Apple Germany can still sell phones in Germany - only Apple Inc. can't, but they never did.
That's very dubious, but as the article points out: even if Apple's interpretation were to hold up, it should be trivial for Motorola to have the injunction extended to Apple Germany.
That seems like moving the goal posts - I was interested in "ad hominem attacks in debates", I didn't get the impression he makes those, so the charge seems unfair.
I don't think he is the person who introduced arrogance and condescension into debates about religion either - that's been around for a long time. (On all sides to be sure.) He doesn't seem any more arrogant as someone arguing that "if you just let Jesus into your heart you will realize the truth" or some such. Grant you, the person making such a statement will typically not realize that it's an arrogant one.
Richard Dawkins, for instance, who is by now a champion of atheism, and has absolutely no need to do so, *still* resorts almost continuously to ad hominem attacks in his debates
Each time I see one of these debates he seems to have extraordinary amounts of patience with his opponents. What are you referring to, really? Or do mean something like calling someone deluded when they claim that god spoke to them? That seems fair - even if you share their belief you'd have to acknowledge that this can only be viewed as a delusion by someone who doesn't.
I always like the ban on buying office supplies near the end of the fiscal year. Brilliant idea that. The worst thing is that they don't understand that it doesn't even work short term. Sure you can move costs from one quarter into the next while harming future profit, but you can only do that one single time. After that your employees catch on, and order office supplies early - before they need them so that there is a buffer.
If you dropped the ban now, nothing at all would happen - all your employees have already bought what they need ahead of time. It's just a testament to corporate stupidity by now.
Well essentially you think of a smartphone as a phone which has grown into a fully fledged computer. It's probably the other way round - a smartphone is a pocket-sized ultra-portable computer, which also has a phone and a GPS built-in. You can make phone calls, but it's just one of many applications and not central to the device.
There might be a market for a lite-phone which could be tethered to a smart phone via Bluetooth - easy to handle, but not able to make phone calls on it's own. A bit like an overgrown Bluetooth headset with some buttons.
Not true though, about "not leaving much of a trace". We've caused one of the most dramatic reduction in the numbers of species on this planet. Only the extinction of the dinosaurs falls into the same category. If we are dying out, and hundreds of million years later another sentient species comes about - we'll be measurable in the fossil record. They'll point at that thin layer of the earth's sediment and see that something dramatic happened there.
I don't think that means we are bad - sure we should take better care of the planet for our own sake, but we came from a long line of prey animals, and decided we should be on top of the food chain. And now we run the show. For all the problems we are having: that's still damn cool. Now lets go and fix that stupid AGW problem - if anyone can do it, it's us.
Dramatic changes in a short time frame are probably not beneficial. That's pretty obvious when you look at coastal regions, but applies in many other areas as well. If you've cultivated land for grain farming, you can't easily switch to rice. If you've built a harbor someplace it doesn't move inland for free.
On top of that: don't conflate the best case with the worst case. The best case we work with now, is a rise of temperatures by 2 degrees. That's if we do something drastic about carbon emissions fairly quickly. If we don't do that (and that's where we are headed, realistically) then we should expect a more significant increase.
Uhm - so now you have some research directly financed by AGW "skeptics". It confirms the results of the "agenda-driven climatologists". How do you go from there to "things look different"? No they don't, they look exactly the same.
I watch as these Occupy people sit around and sing songs, people up at the capital sing slogans, and they expect things are going to change.
Well if you want a revolution (or change in any other way), first you need to convince people of your views. For that you need to focus public discussion onto the topics important to you.
Demonstrations are one way of accomplishing that - historically that has worked quite a few times (examples: Poland's Solidarity or the Monday demonstrations in East Germany).
I have a hard time sympathizing with anyone who has voluntarily taken on large amounts of debt and doesn't understand that they made a poor choice.
Well having no sympathy is a staple of political discussion in the US, no surprise there. Personally I'm not happy with young people no longer being able to afford a good education. That alone I'd already consider an important issue.
That's not all there is to that story though: if it's no longer viable for many US citizens to get a degree, then the US economy will find it hard to get access to a skilled work force in the future. That's a pretty bleak outlook for your country.
For that you don't need to jailbreak an Android phone - just select an app from the market or enable other market - no risk of bricking anything. Ok, you might want to root it for some apps (like a samba server), and then getting root seems to be roughly on the same level as for the iPhone.
As for CyanogenMod - is there really something equivalent you can do on the iPhone?
He just wants the Internet in his pocket, and reading product barcodes to immediatly find reviews & prices interests him. No games or videoconferencing or anything fancy. [...] no-one can tell you before you choose a handset if that one will receive OS updates
I share your frustration about Android upgrade policies. However if you put videoconferencing and games in the "fancy" category, then you definitely don't need OS updates.
Android phones are great for enthusiasts but for my friend & most other folks, the iPhone is a better choice.
Sorry, but that's absurd. If you can handle an iPhone you can handle an Android phone or a WP7 phone.
I believe the "backing" of bitcoin (in the way you are using it) is the network of miners that validate each transaction.
More like the community of users - assurance that it's real is only part of it. That community is too small though, so volatility must be high. Which is exactly what we are seeing and will continue to see.
People owning a large proportion of bitcoins isn't a problem as long as they have to play by the same rules as everyone else.
It means a few people can influence it's value dramatically - i.e. what you asserted couldn't happen. (But already has in the past.)
Good to know bitcoins are so divisible, thanks.
Also I'm not sure I accept the argument that inflation=good, deflation=bad
Well, we've already tried that. Deflationary currencies don't work. Inflationary currencies have their own problems, but you can't address those by replacing them with something which has already been shown to fail.
I don't understand why people feel so strongly that a currency needs to be a commodity first.
Not the point which was made. Currency being a commodity is *one* way to back it. Bitcoin doesn't have that. Another way would be lots of people using it for trading goods, by having a significant power structure (like a country) standing for it etc. As far as I can tell Bitcoin doesn't have backing in the form of the named examples, or in any other form.
its value cannot be manipulated by a central group of people in the same way as fiat.
Unfortunately that's not correct, a small number of people who got in early own most bitcoins. That's not technical problem of currencies like Bitcoin - but it is one Bitcoin has, specifically.
Even worse - the Bitcoin supply itself is finite and very small (compared with economies of entire countries). So it has no chance to ever become stable, and even if it did it would suffer the same problem the gold standard had, i.e. being inherently deflationary.
Bitcoin is interesting because it makes you think about how currencies work, but unfortunately it's not set up to become a viable currency. Either because someone didn't think enough about how currencies work, or because becoming a viable currency wasn't actually the goal.
Well it's more secure then just "slide to unlock" and it's not as inconvenient as a more secure screen lock.
Secure screen locks are a bit of a problem with smart phones, since (in order to save battery) the lock engages so often. It would be nice if there was an option to have different locks - just a slide if you haven't used the phone for a minute, and e.g. a PIN if you haven't used it in 15 mins or so.
There are many cases where the DA has to drop the case for lack of evidence.
And the only ethical thing the DA can do in these cases, is to shut up about it. Simply because nobody has to prove they are innocent - it's the prosecution which has to prove guilt.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple Germany can still sell phones in Germany - only Apple Inc. can't, but they never did.
That's very dubious, but as the article points out: even if Apple's interpretation were to hold up, it should be trivial for Motorola to have the injunction extended to Apple Germany.
That seems like moving the goal posts - I was interested in "ad hominem attacks in debates", I didn't get the impression he makes those, so the charge seems unfair.
I don't think he is the person who introduced arrogance and condescension into debates about religion either - that's been around for a long time. (On all sides to be sure.) He doesn't seem any more arrogant as someone arguing that "if you just let Jesus into your heart you will realize the truth" or some such. Grant you, the person making such a statement will typically not realize that it's an arrogant one.
Looks like you just flunked the "sample size" test. Don't worry about it, brain teasers aren't for everyone.
You are welcome to your view, but "unconvincing in chapter 4" doesn't equate to "ad hominem attacks in debates", surely?
We still wouldn't be safe from five-month pregnant white females.
Richard Dawkins, for instance, who is by now a champion of atheism, and has absolutely no need to do so, *still* resorts almost continuously to ad hominem attacks in his debates
Each time I see one of these debates he seems to have extraordinary amounts of patience with his opponents. What are you referring to, really? Or do mean something like calling someone deluded when they claim that god spoke to them? That seems fair - even if you share their belief you'd have to acknowledge that this can only be viewed as a delusion by someone who doesn't.
Protection against the CIA won't matter for most of us, but protection against burglars should.
I always like the ban on buying office supplies near the end of the fiscal year. Brilliant idea that. The worst thing is that they don't understand that it doesn't even work short term. Sure you can move costs from one quarter into the next while harming future profit, but you can only do that one single time. After that your employees catch on, and order office supplies early - before they need them so that there is a buffer.
If you dropped the ban now, nothing at all would happen - all your employees have already bought what they need ahead of time. It's just a testament to corporate stupidity by now.
Well essentially you think of a smartphone as a phone which has grown into a fully fledged computer. It's probably the other way round - a smartphone is a pocket-sized ultra-portable computer, which also has a phone and a GPS built-in. You can make phone calls, but it's just one of many applications and not central to the device.
There might be a market for a lite-phone which could be tethered to a smart phone via Bluetooth - easy to handle, but not able to make phone calls on it's own. A bit like an overgrown Bluetooth headset with some buttons.
Not true though, about "not leaving much of a trace". We've caused one of the most dramatic reduction in the numbers of species on this planet. Only the extinction of the dinosaurs falls into the same category. If we are dying out, and hundreds of million years later another sentient species comes about - we'll be measurable in the fossil record. They'll point at that thin layer of the earth's sediment and see that something dramatic happened there.
I don't think that means we are bad - sure we should take better care of the planet for our own sake, but we came from a long line of prey animals, and decided we should be on top of the food chain. And now we run the show. For all the problems we are having: that's still damn cool. Now lets go and fix that stupid AGW problem - if anyone can do it, it's us.
Dramatic changes in a short time frame are probably not beneficial. That's pretty obvious when you look at coastal regions, but applies in many other areas as well. If you've cultivated land for grain farming, you can't easily switch to rice. If you've built a harbor someplace it doesn't move inland for free.
On top of that: don't conflate the best case with the worst case. The best case we work with now, is a rise of temperatures by 2 degrees. That's if we do something drastic about carbon emissions fairly quickly. If we don't do that (and that's where we are headed, realistically) then we should expect a more significant increase.
Uhm - so now you have some research directly financed by AGW "skeptics". It confirms the results of the "agenda-driven climatologists". How do you go from there to "things look different"? No they don't, they look exactly the same.
I watch as these Occupy people sit around and sing songs, people up at the capital sing slogans, and they expect things are going to change.
Well if you want a revolution (or change in any other way), first you need to convince people of your views. For that you need to focus public discussion onto the topics important to you.
Demonstrations are one way of accomplishing that - historically that has worked quite a few times (examples: Poland's Solidarity or the Monday demonstrations in East Germany).
I have a hard time sympathizing with anyone who has voluntarily taken on large amounts of debt and doesn't understand that they made a poor choice.
Well having no sympathy is a staple of political discussion in the US, no surprise there. Personally I'm not happy with young people no longer being able to afford a good education. That alone I'd already consider an important issue.
That's not all there is to that story though: if it's no longer viable for many US citizens to get a degree, then the US economy will find it hard to get access to a skilled work force in the future. That's a pretty bleak outlook for your country.
Yeah right - IIS: the workhorse of the really important websites which count.
In other news: in the market of "pissant random web servers" IIS lost half its market share.
IIS and Exchange are actually widely used - Microsoft owns almost 50% of that space
You are lumping IIS and Exchange together for some reason. IIS has less than 16% market share
I wanna install whatever software I want.
For that you don't need to jailbreak an Android phone - just select an app from the market or enable other market - no risk of bricking anything. Ok, you might want to root it for some apps (like a samba server), and then getting root seems to be roughly on the same level as for the iPhone.
As for CyanogenMod - is there really something equivalent you can do on the iPhone?
He just wants the Internet in his pocket, and reading product barcodes to immediatly find reviews & prices interests him. No games or videoconferencing or anything fancy. [...] no-one can tell you before you choose a handset if that one will receive OS updates
I share your frustration about Android upgrade policies. However if you put videoconferencing and games in the "fancy" category, then you definitely don't need OS updates.
Android phones are great for enthusiasts but for my friend & most other folks, the iPhone is a better choice.
Sorry, but that's absurd. If you can handle an iPhone you can handle an Android phone or a WP7 phone.
Cool, yeah I think I'll switch to CyanogenMod eventually.
I believe the "backing" of bitcoin (in the way you are using it) is the network of miners that validate each transaction.
More like the community of users - assurance that it's real is only part of it. That community is too small though, so volatility must be high. Which is exactly what we are seeing and will continue to see.
People owning a large proportion of bitcoins isn't a problem as long as they have to play by the same rules as everyone else.
It means a few people can influence it's value dramatically - i.e. what you asserted couldn't happen. (But already has in the past.)
Good to know bitcoins are so divisible, thanks.
Also I'm not sure I accept the argument that inflation=good, deflation=bad
Well, we've already tried that. Deflationary currencies don't work. Inflationary currencies have their own problems, but you can't address those by replacing them with something which has already been shown to fail.
Don't have it on my stock SGS2. I'm not sure if that's the fault of Google or of Samsung.
I don't understand why people feel so strongly that a currency needs to be a commodity first.
Not the point which was made. Currency being a commodity is *one* way to back it. Bitcoin doesn't have that. Another way would be lots of people using it for trading goods, by having a significant power structure (like a country) standing for it etc. As far as I can tell Bitcoin doesn't have backing in the form of the named examples, or in any other form.
its value cannot be manipulated by a central group of people in the same way as fiat.
Unfortunately that's not correct, a small number of people who got in early own most bitcoins. That's not technical problem of currencies like Bitcoin - but it is one Bitcoin has, specifically.
Even worse - the Bitcoin supply itself is finite and very small (compared with economies of entire countries). So it has no chance to ever become stable, and even if it did it would suffer the same problem the gold standard had, i.e. being inherently deflationary.
Bitcoin is interesting because it makes you think about how currencies work, but unfortunately it's not set up to become a viable currency. Either because someone didn't think enough about how currencies work, or because becoming a viable currency wasn't actually the goal.
Well it's more secure then just "slide to unlock" and it's not as inconvenient as a more secure screen lock.
Secure screen locks are a bit of a problem with smart phones, since (in order to save battery) the lock engages so often. It would be nice if there was an option to have different locks - just a slide if you haven't used the phone for a minute, and e.g. a PIN if you haven't used it in 15 mins or so.
[...] perhaps Pi tells us more about ourselves.
No it doesn't. It does tell us the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter, though.
Useful for Halloween: You can divide the circumference of a pumpkin by it's diameter and get pumpkin pi.
There are many cases where the DA has to drop the case for lack of evidence.
And the only ethical thing the DA can do in these cases, is to shut up about it. Simply because nobody has to prove they are innocent - it's the prosecution which has to prove guilt.