This is completely untrue. Android apps can and do run in the background if they're written such that they can. People background phone and music apps all the time. Third party VoIP and music apps can also be backgrounded, so this isn't some case of Android handling the Phone and Play Music apps specially.
It's British English for a UK pound (the unit of currency used there, worth a dollar and change), and it's about as much "teenie language" (I assume you mean language used by teenagers) as "a buck" is in the US (when referring to a dollar.)
Which is not to say I think it was the best choice of word for a Slashdot summary.
Theranos has been shut down by the FDA. It is a failure even if, for a time, it succeeded in scamming people. Had its investors been more cautious, one of two outcomes might have arisen:
1. It (mostly likely outcome) would not have been created in the first place, making it neither a success nor a failure.
2. It might have given up on the scammy aspects, and adopted technologies that worked, self developed or just current industry standards. In that case, it would have had a fighting chance.
It is a failure by any reasonable definition of the term. It produced a product so bad it was shut down and the entire organization is facing both billions in civil penalties, and criminal charges.
If it's not a failure, then Enron and Bernie Madoff aren't either.
Indeed. Why was this guy charging the device while it was in his back pocket? As I understand it, the Galaxy Note's battery need to be charging for one to catch fire.
Probably true, but I suspect productivity increases will be low to non-existent anyway. Reading (or for whatever reason keeping your eyes off the road) is a great way to get car sick. They'd have to find a way to smooth out the roads and reduce the amount of acceleration and deceleration to something comparable to a train to make cars "mobile offices".
On top of which... who would work? I'd - assuming sickness issues can be resolved - read the news, eat breakfast, and just spend the time waking up. I seriously doubt my boss is going to allow whatever time I get in the car to count as the my going-in-to-work start time.
Looks like they'll sell you a SIM card if you want to pick your own phone. As others have said, they apparently started as a Sprint PCS virtual operator, but if they've switched to SIM cards they probably use AT&T or T-Mobile, both of which are significantly higher quality.
T-Mobile may be marginally less evil than other phone companies, but they're still a phone company. And the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act is still the law of the land. This is not going to end well for Jacob Ajit.
Just a head's up and warning to other would be hackers: T-Mobile's favored execution method is Throttling.
That analogy is a poor one. It's like someone left their back door open and when asked "can I come in" they say "yes".
What on Earth makes you think this is a better analogy? Did the teenager call T-Mobile and ask them if he could use the backdoor? No.
All that happened was there was a backdoor that had poor security. He turned the handle the right way, it opened. That doesn't mean he ever had permission to go in.
"If I send 1,000,000 username and password combinations to a server, and it tells me which are valid, and then I send one of the ones that are valid and ask the server for a file, and it provides it to me, I can't see how that makes me a criminal."
I would suggest that Trump's closest parallels abroad would be Berlusconi and Putin. Neither caused a backlash lurch to the left, and both were/are able to abuse their positions to stay in power - it took some significant scandals to get Berlusconi out of power, and Putin, of course, still is in power.
Trump is a populist demagogue, the history with these people is not positive - they remain popular with a large enough subset of the population, and they remain destructive.
Trump, if elected, will serve eight years and probably find a way to remain in a position of power that outlasts the presidency, something we've never seen in the US before. Clinton will serve four years and be defeated by what's more likely to be a credible, sane, Republican in 2020. I'd prefer the latter, though I don't like either scenario.
Teslas are not self driving. The person watching Harry Potter was committing the same error as the RV riders of urban legend who turned on the cruise control on the Interstate and then went into the back to relax.
This is the version that has an optional GNU/Linux subsystem, so personally I prefer it to the older version. I'm not aware of any ways in which it is more "evil" than the predecessor - at one point they said Cortana would be mandatory, but if you enable search, while technically Cortana might be doing the leg work, it works the same way it did previously for those who had Cortana turned off.
Can't have voter ID laws, because the DNC says Black people can't figure out how to get a free voter ID. But that isn't racist.
Literally nobody has argued that in the history of Voter Suppression Laws. What has been argued is:
1. Minority voters are disproportionately unlikely to have an existing photo ID (say, a driver's license.)
2. Once enacted, states with Voter ID laws have a habit of erecting roadblocks to make it harder to get them if you live in areas with high minority populations. For example, closing offices that issue driver's licenses.
3. If you've never had ID, it can be - depending on your situation - difficult to meet the criteria for obtaining ID, requiring the gathering of paperwork that most people don't actually keep, and in some cases is - in practice - impossible to obtain.
IF you simply look at the excuses being made on behalf of black people, they are all telling black people that they are incapable of doing normal activities, simply because... they are black.And I find that extremely distasteful and as fucking racist as anything.
You're basically making stuff up in order to justify the "But Democrats are the TRUE racists" spin. Have you considered listening to what the big bad Democrats are saying, rather than inventing absurd caricatures? You'll look less ridiculous.
Wow, talk about delusional. The Media has had it out for Trump since the beginning.
The media has barely covered Trump beyond the occasional racism scandal, despite overwhelming evidence he lies about pretty much everything and runs multiple scams. Clinton is still being questioned about her emails, despite a (hostile) congressional investigation and the FBI both clearing her of any serious impropriety, and this weekend's "health scare" is still being treated as a serious story.
You think Trump is being criticized by the media because you already know he's a slimeball and you just assume that a media you never follow would be up there attacking him for it. The reality is rather different. Last Monday, for example, CNN spent less than 30 minutes discussing the recent revelations that the Trump Foundation is essentially a completely fraudulent charity (how much time have they spent on the Clinton Foundation, BTW? You know, that charity that actually spends money on fighting AIDS in Africa?), while it found over five hours to devote to Clinton's health. MSNBC, the former "liberal" news channel (that never was) that people forget was recently revamped as a general news channel? Worse - only 20 minutes on the Trump Foundation, 5 hours and 20 minutes on Clinton's health.
The media hypes every Clinton non-story as a serious scandal. It ignores every Trump scandal with the odd exception of when Trump seriously offends a group that protests.
But yeah, pretend the media is in the tank for Clinton. Because it fits your prejudices.
Well, why don't they then? Why doesn't any Android manufacturer sell anywhere near as much phones as Samsung
Because there are a lot of them? Samsung's market share is under 30%. Non-Samsung phones make up around 50% of the market. LG has 17%, which may not be 30% but it's a fairly large number. Other big Android phone makers include Motorola, and HTC; right now the biggest selling smartphone bought on Amazon's site is made by BLU.
Someone has to be biggest, that doesn't mean they make most Android phones, or that other Android phone makers are struggling.
Samsung seems to be the new "Dell", an arbitrary competitor of Apple's that Apple enthusiasts use as some kind of representative of all Apple alternatives, despite the fact it's hardly representative. Samsung is weak at the low end, and their phones usually lack the features their Android rivals have.
After my Galaxy Nexus, I can tell you I'll never buy a Samsung phone again, and believe it or not I doubt I'll have any problem finding high quality Android phones despite that decision.
Most lower cost Android phones still do. It's really weird in the Android world, as you could argue phones get better the cheaper they are.
- For $300-600, you have phones with good screens and cameras, but no SD card slots, no dual SIM capability, no buttons, no removable batteries, battery lives measured in hours, etc.)
- For $100-300, you have phones with good screens, slightly poorer cameras, and occasionally they have removable batteries and/or SD card slots. Battery lives still shitty.
- For $50-100, you have poorer screens, but you don't care because your (usually removable) battery can last an entire day with some left over for the following morning, SD card slots, a good chance of dual SIMs, and a good chance of the three control buttons.
- For $30, the screen and camera aren't anything to write home about, but do you care? No. You have a phone with a battery life measured in days, SD card slots, control buttons, everything.
Why does this happen? Because the more expensive a phone is, the more the way it looks in the store is prioritized over how functional it is.
And yeah, I'm still pissed I wasted whatever it was I paid for a Galaxy Nexus, and then was stuck with it for years because I didn't realize the budget $30-50 prepaid phones at Walmart were actually better...
Slashdot Mirror
I should have known putting in the word "spoiler" would ensure half of Slashdot never reads the line immediately afterwards!
Yahoo didn't seem to have any problems buying up companies while hemorrhaging money...
This is completely untrue. Android apps can and do run in the background if they're written such that they can. People background phone and music apps all the time. Third party VoIP and music apps can also be backgrounded, so this isn't some case of Android handling the Phone and Play Music apps specially.
Didn't Sony announce they're buying Valve/Steam, with the transaction to complete by the end of September?
.
Spoiler I kid, I kid, but I can just imagine the collective fury of the entire Internet if that ever happened.It's British English for a UK pound (the unit of currency used there, worth a dollar and change), and it's about as much "teenie language" (I assume you mean language used by teenagers) as "a buck" is in the US (when referring to a dollar.)
Which is not to say I think it was the best choice of word for a Slashdot summary.
I don't disagree, I was just baffled by the OP's implied assertion there was a 21st century printing technology.
1. It (mostly likely outcome) would not have been created in the first place, making it neither a success nor a failure.
2. It might have given up on the scammy aspects, and adopted technologies that worked, self developed or just current industry standards. In that case, it would have had a fighting chance.
It is a failure by any reasonable definition of the term. It produced a product so bad it was shut down and the entire organization is facing both billions in civil penalties, and criminal charges.
If it's not a failure, then Enron and Bernie Madoff aren't either.
Are there any printing technologies that are "this century"? The major rival to inkjet is laser, and that predates inkjet by a decade or so.
Indeed. Why was this guy charging the device while it was in his back pocket? As I understand it, the Galaxy Note's battery need to be charging for one to catch fire.
Maybe she bought a 500Gb hard drive, and 4 16Gb microSD cards. That would account for it, right?
If I arrived at work unable to function, I'd get fired. In practice the waking up and having breakfast stuff is what I do before I drive to work.
In reality what's being restored here (which is a good thing) is free time, not productivity.
Probably true, but I suspect productivity increases will be low to non-existent anyway. Reading (or for whatever reason keeping your eyes off the road) is a great way to get car sick. They'd have to find a way to smooth out the roads and reduce the amount of acceleration and deceleration to something comparable to a train to make cars "mobile offices".
On top of which... who would work? I'd - assuming sickness issues can be resolved - read the news, eat breakfast, and just spend the time waking up. I seriously doubt my boss is going to allow whatever time I get in the car to count as the my going-in-to-work start time.
Looks like they'll sell you a SIM card if you want to pick your own phone. As others have said, they apparently started as a Sprint PCS virtual operator, but if they've switched to SIM cards they probably use AT&T or T-Mobile, both of which are significantly higher quality.
Just a head's up and warning to other would be hackers: T-Mobile's favored execution method is Throttling.
What on Earth makes you think this is a better analogy? Did the teenager call T-Mobile and ask them if he could use the backdoor? No.
All that happened was there was a backdoor that had poor security. He turned the handle the right way, it opened. That doesn't mean he ever had permission to go in.
"If I send 1,000,000 username and password combinations to a server, and it tells me which are valid, and then I send one of the ones that are valid and ask the server for a file, and it provides it to me, I can't see how that makes me a criminal."
I would suggest that Trump's closest parallels abroad would be Berlusconi and Putin. Neither caused a backlash lurch to the left, and both were/are able to abuse their positions to stay in power - it took some significant scandals to get Berlusconi out of power, and Putin, of course, still is in power.
Trump is a populist demagogue, the history with these people is not positive - they remain popular with a large enough subset of the population, and they remain destructive.
Trump, if elected, will serve eight years and probably find a way to remain in a position of power that outlasts the presidency, something we've never seen in the US before. Clinton will serve four years and be defeated by what's more likely to be a credible, sane, Republican in 2020. I'd prefer the latter, though I don't like either scenario.
Is it possible they were bought by The Very Big Corporation of America? And does their report say anything at all about the glut in the hat market?
Teslas are not self driving. The person watching Harry Potter was committing the same error as the RV riders of urban legend who turned on the cruise control on the Interstate and then went into the back to relax.
This is the version that has an optional GNU/Linux subsystem, so personally I prefer it to the older version. I'm not aware of any ways in which it is more "evil" than the predecessor - at one point they said Cortana would be mandatory, but if you enable search, while technically Cortana might be doing the leg work, it works the same way it did previously for those who had Cortana turned off.
Literally nobody has argued that in the history of Voter Suppression Laws. What has been argued is:
1. Minority voters are disproportionately unlikely to have an existing photo ID (say, a driver's license.)
2. Once enacted, states with Voter ID laws have a habit of erecting roadblocks to make it harder to get them if you live in areas with high minority populations. For example, closing offices that issue driver's licenses.
3. If you've never had ID, it can be - depending on your situation - difficult to meet the criteria for obtaining ID, requiring the gathering of paperwork that most people don't actually keep, and in some cases is - in practice - impossible to obtain.
There's also been at least one court case where a Voter ID law was thrown out specifically because the Republicans that created it fashioned it knowing that Voter ID laws would disproportionately impact legitimate Democratic voters. I actually heard a Republican pundit argue that they weren't being racist, because, uh, yeah blacks were disproportionately affected, but they overwhelmingly vote Democratic, and attempts to suppress their vote were based upon the fact they were Democrats, not because they were black as such.
Yeah, right.
You're basically making stuff up in order to justify the "But Democrats are the TRUE racists" spin. Have you considered listening to what the big bad Democrats are saying, rather than inventing absurd caricatures? You'll look less ridiculous.
The media has barely covered Trump beyond the occasional racism scandal, despite overwhelming evidence he lies about pretty much everything and runs multiple scams. Clinton is still being questioned about her emails, despite a (hostile) congressional investigation and the FBI both clearing her of any serious impropriety, and this weekend's "health scare" is still being treated as a serious story.
You think Trump is being criticized by the media because you already know he's a slimeball and you just assume that a media you never follow would be up there attacking him for it. The reality is rather different. Last Monday, for example, CNN spent less than 30 minutes discussing the recent revelations that the Trump Foundation is essentially a completely fraudulent charity (how much time have they spent on the Clinton Foundation, BTW? You know, that charity that actually spends money on fighting AIDS in Africa?), while it found over five hours to devote to Clinton's health. MSNBC, the former "liberal" news channel (that never was) that people forget was recently revamped as a general news channel? Worse - only 20 minutes on the Trump Foundation, 5 hours and 20 minutes on Clinton's health.
The media hypes every Clinton non-story as a serious scandal. It ignores every Trump scandal with the odd exception of when Trump seriously offends a group that protests.
But yeah, pretend the media is in the tank for Clinton. Because it fits your prejudices.
You have unlimited access to those 50 titles? ;-)
Because there are a lot of them? Samsung's market share is under 30%. Non-Samsung phones make up around 50% of the market. LG has 17%, which may not be 30% but it's a fairly large number. Other big Android phone makers include Motorola, and HTC; right now the biggest selling smartphone bought on Amazon's site is made by BLU.
Someone has to be biggest, that doesn't mean they make most Android phones, or that other Android phone makers are struggling.
Samsung seems to be the new "Dell", an arbitrary competitor of Apple's that Apple enthusiasts use as some kind of representative of all Apple alternatives, despite the fact it's hardly representative. Samsung is weak at the low end, and their phones usually lack the features their Android rivals have.
After my Galaxy Nexus, I can tell you I'll never buy a Samsung phone again, and believe it or not I doubt I'll have any problem finding high quality Android phones despite that decision.
Most lower cost Android phones still do. It's really weird in the Android world, as you could argue phones get better the cheaper they are.
- For $300-600, you have phones with good screens and cameras, but no SD card slots, no dual SIM capability, no buttons, no removable batteries, battery lives measured in hours, etc.)
- For $100-300, you have phones with good screens, slightly poorer cameras, and occasionally they have removable batteries and/or SD card slots. Battery lives still shitty.
- For $50-100, you have poorer screens, but you don't care because your (usually removable) battery can last an entire day with some left over for the following morning, SD card slots, a good chance of dual SIMs, and a good chance of the three control buttons.
- For $30, the screen and camera aren't anything to write home about, but do you care? No. You have a phone with a battery life measured in days, SD card slots, control buttons, everything.
Why does this happen? Because the more expensive a phone is, the more the way it looks in the store is prioritized over how functional it is.
And yeah, I'm still pissed I wasted whatever it was I paid for a Galaxy Nexus, and then was stuck with it for years because I didn't realize the budget $30-50 prepaid phones at Walmart were actually better...