RIM operates a series of "reflection servers" for Exchange which dynamically "pushes" email to the clients (phones) and maintains better email access for Blackberry users. This is enormously handy for enterprise/business customers. Apple very specifically won't do this for the iPhone (they've been asked).
Could you be more specific in what you mean here? It was my understanding that the iPhone fully support push email from Exchange (and certainly does for, e.g., yahoo mail)
Are you talking about blackberry's servers? What's the advantage?
No, have not tried an external antenna or a microcell or anything. (Do you know anything about them? I don't know)
I would show you on the coverage map (but I'd rather not put anything remotely self identifying out there)...Verizon doesn't show coverage quality levels, but on the AT&T coverage map, there is just a low coverage area that covers a fairly large area.
It's not at all a valley, but I guess it's slightly depressed vis-a-vis surrounding areas. From looking at the coverage maps, I just don't think they have enough towers in the area.
Easy to say. I live in a 200k+ population area. My parents live ~2.5 miles from the nearest AT&T store and maybe 3.5 from the nearest verizon store. They live in a solidly suburban area.
With verizon they were lucky to get 1 bar inside their house. With at&t, they have to turn off 3g to get any service, and regularly miss calls. Have tried Verizon, Alltel, and now AT&T. Their whole neighborhood is a deadzone for at least a ~.5 mile to 1 mile radius... Just saying "live someplace where you get 5 bars and you don't have this problem" is NOT an answer.
Ok, you're obviously deliberately avoiding the question (since you're both wrong and answering a question you apparently made up). Let me simplify for you:
You said:
Did a single MS browser except the Mac IE which runs a different engine support the stable standards of the day it was released without 'extending and embracing' it?
In summary, you claim that MS extends and embraces the "stable standards" of the day. Fair enough, they absolutely have, doing things like inventing AJAX while they were at it.
Now, back to my followup question (notice the highlights):
So are you claiming that Firefox/Netscape/etc have always been 100% standards compliant and furthermore, did not include any features that were NOT part of standards? Please clarify.
This is the important part...the embracing and extending part. What I want to know is simply this -- are you stating that Firefox/Safari(webkit)/Opera etc have NOT EVER extended the standard, or implemented features that were NOT standard? This should be a yes or a no answer.
About the MS puppets... Slashdot user for a long time here, we know who is who and all their tricks.
Of course, because the easiest way to fight someone is to ad hominem them because you don't agree with them. You're either with us or against us, is that right?
Did a single MS browser except the Mac IE which runs a different engine support the stable standards of the day it was released without 'extending and embracing' it?
So are you claiming that Firefox/Netscape/etc have always been 100% standards compliant and furthermore, did not include any features that were NOT part of standards? Please clarify.
Do you call that poster fanboy? I call you a paid MS puppet.
Interesting, I visited Fribourg a year or two ago and it was a very interesting place. Fascinating to me how Bern / Fribourg / Geneva can feel so different, even to a foreigner with extremely limited language (ironically my limited Turkish helped me more than my even more limited French!)
I have to say though, I'm curious about other intra-Swiss stereotypes--what about the Italians? The Romansch?:-P
Sorry bud, that's life for you. You may think you have the most important thing, the most interesting thing, the most creative thing in the world, whatever, but that doesn't mean that either you're right, or anybody else has to care!
And for what it's worth, I would STRIDENTLY disagree with your assertion that "Most of the time a person going in another direction is said to be dumb or defective and is given whatever treatment to make him think like everyone else." Seems a very odd thing to say, and I wonder what makes you believe this?
The good thing about freedom is that it's YOUR freedom. The bad thing about freedom is that it's YOUR freedom. Completely independent of anyone else. You seem to want to have some control over this anthropomorphized "the masses" and how they respond to (you?). That ain't freedom!
Ok, it's obvious you've got a lot of emotion invested on the topic, but seeing as you wrote 5 paragraphs but didn't actually manage to answer the question, I'll repeat it verbatim:
What do you think the 2nd amendment means today, and what do you think the founders meant it to do?
Of course there are restrictions on speech...this is a battle that's been fought in America (and many other places) since the time of Zenger.
This is, however, very different from your false analogy that "we don't have free speech anywhere" because "you cant say a list of words on any major media." That is not what free speech is about. You can say whatever you want, and you can tell whoever you want. You can put it on your webpage. You can write a book. You can make a home movie and distribute it. Nobody is going to stop you doing any of these things.
The right to free speech is NOT a right that people must listen to you, nor MUST media organizations publish your speech.
Freedom of speech is exactly what it sounds like...
Exactly, its the people who keep information for themselves who are the thieves.
I don't think these words mean what you think they mean...
We all praise our society for its freedoms but the only free things we have are the choices between hundreds of meaningless entertainments and foods. I for one welcome our pirate friends who free more and more informations every day.
Wow, go back to square one! If you're really interested in discussions on what freedom means, ESPECIALLY on a site like slashdot, you might want to look up the "free as in beer" versus "free as in speech" comparison. Ignorant of any understanding of such a simple divide, you end up saying really, really dumb sounding things.
You raise a good point, but it's probably exaggerated to some degree. I mean, when on average less than 40% of people choose to vote in elections, the other 60% can't care THAT much, right?
But there are definitely groups of people for whom politics and their political identity IS there identity--and I find those people very problematic. Never understood people for whom picking a political candidate to vote for makes one worthy of scorn, hatred, makes one morally deficit, etc. Disturbing.
Well, I grew up in the south...in one of the bluest counties in America (last election voted ~80% for Obama IIRC). The church my family went to was extremely liberal and extremely democrat (and I'm an atheist [or at least agnostic] now anyway, so that's done with).
The neighborhood I live in now is one that likes to pride itself on being progressive and accepting of alternate lifestyles, etc. I had to keep my political beliefs secret from wife's family because they're not exactly fond of Republicans. When at one Christmas dinner I couldn't stand it anymore and announced mid-Republican joke that I was a Republican there was a shocked silence for several minutes:-)
And yeah, I'm a conservative and a Republican.
Anyway, I guess my point with this post was just that stereotypes about people based on where they lived and _especially_ what party they choose to vote for are STUPID. I don't really get the thing about "oh my gosh, they're REPUBLICANS" [or, though again, I've never seen nor experienced ti..."oh my gosh, they're DEMOCRATS"].. just baffling to me. My wife's political leanings never once entered into my consideration of how much i like her. It's all about respect. Even if you disagree with people politically, you can still respect them...
I guess that's part of uber-partisan modern American though. As the ranks of independents grow, the partisans become all the more vitriolic.
Kind of interesting to me how much vitriol there is specifically towards republicans (but of course more general towards midwestern/rural/etc -- though to read the comments you would think Kansas was Afghanistan...) in this thread (not saying you in particular, though I'm assuming that's what you meant when you mentioned red).
Kind of interesting how many people have talked about hating living near republicans, not liking republicans, etc...don't think I've ever heard someone say they hate to live next to democrats. ~shrug~ so much for tolerance:-P
Since you seem to know what you're talking about (or at least claim to!) I've got a question for you.
The usage of proxies make perfect sense (though to be sure there is dispute in how to interpret the proxies, Climate Audit has dealt with this in cave data and tree cores for instance). What kind of granularity of data do you get from these ancient times though?
That is, you say we have excellent climate data going back 850ky. Looking at that data, when you are looking at the data for let's say 650kya, what kind of timeframes are you looking at? If you say the temperature 650kya was X, for what period of years is X relevant? Let's say carbon dioxide rose very quickly and temperatures rose somewhat over a 200-300 year period, and then reverted to mean. Would that show up in the various proxies?
Or, to ask the question a different way, let's say current climatic trends continue for another 100-200 years (let's say we get some increased co2, increased temperatures, etc) and then by 2200 or so, let's have co2 go back down and temperatures go back down. So we have a maybe 500 years "blip" if you will (this is purely hypothetical of course). Let's say we have no written records, etc. 100 thousand years from now, would we be able to reconstruct this from proxies? 500 thousand years from now, would we have records of the blip? etc
Do the USB mice really suck? I thought the mighty mouse with the scroll bar is pretty nice (though the be fair I don't use one on a daily basis). Of course anything is an improvement after the hockey puck...
Yet another iPhone discussion that includes "apple will not allow [X]"... They are starting to bore and depress me as they are rather futile. The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position
Do you really see a lot of people who are "blindly support[ing]" Apple here? I've read through a lot of the comments and I don't see much (if any at all) of that...
Agreed that this is a geek-emotion battle and neither side is ever going to convince the other with arguments.
I have to wonder if there is ever anything "apple fans" ever complain or disagree with Apple about? I'd like to hear from Apple fans to know if they are actually independent or completely sold into the Apple view.
I'm going to put the onus on you -- where are these Apple fans who claim that apple can do no wrong and is perfect in every way?
Interesting and on its face, unlikely? I tried googling this but didn't have any luck -- do you have any more specific information or memories of when this might have been?
Slashdot Mirror
RIM operates a series of "reflection servers" for Exchange which dynamically "pushes" email to the clients (phones) and maintains better email access for Blackberry users. This is enormously handy for enterprise/business customers. Apple very specifically won't do this for the iPhone (they've been asked).
Could you be more specific in what you mean here? It was my understanding that the iPhone fully support push email from Exchange (and certainly does for, e.g., yahoo mail)
Are you talking about blackberry's servers? What's the advantage?
AT&T doesn't offer them yet (everyone else does, AFAIK), and I'm unsure how 3rd party works?
No, have not tried an external antenna or a microcell or anything. (Do you know anything about them? I don't know)
I would show you on the coverage map (but I'd rather not put anything remotely self identifying out there)...Verizon doesn't show coverage quality levels, but on the AT&T coverage map, there is just a low coverage area that covers a fairly large area.
It's not at all a valley, but I guess it's slightly depressed vis-a-vis surrounding areas. From looking at the coverage maps, I just don't think they have enough towers in the area.
Easy to say. I live in a 200k+ population area. My parents live ~2.5 miles from the nearest AT&T store and maybe 3.5 from the nearest verizon store. They live in a solidly suburban area.
With verizon they were lucky to get 1 bar inside their house. With at&t, they have to turn off 3g to get any service, and regularly miss calls. Have tried Verizon, Alltel, and now AT&T. Their whole neighborhood is a deadzone for at least a ~.5 mile to 1 mile radius... Just saying "live someplace where you get 5 bars and you don't have this problem" is NOT an answer.
Ok, you're obviously deliberately avoiding the question (since you're both wrong and answering a question you apparently made up). Let me simplify for you:
You said:
Did a single MS browser except the Mac IE which runs a different engine support the stable standards of the day it was released without 'extending and embracing' it?
In summary, you claim that MS extends and embraces the "stable standards" of the day. Fair enough, they absolutely have, doing things like inventing AJAX while they were at it.
Now, back to my followup question (notice the highlights):
So are you claiming that Firefox/Netscape/etc have always been 100% standards compliant and furthermore, did not include any features that were NOT part of standards? Please clarify.
This is the important part...the embracing and extending part. What I want to know is simply this -- are you stating that Firefox/Safari(webkit)/Opera etc have NOT EVER extended the standard, or implemented features that were NOT standard? This should be a yes or a no answer.
About the MS puppets... Slashdot user for a long time here, we know who is who and all their tricks.
Of course, because the easiest way to fight someone is to ad hominem them because you don't agree with them. You're either with us or against us, is that right?
Did a single MS browser except the Mac IE which runs a different engine support the stable standards of the day it was released without 'extending and embracing' it?
So are you claiming that Firefox/Netscape/etc have always been 100% standards compliant and furthermore, did not include any features that were NOT part of standards? Please clarify.
Do you call that poster fanboy? I call you a paid MS puppet.
Why would you call him a "paid MS puppet" ?
Interesting, I visited Fribourg a year or two ago and it was a very interesting place. Fascinating to me how Bern / Fribourg / Geneva can feel so different, even to a foreigner with extremely limited language (ironically my limited Turkish helped me more than my even more limited French!)
I have to say though, I'm curious about other intra-Swiss stereotypes--what about the Italians? The Romansch? :-P
It's not infringement if you're using it in the classroom. that's the law plain and simple.
So why does anybody buy textbooks if LEGALLY you can just copy the entire book if it's to be used in a classroom.
In other words, you're wrong.
Sorry bud, that's life for you. You may think you have the most important thing, the most interesting thing, the most creative thing in the world, whatever, but that doesn't mean that either you're right, or anybody else has to care!
And for what it's worth, I would STRIDENTLY disagree with your assertion that "Most of the time a person going in another direction is said to be dumb or defective and is given whatever treatment to make him think like everyone else." Seems a very odd thing to say, and I wonder what makes you believe this?
The good thing about freedom is that it's YOUR freedom. The bad thing about freedom is that it's YOUR freedom. Completely independent of anyone else. You seem to want to have some control over this anthropomorphized "the masses" and how they respond to (you?). That ain't freedom!
Ok, it's obvious you've got a lot of emotion invested on the topic, but seeing as you wrote 5 paragraphs but didn't actually manage to answer the question, I'll repeat it verbatim:
What do you think the 2nd amendment means today, and what do you think the founders meant it to do?
Of course there are restrictions on speech...this is a battle that's been fought in America (and many other places) since the time of Zenger.
This is, however, very different from your false analogy that "we don't have free speech anywhere" because "you cant say a list of words on any major media." That is not what free speech is about. You can say whatever you want, and you can tell whoever you want. You can put it on your webpage. You can write a book. You can make a home movie and distribute it. Nobody is going to stop you doing any of these things.
The right to free speech is NOT a right that people must listen to you, nor MUST media organizations publish your speech.
Freedom of speech is exactly what it sounds like...
Hmm.. I don't know anything about banking networks, but I would rather doubt they're p2p in the sense that anyone normally uses the term.
Like it or not, "p2p" is pretty much synonymous with "p2p filesharing" applications.
Exactly, its the people who keep information for themselves who are the thieves.
I don't think these words mean what you think they mean...
We all praise our society for its freedoms but the only free things we have are the choices between hundreds of meaningless entertainments and foods.
I for one welcome our pirate friends who free more and more informations every day.
Wow, go back to square one! If you're really interested in discussions on what freedom means, ESPECIALLY on a site like slashdot, you might want to look up the "free as in beer" versus "free as in speech" comparison. Ignorant of any understanding of such a simple divide, you end up saying really, really dumb sounding things.
Depends on whether you think the military etc is going to get involved in anything domestic? You can see some of the results at Waco...
What do you think the 2nd amendment means today, and what do you think the founders meant it to do?
5gb caps? I've got an unlimited evdo card from Verizon. I believe it's $60/month.
FWIW, I'm very happy with it...
You raise a good point, but it's probably exaggerated to some degree. I mean, when on average less than 40% of people choose to vote in elections, the other 60% can't care THAT much, right?
But there are definitely groups of people for whom politics and their political identity IS there identity--and I find those people very problematic. Never understood people for whom picking a political candidate to vote for makes one worthy of scorn, hatred, makes one morally deficit, etc. Disturbing.
Heh, klan zinger
Well, I grew up in the south...in one of the bluest counties in America (last election voted ~80% for Obama IIRC). The church my family went to was extremely liberal and extremely democrat (and I'm an atheist [or at least agnostic] now anyway, so that's done with).
The neighborhood I live in now is one that likes to pride itself on being progressive and accepting of alternate lifestyles, etc. I had to keep my political beliefs secret from wife's family because they're not exactly fond of Republicans. When at one Christmas dinner I couldn't stand it anymore and announced mid-Republican joke that I was a Republican there was a shocked silence for several minutes :-)
And yeah, I'm a conservative and a Republican.
Anyway, I guess my point with this post was just that stereotypes about people based on where they lived and _especially_ what party they choose to vote for are STUPID. I don't really get the thing about "oh my gosh, they're REPUBLICANS" [or, though again, I've never seen nor experienced ti..."oh my gosh, they're DEMOCRATS"] .. just baffling to me. My wife's political leanings never once entered into my consideration of how much i like her. It's all about respect. Even if you disagree with people politically, you can still respect them...
I guess that's part of uber-partisan modern American though. As the ranks of independents grow, the partisans become all the more vitriolic.
In short, don't forget that a lot of other places fought AGAINST the biolab. For instance in a fairly rural portion of North Carolina:
http://www.newsobserver.com/business/story/835757.html
Kind of interesting to me how much vitriol there is specifically towards republicans (but of course more general towards midwestern/rural/etc -- though to read the comments you would think Kansas was Afghanistan...) in this thread (not saying you in particular, though I'm assuming that's what you meant when you mentioned red).
Kind of interesting how many people have talked about hating living near republicans, not liking republicans, etc...don't think I've ever heard someone say they hate to live next to democrats. ~shrug~ so much for tolerance :-P
Very interesting reply -- thank you!
Since you seem to know what you're talking about (or at least claim to!) I've got a question for you.
The usage of proxies make perfect sense (though to be sure there is dispute in how to interpret the proxies, Climate Audit has dealt with this in cave data and tree cores for instance). What kind of granularity of data do you get from these ancient times though?
That is, you say we have excellent climate data going back 850ky. Looking at that data, when you are looking at the data for let's say 650kya, what kind of timeframes are you looking at? If you say the temperature 650kya was X, for what period of years is X relevant? Let's say carbon dioxide rose very quickly and temperatures rose somewhat over a 200-300 year period, and then reverted to mean. Would that show up in the various proxies?
Or, to ask the question a different way, let's say current climatic trends continue for another 100-200 years (let's say we get some increased co2, increased temperatures, etc) and then by 2200 or so, let's have co2 go back down and temperatures go back down. So we have a maybe 500 years "blip" if you will (this is purely hypothetical of course). Let's say we have no written records, etc. 100 thousand years from now, would we be able to reconstruct this from proxies? 500 thousand years from now, would we have records of the blip? etc
Do the USB mice really suck? I thought the mighty mouse with the scroll bar is pretty nice (though the be fair I don't use one on a daily basis). Of course anything is an improvement after the hockey puck...
Yet another iPhone discussion that includes "apple will not allow [X]"... They are starting to bore and depress me as they are rather futile. The Apple fans will always blindly support and back the Apple position
Do you really see a lot of people who are "blindly support[ing]" Apple here? I've read through a lot of the comments and I don't see much (if any at all) of that...
Agreed that this is a geek-emotion battle and neither side is ever going to convince the other with arguments.
I have to wonder if there is ever anything "apple fans" ever complain or disagree with Apple about? I'd like to hear from Apple fans to know if they are actually independent or completely sold into the Apple view.
I'm going to put the onus on you -- where are these Apple fans who claim that apple can do no wrong and is perfect in every way?
Interesting and on its face, unlikely? I tried googling this but didn't have any luck -- do you have any more specific information or memories of when this might have been?
What does that mean? example please?