Biometrics is the most stupid way of authenticating anyone. As soon as someone is able to fake your credentials (and so far it's always been simple - fingerprints, face recognition, etc) you're 0wned. Because you cannot change your credentials. Because your credentials are you.
So biometrics for authentication is a no-no. Only clueless executives can realistically push this forward.
How many people have you encountered for which "the" is disrespectful?
Apparently you don't understand the point. Anyone can be offended by anything. What if such a person were to exist? Would you be expected to cater to them? If not, why? Have you arbitrarily decided that it's less important to not offend them for some reason?
Well, no, you don't seem to understand my point here (and not THE point as you put it). No one on the streets is offended by the word "the". Give at least some credit to humankind. To push your point further, people that are offended by such mundane things are living in psychiatric hospitals so you don't have to cater to them. You're not expected to. You forgot my last sentence that was the most important of my post: When there are two sides to an issue, often both are wrong. Some middle ground is often the way to go.
So here: No, you are not expected to cater to people that find "the" offensive. Because there's 3 of them in the US. But yes, you are expected to cater to people that find "I want to rape you" offensive. Because there's 200 million of them in the US. Do you get it now?
Then, learn to respect the others.
"Get out or conform." There are more options, though. Work to change the laws.
I wasn't talking about laws at all. What is your point?
So you can't just dismiss it.
I never said that I could. I just find it amusing how it seems that some people believe that their opinions are facts. The fact of the matter is that your opinions will influence society and laws will perhaps reflect that. That is obvious. But I too have an opinion about all this.
You are entitled to your opinion, just as I am. In all fairness, you seem to view your opinions just as factual as I seem to consider mine. Judging by your words. Of course, this has nothing to do with "respect" which it what this is all about.
In everything you have two sides, and most often both are stupid
Except that this is a subjective matter.
Not really, it isn't. Everything in life is about making compromises. Is Arsenic a poison? It depends. It depends how much you ingest. Is my sentence offensive? It depends. It depends to whom you're saying it. Is it a beautiful day? It depends. It depends on yesterday.
The only fact is that everything is an opinion and that nothing is a fact. And everything is about how much you want of it.
Another fact is that Americans always tend to make two sides on any incoming issue. By doing so, they all miss the real answer which is somewhere in the middle.
Unfortunately, considering that most corporations would be considered sociopaths were they to be psychoanalyzed, the possibility that they will do the right thing because it's the right thing is slim-to-none; hence, fear of legal (or rather, financial) repercussion is about the only way to get their attention.
There are two ways to this thinking. The dude asking the question (TFS) is not the company, he's a manager in some company. He's a goddam human being, so he should be able to feel compassion.
Let's not forget that we - in the CS space - are living in an overprivileged area. Specifically, one where a layoff isn't the end of your life, but just a way to update your resume and search for another job, which you will find in a few days or weeks at the maximum. If you're not completely retarded that is. It's not as if our lives were on the line. We can goddam afford to stand up for our values.
Not many populations have been able to say that in the history of humanity. Let's play that card !
So I now have to know *every* *possible* *thing* that can offend people from *every* *possible* *culture*.
And it's funny how no one *ever* has to understand mine. It's *always* a one way street due to rampant double standards.
Hmmm. Troubled, are you? No it's not a one way street. The point is to try to be with the others as you'd like the others to be with you, but it just doesn't translate quite this literally. Because most often they have different values. So yes, interacting with other human beings is not just about making crude jokes at the coffee machine.
How many people have you encountered for which "the" is disrespectful? I guess none, so please stop with this.
And no, it's not an obligation to talk to other human beings. Of course, if you want a "normal" office job, it probably will be. Then, learn to respect the others. Yes it is a subjective term, but it is what makes society. So you can't just dismiss it.
BTW, zero tolerance policies are stupid. At least we agree on that. In everything you have two sides, and most often both are stupid, it's the middle ground that makes sense.
People: if you can't stop yourself from saying sexually harassing things, you've got some serious problems.
It really is much more simple than that: If you don't care enough about the person you're talking to, just don't talk to him/her. Caring is knowing the other person, his/her limits, culture, tastes. And how do you learn all that? By paying attention, listening.
Of course, the odd mistake can happen, but if you care just one bit, you will notice it and can handle it gently. By going to see the person offended and talking to him/her. Chances are that this alone will make up for your mistake.
Your point is well founded, but I find it a bit disturbing. The reason you shouldn't let this happen should not be the fear of a lawsuit, but the welfare of your employees. They are human beings, and if you drive them all the way to sue you, it probably means you've made them suffer along the road, which is much worse than a "nice settlement".
Of course, there is probably the odd person not really suffering and still suing just for money, but if there's ground for a lawsuit there's probably something morally wrong behind the scene.
You've got to give credit to Apple though: No Password Required. It's all in the ease of use for the user and not bother them with useless questions and controls onscreen.
Those stupid trojans ask for passwords on Windows ! Can you imagine the hassle for the user !??!!
First step first. Lets get good opensource drivers, or at least decent binaries.
Intel maybe but for the rest forget it, it's not going to happen. Heck, they don't even know how to write proper drivers for Windows, what do you expect?
Isn't this what the Alt attribute to the IMG tag is for?
Nope, that's not it at all. ALT represents the text a user agent should substitute to the image on a device that has no image displaying capabilities. Think Lynx, Google, Browsers for disabled people, etc.
I sincerely hope you're joking. Flattened breasts are a pain and very uncomfortable. If you want to be at your best while on the field, it's not the best way to do it.
You make it sound like you disagree with me, but I'm not sure. The point of my post was to discuss whether the iPad was innovative or not, not to talk about patents... It would look as it you agree with me.
So you think a product like the iPad with half the autonomy would have been a blatant failure?
As far as marketing is concerned, yes, they have fans. That doesn't make 70 million sales. That doesn't even make 7 million sales. Maybe 700k sales, but I doubt it. What they have is an asset: Early adopters. Those will blindly buy (that is until they find something really bad). Then they show their friends, family, neighbors. And those people see something they like. And they buy it. But we're out of the fan base at that stage and the product sells itself on its own merit.
As far as rounded corners are concerned, I have a few things to say: - you don't know what you're talking about. There is no patent on rounded corners - as much as you'd like one to exist. - Samsung is the one to blame on that one, going in the Arena fully aware on what they were infringing on and not caring. I mean, it's not like it's a 200 people company dammit! They held thousands of patents before this came into play and Apple was VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD on the fact that they had patented the iPhone and that they were willing to fight to enforce those patents. Let them fight the fight they chose willfully. - Not my point in this thread.
If you really think Marketing alone is responsible for 70 million iPad sales, then I really don't know what to tell you. Apple excel in marketing, this is true. But they failed with many products thus far. Marketing is a great tool, but only if you have something worthy to sell.
So if Toshiba had made the iPad, what would the sales figures have looked like hmm?
Who knows? They were light years away from having the maturity - hardware wise and software wise - anyways. What if the chinese were first to walk on the moon in 1950 hmmmm?
Slashdot Mirror
Writing data doesn't securely get rid of the previous data anyway. You need to write RANDOM data.
Uhhh? Care to back that up?
I think once is enough for your assumption of "most can't read it no more"
1024 really sounds like overkill. Especially it it's a big drive and 1024 wipes will take a few years.
Biometrics is the most stupid way of authenticating anyone. As soon as someone is able to fake your credentials (and so far it's always been simple - fingerprints, face recognition, etc) you're 0wned. Because you cannot change your credentials. Because your credentials are you.
So biometrics for authentication is a no-no. Only clueless executives can realistically push this forward.
You did good in listing Apple's evil actions as reported by the press. Now can you do the same for Google?
Please define evil. By my standard, you must not be in love with Google either.
I am 40+ years old, and no, whenever I start looking for a job I get answers in matter of days.
How many people have you encountered for which "the" is disrespectful?
Apparently you don't understand the point. Anyone can be offended by anything. What if such a person were to exist? Would you be expected to cater to them? If not, why? Have you arbitrarily decided that it's less important to not offend them for some reason?
Well, no, you don't seem to understand my point here (and not THE point as you put it). No one on the streets is offended by the word "the". Give at least some credit to humankind. To push your point further, people that are offended by such mundane things are living in psychiatric hospitals so you don't have to cater to them. You're not expected to. You forgot my last sentence that was the most important of my post: When there are two sides to an issue, often both are wrong. Some middle ground is often the way to go.
So here: No, you are not expected to cater to people that find "the" offensive. Because there's 3 of them in the US. But yes, you are expected to cater to people that find "I want to rape you" offensive. Because there's 200 million of them in the US. Do you get it now?
Then, learn to respect the others.
"Get out or conform." There are more options, though. Work to change the laws.
I wasn't talking about laws at all. What is your point?
So you can't just dismiss it.
I never said that I could. I just find it amusing how it seems that some people believe that their opinions are facts. The fact of the matter is that your opinions will influence society and laws will perhaps reflect that. That is obvious. But I too have an opinion about all this.
You are entitled to your opinion, just as I am. In all fairness, you seem to view your opinions just as factual as I seem to consider mine. Judging by your words. Of course, this has nothing to do with "respect" which it what this is all about.
In everything you have two sides, and most often both are stupid
Except that this is a subjective matter.
Not really, it isn't. Everything in life is about making compromises. Is Arsenic a poison? It depends. It depends how much you ingest. Is my sentence offensive? It depends. It depends to whom you're saying it. Is it a beautiful day? It depends. It depends on yesterday.
The only fact is that everything is an opinion and that nothing is a fact. And everything is about how much you want of it.
Another fact is that Americans always tend to make two sides on any incoming issue. By doing so, they all miss the real answer which is somewhere in the middle.
Unfortunately, considering that most corporations would be considered sociopaths were they to be psychoanalyzed, the possibility that they will do the right thing because it's the right thing is slim-to-none; hence, fear of legal (or rather, financial) repercussion is about the only way to get their attention.
There are two ways to this thinking. The dude asking the question (TFS) is not the company, he's a manager in some company. He's a goddam human being, so he should be able to feel compassion.
Let's not forget that we - in the CS space - are living in an overprivileged area. Specifically, one where a layoff isn't the end of your life, but just a way to update your resume and search for another job, which you will find in a few days or weeks at the maximum. If you're not completely retarded that is. It's not as if our lives were on the line. We can goddam afford to stand up for our values.
Not many populations have been able to say that in the history of humanity. Let's play that card !
So I now have to know *every* *possible* *thing* that can offend people from *every* *possible* *culture*.
And it's funny how no one *ever* has to understand mine. It's *always* a one way street due to rampant double standards.
Hmmm. Troubled, are you? No it's not a one way street. The point is to try to be with the others as you'd like the others to be with you, but it just doesn't translate quite this literally. Because most often they have different values. So yes, interacting with other human beings is not just about making crude jokes at the coffee machine.
How many people have you encountered for which "the" is disrespectful? I guess none, so please stop with this.
And no, it's not an obligation to talk to other human beings. Of course, if you want a "normal" office job, it probably will be. Then, learn to respect the others. Yes it is a subjective term, but it is what makes society. So you can't just dismiss it.
BTW, zero tolerance policies are stupid. At least we agree on that. In everything you have two sides, and most often both are stupid, it's the middle ground that makes sense.
People: if you can't stop yourself from saying sexually harassing things, you've got some serious problems.
It really is much more simple than that: If you don't care enough about the person you're talking to, just don't talk to him/her. Caring is knowing the other person, his/her limits, culture, tastes. And how do you learn all that? By paying attention, listening.
Of course, the odd mistake can happen, but if you care just one bit, you will notice it and can handle it gently. By going to see the person offended and talking to him/her. Chances are that this alone will make up for your mistake.
what user1 perceives as "It's what normal, mature human beings do" is offensive to user2.
And it ends there. So you're offended by the word "the"? Don't expect me to stop using it to make you happy.
How thick can you get?
If you want to interact with other human beings, start by respecting them. It really ends there.
Mind you it's not an obligation. If you don't give a shit, take my advice: avoid any interaction with anyone but your equally retarded friends.
Your point is well founded, but I find it a bit disturbing. The reason you shouldn't let this happen should not be the fear of a lawsuit, but the welfare of your employees. They are human beings, and if you drive them all the way to sue you, it probably means you've made them suffer along the road, which is much worse than a "nice settlement".
Of course, there is probably the odd person not really suffering and still suing just for money, but if there's ground for a lawsuit there's probably something morally wrong behind the scene.
You've got to give credit to Apple though: No Password Required. It's all in the ease of use for the user and not bother them with useless questions and controls onscreen.
Those stupid trojans ask for passwords on Windows ! Can you imagine the hassle for the user !??!!
First step first. Lets get good opensource drivers, or at least decent binaries.
Intel maybe but for the rest forget it, it's not going to happen. Heck, they don't even know how to write proper drivers for Windows, what do you expect?
I haven't had a "Re: re re Re re Fwd re fwd fwd Re re: fwd: re Re re Fwd fwd:" email for years now.
That's because most mail agents won't ass a Re in front of a subject line starting with "Re" anymore. Programs evolve too.
Hummmm. s/ass/add/g. How did I let that through? And more important, how did /;'s lame filter let me do it?
I haven't had a "Re: re re Re re Fwd re fwd fwd Re re: fwd: re Re re Fwd fwd:" email for years now.
That's because most mail agents won't ass a Re in front of a subject line starting with "Re" anymore. Programs evolve too.
Isn't this what the Alt attribute to the IMG tag is for?
Nope, that's not it at all. ALT represents the text a user agent should substitute to the image on a device that has no image displaying capabilities. Think Lynx, Google, Browsers for disabled people, etc.
I sincerely hope you're joking. Flattened breasts are a pain and very uncomfortable. If you want to be at your best while on the field, it's not the best way to do it.
You make it sound like you disagree with me, but I'm not sure. The point of my post was to discuss whether the iPad was innovative or not, not to talk about patents... It would look as it you agree with me.
So you think a product like the iPad with half the autonomy would have been a blatant failure?
As far as marketing is concerned, yes, they have fans. That doesn't make 70 million sales. That doesn't even make 7 million sales. Maybe 700k sales, but I doubt it. What they have is an asset: Early adopters. Those will blindly buy (that is until they find something really bad). Then they show their friends, family, neighbors. And those people see something they like. And they buy it. But we're out of the fan base at that stage and the product sells itself on its own merit.
As far as rounded corners are concerned, I have a few things to say:
- you don't know what you're talking about. There is no patent on rounded corners - as much as you'd like one to exist.
- Samsung is the one to blame on that one, going in the Arena fully aware on what they were infringing on and not caring. I mean, it's not like it's a 200 people company dammit! They held thousands of patents before this came into play and Apple was VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD on the fact that they had patented the iPhone and that they were willing to fight to enforce those patents. Let them fight the fight they chose willfully.
- Not my point in this thread.
Citations, please.
Please, not that, not here.
If you really think Marketing alone is responsible for 70 million iPad sales, then I really don't know what to tell you. Apple excel in marketing, this is true. But they failed with many products thus far. Marketing is a great tool, but only if you have something worthy to sell.
So if Toshiba had made the iPad, what would the sales figures have looked like hmm?
Who knows? They were light years away from having the maturity - hardware wise and software wise - anyways. What if the chinese were first to walk on the moon in 1950 hmmmm?
It was business genius, but the tablet concept was not new.
Yes, but the question was not "Did Apple invent the tablet" but "Was the iPad innovative". Thanks for not answering.