Yeah, it's just crap that you victimise people further that already have the misfortune to be dependent on MS to get their work done. Sure, they can change, but not all people have the skills to go beyond "I want a PC" - heck, even to get them to ask "I want a Mac" is a major win..
I noticed another fun trend: companies stating "There is a problem but we'll only tell our customers" - yup, sure, that's a way to be credible..
This is a bank that hands the entire contents of a business account to a member of staff who isn't even on the account mandate, AFTER a lawyer has warned them.
The UFO shaped Evoluon in Eindhoven had the same device, I remember playing with it in my youth. However, we're talking 40+ years ago (yes, I'm old), the UFO shaped building has changed from a Philips-sponsored exhibition to a conference centre. Sniff.. Your coffee machine is at approx 7:12 in. It also showed those *beautiful* relays that were used for telephones..
It may be worth calling the Philips media representatives in Eindhoven and ask - I'm positive Philips will have the drawings stashed away somewhere. I have noticed some discussion about the specific machine on some Dutch forums (Google for "evoluon koffie" and you'll find them). Sorry, it's in Dutch..
Good luck, and thanks for bringing back those memories - while you're at it, ask them where the giant nixie tubes went!
Oh, wonderful, "100+ improvements". So where is a guide which details them all? Is this a secret Apple attempt to curry favor with publishers by leaving it to online mags to detail it all? For the moment, it seems this is another case of "usability means not having to write manuals" - which is an illusion.
I'm disappointed, Apple can do better. On the plus side, I just came across something that suggests Apple now give Apps a way to back up their data too. That is *very* good, although it means I'll probably face weeks of App upgrades - almost making it MS compatible if it wasn't for the absence of reboots and crashes:-).
.. now they have mapped my SSID I'm moving. Expect anyone navigating using Google Maps to drive off a cliff shortly, mwhohahaha:-)
Actualy, come to think of it, wouldn't it be fun if we set up an effort swapping out SSIDs (or devices)? That could make an unholy mess of this whole navigating-by-SSID idea:-):-)
Because both don't use the glutenous rice that's referred to in the article.
Any other questions, or shall I leave you to find some sticky rice? Hint: you are most likely going to find it in Thai restaurants, but only those that serve *real* Thai food instead of the Western surrogate..
That someone leaves some code in the Streetview car software, OK, maybe. That just means their software development process needs work. However, that code doesn't work in isolation - the data it collects has to be gathered and processed somewhere too, and Google is asking me to believe that back end process just "accidentally" happened to be there too?
Pull the other one, I call BS.
It's more likely they were caught with their pants down by the Germans asking for an audit and are now scrambling for an excuse. Notice how quickly we got the "sorry" and "we let our users down", that's an indication that they know full well they were caught red-handed again, and know it.
OK, maybe I ought to get out more, but I cannot be the only one laughing his head off because of the mini storm that cartoon has set off. It's so perfectly circular there's no hope of getting a simple answer, which is part of the fun.
My take: it SHOULD be on Wikipedia, simply because it's the only way it stops the arguing. But hey, why bother with logic? The current situation is even more fun than the comic itself.
I'm perfectly OK with the principle of sharing that such meters are there to "help along".
What gets me is the abuse. London has plenty of it:
- when a meter is not working you're NOT allowed to park in some places. Yes, that's right, unless they can make money off it that space is going to stay empty! - parking wardens do not have a formalised process for checking their watches, yet some of them use that to determine expiry. There is plenty of evidence that some don'^t even bother to wait for expiry - I am personally grateful for not being there when my wife returned in time with the baby, put the baby in the back who threw up (babies do that occasionally). When she turned round from the clean up she found a ticket on the window. I think I may have lost it if I had seen that, I'm not quite sure how the person would have ended up, but I suspect some re-assembly may have been required. - they count on the hassle factor to get away with illegally issued tickets: evidence exists from insiders that your first protest letter is not even read but simply answered with a standard template denying the incorrect issue. - to make matters worse, London allows clampers, who have their own modus operandi for ensuring they earn well: * only non-traceable forms of payment are accepted, and they are generally unreceipted. That's a license for abuse as well as tax evasion * their staff generally uses up parking spaces in the area they patrol, thus increasing the chance of a violation. * they rarely carry ID that allows correct identification of (a) staff identity as well as (b) authorisation to work that area. I actually got out of a car clamp because I asked them for it and threatened to take them to the local police station for impersonating operators (I can be very convincing, and they had nothing). - last but not least we have the people that tow your car away. The original concept was to remove vehicles that were obstructions, these days it's simply an illegal way to increase the costs of a parking offence. I'm waiting for the first crooks that entertain themselves with loading up cars so marked, but drive them off for stripping instead of to the car pond.
I now live in a city where parking enforcement is actually reasonable. You'll get fined, but not the very second the counter goes to zero, there are blue zones where you can park for free for an hour (with a parking disc) or permanent if you're a resident (for which you need a permit). If you're dumb and forget your residence card, they wave your first fine (but not afterwards, they're not dumb:-). At night you only get a ticket if you're parked in a way that forms an obstruction to emergency traffic. If you need to park for a day you can buy a ticket for that too online. This is how it should be.
I'm also not very fond of shops implementing paid parking - if I go to spend my money there I should expect parking space to be part of the offering.
1 - There are no real problems with information sharing if they really wanted to. The model for this that would allow control over what is shared has existed for years in the military. However...
2 - The participants are hopefully aware that part of the job is protecting themselves against the others. What one nation labels "organised crime" is for another nation simply "economic espionage". For starters, I would love to be near US customs when all these delegates arrive and are temporarily relieved of their laptops...
Maybe we look at this from different angles. I have some experience with media and creating awareness (mainly because I wanted to avoid the need for marketing droids) and I know that if you want something to be widely reported it needs to be catchy - it needs to grip the user the moment they pass their eyes over it.
Think grabbing the eyeballs of someone with the attention span of a ADHD gnat on speed - a millisecond job. That rules out words with more than two syllables and multi-word concepts (you max is two). Think of it as something that former President Bush would not only manage to read, but also pronounce.
But hey, neither expression is going to make it so I'm not bothered:-)
It's actually a volume question. If we all would start using that term, and then get some well known people to follow suite, *WE* would define the term. I must admit I like the whole idea of using "zuck" for any deceptive activity that impacts your privacy - I would support that no problem. "Evil interfaces" is, sorry, total crap.
First of all will it confuse people with Google's "Do no evil unless we make money on it", secondly it's not very creative and about as juveline as the content of that video they made. No, "zuck" is IMHO MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCH better.
Don't twist my words, please. I never said the finder should give the 4G to someone that doesn't own it, I suggested that leaving it with bar staff (i.e. leaving it in the area where it was lost) would give a better chance of the 4G getting back to its owner. Indeed, the Apple guy rang there repeatedly. I also note with interest that the "finder" made no attempt to contact the bar afterwards - why not? Was the original plan to squeeze Apple for some gifts for returning the prototype? We'll never know, but fact remains that the claim of "trying everything to return the device" doesn't stand up to scrutiny, even before observing the events following.
Secondly, he could have shown the device and then return it to the bar. Instead, it changed hands (fine, maybe a better intermediary), but so did money. You can give it any name you want, but the fact that both events took place simultaneously is not exactly looking good. Without the money they could have possibly been able to pass it off as something other than misappropriation, with the money exchange life has just become that much more fun.
But hey, in a way you're right - I'm just going to get some popcorn and watch the show. We'll soon know what is correct and what isn't as the police and the lawyers have gotten their teeth into it.
Maybe it proves that the business cards indeed originated from that location, instead of a single one being passed between people. I know, it's clutching at straws but it's the only thing I could think of:-)
If I take a can of coke out of a shop and later come back in to pay for it, it doesn't undo the fact that my original walk-out was theft. Undoing the effect doesn't help (although in the above case you'd be let off because it would be deemed a mistake and not worth the hassle).
Let's start with the point that a device was found that belonged to a person. There was originally nothing to suggest it wasn't his own phone, so returning it to Apple raises question number 1: why? Why wasn't it left under care of the bar staff, as that would be logically the place where the guy who lost it would go looking?
Question 2: why Gizmodo? It has emerged that a number of parties were contacted, offering access to the device. Back to basics: the person selling access or generating money in any way, shape or form off the device had no right to do so as it was not their device - the excuses won't wash. Someone made $5000 which he would not have made without having the device in his possession - which wasn't his. In law I cannot see any complications there. Note that it's not Apple's problem at this point, this is state law. Apple will just quietly sit back and watch the wheels mulch the people involved.
If Gizmodo had any brains they would have put the 4G back together and returned it to the bar, then wait a while before publishing. That way it would be much harder to figure out where the leak was, Jobs would have steam coming out of his ears and nobody would be able to prove anything. But hey, let's fling it onto the Net as soon as possible, and, oh yes, hang the person who made an honest mistake out to dry as well. There was no need for that either.
There's also a legal requirement to carry some money, used to be 500 BEF
That should be higher, after all, you have to make sure someone is worth mugging:-)
That's quite interesting - I never knew that, thanks. Is a foreigner thus required to carry passport or ID with them at all times, or is a picture driving license sufficient?
Well, the theory sounds good. The problem is a basic assumption: illegal, abused immigrants harm the economy. That is a dangerous assertion, because it assumes that for any illegal kicked out, a legal entity gets the job, and that assumption stumbles over the same economics you use to address what you perceive to be the problem. In an ideal world, you would be 100% correct and I like the model.
Slashdot Mirror
Enough said, I think. It'll take a while to get rid of that image.. :)
I think there are a number of systems already in circulation that do this, so let's see who will hit Google first..
Yeah, it's just crap that you victimise people further that already have the misfortune to be dependent on MS to get their work done. Sure, they can change, but not all people have the skills to go beyond "I want a PC" - heck, even to get them to ask "I want a Mac" is a major win..
I noticed another fun trend: companies stating "There is a problem but we'll only tell our customers" - yup, sure, that's a way to be credible..
This is a bank that hands the entire contents of a business account to a member of staff who isn't even on the account mandate, AFTER a lawyer has warned them.
So, no surprise there.
The UFO shaped Evoluon in Eindhoven had the same device, I remember playing with it in my youth. However, we're talking 40+ years ago (yes, I'm old), the UFO shaped building has changed from a Philips-sponsored exhibition to a conference centre. Sniff.. Your coffee machine is at approx 7:12 in. It also showed those *beautiful* relays that were used for telephones..
It may be worth calling the Philips media representatives in Eindhoven and ask - I'm positive Philips will have the drawings stashed away somewhere. I have noticed some discussion about the specific machine on some Dutch forums (Google for "evoluon koffie" and you'll find them). Sorry, it's in Dutch..
Good luck, and thanks for bringing back those memories - while you're at it, ask them where the giant nixie tubes went!
.. Do you have any idea how hard it is to digest such pictures? :)
Oh, wonderful, "100+ improvements". So where is a guide which details them all? Is this a secret Apple attempt to curry favor with publishers by leaving it to online mags to detail it all? For the moment, it seems this is another case of "usability means not having to write manuals" - which is an illusion.
I'm disappointed, Apple can do better. On the plus side, I just came across something that suggests Apple now give Apps a way to back up their data too. That is *very* good, although it means I'll probably face weeks of App upgrades - almost making it MS compatible if it wasn't for the absence of reboots and crashes :-).
That idea has come a bit late (sorry, German language only).
A Swiss company appears already in discussion to provide fabric like it..
Hahaha, I know *exactly* what you mean. In NE Thailand, they think dynamite chillies aren't hot enough, so they roast them. Avoid..
BTW, it's also a baaaad idea to be downwind from the fire where they are roasting it - it takes a good 40 minutes to stop coughing :-(..
.. now they have mapped my SSID I'm moving. Expect anyone navigating using Google Maps to drive off a cliff shortly, mwhohahaha :-)
Actualy, come to think of it, wouldn't it be fun if we set up an effort swapping out SSIDs (or devices)? That could make an unholy mess of this whole navigating-by-SSID idea :-) :-)
Yes, I'm in evil mode today. Blame the cat.
4 - add a rule that any sign of tampering with the video renders the video as "not available", thus automatically rule 1
Because both don't use the glutenous rice that's referred to in the article.
Any other questions, or shall I leave you to find some sticky rice? Hint: you are most likely going to find it in Thai restaurants, but only those that serve *real* Thai food instead of the Western surrogate..
We're obviously not using the cows correctly. There are 4 connectors per cow.
Oh, wait, that's milk. What are we going to do with that?
That someone leaves some code in the Streetview car software, OK, maybe. That just means their software development process needs work. However, that code doesn't work in isolation - the data it collects has to be gathered and processed somewhere too, and Google is asking me to believe that back end process just "accidentally" happened to be there too?
Pull the other one, I call BS.
It's more likely they were caught with their pants down by the Germans asking for an audit and are now scrambling for an excuse. Notice how quickly we got the "sorry" and "we let our users down", that's an indication that they know full well they were caught red-handed again, and know it.
Google, don't worry about losing my trust.
You never had it to start with.
OK, maybe I ought to get out more, but I cannot be the only one laughing his head off because of the mini storm that cartoon has set off. It's so perfectly circular there's no hope of getting a simple answer, which is part of the fun.
My take: it SHOULD be on Wikipedia, simply because it's the only way it stops the arguing. But hey, why bother with logic? The current situation is even more fun than the comic itself.
Thank you, XKCD, you made my day once again :-).
I'm perfectly OK with the principle of sharing that such meters are there to "help along".
What gets me is the abuse. London has plenty of it:
- when a meter is not working you're NOT allowed to park in some places. Yes, that's right, unless they can make money off it that space is going to stay empty!
- parking wardens do not have a formalised process for checking their watches, yet some of them use that to determine expiry. There is plenty of evidence that some don'^t even bother to wait for expiry
- I am personally grateful for not being there when my wife returned in time with the baby, put the baby in the back who threw up (babies do that occasionally). When she turned round from the clean up she found a ticket on the window. I think I may have lost it if I had seen that, I'm not quite sure how the person would have ended up, but I suspect some re-assembly may have been required.
- they count on the hassle factor to get away with illegally issued tickets: evidence exists from insiders that your first protest letter is not even read but simply answered with a standard template denying the incorrect issue.
- to make matters worse, London allows clampers, who have their own modus operandi for ensuring they earn well:
* only non-traceable forms of payment are accepted, and they are generally unreceipted. That's a license for abuse as well as tax evasion
* their staff generally uses up parking spaces in the area they patrol, thus increasing the chance of a violation.
* they rarely carry ID that allows correct identification of (a) staff identity as well as (b) authorisation to work that area. I actually got out of a car clamp because I asked them for it and threatened to take them to the local police station for impersonating operators (I can be very convincing, and they had nothing).
- last but not least we have the people that tow your car away. The original concept was to remove vehicles that were obstructions, these days it's simply an illegal way to increase the costs of a parking offence. I'm waiting for the first crooks that entertain themselves with loading up cars so marked, but drive them off for stripping instead of to the car pond.
I now live in a city where parking enforcement is actually reasonable. You'll get fined, but not the very second the counter goes to zero, there are blue zones where you can park for free for an hour (with a parking disc) or permanent if you're a resident (for which you need a permit). If you're dumb and forget your residence card, they wave your first fine (but not afterwards, they're not dumb :-). At night you only get a ticket if you're parked in a way that forms an obstruction to emergency traffic. If you need to park for a day you can buy a ticket for that too online. This is how it should be.
I'm also not very fond of shops implementing paid parking - if I go to spend my money there I should expect parking space to be part of the offering.
1 - There are no real problems with information sharing if they really wanted to. The model for this that would allow control over what is shared has existed for years in the military. However...
2 - The participants are hopefully aware that part of the job is protecting themselves against the others. What one nation labels "organised crime" is for another nation simply "economic espionage". For starters, I would love to be near US customs when all these delegates arrive and are temporarily relieved of their laptops...
Maybe we look at this from different angles. I have some experience with media and creating awareness (mainly because I wanted to avoid the need for marketing droids) and I know that if you want something to be widely reported it needs to be catchy - it needs to grip the user the moment they pass their eyes over it.
Think grabbing the eyeballs of someone with the attention span of a ADHD gnat on speed - a millisecond job. That rules out words with more than two syllables and multi-word concepts (you max is two). Think of it as something that former President Bush would not only manage to read, but also pronounce.
But hey, neither expression is going to make it so I'm not bothered :-)
It's actually a volume question. If we all would start using that term, and then get some well known people to follow suite, *WE* would define the term. I must admit I like the whole idea of using "zuck" for any deceptive activity that impacts your privacy - I would support that no problem. "Evil interfaces" is, sorry, total crap.
First of all will it confuse people with Google's "Do no evil unless we make money on it", secondly it's not very creative and about as juveline as the content of that video they made. No, "zuck" is IMHO MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCH better.
Don't twist my words, please. I never said the finder should give the 4G to someone that doesn't own it, I suggested that leaving it with bar staff (i.e. leaving it in the area where it was lost) would give a better chance of the 4G getting back to its owner. Indeed, the Apple guy rang there repeatedly. I also note with interest that the "finder" made no attempt to contact the bar afterwards - why not? Was the original plan to squeeze Apple for some gifts for returning the prototype? We'll never know, but fact remains that the claim of "trying everything to return the device" doesn't stand up to scrutiny, even before observing the events following.
Secondly, he could have shown the device and then return it to the bar. Instead, it changed hands (fine, maybe a better intermediary), but so did money. You can give it any name you want, but the fact that both events took place simultaneously is not exactly looking good. Without the money they could have possibly been able to pass it off as something other than misappropriation, with the money exchange life has just become that much more fun.
But hey, in a way you're right - I'm just going to get some popcorn and watch the show. We'll soon know what is correct and what isn't as the police and the lawyers have gotten their teeth into it.
Maybe it proves that the business cards indeed originated from that location, instead of a single one being passed between people. I know, it's clutching at straws but it's the only thing I could think of :-)
If I take a can of coke out of a shop and later come back in to pay for it, it doesn't undo the fact that my original walk-out was theft. Undoing the effect doesn't help (although in the above case you'd be let off because it would be deemed a mistake and not worth the hassle).
Let's start with the point that a device was found that belonged to a person. There was originally nothing to suggest it wasn't his own phone, so returning it to Apple raises question number 1: why? Why wasn't it left under care of the bar staff, as that would be logically the place where the guy who lost it would go looking?
Question 2: why Gizmodo? It has emerged that a number of parties were contacted, offering access to the device. Back to basics: the person selling access or generating money in any way, shape or form off the device had no right to do so as it was not their device - the excuses won't wash. Someone made $5000 which he would not have made without having the device in his possession - which wasn't his. In law I cannot see any complications there. Note that it's not Apple's problem at this point, this is state law. Apple will just quietly sit back and watch the wheels mulch the people involved.
If Gizmodo had any brains they would have put the 4G back together and returned it to the bar, then wait a while before publishing. That way it would be much harder to figure out where the leak was, Jobs would have steam coming out of his ears and nobody would be able to prove anything. But hey, let's fling it onto the Net as soon as possible, and, oh yes, hang the person who made an honest mistake out to dry as well. There was no need for that either.
Why wasn't it left at the bar under care of the bar staff? That was the most logical place for the guy who dropped it to start looking for it.
There's also a legal requirement to carry some money, used to be 500 BEF
That should be higher, after all, you have to make sure someone is worth mugging :-)
That's quite interesting - I never knew that, thanks. Is a foreigner thus required to carry passport or ID with them at all times, or is a picture driving license sufficient?
Well, the theory sounds good. The problem is a basic assumption: illegal, abused immigrants harm the economy. That is a dangerous assertion, because it assumes that for any illegal kicked out, a legal entity gets the job, and that assumption stumbles over the same economics you use to address what you perceive to be the problem. In an ideal world, you would be 100% correct and I like the model.
The challenge is to find that ideal world..