Also agreed - too bad it didn't do better. A launcher might end up working out really well for them. Hundreds of millions of younger generation that are intimately familiar with XBox UI and also Windows 10 now.
Every time I see or hear somebody call Android open source I have to puke and wonder if they know what Open Source actually means or are just blinded by Google.
Google 100% controls Android. 100%. You can maybe call it "Open Sauce" - but definitely not Open Source. You can add your own flavor to it, the sauce if you will, but you can't add or control jack shit.
Everything is relative. Given the ease of uncovering the douche bags and their seeming unsophistication there is little downside.
This actually will serve as a really good example and wakeup call that can be shown to people that interactions on the Internet actually have real world consequences. I sound like an old fart for the first time saying that the current crop of kids definitely just do not get that yet.
You either totally misunderstood or misread Coward's comments. There were two types of comments.
There was the low key basic trolling that you would expect and that was handled in a regular way.
The stuff you just pointed out is separate from that and what drove things over the edge.
That was Curt's whole point. He expected the former, and the latter is just way too much.
Uhh - look at the wireline coverage maps. Verizon and AT&T don't compete almost anywhere. Legacy Ma Bell breakup. They compete against the cable companies in their own territories.
It's simple - Google has paused, or at least scaled back their gigabit roll-out, so when combined with the uncertainty of net neutrality (and the new ip broadband regulations) they have too. Why build out what their competitors can use, if the biggest threat isn't building out?
Funny enough - you can think of Microsoft kinda like the Chinese (authoritarian, not really ever communist) government and their dance to embrace capitalism... Taking baby steps into the future as they evolve: embracing where it makes sense and still controlling where it makes sense. Their efforts around the.Net development community and projects, asp.net, mvc and the like have been really positive. The.net open source ecosystem is vibrant and thriving.
Funny enough - you can think of Microsoft kinda like the Chinese (authoritarian, not really ever communist) government and their dance to embrace capitalism...
Taking baby steps into the future as they evolve: embracing where it makes sense and still controlling where it makes sense.
Their efforts around the.Net development community and projects, asp.net, mvc and the like have been really positive.
The.net open source ecosystem is vibrant and thriving.
The acceptance policy had been the same since the beginning. Those that may have been bigoted are mostly leaving for other organizations, and good for Scouts.
They never would have approved of a separate organization that was confusing and conflicted. The better thing would have been to work with BSA to have Hacker Scouts be part of the same organization - not try to hijack the name and similar structure.
Get facts straight, not bullying at all. Is part of the trademark application process that Hacker Scouts is trying to go through. It is in the "Publication for Opposition" period and the BSA response is according to that procedure.
There are many different troops, etc. sponsored by many different organizations. The ideals are very good, there are always people who are exceptions to the rule.
At the Cub Scout level it is more family oriented, boys and their siblings (male or female) go camping, etc. and women leaders are OK.
At the Boy Scout level it is strictly for boys.
At the Venture & Explorer Scout level it opens up to boys and girls.
Agree, I also though it maybe was a related group. The need to defend is there. They also were not bullying - it was a response during the normal trademark application process.
I like both Boy Scouts and the "maker" community and agree there would be a high level of interest. Unfortunately the Maker Scouts was a pretty blatant infringement, even in how they were structuring things.
True - the need to defend is there. They also were not bullying - it was a response during the normal trademark application process.
I like both Boy Scouts and the "maker" community and agree there would be a high level of interest. Unfortunately the Maker Scouts was a pretty blatant infringement, even in how they were structuring things.
Is it just me or does this sound like the pitch for a really bad horror or end-of-days B movie? Who would be the key cast members?
Sounds like a really, really bad idea. LOL.
Android is not "Open Source", should not even pretend to be, and people should not think of it that way. It is "Open Sauce". You can take it, put your favorite flavor on it, massage it as you will, but you cannot "add" or rather "contribute" anything to Android.
There is a total NIH (not invented here) attitude by the Android team and nothing from the outside will realistically be included. It does not operate like any other real Open Source community.
Google has their controllers and determiners, and only they get to do any of the actual determination.
You don't really get to submit to Android like you do other open source software programs. There is a NIH (not invented here) attitude.
It is "open sauce". Add your favorite sauce on top of it after it is done, but that is truly about it,.
Slashdot Mirror
Also agreed - too bad it didn't do better. A launcher might end up working out really well for them. Hundreds of millions of younger generation that are intimately familiar with XBox UI and also Windows 10 now.
Every time I see or hear somebody call Android open source I have to puke and wonder if they know what Open Source actually means or are just blinded by Google. Google 100% controls Android. 100%. You can maybe call it "Open Sauce" - but definitely not Open Source. You can add your own flavor to it, the sauce if you will, but you can't add or control jack shit.
deserves what they get. Sometimes life just sucks wtihout any help and sometimes you bring it on yourself
Everything is relative. Given the ease of uncovering the douche bags and their seeming unsophistication there is little downside. This actually will serve as a really good example and wakeup call that can be shown to people that interactions on the Internet actually have real world consequences. I sound like an old fart for the first time saying that the current crop of kids definitely just do not get that yet.
You either totally misunderstood or misread Coward's comments. There were two types of comments. There was the low key basic trolling that you would expect and that was handled in a regular way. The stuff you just pointed out is separate from that and what drove things over the edge. That was Curt's whole point. He expected the former, and the latter is just way too much.
Uhh - look at the wireline coverage maps. Verizon and AT&T don't compete almost anywhere. Legacy Ma Bell breakup. They compete against the cable companies in their own territories.
It's simple - Google has paused, or at least scaled back their gigabit roll-out, so when combined with the uncertainty of net neutrality (and the new ip broadband regulations) they have too. Why build out what their competitors can use, if the biggest threat isn't building out?
Funny enough - you can think of Microsoft kinda like the Chinese (authoritarian, not really ever communist) government and their dance to embrace capitalism... Taking baby steps into the future as they evolve: embracing where it makes sense and still controlling where it makes sense. Their efforts around the .Net development community and projects, asp.net, mvc and the like have been really positive. The .net open source ecosystem is vibrant and thriving.
Funny enough - you can think of Microsoft kinda like the Chinese (authoritarian, not really ever communist) government and their dance to embrace capitalism... Taking baby steps into the future as they evolve: embracing where it makes sense and still controlling where it makes sense. Their efforts around the .Net development community and projects, asp.net, mvc and the like have been really positive.
The .net open source ecosystem is vibrant and thriving.
The acceptance policy had been the same since the beginning. Those that may have been bigoted are mostly leaving for other organizations, and good for Scouts.
Hey coward - Just plain wrong.
They never would have approved of a separate organization that was confusing and conflicted. The better thing would have been to work with BSA to have Hacker Scouts be part of the same organization - not try to hijack the name and similar structure.
Get facts straight, not bullying at all. Is part of the trademark application process that Hacker Scouts is trying to go through. It is in the "Publication for Opposition" period and the BSA response is according to that procedure.
Agree. Very good and succinct explanation.
There are many different troops, etc. sponsored by many different organizations. The ideals are very good, there are always people who are exceptions to the rule. At the Cub Scout level it is more family oriented, boys and their siblings (male or female) go camping, etc. and women leaders are OK. At the Boy Scout level it is strictly for boys. At the Venture & Explorer Scout level it opens up to boys and girls.
Agree, I also though it maybe was a related group. The need to defend is there. They also were not bullying - it was a response during the normal trademark application process. I like both Boy Scouts and the "maker" community and agree there would be a high level of interest. Unfortunately the Maker Scouts was a pretty blatant infringement, even in how they were structuring things.
True - the need to defend is there. They also were not bullying - it was a response during the normal trademark application process. I like both Boy Scouts and the "maker" community and agree there would be a high level of interest. Unfortunately the Maker Scouts was a pretty blatant infringement, even in how they were structuring things.
Is it just me or does this sound like the pitch for a really bad horror or end-of-days B movie? Who would be the key cast members? Sounds like a really, really bad idea. LOL.
Android is not "Open Source", should not even pretend to be, and people should not think of it that way. It is "Open Sauce". You can take it, put your favorite flavor on it, massage it as you will, but you cannot "add" or rather "contribute" anything to Android.
There is a total NIH (not invented here) attitude by the Android team and nothing from the outside will realistically be included. It does not operate like any other real Open Source community.
Google has their controllers and determiners, and only they get to do any of the actual determination.
So once again, it is "Open Sauce"
Too true. Very funny and he is doing a good job, just barely, of keeping a straight face. Good appearance at Dragon*Con too.
You don't really get to submit to Android like you do other open source software programs. There is a NIH (not invented here) attitude. It is "open sauce". Add your favorite sauce on top of it after it is done, but that is truly about it,.