No. The problem is how few people get involved in the grass roots.
Nope, blaming human nature is not the answer to any problem. The problem here is a system that relies on a phenomenal effort from the grass roots (getting people to change their behaviour) all the while stacking the odds against it ever achieving something (2 party FPTP voting system). It won't change without changing the underlying system, but America would freak out if someone even proposed that (or more likely, people of one colour would freak out if it happens to be proposed by people of another colour). Your election process shows this very well. When people feel like they've been let down they won't even bother with your grass roots campaign, but rather just give up on the process altogether (as shown by voter turnout figures, or in countries where voting is mandatory buy the number of dummy votes cast).
And those two different colored turds are *very* different. Difference between toxic waste and fertilizer.
Ahhh a partisan person. Hate to break it to you but the state of the nation isn't due to the colour, but rather the fact that it offers only 2 highly opposed flavours of a very diverse set of governing methods. Governance by endless reversal never works out in the favour of the country much less its people.
And the end result? A government determined by rich and powerful players where clout and political capital alone determines who runs for the highest office and the resulting choice often coming down to two different coloured turds.
Cool you found a case. Hurray for you. I'm sure you can find us research on climate change not being real, and that cigarettes are good for you. You may even find a few cases of research that shows autism is caused by vaccines and that some scientists have been oh so naughty. Finding odd cases does not point to any systematic issue within the field. It's is very much the process equivalent of anecdotes != data.
On behalf of scientists everywhere: That's not how science works.
You don't want to be insulted? Don't approach the topic like a complete moron.
e) Participate in the local elections and platform conventions where "red" and "blue" get defined.
In a two-party system (driven by one-person-one-vote), you pick one party and then shape it to look like what you want it to look like. Spinning up a third party is too much effort. Taking over a party has been done many times in American history.
Ahhh good citizen, keep pretending like you can affect the outcome.
Scanning a 35mm negative and getting all of the info off of it, including grain, takes a 50MP scan.
That is highly dependent on the film. For most consumer film, digital surpassed film in quality MANY years ago, but there were some really fantastic films out there, often not very sensitive to boot, which leads me to the point: What capabilities are we talking about.
About the only thing film still has over digital is the smooth rolloff in the high end rather than hard clipping, but these days there's so much dynamic range available in digital sensors that underexposing isn't the noisy mess it used to be.
I'm sure they were. Photography generally isn't known for such elitist crap, so it would have been priceless given that their digital cameras can do everything exactly like film.
Now you could have accepted the digital crew but told them they needed image review turned off. But you wouldn't have thought of that because your reasons have nothing to do with photography.
Wait a minute there. Are you talking about OS support or wanting the latest shiny? The two are very different in Android where just because you don't have Oreo doesn't mean you don't have a system completely up to date with the latest security patches.
Also why are you so fascinated about having the latest OS? They stopped adding any meaningful features ages ago, and it's basically down to cosmetic releases these days.
Bullshit, my partner's S8+ has been getting updates monthly since she bought it shortly after release. Maybe yours is being blocked by your carrier for some reason. As for the Oreo thing, completely irrelevant. Security updates have nothing to do with OS version, and security updates are back-ported by Google all the way to JellyBean (and until recently, KitKat).
What are you talking about, Samsung security updates rarely trail more than a month from the Android security release. Samsung take forever to roll out OS upgrades, but that is completely irrelevant to this discussion.
...requiring all packaging and marketing materials to state "This device will not receive security updates after [date]"
Samsung already does this on their website. http://www.samsung.com/nl/smar... Look under the title "Software support". The S9 will receive updates until March 2020.
Now that said this is just the general service period for the device. That's not to say that if a security issue arises that is serious they won't issue an update for older devices as well. My Galaxy S5 got the July 2017 update because it was serious enough, that was 3.25 years after release, and well over a year after the official service period ended.
This is also why this got thrown out of court. You can't sue someone for something that hasn't happened yet. If a widely exploited security vulnerability starts affecting handsets, expect either a) Samsung to issue an update regardless of formal support, or b) this court case to be brought again and this time the finding will be in the other direction.
Nope, You're assuming why it gained market share / popularity. And you'd be wrong. The reason it gained market share was aggressive adherence to standards, providing very good functionality and impressive speed (all the while actually being a very heavy browser from the onset), combined with aggressive advertising across the entire Google platform, combined with woeful mismanagement by both its main competitors. It was never very good on resources, and has been pumping in more and more features even back in the days where it was still aggressively gaining market share. They were the only ones who had a javascript engine worth a damn at a time when more and more things moved to javascript.
In other news benchmarkings show that Windows 10 runs programs and manages memory faster than Windows 7 or XP, so I take it that means by your standards its free from bloat and lockin?
My opinion is many of these side features not directly related to browsing or niche preferences should be add-ons
That would be my opinion for anything that isn't listed as part of the internet standards. E.g. That pocket garbage in Firefox. On the other hand I expect and wish for a day where we can get to any website with a vanilla browser without having to install yet another shitty extension from some crappy untrustworthy source. Or when you actually need to visit a website for something do you want to put a bullet in the barrel and give it a spin: https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...
Ooooh you're British! Explains it all. Right, I didn't realise your idea of a house was those tiny little terraced mini things that are about as small as an inner city apartment. I actually find it strange even outside of London where you have space a plenty you tend to build "houses" the size of normal apartments.
The top one is 76 sqm and not all rooms are listed. Well over 800sqft, and not all the rooms have sizes listed. For the record my shitty apartment in the Netherlands is 90sqm and a 1 bedroom + study (you can't really fit a bed in the other "bedroom".
If you obsess over lack of living space like the rest of the UK then yes we are speaking two different languages here. This is what I was talking about when I said houses, and since we're on Slashdot I assumed you were American. https://www.realestate.com.au/... First 3-bedroom I found in an Australian city. Sizes aren't listed but that combined living, dining space looks like it is about 600sqft. https://www.realestate.com.au/... Here's something that looks a bit small it's only 150sqm (1600sqft) But check out how spacious it is.
Both of them were just on the front page when I selected 3 bedroom and picked a random city.
I honestly don't know how you guys live in places so small. We are 2 people and we're thinking of moving into something larger, and we already have 30% on top of the places you listed.
What kind of a stupid proxy is "Not reading terms and conditions" to "not caring about privacy"? How does reading 1000 words of legal junk help? It's not like there's a lot of active choice in the market for not having your data sucked up by some firm for reasons hither to unprofitable. You can barely buy a fridge without the TOS signing off your first born to some foreign Korean CEO.
If anything people concerned about the privacy are the ones who don't read TOS because they know what's in them and they know doing so is a waste of time.
Ironically this is the same consumer attack as in the summary. Reading terms and conditions doesn't help your privacy, not when every company out there sucks up all your data without even a clue on what they will do with it yet.
Likewise what are you going to do next election? Select 1: a) Vote Red b) Vote Blue c) Not Vote d) Go through the motions of voting only to realise that in your system if you didn't pick a or b your vote will ultimately be treated like c.
Which one of those will help not elect the same sumbitches?
Yeah, it's almost like my life is finite and reading legalese isn't what I want to do with it.
I got a better argument: It's not like reading the legalese will change anything. You can see that clearly, when a company actually promises not to fuck you over in the terms and conditions it actually makes the news, so what's the point of reading the terms if you already know what's in them and have no power to optionally accept some of them?
but it's not really worth my time or trouble to bother ACTUALLY doing something about
And what can a person do about it? Every site hoovers up your data. You can't buy a TV or a fridge without the Terms and Conditions giving the company the right to name your first born.
A consumer by themselves can do nothing. Not reading the terms and conditions are also a stupid indication of an action vs a concern. I will wager there are proper tinfoil hat types here who only use RMS approved computers and raged when Firefox optionally gave the ability to recommend tiles,... who don't read the terms and conditions on everything they buy.
Sorry I missread. I was talking in cubic and you replied in square which threw me off. But my point stands even despite the error because I actually applied the error twice.
600sq ft is 55 square meters. That is a tiny arse apartment by European standards, often single bedroom, combined kitchen / living room without any deck.
I don't for a single moment believe your house is that small. I don't actually believe they make houses that small. I own a house in Australia which has a far more American culture of living. It's a modest sized house. 2 bedroom + bathroom + onsuite in one bedroom house with a combined kitchen / living area. That's 250sqm or 2700 sq ft. Single floor.
Know what is 600sqft? My hotel room right now. Note: Room, not executive suite, just room.
I test my software for longer than a week before releasing it, and it's not even safety critical.
And when you change a value in otherwise working and completely standardised software do you proceed to waste more than a week testing it as well?
I actually design safety systems for a living (not on cars though), the amount of testing is highly dependent on the scope of the change. Also this is ABS. I guarantee the code is shared across every Telsa vehicle produced in the past few years reducing the testing scope down to a tuning issue. We don't start with a big bang and billions of years of evolution every time we need to improve performance of something.
I'm more concerned that a) they released the car with crap brakes
Define crap brakes? Tesla was tested at 52m (152ft). It's worst in class for new model cars but certainly far from worst of new model cars on the road, and still pretty damn good given the number of older clunkers on the road. There was about a 11% improvement after the software update which put it in the middle of it's class for new cars.
But that isn't as sensationalistic.
b) an over-the-air software update developed in about a week can apparently affect the operation of a critical safety system.
What is your concern, that software affects the braking distance? That the update can be delivered over the air? Or that it was developed in a week? To address each in order:
1) That's been standard for the past 20 years. 2) I'll start worrying about it when we can show actual security flaws in the process. Interestingly with all the flaws that have been shown to screw up cars over the air and through interacting systems, I haven't seen any Tesla ones yet, and they should be the easiest target with their high level of standardisation and good connectivity. 3) Maybe it was a one line bug-fix and they spent 6.9 days testing it. That would put them head and shoulders above everyone else. We don't know anything about the problem or the fix.
value to a lot of people and it sure as shit isn't just marketing.
Here have a thing you know nothing about what it does, I won't tell you what it does, and you have no idea what benefit it will bring:
Sound like you want to buy it? You have it backwards. Value intrinsically is supported by a shitton of marketing otherwise customers have no idea. Everything about Apple's (and Samsung's and Google's and Microsoft's etc) products is driven by marketing. Without it you won't get the value. We often see the same comments about all new products on Slashdot: "Why do I want this?"
The same has been said about every Apple product, and every other product in general. The answer is marketing, and Apple is damn fucking good at marketing given that 90% of the value they offer can be had for less than half the price.
The best healthcare in the world doesn't help people who dedicate their lives to ensuring they will be wholly dependent on it through eating nothing but shit and only ever moving in order to get the next meal.
I like heaping on USA's healthcare system as much as the next gobsmacked international observer, but the reality is American life expectancy is despite of the healthcare, not because of it.
Slashdot Mirror
No. The problem is how few people get involved in the grass roots.
Nope, blaming human nature is not the answer to any problem. The problem here is a system that relies on a phenomenal effort from the grass roots (getting people to change their behaviour) all the while stacking the odds against it ever achieving something (2 party FPTP voting system). It won't change without changing the underlying system, but America would freak out if someone even proposed that (or more likely, people of one colour would freak out if it happens to be proposed by people of another colour). Your election process shows this very well. When people feel like they've been let down they won't even bother with your grass roots campaign, but rather just give up on the process altogether (as shown by voter turnout figures, or in countries where voting is mandatory buy the number of dummy votes cast).
And those two different colored turds are *very* different. Difference between toxic waste and fertilizer.
Ahhh a partisan person. Hate to break it to you but the state of the nation isn't due to the colour, but rather the fact that it offers only 2 highly opposed flavours of a very diverse set of governing methods. Governance by endless reversal never works out in the favour of the country much less its people.
And the end result? A government determined by rich and powerful players where clout and political capital alone determines who runs for the highest office and the resulting choice often coming down to two different coloured turds.
Cool you found a case. Hurray for you. I'm sure you can find us research on climate change not being real, and that cigarettes are good for you. You may even find a few cases of research that shows autism is caused by vaccines and that some scientists have been oh so naughty. Finding odd cases does not point to any systematic issue within the field. It's is very much the process equivalent of anecdotes != data.
On behalf of scientists everywhere: That's not how science works.
You don't want to be insulted? Don't approach the topic like a complete moron.
e) Participate in the local elections and platform conventions where "red" and "blue" get defined.
In a two-party system (driven by one-person-one-vote), you pick one party and then shape it to look like what you want it to look like. Spinning up a third party is too much effort. Taking over a party has been done many times in American history.
Ahhh good citizen, keep pretending like you can affect the outcome.
Scanning a 35mm negative and getting all of the info off of it, including grain, takes a 50MP scan.
That is highly dependent on the film. For most consumer film, digital surpassed film in quality MANY years ago, but there were some really fantastic films out there, often not very sensitive to boot, which leads me to the point: What capabilities are we talking about.
About the only thing film still has over digital is the smooth rolloff in the high end rather than hard clipping, but these days there's so much dynamic range available in digital sensors that underexposing isn't the noisy mess it used to be.
The puzzled looks were priceless.
I'm sure they were. Photography generally isn't known for such elitist crap, so it would have been priceless given that their digital cameras can do everything exactly like film.
Now you could have accepted the digital crew but told them they needed image review turned off. But you wouldn't have thought of that because your reasons have nothing to do with photography.
You give us Nikon users a bad name.
Wait a minute there. Are you talking about OS support or wanting the latest shiny? The two are very different in Android where just because you don't have Oreo doesn't mean you don't have a system completely up to date with the latest security patches.
Also why are you so fascinated about having the latest OS? They stopped adding any meaningful features ages ago, and it's basically down to cosmetic releases these days.
Replying to self: My S7 is on security update April 2018 and it has been getting them monthly since I got the phone as well.
I had an S8+ and went months between updates.
Bullshit, my partner's S8+ has been getting updates monthly since she bought it shortly after release. Maybe yours is being blocked by your carrier for some reason.
As for the Oreo thing, completely irrelevant. Security updates have nothing to do with OS version, and security updates are back-ported by Google all the way to JellyBean (and until recently, KitKat).
What are you talking about, Samsung security updates rarely trail more than a month from the Android security release. Samsung take forever to roll out OS upgrades, but that is completely irrelevant to this discussion.
...requiring all packaging and marketing materials to state "This device will not receive security updates after [date]"
Samsung already does this on their website. http://www.samsung.com/nl/smar... Look under the title "Software support". The S9 will receive updates until March 2020.
Now that said this is just the general service period for the device. That's not to say that if a security issue arises that is serious they won't issue an update for older devices as well. My Galaxy S5 got the July 2017 update because it was serious enough, that was 3.25 years after release, and well over a year after the official service period ended.
This is also why this got thrown out of court. You can't sue someone for something that hasn't happened yet. If a widely exploited security vulnerability starts affecting handsets, expect either a) Samsung to issue an update regardless of formal support, or b) this court case to be brought again and this time the finding will be in the other direction.
Apple, Microsoft and Facebook have achieved their huge "market cap" simply by issuing more shares of stock than anyone else -- billions of shares.
LOL, that's not how shares work.
I'm just saying why it gained market share.
Nope, You're assuming why it gained market share / popularity. And you'd be wrong. The reason it gained market share was aggressive adherence to standards, providing very good functionality and impressive speed (all the while actually being a very heavy browser from the onset), combined with aggressive advertising across the entire Google platform, combined with woeful mismanagement by both its main competitors. It was never very good on resources, and has been pumping in more and more features even back in the days where it was still aggressively gaining market share. They were the only ones who had a javascript engine worth a damn at a time when more and more things moved to javascript.
In other news benchmarkings show that Windows 10 runs programs and manages memory faster than Windows 7 or XP, so I take it that means by your standards its free from bloat and lockin?
My opinion is many of these side features not directly related to browsing or niche preferences should be add-ons
That would be my opinion for anything that isn't listed as part of the internet standards. E.g. That pocket garbage in Firefox. On the other hand I expect and wish for a day where we can get to any website with a vanilla browser without having to install yet another shitty extension from some crappy untrustworthy source.
Or when you actually need to visit a website for something do you want to put a bullet in the barrel and give it a spin: https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...
Ooooh you're British! Explains it all. Right, I didn't realise your idea of a house was those tiny little terraced mini things that are about as small as an inner city apartment. I actually find it strange even outside of London where you have space a plenty you tend to build "houses" the size of normal apartments.
The top one is 76 sqm and not all rooms are listed. Well over 800sqft, and not all the rooms have sizes listed. For the record my shitty apartment in the Netherlands is 90sqm and a 1 bedroom + study (you can't really fit a bed in the other "bedroom".
If you obsess over lack of living space like the rest of the UK then yes we are speaking two different languages here. This is what I was talking about when I said houses, and since we're on Slashdot I assumed you were American.
https://www.realestate.com.au/... First 3-bedroom I found in an Australian city. Sizes aren't listed but that combined living, dining space looks like it is about 600sqft.
https://www.realestate.com.au/... Here's something that looks a bit small it's only 150sqm (1600sqft) But check out how spacious it is.
To pick Americans:
Here's a 3 bedroom I found in Seattle: https://www.realestate.com/404... 2240 sqft
Here's another: https://www.realestate.com/103... 2860 sqft
Both of them were just on the front page when I selected 3 bedroom and picked a random city.
I honestly don't know how you guys live in places so small. We are 2 people and we're thinking of moving into something larger, and we already have 30% on top of the places you listed.
What kind of a stupid proxy is "Not reading terms and conditions" to "not caring about privacy"? How does reading 1000 words of legal junk help? It's not like there's a lot of active choice in the market for not having your data sucked up by some firm for reasons hither to unprofitable. You can barely buy a fridge without the TOS signing off your first born to some foreign Korean CEO.
If anything people concerned about the privacy are the ones who don't read TOS because they know what's in them and they know doing so is a waste of time.
Ironically this is the same consumer attack as in the summary. Reading terms and conditions doesn't help your privacy, not when every company out there sucks up all your data without even a clue on what they will do with it yet.
Likewise what are you going to do next election? Select 1:
a) Vote Red
b) Vote Blue
c) Not Vote
d) Go through the motions of voting only to realise that in your system if you didn't pick a or b your vote will ultimately be treated like c.
Which one of those will help not elect the same sumbitches?
Yeah, it's almost like my life is finite and reading legalese isn't what I want to do with it.
I got a better argument: It's not like reading the legalese will change anything. You can see that clearly, when a company actually promises not to fuck you over in the terms and conditions it actually makes the news, so what's the point of reading the terms if you already know what's in them and have no power to optionally accept some of them?
but it's not really worth my time or trouble to bother ACTUALLY doing something about
And what can a person do about it? Every site hoovers up your data. You can't buy a TV or a fridge without the Terms and Conditions giving the company the right to name your first born.
A consumer by themselves can do nothing. Not reading the terms and conditions are also a stupid indication of an action vs a concern. I will wager there are proper tinfoil hat types here who only use RMS approved computers and raged when Firefox optionally gave the ability to recommend tiles, ... who don't read the terms and conditions on everything they buy.
Sorry I missread. I was talking in cubic and you replied in square which threw me off. But my point stands even despite the error because I actually applied the error twice.
600sq ft is 55 square meters. That is a tiny arse apartment by European standards, often single bedroom, combined kitchen / living room without any deck.
I don't for a single moment believe your house is that small. I don't actually believe they make houses that small. I own a house in Australia which has a far more American culture of living. It's a modest sized house. 2 bedroom + bathroom + onsuite in one bedroom house with a combined kitchen / living area. That's 250sqm or 2700 sq ft. Single floor.
Know what is 600sqft? My hotel room right now. Note: Room, not executive suite, just room.
Consumer Reports Recommends Tesla's Model 3 After Braking Fix
Seems counter-productive. :-)
I started recommending Intel again once Microsoft "broke" the "fix" to Spectre. :-)
Diseases worse than cures. /Side note: Whoosh me, I friggin dare ya!
... and over-the-air update can also break it.
If you're worried about this don't buy a car ever again.
I test my software for longer than a week before releasing it, and it's not even safety critical.
And when you change a value in otherwise working and completely standardised software do you proceed to waste more than a week testing it as well?
I actually design safety systems for a living (not on cars though), the amount of testing is highly dependent on the scope of the change. Also this is ABS. I guarantee the code is shared across every Telsa vehicle produced in the past few years reducing the testing scope down to a tuning issue. We don't start with a big bang and billions of years of evolution every time we need to improve performance of something.
I'm more concerned that a) they released the car with crap brakes
Define crap brakes? Tesla was tested at 52m (152ft). It's worst in class for new model cars but certainly far from worst of new model cars on the road, and still pretty damn good given the number of older clunkers on the road. There was about a 11% improvement after the software update which put it in the middle of it's class for new cars.
But that isn't as sensationalistic.
b) an over-the-air software update developed in about a week can apparently affect the operation of a critical safety system.
What is your concern, that software affects the braking distance? That the update can be delivered over the air? Or that it was developed in a week? To address each in order:
1) That's been standard for the past 20 years.
2) I'll start worrying about it when we can show actual security flaws in the process. Interestingly with all the flaws that have been shown to screw up cars over the air and through interacting systems, I haven't seen any Tesla ones yet, and they should be the easiest target with their high level of standardisation and good connectivity.
3) Maybe it was a one line bug-fix and they spent 6.9 days testing it. That would put them head and shoulders above everyone else. We don't know anything about the problem or the fix.
value to a lot of people and it sure as shit isn't just marketing.
Here have a thing you know nothing about what it does, I won't tell you what it does, and you have no idea what benefit it will bring:
Sound like you want to buy it? You have it backwards. Value intrinsically is supported by a shitton of marketing otherwise customers have no idea. Everything about Apple's (and Samsung's and Google's and Microsoft's etc) products is driven by marketing. Without it you won't get the value. We often see the same comments about all new products on Slashdot: "Why do I want this?"
The same has been said about every Apple product, and every other product in general. The answer is marketing, and Apple is damn fucking good at marketing given that 90% of the value they offer can be had for less than half the price.
for profit capitalistic health care isn't working
The best healthcare in the world doesn't help people who dedicate their lives to ensuring they will be wholly dependent on it through eating nothing but shit and only ever moving in order to get the next meal.
I like heaping on USA's healthcare system as much as the next gobsmacked international observer, but the reality is American life expectancy is despite of the healthcare, not because of it.