I think in this type of situation, it's a reasonable expectation that the recipient should return the PS Vita too. They paid £19.99 and got sent a completely different item; it isn't as if the PS Vita was priced at £19.99 in error and the company mistakenly fulfilled the order.
It's only reasonable if the company is compensating them for the expense and time of sending it back. Personally, I would only consider it if the company was at least offering to send me the correct merchandise after refunding my £19.99 in exchange for the return. I'd probably hold out for a check for £19.99 in addition to a full refund and shipment of my intended purchase item. I'd call it a "restocking fee". If I had mistakenly ordered a PS Vita and then sent it back, the company would charge me a "restocking fee" too.
If they refused to compensate me, I'd just sell the Vita, buy the correct game from someone else, and pocket the difference. I would see this as fair, because it would require additional effort to obtain the item I had paid for but not received, and I would expect to be compensated for that.
When I lose something, I offer a reward to get it back. I don't threaten the person who found it.
Sadly, I see similar situations happen all the time. Companies make a mistake with their pricing online and don't fulfil the order and the people who thought they were getting a 40" TV for £50 start talking about their "right" to buy it for that price.
That's because it's dangerously close to a bait-and-switch, which is illegal. It's only not illegal if it is genuinely a mistake. If you're advertising a 40" TV for $50 without any conditions, then customers do, in fact, have the right to buy it for that price. If it is an honest mistake, and the company does not ship the item, but simply refunds the customer's money, the customer has still been harmed. The company has wasted the customer's time.
Let's turn it around a bit: if the customers had asked to return the game they bought and accidentally sent a PS Vita to the company, would the customers be arguing that their mistake represented an "unsolicited gift"?
The company would probably send it back, not because it's their duty under the law, but because it makes good business sense. If they didn't send it back they would lose that customer forever, and they would badmouth the company to others. It could easily end up costing them more than the value of the item.
On the other hand, other than the legal threats, the customers have no incentive to send the devices back. If Zawi refuses to ever do business with them again, they'll just buy stuff from someone else.
I ask because since the Sharp Zaurus days I have wanted a phone which runs 'proper' Linux, a Linux kernel with glibc, X-windows, GTK, QT, etc... I wanted something that I could easily 'port' desktop apps over just by recompiling.
Sounds like you have wanted the N900. X11, Qt, GTK, SDL, Java, and even Mono are all available in the extras repo and easily installable through apt-get.
Sailfish uses Wayland and QT. I'm not sure if GTK is available in the Mer repos. You could probably get XWayland rocking on it.
My very limited understanding of Sailfish is that it is just a Linux kernel with webkit dropped on top of it to run HTML5 apps not unlike Google Chrome. Was I mistaken?
Yes. You were very mistaken. This is a good description of WebOS, not Sailfish.
Sailfish uses Wayland and QT. I believe Python is preinstalled. I'm not sure if GTK is available in the Mer repos. You could probably get XWayland rocking on it. Sailfish is the closest thing to 'proper' Linux available for phones right now, even closer than Ubuntu Phone.
One of the reasons I bought the n900 rather than one of the others was the wonderful resistive touchscreen. It was an excellent choice, as it was so much more precise than the capacitive screens on all the iOS and Android devices at the time. I could actually use the tiny UI elements in desktop apps running from a debian chroot.
I agree. The article and summary are badly written. However, parent was complaining there was no "hint" as to the identities of Jolla and Sailfish. He was so emphatic about the word "hint" that he used the emphasis tag. I simply pointed out that there were plenty of hints available, and that those hints should indicate whether the article might fall within his interests. He could simply ask, "Am I interested in installing an alternative OS on an Android phone?". If yes, research Jolla and Sailfish. If no, don't.
I understand that he didn't really want hints, and that he wanted explicit background information. However, parent's statements were so exaggerated that they undermined his argument by being demonstrably false.
would it kill you just to give a hint of what Jolla and Sailfish are?
They gave you several hints.
"Jolla CEO Tomi Pienimäki": Hmm. Jolla must be a corporation. That name sounds Finnish.
"If Jolla truly is compatible with Android devices...": Jolla seems to be making some sort of cell phone software.
"Is Jolla going to let individual users to install the Sailfish operating system..." Sailfish is an operating system for cell phones.
So, Jolla is a Finnish cell phone company that is producing an OS called Sailfish. It will be installable on Android devices. It seems like you would have enough information there to know if you want to know more. They've even provided all the relevant keywords: "Jolla", "Sailfish", which you can enter into a search engine to find more information
Complaining about this makes you appear stupid and lazy.
It isn't a one-click method to install the CM firmware though - just a method of making the installation via PC less painless.
Oooh! Great! Where do I download? I've been looking for ways to make installing 3rd party firmwares more painful. As it stands right now, the process is far too pleasant and enjoyable.
The n900 doesn't try to pretend it's not a computer. Maemo is a real linux distro, using X11 as its display server. Everything else is a dumbed-down toy.
If you don't see the value of this, then I guess the n900 just isn't for you. Have fun with your fart apps.
Re:Good for the young, healthy, & coordinated
on
How Safe Is Cycling?
·
· Score: 1
Road driving excludes many people. the poor who can't afford a car, insurance or fuel; people with poor vision, especially the elderly; the otherwise frail; and uncoordinated.
It seems like an idea for the young and wealthy, for the young and wealthy. Which is fine, but devoting significant public resources to it seems questionable. Should cities invest in paved roads that many residents are unable to utilize?
Can't install anything on Android nowdays. Each app wants permissions to make phone calls, take pictures with your camera (without your knowledge, not just while it is used) or read address book and current phone state. No good reason for the app to want this, but no way to install without allowing everything the app asks for.
There are several ways to install Android applications without allowing everything the app asks for. The best one is called openpdroid.
Notice how "the laws of the United States" are pursuant to (and therefore subordinate to) "the constitution". Notice how the constitution defines itself as "the supreme law of the land" by virtue of being one of the subjects of that sentence. The constitution is entirely law. Mostly it defines the structure of government under the law and the process by which government can enact additional laws. That's why we have a "Supreme Court": to rule on issues regarding "Supreme Law". That's why they are able to invalidate other laws as being "unconstitutional".
The 4th amendment absolutely is a law, and any laws contrary to it are invalid.
It's not a law? Seriously? It is the supreme law of the land. The constitution and its amendments trump all other laws in the US. If they're violating the 4th amendment, they're violating the law. Period.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
How is that even the case? TiVo makes a set top box where the flash is locked after the firmware is installed, but as per GPL2, TiVo publishes the sources - not that it's of any use to anybody since it can't be altered.
Exactly the problem GPL3 was intended to address.
But TiVo made this before selling it to the content provider: it's usually the content provider who includes this in their package. So you get the thing already with the flash locked. On a rare occasion that the content provider might want to upgrade something on the STB, they access your box, do it and then resume operations. Most people neither know nor care. Those who do probably got MythTV or something of that sort.
Public outrage against TiVo-ization predates the integration of TiVo into cable/satellite boxes. I had the original TiVo. It was marketed direct to consumers. No "content provider" involved. It was a stand-alone box. They didn't start integrating it into cable/satellite boxes until years later. It was my hardware, not their hardware. The device phoned-home (quite literally, through the integrated modem) every couple of days to check for new listings and software updates (and presumably report everything I'd watched). However, there was no reason any "content provider" should ever access my hardware.
The reason TiVo did what it did is obvious. They've written a software, that captures the video inputs that they are getting, transcode them into something whose output goes to HDMI or an S-video port, and that's it.
That's not it. The software also output to, say, an MP4 file, which was stored on the hard drive so that the user could watch the video whenever he pleased.
The content providers don't want it to send its output to, say, an MP4 file, which can then be uploaded on YouTube and splashed for the world to see, and so the only reason they agreed to let TiVo, or ReplayTV or anyone else in the same biz do it is so that TiVo prevents such an alteration of the hardware. Essentially, instead of a Flash, had TiVo put it on a masked ROM or even an OTP PROM, they'd have been fine, since the FSF engages in an exercise in sophistry by labeling it a 'circuit'.
This wasn't an issue until later. The original reason TiVo wanted to lock you out of the device was that TiVo wanted to sell you a subscription to their listings service. They were breaking even (or possibly even losing) on the hardware at the time. If users could actually control the hardware, they could get the listings info from another source, depriving TiVo of income. Appeasing "content providers" didn't become an issue until much later.
Bottom line - FSF/RMS didn't bother to find out why TiVo was doing what it did, or didn't care.
Stallman knew exactly why TiVo did what it did, and he did care. He cared that they had taken free software, provided in good faith that users would be able to exercise their freedoms, and they had cheated the public out of all their freedoms by locking the user out in hardware (hence the term TiVo-ization). He cared that TiVo could arbitrarily cease to provide service, leaving the public with millions of paperweights. Stallman doesn't care about their profits. He cares about freedom.
GPLv3 came about not because GPLv2 software isn't free but because RMS wanted to further leverage the license to restrict what hardware vendors do with your property.
You liked fennec on n900? I found it to be pretty much unusable. The interface was nice, but the n900 just didn't have the juice to run it properly. Using desktop firefox (iceweasel) from easydebian ran much faster, and as an added bonus, was compatible with all the firefox addons. Fennec addons is still a barren wasteland. No requestpolicy. No cookie monster. Noscript mobile is out there, but not on addons.mozilla.org.
Fennec sucks. It's a horrible replacement for real firefox. However, it's also the best browser for android, because somehow all the other browsers suck more.
As an added bonus of lameness. Mozilla has decided to remove the link to download the firefox mobile apk from their site. They only link to google play now. I had to search duckduckgo to find the real link hiding on their wiki*.
Their reasoning for this seems to be to encourage users to update regularly. Their wiki says, "You will need to keep Firefox up to date yourself if you do not install it through the Market." This is not true. Google Play will try to update firefox even if you did not install it through the Play Store. This kind of crap is exactly why I refuse to install the Play Store (actually whole gapps package) to begin with.
*Fennec is also available through F-Droid, but it's hidden by default because it "promotes non-free addons".
Slashdot Mirror
It's almost a prestigious a Hardvard!
I think in this type of situation, it's a reasonable expectation that the recipient should return the PS Vita too. They paid £19.99 and got sent a completely different item; it isn't as if the PS Vita was priced at £19.99 in error and the company mistakenly fulfilled the order.
It's only reasonable if the company is compensating them for the expense and time of sending it back. Personally, I would only consider it if the company was at least offering to send me the correct merchandise after refunding my £19.99 in exchange for the return. I'd probably hold out for a check for £19.99 in addition to a full refund and shipment of my intended purchase item. I'd call it a "restocking fee". If I had mistakenly ordered a PS Vita and then sent it back, the company would charge me a "restocking fee" too.
If they refused to compensate me, I'd just sell the Vita, buy the correct game from someone else, and pocket the difference. I would see this as fair, because it would require additional effort to obtain the item I had paid for but not received, and I would expect to be compensated for that.
When I lose something, I offer a reward to get it back. I don't threaten the person who found it.
Sadly, I see similar situations happen all the time. Companies make a mistake with their pricing online and don't fulfil the order and the people who thought they were getting a 40" TV for £50 start talking about their "right" to buy it for that price.
That's because it's dangerously close to a bait-and-switch, which is illegal. It's only not illegal if it is genuinely a mistake. If you're advertising a 40" TV for $50 without any conditions, then customers do, in fact, have the right to buy it for that price. If it is an honest mistake, and the company does not ship the item, but simply refunds the customer's money, the customer has still been harmed. The company has wasted the customer's time.
Let's turn it around a bit: if the customers had asked to return the game they bought and accidentally sent a PS Vita to the company, would the customers be arguing that their mistake represented an "unsolicited gift"?
The company would probably send it back, not because it's their duty under the law, but because it makes good business sense. If they didn't send it back they would lose that customer forever, and they would badmouth the company to others. It could easily end up costing them more than the value of the item.
On the other hand, other than the legal threats, the customers have no incentive to send the devices back. If Zawi refuses to ever do business with them again, they'll just buy stuff from someone else.
I ask because since the Sharp Zaurus days I have wanted a phone which runs 'proper' Linux, a Linux kernel with glibc, X-windows, GTK, QT, etc... I wanted something that I could easily 'port' desktop apps over just by recompiling.
Sounds like you have wanted the N900. X11, Qt, GTK, SDL, Java, and even Mono are all available in the extras repo and easily installable through apt-get.
Sailfish uses Wayland and QT. I'm not sure if GTK is available in the Mer repos. You could probably get XWayland rocking on it.
My very limited understanding of Sailfish is that it is just a Linux kernel with webkit dropped on top of it to run HTML5 apps not unlike Google Chrome. Was I mistaken?
Yes. You were very mistaken. This is a good description of WebOS, not Sailfish.
Sailfish uses Wayland and QT. I believe Python is preinstalled. I'm not sure if GTK is available in the Mer repos. You could probably get XWayland rocking on it. Sailfish is the closest thing to 'proper' Linux available for phones right now, even closer than Ubuntu Phone.
One of the reasons I bought the n900 rather than one of the others was the wonderful resistive touchscreen. It was an excellent choice, as it was so much more precise than the capacitive screens on all the iOS and Android devices at the time. I could actually use the tiny UI elements in desktop apps running from a debian chroot.
I agree. The article and summary are badly written. However, parent was complaining there was no "hint" as to the identities of Jolla and Sailfish. He was so emphatic about the word "hint" that he used the emphasis tag. I simply pointed out that there were plenty of hints available, and that those hints should indicate whether the article might fall within his interests. He could simply ask, "Am I interested in installing an alternative OS on an Android phone?". If yes, research Jolla and Sailfish. If no, don't.
I understand that he didn't really want hints, and that he wanted explicit background information. However, parent's statements were so exaggerated that they undermined his argument by being demonstrably false.
would it kill you just to give a hint of what Jolla and Sailfish are?
They gave you several hints.
"Jolla CEO Tomi Pienimäki": Hmm. Jolla must be a corporation. That name sounds Finnish.
"If Jolla truly is compatible with Android devices...": Jolla seems to be making some sort of cell phone software.
"Is Jolla going to let individual users to install the Sailfish operating system ..." Sailfish is an operating system for cell phones.
So, Jolla is a Finnish cell phone company that is producing an OS called Sailfish. It will be installable on Android devices. It seems like you would have enough information there to know if you want to know more. They've even provided all the relevant keywords: "Jolla", "Sailfish", which you can enter into a search engine to find more information
Complaining about this makes you appear stupid and lazy.
It isn't a one-click method to install the CM firmware though - just a method of making the installation via PC less painless.
Oooh! Great! Where do I download? I've been looking for ways to make installing 3rd party firmwares more painful. As it stands right now, the process is far too pleasant and enjoyable.
There is an unofficial build for the N9.
ATHF tests show that 3d printed guns explode whenever dropped by an anthropomorphic milkshake.
That example does not compile in Ceylon with a compile error that disproves your claim:
expression must be of boolean type: Integer is not assignable to Boolean
variable value x = 3;
if ( x = 4 ) {
}
if(x=true) ...
This is still bad.
What the hell do people see in the N900?
The n900 doesn't try to pretend it's not a computer. Maemo is a real linux distro, using X11 as its display server. Everything else is a dumbed-down toy.
If you don't see the value of this, then I guess the n900 just isn't for you. Have fun with your fart apps.
Road driving excludes many people. the poor who can't afford a car, insurance or fuel; people with poor vision, especially the elderly; the otherwise frail; and uncoordinated.
It seems like an idea for the young and wealthy, for the young and wealthy. Which is fine, but devoting significant public resources to it seems questionable. Should cities invest in paved roads that many residents are unable to utilize?
Can't install anything on Android nowdays. Each app wants permissions to make phone calls, take pictures with your camera (without your knowledge, not just while it is used) or read address book and current phone state. No good reason for the app to want this, but no way to install without allowing everything the app asks for.
There are several ways to install Android applications without allowing everything the app asks for. The best one is called openpdroid.
Notice how "the laws of the United States" are pursuant to (and therefore subordinate to) "the constitution". Notice how the constitution defines itself as "the supreme law of the land" by virtue of being one of the subjects of that sentence. The constitution is entirely law. Mostly it defines the structure of government under the law and the process by which government can enact additional laws. That's why we have a "Supreme Court": to rule on issues regarding "Supreme Law". That's why they are able to invalidate other laws as being "unconstitutional".
The 4th amendment absolutely is a law, and any laws contrary to it are invalid.
And anyhow, the 4th isn't a law.
It's not a law? Seriously? It is the supreme law of the land. The constitution and its amendments trump all other laws in the US. If they're violating the 4th amendment, they're violating the law. Period.
The Supremacy Clause of the US constitution states:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
How is that even the case? TiVo makes a set top box where the flash is locked after the firmware is installed, but as per GPL2, TiVo publishes the sources - not that it's of any use to anybody since it can't be altered.
Exactly the problem GPL3 was intended to address.
But TiVo made this before selling it to the content provider: it's usually the content provider who includes this in their package. So you get the thing already with the flash locked. On a rare occasion that the content provider might want to upgrade something on the STB, they access your box, do it and then resume operations. Most people neither know nor care. Those who do probably got MythTV or something of that sort.
Public outrage against TiVo-ization predates the integration of TiVo into cable/satellite boxes. I had the original TiVo. It was marketed direct to consumers. No "content provider" involved. It was a stand-alone box. They didn't start integrating it into cable/satellite boxes until years later. It was my hardware, not their hardware. The device phoned-home (quite literally, through the integrated modem) every couple of days to check for new listings and software updates (and presumably report everything I'd watched). However, there was no reason any "content provider" should ever access my hardware.
The reason TiVo did what it did is obvious. They've written a software, that captures the video inputs that they are getting, transcode them into something whose output goes to HDMI or an S-video port, and that's it.
That's not it. The software also output to, say, an MP4 file, which was stored on the hard drive so that the user could watch the video whenever he pleased.
The content providers don't want it to send its output to, say, an MP4 file, which can then be uploaded on YouTube and splashed for the world to see, and so the only reason they agreed to let TiVo, or ReplayTV or anyone else in the same biz do it is so that TiVo prevents such an alteration of the hardware. Essentially, instead of a Flash, had TiVo put it on a masked ROM or even an OTP PROM, they'd have been fine, since the FSF engages in an exercise in sophistry by labeling it a 'circuit'.
This wasn't an issue until later. The original reason TiVo wanted to lock you out of the device was that TiVo wanted to sell you a subscription to their listings service. They were breaking even (or possibly even losing) on the hardware at the time. If users could actually control the hardware, they could get the listings info from another source, depriving TiVo of income. Appeasing "content providers" didn't become an issue until much later.
Bottom line - FSF/RMS didn't bother to find out why TiVo was doing what it did, or didn't care.
Stallman knew exactly why TiVo did what it did, and he did care. He cared that they had taken free software, provided in good faith that users would be able to exercise their freedoms, and they had cheated the public out of all their freedoms by locking the user out in hardware (hence the term TiVo-ization). He cared that TiVo could arbitrarily cease to provide service, leaving the public with millions of paperweights. Stallman doesn't care about their profits. He cares about freedom.
These are Primus locks.
To defy the locks of tradition is a crusade only for the brave.
GPLv3 came about not because GPLv2 software isn't free but because RMS wanted to further leverage the license to restrict what hardware vendors do with your property.
Fixed that for ya'.
It's not like Elop didn't know this would be a colossal clusterfsck. Why they didn't fire his ass on 2/12/2011, I'll never know.
Not anymore, baby! Now it's advertisers, advertisers, advertisers, advertisers, advertisers!
There is however a ramp-like plank up which they could walk to reach the perch, if they where so inclined.
I see what you did there.
You can wake up almost four years ago. The n900 has been around for a while.
Does the NSA app come pre-installed, or do I have to download it?
I wish.
Unfortunately, it looks like Mozilla is heading in a different direction.
You did mean this, right?
You liked fennec on n900? I found it to be pretty much unusable. The interface was nice, but the n900 just didn't have the juice to run it properly. Using desktop firefox (iceweasel) from easydebian ran much faster, and as an added bonus, was compatible with all the firefox addons. Fennec addons is still a barren wasteland. No requestpolicy. No cookie monster. Noscript mobile is out there, but not on addons.mozilla.org.
Fennec sucks. It's a horrible replacement for real firefox. However, it's also the best browser for android, because somehow all the other browsers suck more.
As an added bonus of lameness. Mozilla has decided to remove the link to download the firefox mobile apk from their site. They only link to google play now. I had to search duckduckgo to find the real link hiding on their wiki*.
Their reasoning for this seems to be to encourage users to update regularly. Their wiki says, "You will need to keep Firefox up to date yourself if you do not install it through the Market." This is not true. Google Play will try to update firefox even if you did not install it through the Play Store. This kind of crap is exactly why I refuse to install the Play Store (actually whole gapps package) to begin with. *Fennec is also available through F-Droid, but it's hidden by default because it "promotes non-free addons".
It's perfectly okay to orbit Europa, as long as you attempt no landings there.