Try attaching an ebook and a photo (or any combination of attachments) to the same email. When you've already started writing that email. Sounds trivial, doesn't it? Try playing a 1080p movie in.mkv format on your iPad3 without converting it. Now try playing the same movie in a different player. Sounds trivial, doesn't it? Good luck.
The reality is that iOS is a usability nightmare for some very very trivial things.
Even though I have been very happy with my HTC devices in the past couple of years, I have always looked at the competing Nokia hardware with much envy. I would have bought a Windows Mobile 6 device from them, had they offered it and I would instabuy an Android N9 successor were it to come out.
Two-dimensional icon grids or 'tiles' are generally terrible. The only valid use I've ever seen for them is when the 'icon' is actually a preview of the content, such as image galleries. For everything else, straight one-dimensional lists make much more sense (Windows Explorer: ALT+V, D).
I think GP meant that we then generally still perceive the wall as being white. At least, I hope he did. Best optical illusion that illustrates this I've seen to date: http://www.planetperplex.com/en/item/checker-shadow
You can make all the snarky comments you want. Just walk around for a day and think about all the fucking idiots you see that you wouldn't even trust holding scissors. Now imagine those same idiots with a gun. If you don't have the time to do that, let these law abiding citizens make you proud: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTVa0aQnvVU
Apple has already somewhat innovated (or at least done something better) in their unpolished product. They're using vector based map images rather than the more images in Google maps. It allows you to see zoom in a more continuous fashion (as opposed to discreet zoom levels) and allows up to 300 miles of visibility rather than the 35 miles Google maps allows in the event that the phone goes off line.
Sigh. If you'd have bothered to read the comments at your link, you'd have been more informed:
gatorguy 2012/08/03 10:13am Google's maps on Android are not bit-mapped (raster). The desktop maps version may still be, I'm not sure, but Google swapped over to vector-based maps for Android back in 2010.
BPA or not, there is probably a significant link between teens who drink a lot of soda and those that don't. Maybe this obvious correlation is not causation issue is covered in the full publication (I only read the excerpt)... but if not, this is pretty damn stupid.
Yep. From the abstract:
"Controlling for race/ethnicity, age, caregiver education, poverty to income ratio, sex, serum cotinine level, caloric intake, television watching, and urinary creatinine level, children in the lowest urinary BPA quartile had a lower estimated prevalence of obesity".
So apparently they haven't controlled for the soda (or sugar) intake. On the other hand, I'd expect that to be correlated to a number of the factors they did control for.
It won't reach quite to Hawaii, but it's a pretty big aerial/carrier denial tool. Then again, it's not a problem until someone actually sinks a carrier with one.
Well, unless it is taken out by a Goalkeeper or other anti-missile defense system on a supporting vessel. IIRC, detecting the missiles is the only real problem.
Generally accepted or not, it's just plain wrong. Piracy has a specific legal meaning, and Big Content has waged a purposeful campaign to get you to conflate it with downloading, even though they ARE two very different things.
So "generally accepted" or not, why are you doing their work for them?
I'm not. I'd like to see the abuse of the word piracy eradicated as much as you do. Well, maybe not as much, but we're on the same side is all I'm saying:-)
I'm just suggesting that if you really want the abuse to disappear, it has to be supplanted with the use of something with equal brevity and similar specifity.
No, they do not "mean" that, per se, but they do include it. P2P and filesharing ARE acceptable (and correct) terms to use for "downloading/uploading content to which one does not own the rights to possess or redistribute", if that is indeed what you are doing. You are splitting hairs here, and IMO not justifiably.
That is comparable with saying that 'wielding a knife' includes 'stabbing somebody to death' (or, if the magnitude bothers you: 'slicing off your fingertip'). Or perhaps more relevant: that 'splitting stuff' includes 'splitting hairs';-)
Language evolves in a specific way and in such a manner that popular concepts get their own word, existing or new. Tweeting also never meant microweblogging. Good luck in convincing people to stop using it to refer to microweblogging.
Let me put it differently: consider your current strategy to change the abuse of the term piracy. How do you see it leading to the preferred result?
I beg do differ. I know that we are basically on the same side regarding the legality, but "piracy" is NOT a general term. It was deliberately introduced into the vernacular to get people to think it was.
"Piracy" is a legal term. It was first used in the context of copyright around 100 years or so ago, maybe a bit more. But since then it has become embodied in actual law. Piracy is defined by federal statute to be as I described. So no, it is not a general term. It is a specific legal term, and if you use it as a general term for downloading, I say again: you are doing the RIAA and MPAA's jobs (in regard to PR) for them.
Be that as it may, I'd wager that 90% of even semiliterate users have come to understand 'piracy' in this context as copyright infringement. This is what I meant by 'generally accepted term'.
We ALREADY have alternatives!!! Not just one, but several: "downloading" is one but pretty vague. But there there are "P2P" and "filesharing", both of which are antithesis -- antagonistic -- to actual "piracy". Take your pick.
P2P, filesharing and downloading do not mean "downloading/uploading content to which one does not own the rights to possess or redistribute". So no, they are not alternatives. Far from being such, actually.
As for the catchy terms: bootsharing, bootsharers, bootleeching, bootleeches. This is the solution. I promise.
GP did not say downloading [content to which one does not own the rights to possess] was legal. You clearly misunderstand what 'crime' means (hint: speeding is not a crime).
GP is correct, but as my first sentence shows, 'piracy' is a much more convenient generally accepted term for the behaviour we're discussing. Bashing it's use without providing an alternative is bound to fail, imho. We need a catchy marketing term to cover it!
The things you mention don't really classify as technology.
Generally, technology means (a set of) tools and ways to use them. If we're going to call fire a technology, we might as well call rusting a technology. More accurate would be 'Using campfires to cook' or 'Using a spinning wheel to convert cotton into thread', both of which aren't used professionally on a meaningful scale in the western world.
Lossless audio codecs like ALAC and FLAC do waveform analysis and "know more" about the nature of audio files so that they can be compressed more than your typical compression algorithm like gzip would do
I remember seeing this claim a while ago and having a hard time believing it (it's supposed to make a 20% difference or some number like that). I was always under the impression that modern compression algorithms are pretty close to what is mathematically possible, so I tried to find some proof for the claims for an hour. Could not find it.
It could be my lacking Google Fu in combination with my lacking expertise in this area, so my honest question is: really? Why not add FLAC-like analysis and encoding to generic compression algorithms? A potential improvement of 20% seems worth going for.
This. Save for forcing your kid to live in the past by handing him a 486 or older, this is probably the best way to foster understanding of the basic components of a computer.
Bonus points for buying the components one at a time.
Slashdot Mirror
Try attaching an ebook and a photo (or any combination of attachments) to the same email. When you've already started writing that email. Sounds trivial, doesn't it? .mkv format on your iPad3 without converting it. Now try playing the same movie in a different player. Sounds trivial, doesn't it?
Try playing a 1080p movie in
Good luck.
The reality is that iOS is a usability nightmare for some very very trivial things.
So true.
Even though I have been very happy with my HTC devices in the past couple of years, I have always looked at the competing Nokia hardware with much envy. I would have bought a Windows Mobile 6 device from them, had they offered it and I would instabuy an Android N9 successor were it to come out.
(giving us wonderful mind-numbing features like a "Start" button and walking menus on a 3 inch phone screen)
Actually, installing the extension QuickMenu made the Start menu much more like the Desktop start menu and consequently infinitely more useable (with a stylus, of course):
http://www.freewarepocketpc.net/ppc-download-quickmenu-v2-7.html
Two-dimensional icon grids or 'tiles' are generally terrible. The only valid use I've ever seen for them is when the 'icon' is actually a preview of the content, such as image galleries. For everything else, straight one-dimensional lists make much more sense (Windows Explorer: ALT+V, D).
Yes, apparently replacing wires is the general idea of the 802.11ad:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-57326718-264/wilocity-60ghz-wireless-revolution-begins-at-ces/
Or wireless point to point line of sight commercial connections:
http://www.bridgewave.com/products/60ghz.cfm
Yes, the paradox more commonly known as:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ant_on_a_rubber_rope (the expansion of space is explicitly referenced at the end of the article).
It has to be said however, that the 'finite amount of time' can easily be ridiculously large.
I think GP meant that we then generally still perceive the wall as being white. At least, I hope he did.
Best optical illusion that illustrates this I've seen to date: http://www.planetperplex.com/en/item/checker-shadow
I did. When you say firearm, you make it sound like handgun: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ushomicidesbyweapon.svg
The Swiss have relatively few handguns:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland#Number_of_guns_in_circulation
Don't forget to read on about how difficult it is for the Swiss to acquire a carrying permit and how most Swiss gun owners have had extensive training on handling guns due to their mandatory military enlistment.
Practices that are mostly deemed superfluous or even unconstitutional in the US, if I understand correctly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_carry_in_the_United_States#Permitting_policies
So yes, take a look at Switzerland.
You can make all the snarky comments you want. Just walk around for a day and think about all the fucking idiots you see that you wouldn't even trust holding scissors. Now imagine those same idiots with a gun.
If you don't have the time to do that, let these law abiding citizens make you proud:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTVa0aQnvVU
Extra points if you stick around till about 4:55.
You know something's wrong when your 'Quick start' guide has a table of contents:
http://www.enigmail.net/documentation/quickstart.php
Enabling encryption is going to have to become *much* easier for more people to do it.
Apple has already somewhat innovated (or at least done something better) in their unpolished product. They're using vector based map images rather than the more images in Google maps. It allows you to see zoom in a more continuous fashion (as opposed to discreet zoom levels) and allows up to 300 miles of visibility rather than the 35 miles Google maps allows in the event that the phone goes off line.
Sigh. If you'd have bothered to read the comments at your link, you'd have been more informed:
gatorguy 2012/08/03 10:13am
Google's maps on Android are not bit-mapped (raster). The desktop maps version may still be, I'm not sure, but Google swapped over to vector-based maps for Android back in 2010.
Yes, 2010. http://googlesystem.blogspot.nl/2010/12/vector-based-google-maps-for-android.html
I don't think the Sea Scouts count..
Right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_Mobile#History
Served me very well, even on my Sony Ericsson P800 in 2003.
BPA or not, there is probably a significant link between teens who drink a lot of soda and those that don't. Maybe this obvious correlation is not causation issue is covered in the full publication (I only read the excerpt)... but if not, this is pretty damn stupid.
Yep. From the abstract: "Controlling for race/ethnicity, age, caregiver education, poverty to income ratio, sex, serum cotinine level, caloric intake, television watching, and urinary creatinine level, children in the lowest urinary BPA quartile had a lower estimated prevalence of obesity".
So apparently they haven't controlled for the soda (or sugar) intake. On the other hand, I'd expect that to be correlated to a number of the factors they did control for.
It won't reach quite to Hawaii, but it's a pretty big aerial/carrier denial tool. Then again, it's not a problem until someone actually sinks a carrier with one.
Well, unless it is taken out by a Goalkeeper or other anti-missile defense system on a supporting vessel. IIRC, detecting the missiles is the only real problem.
Generally accepted or not, it's just plain wrong. Piracy has a specific legal meaning, and Big Content has waged a purposeful campaign to get you to conflate it with downloading, even though they ARE two very different things. So "generally accepted" or not, why are you doing their work for them?
I'm not. I'd like to see the abuse of the word piracy eradicated as much as you do. Well, maybe not as much, but we're on the same side is all I'm saying :-)
I'm just suggesting that if you really want the abuse to disappear, it has to be supplanted with the use of something with equal brevity and similar specifity.
No, they do not "mean" that, per se, but they do include it. P2P and filesharing ARE acceptable (and correct) terms to use for "downloading/uploading content to which one does not own the rights to possess or redistribute", if that is indeed what you are doing. You are splitting hairs here, and IMO not justifiably.
That is comparable with saying that 'wielding a knife' includes 'stabbing somebody to death' (or, if the magnitude bothers you: 'slicing off your fingertip'). Or perhaps more relevant: that 'splitting stuff' includes 'splitting hairs' ;-)
Language evolves in a specific way and in such a manner that popular concepts get their own word, existing or new. Tweeting also never meant microweblogging. Good luck in convincing people to stop using it to refer to microweblogging.
Let me put it differently: consider your current strategy to change the abuse of the term piracy. How do you see it leading to the preferred result?
Be that as it may, I'd wager that 90% of even semiliterate users have come to understand 'piracy' in this context as copyright infringement. This is what I meant by 'generally accepted term'.
P2P, filesharing and downloading do not mean "downloading/uploading content to which one does not own the rights to possess or redistribute". So no, they are not alternatives. Far from being such, actually.
As for the catchy terms: bootsharing, bootsharers, bootleeching, bootleeches. This is the solution. I promise.
GP did not say downloading [content to which one does not own the rights to possess] was legal. You clearly misunderstand what 'crime' means (hint: speeding is not a crime).
GP is correct, but as my first sentence shows, 'piracy' is a much more convenient generally accepted term for the behaviour we're discussing. Bashing it's use without providing an alternative is bound to fail, imho. We need a catchy marketing term to cover it!
Infringeloading? Downfringing? Bootsharing? Sharinfringing? Digifringing?
Or maybe we should just accept the abuse of the word piracy..
To be fair, his original ending was actually similarly crappy grammar-wise:
(my emphasis)
Unless you're a Buddhist, there are probably billions of 'animals' that you couldn't care less about.
Most of us realize that drawing the line somewhere between amphibians and mammals and/or based on the ease of anthropomorphization is irrational.
Step 2: candles ;-)
The things you mention don't really classify as technology.
Generally, technology means (a set of) tools and ways to use them. If we're going to call fire a technology, we might as well call rusting a technology. More accurate would be 'Using campfires to cook' or 'Using a spinning wheel to convert cotton into thread', both of which aren't used professionally on a meaningful scale in the western world.
I guess that means that GP is fired.
I remember seeing this claim a while ago and having a hard time believing it (it's supposed to make a 20% difference or some number like that). I was always under the impression that modern compression algorithms are pretty close to what is mathematically possible, so I tried to find some proof for the claims for an hour. Could not find it.
It could be my lacking Google Fu in combination with my lacking expertise in this area, so my honest question is: really? Why not add FLAC-like analysis and encoding to generic compression algorithms? A potential improvement of 20% seems worth going for.
Looking at Europe, policies indeed seem to influence matters significantly: https://www.mylookout.com/_gfx/page-images/state-mobile-security/likelihood-heat-map.jpg
I'm not sure whether France and Norway are particularly lax in their SMS regulation, but it could be.
This. Save for forcing your kid to live in the past by handing him a 486 or older, this is probably the best way to foster understanding of the basic components of a computer.
Bonus points for buying the components one at a time.