I'm on Verizon simply because both AT&T and SPRINT suck coverage in my city. I've never dropped a call. And for all the things that a Rooted Phone may provide, it wouldn't matter a single bit if I can't make a reliable phone call from where I need to. Dropped calls are not an option, and #1 on my priority. Everything else pales in comparison.
Give that, and when I bought my phone, I was torn between Galaxy and Droid, I chose Droid because of the Gorilla Glass, and I'm glad I did. People I know with the Samsungs their screens look like crap, and mine still looks good. What good is a phone, rooted or not, where the screen is crap?
Yes, having a phone like mine that I can update/root without VZ's permission would be great, but so would an AT&T Network that didn't suck, or being able to move from network to network without hassles, but VZ is on CDMA and sim cards don't work.
On my list of things that are a "deal breaker", Rooted phone is not on that list. Else I'd have one and be on GSM and not be able to use it half the time.
I do feel for the networks, though. They are trapped. If the TV model dies and is replaced by the model where every device has equal access to ubiquitous data, they're screwed if they don't adapt.
FTFY
The point is, that model is already being damaged by things like HULU and Netflix. It is only going to get worse for them. The networks need to figure it out, that cable/broadcast model is breaking under the stress of universal data access (Internet) They will adapt or die. If I was a board member, that would be directive to the CEO, figure it out, or we'll find someone who can.
Litigation is only a temporary solution. The writing is on the wall already.
If I was CEO of a Smartphone company, I'd release two two versions of every phone. One that was locked down with signed OS and Firmware, and one that is open. One for the average guy to keep his phone safe and secure and fully... in control. The other open and uncontrolled. Just to shut the geeks up.
I have a Droid X, a locked phone. I'm a geek. People I know with unlocked phones have significantly more problems than I do. I don't think this is a coincidence. Some People, like me, just want a phone that isn't a hassle. If you want to play with a phone, buy a Nexus (they still have them), and quit bitching about how phones are locked. As long as there is ONE phone on the market that is unlocked, you have no right to complain that the locked phone you bought is.. locked.
Okay. I'm glad you asked about TiVO. I have TWO questions about the fallout from that.
1) Has TiVO been improved by the GPL(3) changes? 2) Has the Software used by TiVO been improved by locking it out of TiVO via GPL(3)?
The answer to both these questions is.. NO. It did nothing for users or the software.All it did was soothe the wadded panties of GNU purists. This was nothing short of a little boy temper tantrum when the game didn't go his way, and took his ball home and cried to mommy.
And that little boy is going to grow up and realize that nobody wants to play with him. He'll have a ball playing with himself, while crying to mommy because he has no friends.
Having good friends die at the hands of drunk drivers, and being a Libertarian, I can assure you I do not stand "shoulder to shoulder" with drunk drivers. I can also assure you, that I don't care that there is an App that gives details to DUI check points. The biggest reason? Drunks are stupid. They may be brilliant people when sober, but when drunk they are... as dumb as a stump they just tripped over.
The only people who don't want this app out there are as stupid as the drunks they are trying to catch. If you want to catch a drunk driver, park outside a bar, watch people leave stumbling and get into their car and pull them over right there.
Which is why you should go to www.redcross.org, click the "DONATE" button in the upper right corner and fill out the required fields and donate directly to them. Or you can call them on this thing called a "phone"... 1-800 RED CROSS ( I guess that is too hard to remember), where someone helpful will answer and take your information.
Getting the money to the organization in one step and not waiting 90 days is hugely important. The money is needed NOW (and continuing).
Also, The GPL(3) exposes the hypocritical GNU for being the control freaks that THEY are.
The GPL(2) is a good license. It breed cooperation from those that contribute to it. The GPL(3) has done nothing to further cooperation, but rather instead has started chasing people who once were allies to "Free Software" back to their dens of proprietary code. And I, as an end user am harmed by it, at least indirectly. Samba doesn't get the code from Apple any longer because Apple no longer will contribute given the terms of the GPL(3). If you think that makes Samba better in the long run, good for you. I don't.
And if it ceases to be useful to a developer.... ?
The GPL(3) isn't about code, or the users, it is about commercial usage of formerly useful code. It is about appearing to be for "users" but in the end, what good is code that nobody can use, unless they do it themselves?
SAMBA is getting what they deserve, less people using their software, making it less useful for users. You see, it isn't about the users at all, is it?
That is exactly what is happening. The problem is the people who wrote GPL(3) aren't happy because really good code isn't being used because the restrictions they placed on it are onerous to companies like Apple. The GPL(3) is functioning as it was designed, restricting use of GPL(3) code. It is just not the way they thought it would pan out.
SAMBA is going to be replaced with something that works that has fewer restrictions on it. Unless they revert back to GPL(2).
So, your solution is that the user shouldn't get access to the code, unless they do it themselves. Typical geek think. The GPL(3) was invented because people didn't like how others were using GPL(2) code. We don't approve, so now we're going to take our ball and go home.
And people are surprised that nobody wants to play ball with that kid any more.
Specifically, in this case, SAMBA is losing out because it no longer is getting help from Apple, because it wants to tell Apple how it may use the product, and Apple doesn't want to be told by SAMBA team what it can and can't do with code it contributed to, and shared with the SAMBA team.
The GPL(3) is AWFUL in terms of licensing. If I were building anything useful and wanting to sell it, I sure the hell wouldn't use any GPL(3) code.
The GPL(3) is functioning just as it was designed, to limit commercial use of code. You can't complain that it is doing what it was designed to do. Does this make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
You'd probably call me right wing because I'm libertarian and can't stand all powerful government the left and most of the moderate neo-cons want. I'm not a hypocrite because I hate censorship of any kind. However, since you want to go down that road, the left has bigger issues with censorship than the right does, from Fairness Docrine attempts to all the Politically Correct Crap that is going on, to the shouting down of anyone they disagree with (as if being loud and obnoxious = being right).
The left puts up with trying to squash free speech anytime someone they disagree with gets too popular, and it is to their own shame and hypocrisy.
And if you bring up porn, I'll tell you that porn is one of the worst sins of the left, not because they support it under the guise of free speech, but they say nothing about the objectification of women as sex toys for men that is the prevalent theme of most porn. In other words, I don't object to porn because it is sex, I object to it the same way I'd object to a black person being called a nigger.
Basically, both the (R) and (D) have plenty of things they are hypocritical about, and one of the reason's I'm neither. The problem is that the left doesn't see its own hypocrisy, while crying hypocrisy on the right. Remove that Beam before you talk about the mote.
This is more of a problem with Linux than it is with... Apple. iPods are not open devices, and Linux isn't popular enough to support iTunes. I wonder if you'd complain that the Canon printer I just got doesn't work with my OS/2 machine the same way the iPod doesn't work with Linux.
I'm sure you can get iTunes to work in a VM on your Linux box, or perhaps use a version that runs well under WINE or something. After all, isn't the point of running Linux on your desktop.. geek snobbery? Hell, give your son a chance to hack it all up and get it to work, and give him a Sansa instead.
The problem with a hard limit for maximum currency in existence is that it invariably leads to deflation. Not necessarily a bad thing, but something that is entirely uncommon in today's world. Deflation has interesting properties when compared to inflation. Generally speaking in High Inflation, consumers who purchase goods and hold onto real assets(property) benefit more than those who try to "save" money. In deflation, people who produce goods (consumables) which sell end up doing very well, while consumers have the bulk of the problems. Yes, this is over simplification macro view.
In Deflation it is cheaper to fix a broken car than it is to buy a new one. In Inflation, it is better to buy a car than fix a broken one.
BitCoin is, by definition, going to be highly deflationary if it is ever successful. And if that is the case, it would be better to get in early than late, because the bitcoin you buy now, will be able to buy more later than it does now. WHICH would make gaining and holding onto BitCoin better than spending it.
Start mining now, start acquiring bitcoins now, and if/when it takes off, you'll be rich.
Don't drink and derive, the calculus gets all messed up. Don't drink and drive, you might hit a bump and spill your drink. Drunk Drivers give everyone who drinks and drives a bad name.
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot to mention the Dumbicrats. I wonder why?
Well, you see, there in lies the rub.
I'm on Verizon simply because both AT&T and SPRINT suck coverage in my city. I've never dropped a call. And for all the things that a Rooted Phone may provide, it wouldn't matter a single bit if I can't make a reliable phone call from where I need to. Dropped calls are not an option, and #1 on my priority. Everything else pales in comparison.
Give that, and when I bought my phone, I was torn between Galaxy and Droid, I chose Droid because of the Gorilla Glass, and I'm glad I did. People I know with the Samsungs their screens look like crap, and mine still looks good. What good is a phone, rooted or not, where the screen is crap?
Yes, having a phone like mine that I can update/root without VZ's permission would be great, but so would an AT&T Network that didn't suck, or being able to move from network to network without hassles, but VZ is on CDMA and sim cards don't work.
On my list of things that are a "deal breaker", Rooted phone is not on that list. Else I'd have one and be on GSM and not be able to use it half the time.
FTFY
The point is, that model is already being damaged by things like HULU and Netflix. It is only going to get worse for them. The networks need to figure it out, that cable/broadcast model is breaking under the stress of universal data access (Internet) They will adapt or die. If I was a board member, that would be directive to the CEO, figure it out, or we'll find someone who can.
Litigation is only a temporary solution. The writing is on the wall already.
If I was CEO of a Smartphone company, I'd release two two versions of every phone. One that was locked down with signed OS and Firmware, and one that is open. One for the average guy to keep his phone safe and secure and fully ... in control. The other open and uncontrolled. Just to shut the geeks up.
I have a Droid X, a locked phone. I'm a geek. People I know with unlocked phones have significantly more problems than I do. I don't think this is a coincidence. Some People, like me, just want a phone that isn't a hassle. If you want to play with a phone, buy a Nexus (they still have them), and quit bitching about how phones are locked. As long as there is ONE phone on the market that is unlocked, you have no right to complain that the locked phone you bought is .. locked.
Maybe
Yes.
Or, see my sig
Okay. I'm glad you asked about TiVO. I have TWO questions about the fallout from that.
1) Has TiVO been improved by the GPL(3) changes?
2) Has the Software used by TiVO been improved by locking it out of TiVO via GPL(3)?
The answer to both these questions is .. NO. It did nothing for users or the software.All it did was soothe the wadded panties of GNU purists. This was nothing short of a little boy temper tantrum when the game didn't go his way, and took his ball home and cried to mommy.
And that little boy is going to grow up and realize that nobody wants to play with him. He'll have a ball playing with himself, while crying to mommy because he has no friends.
Dominance is relative.
Market Cap (as of this post)
Apple 318 Bil
Microsoft 217 Bil
Who cares if you have 85% of a stagnate market and can't function outside of that market?
Having good friends die at the hands of drunk drivers, and being a Libertarian, I can assure you I do not stand "shoulder to shoulder" with drunk drivers. I can also assure you, that I don't care that there is an App that gives details to DUI check points. The biggest reason? Drunks are stupid. They may be brilliant people when sober, but when drunk they are ... as dumb as a stump they just tripped over.
The only people who don't want this app out there are as stupid as the drunks they are trying to catch. If you want to catch a drunk driver, park outside a bar, watch people leave stumbling and get into their car and pull them over right there.
FTFY
This is why you make two donations ... one for the specific disaster, and the other for the NEXT disaster (general fund).
Which is why you should go to www.redcross.org, click the "DONATE" button in the upper right corner and fill out the required fields and donate directly to them. Or you can call them on this thing called a "phone"... 1-800 RED CROSS ( I guess that is too hard to remember), where someone helpful will answer and take your information.
Getting the money to the organization in one step and not waiting 90 days is hugely important. The money is needed NOW (and continuing).
Also, The GPL(3) exposes the hypocritical GNU for being the control freaks that THEY are.
The GPL(2) is a good license. It breed cooperation from those that contribute to it. The GPL(3) has done nothing to further cooperation, but rather instead has started chasing people who once were allies to "Free Software" back to their dens of proprietary code. And I, as an end user am harmed by it, at least indirectly. Samba doesn't get the code from Apple any longer because Apple no longer will contribute given the terms of the GPL(3). If you think that makes Samba better in the long run, good for you. I don't.
And the writers of the GPL(3) hate users, just not the end user, but the user between the developer and the end user.
Limiting lock down is in itself a lock down. Do you see the irony?
And if it ceases to be useful to a developer .... ?
The GPL(3) isn't about code, or the users, it is about commercial usage of formerly useful code. It is about appearing to be for "users" but in the end, what good is code that nobody can use, unless they do it themselves?
SAMBA is getting what they deserve, less people using their software, making it less useful for users. You see, it isn't about the users at all, is it?
That is exactly what is happening. The problem is the people who wrote GPL(3) aren't happy because really good code isn't being used because the restrictions they placed on it are onerous to companies like Apple. The GPL(3) is functioning as it was designed, restricting use of GPL(3) code. It is just not the way they thought it would pan out.
SAMBA is going to be replaced with something that works that has fewer restrictions on it. Unless they revert back to GPL(2).
So, your solution is that the user shouldn't get access to the code, unless they do it themselves. Typical geek think. The GPL(3) was invented because people didn't like how others were using GPL(2) code. We don't approve, so now we're going to take our ball and go home.
And people are surprised that nobody wants to play ball with that kid any more.
Specifically, in this case, SAMBA is losing out because it no longer is getting help from Apple, because it wants to tell Apple how it may use the product, and Apple doesn't want to be told by SAMBA team what it can and can't do with code it contributed to, and shared with the SAMBA team.
The GPL(3) is AWFUL in terms of licensing. If I were building anything useful and wanting to sell it, I sure the hell wouldn't use any GPL(3) code.
The GPL(3) is functioning just as it was designed, to limit commercial use of code. You can't complain that it is doing what it was designed to do. Does this make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?
You'd probably call me right wing because I'm libertarian and can't stand all powerful government the left and most of the moderate neo-cons want. I'm not a hypocrite because I hate censorship of any kind. However, since you want to go down that road, the left has bigger issues with censorship than the right does, from Fairness Docrine attempts to all the Politically Correct Crap that is going on, to the shouting down of anyone they disagree with (as if being loud and obnoxious = being right).
The left puts up with trying to squash free speech anytime someone they disagree with gets too popular, and it is to their own shame and hypocrisy.
And if you bring up porn, I'll tell you that porn is one of the worst sins of the left, not because they support it under the guise of free speech, but they say nothing about the objectification of women as sex toys for men that is the prevalent theme of most porn. In other words, I don't object to porn because it is sex, I object to it the same way I'd object to a black person being called a nigger.
Basically, both the (R) and (D) have plenty of things they are hypocritical about, and one of the reason's I'm neither. The problem is that the left doesn't see its own hypocrisy, while crying hypocrisy on the right. Remove that Beam before you talk about the mote.
This is more of a problem with Linux than it is with ... Apple. iPods are not open devices, and Linux isn't popular enough to support iTunes. I wonder if you'd complain that the Canon printer I just got doesn't work with my OS/2 machine the same way the iPod doesn't work with Linux.
I'm sure you can get iTunes to work in a VM on your Linux box, or perhaps use a version that runs well under WINE or something. After all, isn't the point of running Linux on your desktop .. geek snobbery? Hell, give your son a chance to hack it all up and get it to work, and give him a Sansa instead.
The problem with a hard limit for maximum currency in existence is that it invariably leads to deflation. Not necessarily a bad thing, but something that is entirely uncommon in today's world. Deflation has interesting properties when compared to inflation. Generally speaking in High Inflation, consumers who purchase goods and hold onto real assets(property) benefit more than those who try to "save" money. In deflation, people who produce goods (consumables) which sell end up doing very well, while consumers have the bulk of the problems. Yes, this is over simplification macro view.
In Deflation it is cheaper to fix a broken car than it is to buy a new one. In Inflation, it is better to buy a car than fix a broken one.
BitCoin is, by definition, going to be highly deflationary if it is ever successful. And if that is the case, it would be better to get in early than late, because the bitcoin you buy now, will be able to buy more later than it does now. WHICH would make gaining and holding onto BitCoin better than spending it.
Start mining now, start acquiring bitcoins now, and if/when it takes off, you'll be rich.
Where's Waldo ...
http://182.48.18.107/file/c92dc671abc254f7a14e451d49a6fae4.jpg
A few random thoughts.
Don't drink and derive, the calculus gets all messed up.
Don't drink and drive, you might hit a bump and spill your drink.
Drunk Drivers give everyone who drinks and drives a bad name.