopt either the euro or dollar as a shadow currency.
1. There's many places a person can't go, manned missions are limited to LEO, Moon and possibly Mars. I do assume we want to explore the rest of the solar system?
2. Even if we send manned missions, we will probably want lots of robotics to make it work well. So it's not robotics or humans, it's more should we have humans at all.
3. What about missions vs telescopes? Pardon me for saying so, but right now the solar system isn't where the most exciting news are happening. Apart from absurdly outliving all lifetime expectations, I haven't heard of any revolutionary news from the rovers.
Apart from exoplanets, I'd be most interested in a dry-run dome construction on Mars with pressure, temperature, oxygen, radiation controls and so on. Build astronaut replacements that burn oxygen and otherwise mimics an actual astronaut living there. In other words, a complete on-site simulation through robotics. If all goes well, then send humans.
They found that a bullet fired straight up isn't dangerous to people on the ground. Its just like dropping a bullet from a hot air balloon.
Yes, but only because their terminal velocity speeds were ridiculously wrong based on a flawed experiment in a wind tunnel. They tried blowing air at a bullet until it stopped falling and assumed 150 fps of wind resistance works the same on a bullet travelling 0 fps and one travelling 150 fps. In reality the bullet is extremely aerodynamically stable at 150 fps and will continue to accelerate until it reaches a terminal velocity of 3-500 fps, depending on the type of bullet. Around 200 fps is the border for penetrating the skull, so all their experiments and conclusions after that came to the wrong conclusion.
Well, trolling with a good dose of truth because when Vista was awful and Ubuntu was good so like 2007-2008, one of the explanations why YotLD didn't come was that people were too stuck on XP. Even Vista couldn't compete against its previous incarnation. Then there comes a new Windows that's actually good and it shows, hey people will move. (Written on a Win7 machine after 3.5 years on Kubuntu, FWIW)
Why can't we have politicians who can think rationally?
They rationally play on people's irrational fears. Don't assume all politicians are drooling idiots, being a successful politician and a successful manipulator share many of the same traits.
And the homebrew NAS also costs more in time to setup, has no support, and uses probably anywhere from a few dozen to a few hundred watts more power
If you manage to build a storage server that pulls a few hundred more watts of power, you must be doing something very wrong. Even a gaming system with a 2600k and a HD6870 draws 75 watts at idle from the wall socket, and that's roughly the worst possible setup for a storage server you can get.
If you just want 10TB of storage capacity to go with your laptop, setting up a Linux box and sharing it out is dead easy. If you want a full server then the NAS boxes don't deliver that. But I agree, there's a pretty good market in between for a somewhat complicated setup that is already set up and tested. Compared to the cost of an equivalent box though they're pretty expensive, particularly if you want more than 4 bays. A full size tower with a good motherboard and PSU will give you far more bays for less.
You don't get it, if you are male and I tell you "Stop being such a fucking cunt" then it's an insult to you that you're acting like a woman and an implied insult that women are cunts. Those meanings aren't separate, they're the basis of the whole insult. Here's a derogatory term for a whole group and you're just as bad as them. Any way you use it amounts to "You're as bad as being a black person and being a black person is very bad." Naturally black people would object to that even if they're not the direct target of the statement.
but if there's _any_ group of persons who should expect less privacy than the rest, it should be the cops and court system officials.
I don't think there should be any expectation of privacy for an officer on duty, anything you do wearing the uniform should be up for scrutiny. But that is their day job, when they take off the uniform and go home I think they should have the same protections as everyone else. In fact, it's very few other occupations that so often lead to harassment, vandalization or outright threats against yourself or our family. By enforcing the law you're attracting the anger of people that have very little problem breaking the law.
I'm not talking primarily about the big stuff, like when the mafia or drug lords go to more or less outright war against the police, judges and juries. But more like "There's lives the asshole who caught me shoplifting, let's egg his car and stab the tires" kind of thing. I suppose in a small town everybody would know anyway, but in the city it wouldn't normally be that easy. Exposing their private lives is far more likely to give people the means for intimidation to prevent them doing their jobs or leave the force than to keep them honest.
I mean if you were doing any serious coverup for somebody, would you have them listed as your friend on a social networking site? It'd be a pretty blatant conflict of interest, if anything you'd try to it indirectly so your name doesn't come up. And your home address, yeah uh huh so check that you're not covering for your neighbors right? Oh please, that's got almost zero legitimate uses and plenty bad ones. It's far more likely to be used in a "we know where you live and everybody you care about" kind of way.
Not to mention the Soviet Union was extremely aware of, which is why almost two million died at Stalingrad - most of them Russians. That was the gateway to their oil riches to the south and had to hold at all costs. From the WP page:
The Soviets first defended Stalingrad against a fierce German onslaught. So great were Soviet losses that at times, the life expectancy of a newly arrived soldier was less than a day, and the life expectancy of a Soviet officer was three days.
Lambs to the slaughter... but it was defense at all costs. In war, and at least if you're the Soviets, men were plentiful and oil scarce. They were willing to sacrifice plenty of the first to secure the second.
If they ever decide to stop releasing the source, self entitled trolls like you still have no right to complain: They've released more OS source code than Apple and Microsoft combined ever will.
Of course Microsoft or Apple never pretended their OS was open source either. And if Google wants to come right out and say we're moving to a closed source platform too, that's their right. But the whole "we might drop some source sometimes for some versions at some time" is neither here nor there. "Buy Android, it's open source" (2.x) "Forget Android and get an iPhone/iPad, same closed source shit" (3.x) "Oooh, it's open source again" (4.x) "Damn, they didn't release source again" (5.x).
I mean Google has pretty much set the precedent that they don't mind shipping products with no code. What's to say they won't do that again? Assuming the 4.0 code is coming out as promised, and I'm not holding my breath for that. Last time I heard them promise that it was for 3.1...
Slashdot Mirror
Or because they had plenty patents of their own and cross-licensed for peanuts. Or just got a good deal. Many patent trolls will give out the first licenses for next to nothing, then try to shake down the rest claiming the rest of the industry has licensed it. We'll see when it comes to court how real their claims are.
I guess it depends what you're doing too. Compared to all the time you're working on code, design, architecture, documentation, meetings and using cached compiled code, how often do you really make a full recompile and how long do you wait? Are you instead thinking ahead or are those minutes the usual slack people have to get a cup of coffee or something? I mean if you are working for a software giant on a huge project that takes forever to compile, I doubt you'd be stuck with 4GB of RAM. You just have to have a reasonable business case that getting a fast machine would save you X minutes a day.
Back in the day, you could recompile Linux in 4MB on a 386 in a few hours. (...) do all those parts really have to be compiled at the same time?
No, if you're willing to wait 5 hours for a single-threaded compile (like you say, Android is way more than just Linux) then you can with far less memory. But if you're paying anything like a western salary then 16GB RAM and 25 minute (hint: much shorter than "a few hours") compile time is recommended.
How about existing friends and family? A 5 hour drive is roughly the limit where you can go home a weekend for $MAJOR_EVENT. I've lived one year abroad where I went home exactly once for Christmas, it's a choice but I fully understand those that wouldn't. Both travel time and cost tends to get rather prohibitive unless both ends are right at a major airport.
Surely most people prefer to listen to the opposite sex, provided they do not suffer from sexual identity disorder or a similar crippling condition ...
I'm guessing it's the same phenomenon as with magazines. The manly magazines are full of highly attractive women. The womanly magazines are also full of highly attractive women. Men like talking to a woman. Women like talking to another woman. It probably goes all the way back to our cavemen days where women were chatting at camp or out gathering, while the men were more rivals and out hunting pray, which obviously leads to less talking. So most everyone feels better talking to a woman, except when taking directions on where to drive. Which some say can also be traced back to our cavemen days...
I'm not going to 'twitter' a client or colleague asking them for an update on the latest price margin research.
But if they call it "Office Communicator" people will...
And anytime I do try and generate interest in actual programming, it is hard to get past the "How do you program games?" point. Let's work past printf and scanf first, junior.
No, let's not. If you can create even a simple "whack-a-mole" game flipping an image, mouse click to whack and a high score you've given that kid 100x the interest rather than printf and scanf. Are you trying to scare them away or just really that stuck in the 1980s?
If that is a fact then the "right to bear arms" doesn't apply to modern weapons either.
Well if the US ever tried to actually summon the militia they have banned some of the most common assault rifles soldiers would have. Even in small arms fire they'd be seriously outgunned by a modern infantry. But then I don't think anyone seriously considers using them as a military unit anymore.
First, your example is about national politics, while collaborative governance is intended to start at the very small level and scale up as people get used to it and as the software and systems mature.
Considering I've seen excessive consensus-seeking fail in groups as small as ten, I have no idea how it could even work in a local council.
Second, if people can't find a consensus, then they shouldn't have a law. Period. Are you saying it is better to force rule onto people? That's called authoritarianism and/or tyranny.
So if everybody but the idiot who wants to play loud music at 3AM, then there shouldn't be a law because there's no consensus? Draw the line somewhere at 50, 75, 90 or 99% but yes, almost every law has to be forced upon some minority. And I don't mean just libertarian lack of laws, but NAMBLA blocking laws against child sex. What you call tyranny is what most others call civilized society and the rule of law. Total lack of forced rule is either anarchy or a fairy tale.
Third, consensus is much more possible when you take away the politicians and use a system which drives synthesis instead of conflict. See this earlier post, where this is discussed in more detail.
The formal representatives would go away, but you can bet the politics won't.
Fourth, you can't expect a Christian, Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist to "reach religious consensus" but you can get them to reach governance consensus by finding common ground. I'll bet you could get all four of them to agree that cold-blooded murder shouldn't be legal, for example.
There's probably some gun-toting Texan who feels vigilante justice would work just fine. But that consensus works when everybody agrees is obvious, it doesn't mean you can find consensus when they don't.
Somehow I suspect this has a lot of unpredictable side effects, like one person supertanking by turning it way down so everyone else can score XP. Unless it affects party drop rates, but then everyone would hate you. Not saying it couldn't be done, but it would be a lot more complicated than adding a slider...
That's certainly a concern for the rich but the working normally exceed the non-working. Just checking the numbers here for Norway about 2.5 of 3.7 million eligible voters (18+) are working. And all of those that work are rather interested in keeping their own income. If on the other hand there was 1.5 of 3.7 million people working, yes I'd worry more. Though there's also the public sector, who can also tend to vote for an even bigger public sector. But it's not really quite as flawed as he claims.
2. Collaborative governance, where actual decision-making is directly and solely controlled by a collaborative consensus process. (...) Because it is consensus-based, it avoids the pitfalls of mob rule.
You can talk and talk, but if people fundamentally disagree there's never going to be consensus. It's like putting a Christian, Muslim, Hindu and Buddhist in the same room and tell them to reach religious consensus. Beyond a certain point it just becomes pointless and futile, a war of attrition whose only purpose is to see who'll abandon their position first to at least get some decision made. Either then you have to push what 60% want, or you're going to let the 40% block it. In many decisions like deciding on a national budget "not reaching consensus" isn't even an option. You will have to decide on some budget, even if 51% approve and 49% are vehemently against. It's a good ideal to try making everybody happy and not just say fuck you the moment you have a majority but in practice I think you will find that many will not budge. And if you just say we've tried through our process and do it anyway, you've just wrapped the iron fist of mob rule in a velvet glove.
You jumped from 1TB to 9GB, but forgot the biggest one in between. The IBM DeskStar aka DeathStar was a huge scandal and probably lead to them selling off the division.
Supposedly the fixed one BSOD bug a few days ago. That wouldn't be with this controller anyway, but their record isn't spotless. Then again, Intel managed a SSD blemish too so... you're seeing an industry moving at breakneck speed, just make sure yours isn't on the line.
Is it a bad sign when I want to nitpick and say you could just use "User.LonlinessScore++;"?
You'd be surprised how many people are keen on this idea. A friend of mine, very smart guy is strongly for this and I can see his reasons. He's very frustrated with all the people and companies that cheat on their taxes, I know with myself several fast food stops that have permanently broken payment terminals - cash only please. Also benefit fraud through working off the record and getting paid in cash and various other ways.
I must admit that about 95% of my payments go through my online bank, but no money would seriously mean no money. I can't just hand a friend gas money, it must be recorded in the bank. You can't give kids money for ice cream without making an electronic transfer to their card - for their allowance of course, remember there's absolutely no cash. Pray that you never get in the situation where you legitimately paid someone who also sold drugs on the side, you're now a suspected customer.
But I only don't feel that one is half as insulting as the fact that as of next year everyone here in Norway has been radio tagged, thanks to EUs Data Storage Directive and a spineless parliament. And unlike a cashless system where people would find other things of value to trade, there's not many other alternatives to turning off your cell phone. In fact I suspect the first country to ban cash would quickly adopt either the euro or dollar as a shadow currency.
1. There's many places a person can't go, manned missions are limited to LEO, Moon and possibly Mars. I do assume we want to explore the rest of the solar system?
2. Even if we send manned missions, we will probably want lots of robotics to make it work well. So it's not robotics or humans, it's more should we have humans at all.
3. What about missions vs telescopes? Pardon me for saying so, but right now the solar system isn't where the most exciting news are happening. Apart from absurdly outliving all lifetime expectations, I haven't heard of any revolutionary news from the rovers.
Apart from exoplanets, I'd be most interested in a dry-run dome construction on Mars with pressure, temperature, oxygen, radiation controls and so on. Build astronaut replacements that burn oxygen and otherwise mimics an actual astronaut living there. In other words, a complete on-site simulation through robotics. If all goes well, then send humans.
They found that a bullet fired straight up isn't dangerous to people on the ground. Its just like dropping a bullet from a hot air balloon.
Yes, but only because their terminal velocity speeds were ridiculously wrong based on a flawed experiment in a wind tunnel. They tried blowing air at a bullet until it stopped falling and assumed 150 fps of wind resistance works the same on a bullet travelling 0 fps and one travelling 150 fps. In reality the bullet is extremely aerodynamically stable at 150 fps and will continue to accelerate until it reaches a terminal velocity of 3-500 fps, depending on the type of bullet. Around 200 fps is the border for penetrating the skull, so all their experiments and conclusions after that came to the wrong conclusion.
Well, trolling with a good dose of truth because when Vista was awful and Ubuntu was good so like 2007-2008, one of the explanations why YotLD didn't come was that people were too stuck on XP. Even Vista couldn't compete against its previous incarnation. Then there comes a new Windows that's actually good and it shows, hey people will move. (Written on a Win7 machine after 3.5 years on Kubuntu, FWIW)
Why can't we have politicians who can think rationally?
They rationally play on people's irrational fears. Don't assume all politicians are drooling idiots, being a successful politician and a successful manipulator share many of the same traits.
And the homebrew NAS also costs more in time to setup, has no support, and uses probably anywhere from a few dozen to a few hundred watts more power
If you manage to build a storage server that pulls a few hundred more watts of power, you must be doing something very wrong. Even a gaming system with a 2600k and a HD6870 draws 75 watts at idle from the wall socket, and that's roughly the worst possible setup for a storage server you can get.
If you just want 10TB of storage capacity to go with your laptop, setting up a Linux box and sharing it out is dead easy. If you want a full server then the NAS boxes don't deliver that. But I agree, there's a pretty good market in between for a somewhat complicated setup that is already set up and tested. Compared to the cost of an equivalent box though they're pretty expensive, particularly if you want more than 4 bays. A full size tower with a good motherboard and PSU will give you far more bays for less.
You don't get it, if you are male and I tell you "Stop being such a fucking cunt" then it's an insult to you that you're acting like a woman and an implied insult that women are cunts. Those meanings aren't separate, they're the basis of the whole insult. Here's a derogatory term for a whole group and you're just as bad as them. Any way you use it amounts to "You're as bad as being a black person and being a black person is very bad." Naturally black people would object to that even if they're not the direct target of the statement.
but if there's _any_ group of persons who should expect less privacy than the rest, it should be the cops and court system officials.
I don't think there should be any expectation of privacy for an officer on duty, anything you do wearing the uniform should be up for scrutiny. But that is their day job, when they take off the uniform and go home I think they should have the same protections as everyone else. In fact, it's very few other occupations that so often lead to harassment, vandalization or outright threats against yourself or our family. By enforcing the law you're attracting the anger of people that have very little problem breaking the law.
I'm not talking primarily about the big stuff, like when the mafia or drug lords go to more or less outright war against the police, judges and juries. But more like "There's lives the asshole who caught me shoplifting, let's egg his car and stab the tires" kind of thing. I suppose in a small town everybody would know anyway, but in the city it wouldn't normally be that easy. Exposing their private lives is far more likely to give people the means for intimidation to prevent them doing their jobs or leave the force than to keep them honest.
I mean if you were doing any serious coverup for somebody, would you have them listed as your friend on a social networking site? It'd be a pretty blatant conflict of interest, if anything you'd try to it indirectly so your name doesn't come up. And your home address, yeah uh huh so check that you're not covering for your neighbors right? Oh please, that's got almost zero legitimate uses and plenty bad ones. It's far more likely to be used in a "we know where you live and everybody you care about" kind of way.
Not to mention the Soviet Union was extremely aware of, which is why almost two million died at Stalingrad - most of them Russians. That was the gateway to their oil riches to the south and had to hold at all costs. From the WP page:
The Soviets first defended Stalingrad against a fierce German onslaught. So great were Soviet losses that at times, the life expectancy of a newly arrived soldier was less than a day, and the life expectancy of a Soviet officer was three days.
Lambs to the slaughter... but it was defense at all costs. In war, and at least if you're the Soviets, men were plentiful and oil scarce. They were willing to sacrifice plenty of the first to secure the second.
If they ever decide to stop releasing the source, self entitled trolls like you still have no right to complain: They've released more OS source code than Apple and Microsoft combined ever will.
Of course Microsoft or Apple never pretended their OS was open source either. And if Google wants to come right out and say we're moving to a closed source platform too, that's their right. But the whole "we might drop some source sometimes for some versions at some time" is neither here nor there. "Buy Android, it's open source" (2.x) "Forget Android and get an iPhone/iPad, same closed source shit" (3.x) "Oooh, it's open source again" (4.x) "Damn, they didn't release source again" (5.x).
I mean Google has pretty much set the precedent that they don't mind shipping products with no code. What's to say they won't do that again? Assuming the 4.0 code is coming out as promised, and I'm not holding my breath for that. Last time I heard them promise that it was for 3.1...