It was removed for ToS violations, specifically not having moderation in place to deal with content that advocates violence or hatred against groups of people.
tell us, please, what percentage of Android apps are installed from anywhere else.
Sadly I can't find any stats, but both Amazon's Appstore and F-Droid have been going for years and seem to be reasonably popular. And there is nothing stopping Gab simply offering the app on their own web site too, or are they complaining that they are not popular enough and need free advertising on Play to survive?
The issue in the Internet Explorer case was that IE could not be completely removed or completely replaced with a different app.
That isn't the case for Google Play. You can run Android without it. You can replace every one of its functions with a different app store. And in this specific case, the ability to side-load apps is definitely not hindered by Play. They can't just make a broad claim about its general nature, they have to be specific about what it prevented them from doing, and to be clear it didn't prevent anything.
Google blacklisted them because they made themselves into a cesspit of racist abuse and Nazi propaganda, which is against the terms of service of the Play store. The same reason that there is no PornHub app on there.
It's not an anti-trust violation and they will get slapped down hard. That's not the point though, this is just part of their "people on the right are being victimized" narrative.
They claim that Google, Twitter and the mainstream media are all censoring right wing views. It's similar to the narrative Trump used at times. It brings moderate conservatives to their far right cause, by convincing them that they are under attack. Remember that famous quote from Goering about how you can make people vote for you and go along with almost anything if you just tell them they are being attacked? They certainly do.
Gab isn't really a free speech platform. It's a right leaning speech platform, that bans left leaning users and is made up of people who were kicked of Twitter for trolling.
""Today, consistent with the administration's commitment to take all actions necessary to ensure the protection of U.S. national security, the president issued an order prohibiting the acquisition," Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said in a statement Wednesday."
Maybe he was told to do it, but as a statement of fact he issued the order and had presumably could have declined to.
WebGL is mostly used for tracking. The sites render some text and graphics and slight variations in your system make the result semi-unique, and combined with other factors can be used to identify your browser as your move from site to site.
As such, I disable WebGL entirely. I also use CanvasFingerprintBlock for the same reason.
How long are ads displayed for? Probably not long in most cases. Many browsers, especially Chrome, throttle Javascript or even stop it running entirely to save energy when the user isn't interacting with the page. And Javascript isn't exactly known for its high performance when it comes to maths.
A lot of processing will be wasted. Anything that ends before the minimum work unit that can be saved is complete is lost.
If they are mining a popular currency the chances are Javascript running on a CPU will to too slow to earn anything significant. If they are mining a less popular currency it is now tainted by malware and unlikely to ever be worth much.
Not that I don't oppose this kind of thing, but a couple of points of fact.
$230,769.23 per job.
Only if you only include direct jobs. How many jobs in other sectors will be created to support this factory? I'm not suggesting it makes the incentive worth it, only that this naive calculation is wrong.
If governments were good at "picking winners", the Soviet Union would have won the Cold War.
The US government seems to do okay. The fund that supported Tesla, among others, actually turned a decent profit.
Your statement is too broad, it's like saying "if investors were good at picking winners we wouldn't have tech bubbles". Some are clearly better than others.
I prefer to look at how this changed Facebook's behaviour, and the behaviour of other companies. If they ignored the fine and carried on violating people's privacy, I'd regard it as a failure. If they stopped violating non-user's privacy, I'd say it worked. If it stops other companies doing the same thing, I'd be very happy.
Having said that, in this case it's likely to get escalated to the EU level anyway.
The Core i5 2500 you compare to is six years old. It was released in 2011. So what you are saying is that the latest Apple ARM CPU mostly performs worse than a six year old, mid range desktop CPU with modern code and much faster RAM.
Even with this comparison, the ARM CPU gets trounced where it really counts: memory latency and bandwidth. That's the main limitation on phone CPUs, due to using low power RAM and memory controllers, as well as having to share some bandwidth with the GPU.
Single core performance on a phone isn't very useful... What really affects performance is available RAM and flash memory speed. The iPhone X only has 3GB of RAM, kinda low for a flagship from a couple of years ago. Flash memory performance (with encryption enabled) seems competitive though.
The UI is the other thing that massively effects performance. iOS and it's one-button/no-button design is rather slow.
It's a free backup service... If you want long term backups, you need to take care of them yourself.
Also note that it's only certain phone data, the stuff people really care about like photos, videos and email are all stored for the lifetime of the gmail account or up to the free Google Drive limit (something like 5GB for mail last time I checked).
Apple heavily optimizes for benchmarks, but in terms of actually getting stuff done with the phone...
Just the app switching button on Android alone makes it 10x faster to do stuff than on iOS. You can double tap it to switch back and forth between two apps, which is great for note taking, comparing or copy/pasting translations. The transition takes a few hundred milliseconds.
You are mistaken about Apple pioneering/inventing certain tech too. Secure enclaves have been around long before Apple came on the scene, and actually Samsung was the first to use them to secure phones. For years apple was known for low quality, low DPI displays when everyone else was doing at least 720p, and 1080p or higher was standard on flagships. Apple was hobbled by the need to go to exact multiples of the original iPhone resolution to make skeudimorphic graphics scale well.
TL;DR the gap varies by industry, and as well as simply being paid less there is also less opportunity. The figure taking into account all factors is typically 1-5% depending on industry. 2% is the equivalent of working for free for one week a year.
What about discrimination that limits opportunity? The lawsuit alleges that opportunities to advance and get better paid positions were denied to female employees. As such they ended up in lower paid positions, unable at advance as fast as similarly or better qualified males.
That wouldn't show up if you simply compared people doing the same jobs. You would need to look at their performance and career path within the company.
Their case seems to rely on proving that there is systemic bias. Others Google will just say that they sucked. So there will likely be lots of examination of the systems at Google for managing employees, particularly the technical/non-technical tracks.
If they can prove that then it could apply to a lot of female employees.
Slashdot Mirror
Default is king.
Tell that to Bing/MSN, or Internet Explorer.
While true, it's also irrelevant. They are not making an alternative app store, so can't use that argument.
People need to endure the idiots or give up free speech. you can't have both.
Spam/troll filters are not anti-free-speech. They are pro-freedom-not-to-listen.
More over, no-one owes you a soap box.
Why make up bullshit when we can just google (or bing) the real reason?
https://arstechnica.com/tech-p...
It was removed for ToS violations, specifically not having moderation in place to deal with content that advocates violence or hatred against groups of people.
tell us, please, what percentage of Android apps are installed from anywhere else.
Sadly I can't find any stats, but both Amazon's Appstore and F-Droid have been going for years and seem to be reasonably popular. And there is nothing stopping Gab simply offering the app on their own web site too, or are they complaining that they are not popular enough and need free advertising on Play to survive?
The issue in the Internet Explorer case was that IE could not be completely removed or completely replaced with a different app.
That isn't the case for Google Play. You can run Android without it. You can replace every one of its functions with a different app store. And in this specific case, the ability to side-load apps is definitely not hindered by Play. They can't just make a broad claim about its general nature, they have to be specific about what it prevented them from doing, and to be clear it didn't prevent anything.
Google blacklisted them because they made themselves into a cesspit of racist abuse and Nazi propaganda, which is against the terms of service of the Play store. The same reason that there is no PornHub app on there.
It's a problem because Google doesn't want to enable people to send targeted messages to the far right.
I'll defend your right to free speech to the death, but I won't help you advertise your racist messages.
It's not an anti-trust violation and they will get slapped down hard. That's not the point though, this is just part of their "people on the right are being victimized" narrative.
They claim that Google, Twitter and the mainstream media are all censoring right wing views. It's similar to the narrative Trump used at times. It brings moderate conservatives to their far right cause, by convincing them that they are under attack. Remember that famous quote from Goering about how you can make people vote for you and go along with almost anything if you just tell them they are being attacked? They certainly do.
Gab isn't really a free speech platform. It's a right leaning speech platform, that bans left leaning users and is made up of people who were kicked of Twitter for trolling.
Indeed, it's odd that they are not suing Apple since Apple also banned their app. Maybe the far right prefers Android.
Thanks, that's an interesting link.
I'm really glad I block WebGL.
From TFA:
""Today, consistent with the administration's commitment to take all actions necessary to ensure the protection of U.S. national security, the president issued an order prohibiting the acquisition," Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said in a statement Wednesday."
Maybe he was told to do it, but as a statement of fact he issued the order and had presumably could have declined to.
WebGL is mostly used for tracking. The sites render some text and graphics and slight variations in your system make the result semi-unique, and combined with other factors can be used to identify your browser as your move from site to site.
As such, I disable WebGL entirely. I also use CanvasFingerprintBlock for the same reason.
But how much currency can it mine?
How long are ads displayed for? Probably not long in most cases. Many browsers, especially Chrome, throttle Javascript or even stop it running entirely to save energy when the user isn't interacting with the page. And Javascript isn't exactly known for its high performance when it comes to maths.
A lot of processing will be wasted. Anything that ends before the minimum work unit that can be saved is complete is lost.
If they are mining a popular currency the chances are Javascript running on a CPU will to too slow to earn anything significant. If they are mining a less popular currency it is now tainted by malware and unlikely to ever be worth much.
Double tap the home button on an iOS device
They removed the home button on the latest iPhones. It's all done through gestures now. Slow, awkward gestures.
the ability of iOS to display two apps side by side may be even more useful.
Copied from Android...
Not that I don't oppose this kind of thing, but a couple of points of fact.
$230,769.23 per job.
Only if you only include direct jobs. How many jobs in other sectors will be created to support this factory? I'm not suggesting it makes the incentive worth it, only that this naive calculation is wrong.
If governments were good at "picking winners", the Soviet Union would have won the Cold War.
The US government seems to do okay. The fund that supported Tesla, among others, actually turned a decent profit.
Your statement is too broad, it's like saying "if investors were good at picking winners we wouldn't have tech bubbles". Some are clearly better than others.
I prefer to look at how this changed Facebook's behaviour, and the behaviour of other companies. If they ignored the fine and carried on violating people's privacy, I'd regard it as a failure. If they stopped violating non-user's privacy, I'd say it worked. If it stops other companies doing the same thing, I'd be very happy.
Having said that, in this case it's likely to get escalated to the EU level anyway.
The Core i5 2500 you compare to is six years old. It was released in 2011. So what you are saying is that the latest Apple ARM CPU mostly performs worse than a six year old, mid range desktop CPU with modern code and much faster RAM.
Even with this comparison, the ARM CPU gets trounced where it really counts: memory latency and bandwidth. That's the main limitation on phone CPUs, due to using low power RAM and memory controllers, as well as having to share some bandwidth with the GPU.
Single core performance on a phone isn't very useful... What really affects performance is available RAM and flash memory speed. The iPhone X only has 3GB of RAM, kinda low for a flagship from a couple of years ago. Flash memory performance (with encryption enabled) seems competitive though.
The UI is the other thing that massively effects performance. iOS and it's one-button/no-button design is rather slow.
It's a free backup service... If you want long term backups, you need to take care of them yourself.
Also note that it's only certain phone data, the stuff people really care about like photos, videos and email are all stored for the lifetime of the gmail account or up to the free Google Drive limit (something like 5GB for mail last time I checked).
Apple heavily optimizes for benchmarks, but in terms of actually getting stuff done with the phone...
Just the app switching button on Android alone makes it 10x faster to do stuff than on iOS. You can double tap it to switch back and forth between two apps, which is great for note taking, comparing or copy/pasting translations. The transition takes a few hundred milliseconds.
You are mistaken about Apple pioneering/inventing certain tech too. Secure enclaves have been around long before Apple came on the scene, and actually Samsung was the first to use them to secure phones. For years apple was known for low quality, low DPI displays when everyone else was doing at least 720p, and 1080p or higher was standard on flagships. Apple was hobbled by the need to go to exact multiples of the original iPhone resolution to make skeudimorphic graphics scale well.
Trying to boil it down to just one number is way too simplistic, and the number you give doesn't seem to be supported by other studies.
Have a look at this study: http://www.payscale.com/data-p...
TL;DR the gap varies by industry, and as well as simply being paid less there is also less opportunity. The figure taking into account all factors is typically 1-5% depending on industry. 2% is the equivalent of working for free for one week a year.
What about discrimination that limits opportunity? The lawsuit alleges that opportunities to advance and get better paid positions were denied to female employees. As such they ended up in lower paid positions, unable at advance as fast as similarly or better qualified males.
That wouldn't show up if you simply compared people doing the same jobs. You would need to look at their performance and career path within the company.
Their case seems to rely on proving that there is systemic bias. Others Google will just say that they sucked. So there will likely be lots of examination of the systems at Google for managing employees, particularly the technical/non-technical tracks.
If they can prove that then it could apply to a lot of female employees.
I'm gonna link this post next time someone calls me an SJW.