This follows news of services of startup Uber being forbidden in countries like Spain as well as Germany and some city councils worldwide like Delhi, or other services like AirBnb being put under pressure to cope with local laws in other jurisdictions.
Pretty much the only thing I can see that connects these three are that a US company operating abroad sometimes doesn't find a service that's legal in the US to be legal or practical in $RANDOM_COUNTY_THAT_ISNT_MERICA
As for the story, it's a shame, but that's how the Spanish media wants to operate, the Spanish government agrees with them, and so be it. It's not a big issue, or at least, if it ends up causing hardship, the political process will be followed again and changes will be made again.
Depends on what you mean by pure analog. As I understand it, the Odyssey was a digital device, but implemented using lower level components than were used later. Digital logic, even in the latest CPU, is always built upon lower level components that are essentially analog in nature, with the various circuits used to produce 1s and 0s.
Hey, here's a question: A CRT TV. We'll go further: a CRT TV built by EMI in the 1920 or 1930s. 100% analog? Or did it contain at least one digital circuit?
(Hint: somehow it was keeping track of the exactly 405 - in the case of the System A TV I just described - lines it had to display. What's even more awesome is that the digital circuit involved wasn't using binary arithmetic...)
Yes, the list is out of date, but you're missing the fact you don't really need it. Comcast uses the regular DOCSIS cable modem standards in the US. When you go off to BuyMore to buy a cable modem, they actually advertise (1) that they're DOCSISx and (2) that they're compatable with Comcast in your area. Using "the list" is like walking into, uh, BuyMore, looking at a DVD player, seeing it actually has a picture of a DVD of The Matrix on it, and then going on to Warner Bro's site to see if it's on an official list of DVD players that play The Matrix.
Here's what happened when I signed up for Comcast service. I went online, I selected the service I wanted, I was asked if I wanted to rent their modem, I declined, and then I set up an install date. I then went to Best Buy and bought an off-the-shelf Zyxel modem. On the install date, the installer ran the wire, plugged everything in, verified I had a connection, wasn't sure if it would work as it wasn't on his list but tried it anyway (no, he didn't need convincing or anything, he just hadn't heard of the modem, though he looked less unsure when he saw the magic "DOCSIS3" words on the box and told me I'd gotten a pretty good modem in that case), sent the MAC address to Comcast, and that was pretty much it. Other than the usual account misset-up snafu, which had nothing to do with my selection of modem and was never blamed on the modem, everything when smoothly.
You guys are inventing conspiracies that do not exist. Comcast doesn't force anyone to use their routers. The set-up of xfinitywifi is not a threat to your security or bandwidth. It is useful (and I've made use of it) to have access to Wifi away from home.
At best, some of you may have had some pushy salespeople. Pushy salespeople suck. Comcast sucks for using pushy salespeople. But their Internet service, salespeople aside, is great, and xfinitywifi is a good idea, regardless of how bad their sales department is.
That's right, when I had Earthlink, they broke into my house once day and installed and turned on the rou... WAIT, THEY DIDN'T.
Sorry, when I had AT&T they hacked into my network and reprogrammed my wireless router to... WAIT, THEY DIDN'T.
Sorry, what I meant was, when I had Comcast, they sent a letter saying that if I used one of their routers they were enabling this new feature. Of course, this feature didn't apply to me because I had my own router, which is an option all Comcast users have. Also at worst, if I got a customer service idiot who informed my otherwise, as some are claiming here has happened to them, I also have the option of canceling and going with someone else.
So actually, yes, Comcast's customers consent to this. They may not proactively seek it, but they do consent by deciding to use Comcast's equipment rather than their own.
BTW, I also think xfinitywifi is a fucking awesome idea. No, really. If Comcast wants to give me some equipment for free that'd implement it (no, I still want to use my own Wifi router Comcast, so what you give me needs to be a box that can plug into a cable splitter or else has a cable pass-thru I can plug my DOCSIS3 modem into) I'll plug it in.
This is a nice way for customers to allow people to have Wifi access without having to give everyone access to their own networks. I like that idea. Slashdotters, who traditionally have hated it when people lock down their own routers as DESTROYING TEH FREEDUMB you'd have thought would also be in favor of it.
If you use your browser for things other than downloading VLC, then you end up with a range of ads based upon those other things, and your attempt to download VLC is only one minor factor in the process Google et al use to determine which ads to show you.
So no, unless you exclusively use your browser for downloading VLC (or some other gamed search result) it is absolutely not the case that you will only ever see malicious ads.
I can prove this based upon my own experience, BTW. I have used by browser to download VLC, and I very, very, very, rarely see malicious ads. They're extremely uncommon.
All of the unobtrusive ad's I've seen from adblock plus contain some link to a malicious download. Don't believe me? do the VLC Test.
OK, point taken, but you're very much an edge case - I'd estimate the vast majority of people use web browsers for things other than exclusively for downloading VLC. I use mine - as an example - for reading the news, a certain amount of social networking (largely Twitter), discussions (like Slashdot - how did you get here BTW?), etc.
I dont know where you attended classes, many of us did program on it,
Just in case it wasn't clear (I'm aware I have a TL;DR problem), I didn't say nobody did. I said the vast majority didn't, but the laws of numbers said it had an advantage because even a small percentage of users programming it meant a huge number of programmers and hence games.
Unfortunately I completely agree with this;-) I was in my soon-to-be-teens when the Spectrum took off, and almost every school kid I knew had one. Virtually not a single one actually programmed them, and they gave me weird looks for even suggesting it was worth doing.
It was, essentially, used as a games console by most buyers. The alternatives at the time were other home computers, notably the C64, which did fairly well, but again was used primarily as a games console, and the Atari 2600, which never really took off here.
What made the Spectrum and C64 popular? Well, games cost somewhere between 2GBP and 10GBP, and there were a lot of them. By comparison console games generally started at 15GBP. Both home computers also had better hardware than dedicated games consoles, had more games available, and the only negative was that it took five minutes to load a game.
As far as BASIC went, it was a factor, but not in a "WOW! If I buy this I can program this myself!"
No, the ability to program home computers had two advantages: it was a selling point to parents, and it also helped increase the number of games. The percentage of home computer users who learned how to program was probably in the single digits, but with tens of millions of sales, that still added up to tens-hundreds of thousands of programmers who wanted to scratch itches and develop games. Home computers ended up with more software than the games consoles because nobody outside of a small elite group had any idea how to program the latter, and needed special equipment if they tried.
That was wonderful time. I really look forward to when we get a new generation of computers as easy to pick up and develop for as home computers were. It's a shame Microsoft didn't bundle VB with Windows back in the 1990s, and we're still stuck with relatively impenetrable - for newcomers - tools for mainstream development elsewhere.
That's true, the pre-Hoover FBI was a model of how a government agency should be: it solved every case before it, never harassed or hurt the innocent, was honest, scrupulous, efficient, dependable...
Then J. Edgar Hoover became its founding Director and it all went to hell...
Largely agree though I'm not sure about the "stupid" thing.
I haven't played V yet, but have played 3/VC/SA/4, and wouldn't describe any in the series as "stupid". They're biting depictions of US pop "crime culture" as seen from 3,000 miles away, and they belong on the shelves in any store that sells games but also sells TV box sets from The Sopranos to Miami Vice.
I'm not arguing it's perfect, that it's the funniest, that if all games were like the GTA series there wouldn't be a problem, but standalone, marketed and sold only to adults, there should be no problem with the game being sold. We see a backlash against it largely because of a combination of politicians raising its profile as some kind of embodiment of evil in video gaming, and because of the background issue of there being so many games that persist sharing GTA's social flaws, something that's becoming a prominant concern now inside and outside the industry.
Stupid? No. each game in the series I've seen does what it sets out to do, does it with wit and insight, and tries its very best to present a provoking look at an artificial world that's a little twisted to begin with.
It's Sony Pictures we're talking about here, they probably run that operating system on all their PCs where all you need to do to download all the data on their network is plug in a USB stick, while your tech wizard back at the base hacks into the computer and installs the virus.
As long as you make sure you're in and out of the office containing the PC in the 60 second window between night watchmen checking in, there shouldn't be any problem with doing this.
Newborns don't show preferences for anything at all. Hell, feeding them is a chore.
My toddler seems to be interested in a mix of girly and boy things. When she was six months she started trying to take evereything apart and very obviously wanted to know how they worked, an engineering mindset. It's anecdotal evidence, to be sure, but almost (not all, but all but one) every parent I've spoken to that has taken on a policy of letting the child steer them in his or her interests has seen their child have a mix of interests until they mix with other children, where peer pressure starts to apply.
And of course, there's that whole pink/blue thing that is a modern invention. Hard to explain that.
Nobody in their right mind would argue that girls will never be drawn to certain interests more frequently than boys and vice versa, but it's hard to see why science and engineering would be amongst those affected by this without heavy peer pressure. Girls are no less curious than boys. What is science but the ultimate embodiment of curiousity?
OK, probably not a perfect answer, but you could use probabilities to keep it largely accurate. When you're in the number range that represents 1,000s, for example, you could have an algorithm whereby each time someone views that video, there's a 1 on 1,000 chance the counter will be incremented.
I'm overthinking this, aren't I? (Personally I hate the whole "Try to convert everything into ranges" thing that's been going on; view counters probably wouldn't bother me, but it's getting annoying with dates, why not just show the damned date and time instead of "4 hours ago", "Just now", "July 2011"? Why?! Why?!)
Well, LTE is a bunch of things and was originally intended to describe the process, not the standard.
But think of it like this:
2G GSM (ie first GSM) was ISDN married with cellular. That is, the engineers who created it were tasked with creating a modern, efficient, mobile phone system that would integrate into what was supposed to be a pan-European ISDN network. Why ISDN? Because that literally was the most advanced mainstream digital phone system in the world at the time, and most of Europe planned to migrate everyone over to it, even private residences. Everything you wanted to do over the phone in the 1980s was possible (and better when) using ISDN. And so 2G GSM was built as a single line ISDN with lower bandwidth.
At the air interface end, a custom FHSS digital interface was built to support the requirements of the upper level protocols.
This worked great, except the Internet happened, and people wanted to access the 'net everywhere. So 3G GSM happened, also known as UMTS. This involved rejigging the protocols to provide what they thought mobile users wanted - two "lines", one for voice, and one variable width for data (think ISDN + DSL in terms of usage model) So it was a complete redesign.
As it was, the FHSS interface made for 2G GSM didn't work for it, so they made a new one, based - largely because of politics - on a Code Division Multiple Access system. Actually there are at least two, one called WCDMA, the other TD-CDMA I think.
This... sucked. Part of it was Code Division Multiple Access isn't all its cracked up to be, but most of it is that ISDN+DSL is not actually the model to go for. It's a kludge that expects networks in general to be divided into voice and data, when in fact we're increasingly going with data only.
Hence 4G LTE. Which is still being rolled out FWIW. But voice is now a service over IP when implemented on LTE. Which means an LTE device fits into modern networking, and in theory, ultimately, you can roam an LTE device onto your Wi-fi network and it'll just work. Eventually. It doesn't work right now.
Now, funny thing here. At this point, the air interface thing kinda changes and kinda doesn't. For actual 4G LTE, as in, IMT-Advanced LTE, they created a new OFDM based air interface with really low latency (E-UTRA.) However, the upper layers of LTE can also run over W-CDMA (the name of the air interface in UMTS - 3G GSM), and the more advanced variants, such as HSPA+, actually work well with the protocol.
So what does all this mean? Well, it means we've had three generations of GSM that are about protocol, not air interface. The air interface was changed at the same time, and each time coincided with this whole 2G/3G/4G crap, but that was a side show, the action was in the upper levels.
It is not likely at all at this stage - in the next two decades anyway - that there will be a fourth generation of GSM as far as protocols go. Everything-over-IP is the way everything is going, and LTE already does that.
So 5G will be LTE at the upper levels too. It'll have a new air interface. But right now LTE already runs over HSPA+ and E-UTRA. This'll just be another approved air interface for LTE. Which is good.
I've lived in a variety of multicultural environments in the UK in the past, and not seen anything other than normal levels of policing - which by suburban US standards (never mind urban standards) are extremely relaxed.
I'm not sure what studies you're referring to, but I would revisit them if I were you with a very skeptical eye. I'd be more inclined to think the US has a particular problem due to history and the level of corruption in local governments, which has lead to particularly bad policing, which has in turn lead to an assumption that that's just the way things should be from a populace brought up in that environment.
He's right and you're wrong. Those two issues are not the primary purposes of the Federal Government, and even if you had been technically right (you're not, ICC is of considerable more historic purpose), you would have been handwaving as claiming two issues are "primary" does not eliminate the other unsaid issues.
I'm bemused by his answer to be honest. I was making a light hearted comment about someone's attempt to justify a party position ("Against big gubmint") by launching into a dubious official-justification "Trying to protect the constitution" rant.
So I drew a parallel with #ethics!!?!1!, and got a massive MRA rant in response, as if the intent was to make the thread symmetric. Apparent Reason 1 -> Dubious Official Position 1 -> Dubious Official Position 2 -> (Whitewashed) Apparent Reason 2.
Huh.
BTW Shadow, FWIW, the tactics of your fellow MRAs/channer trolls/opportunists/dupes lead me to actually sit down and watch Anita Sarkeesian's video series the other week. Well, I had to. And yes, it will impact some of my work in future, she makes some excellent points. Me, myself, probably won't make a difference to you, but I know plenty of others who have done the same. And by coming out into the open, you've also made it easier for us to see you, for me to, for example, warn my daughter (when she's old enough, I'm not going to scare the shit out of her right now) about the extremists in your group who write articles like "How to get away with rape" and "How to break a woman".
So thank you - to you and the people you defend and associate with - for making it easier to arm my daughter, and for ensuring I, and legions of other men who seriously had thought sexism against women was nothing like as serious as it is, open our eyes and start fighting for equality.
No, it's about the Constitution. The US (as in United States) was never intended as designed to become ruled by some huge, monolithic federal governing kleptocracy.
(This is how Google used to work. Then they switched to automatically searching for the search query they think you want. Then they introduced the "any of these words" bullshit. And now they even change your query without telling you, leaving you literally with no relationship between what you've entered and the search results. Baffling.)
Slow Down Cowboy!
Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.
It's been 3 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
Chances are, you're behind a firewall or proxy, or clicked the Back button to accidentally reuse a form.
Please try again. If the problem persists, and all other options have been tried, contact the site administrator.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, that's as bad as my Keurig toaster. I found out it was a problem when they stopped selling the individual bread cartridges.
Pretty much the only thing I can see that connects these three are that a US company operating abroad sometimes doesn't find a service that's legal in the US to be legal or practical in $RANDOM_COUNTY_THAT_ISNT_MERICA
As for the story, it's a shame, but that's how the Spanish media wants to operate, the Spanish government agrees with them, and so be it. It's not a big issue, or at least, if it ends up causing hardship, the political process will be followed again and changes will be made again.
Depends on what you mean by pure analog. As I understand it, the Odyssey was a digital device, but implemented using lower level components than were used later. Digital logic, even in the latest CPU, is always built upon lower level components that are essentially analog in nature, with the various circuits used to produce 1s and 0s.
Hey, here's a question: A CRT TV. We'll go further: a CRT TV built by EMI in the 1920 or 1930s. 100% analog? Or did it contain at least one digital circuit?
(Hint: somehow it was keeping track of the exactly 405 - in the case of the System A TV I just described - lines it had to display. What's even more awesome is that the digital circuit involved wasn't using binary arithmetic...)
Yes, the list is out of date, but you're missing the fact you don't really need it. Comcast uses the regular DOCSIS cable modem standards in the US. When you go off to BuyMore to buy a cable modem, they actually advertise (1) that they're DOCSISx and (2) that they're compatable with Comcast in your area. Using "the list" is like walking into, uh, BuyMore, looking at a DVD player, seeing it actually has a picture of a DVD of The Matrix on it, and then going on to Warner Bro's site to see if it's on an official list of DVD players that play The Matrix.
Here's what happened when I signed up for Comcast service. I went online, I selected the service I wanted, I was asked if I wanted to rent their modem, I declined, and then I set up an install date. I then went to Best Buy and bought an off-the-shelf Zyxel modem. On the install date, the installer ran the wire, plugged everything in, verified I had a connection, wasn't sure if it would work as it wasn't on his list but tried it anyway (no, he didn't need convincing or anything, he just hadn't heard of the modem, though he looked less unsure when he saw the magic "DOCSIS3" words on the box and told me I'd gotten a pretty good modem in that case), sent the MAC address to Comcast, and that was pretty much it. Other than the usual account misset-up snafu, which had nothing to do with my selection of modem and was never blamed on the modem, everything when smoothly.
You guys are inventing conspiracies that do not exist. Comcast doesn't force anyone to use their routers. The set-up of xfinitywifi is not a threat to your security or bandwidth. It is useful (and I've made use of it) to have access to Wifi away from home.
At best, some of you may have had some pushy salespeople. Pushy salespeople suck. Comcast sucks for using pushy salespeople. But their Internet service, salespeople aside, is great, and xfinitywifi is a good idea, regardless of how bad their sales department is.
That's right, when I had Earthlink, they broke into my house once day and installed and turned on the rou... WAIT, THEY DIDN'T.
Sorry, when I had AT&T they hacked into my network and reprogrammed my wireless router to... WAIT, THEY DIDN'T.
Sorry, what I meant was, when I had Comcast, they sent a letter saying that if I used one of their routers they were enabling this new feature. Of course, this feature didn't apply to me because I had my own router, which is an option all Comcast users have. Also at worst, if I got a customer service idiot who informed my otherwise, as some are claiming here has happened to them, I also have the option of canceling and going with someone else.
So actually, yes, Comcast's customers consent to this. They may not proactively seek it, but they do consent by deciding to use Comcast's equipment rather than their own.
BTW, I also think xfinitywifi is a fucking awesome idea. No, really. If Comcast wants to give me some equipment for free that'd implement it (no, I still want to use my own Wifi router Comcast, so what you give me needs to be a box that can plug into a cable splitter or else has a cable pass-thru I can plug my DOCSIS3 modem into) I'll plug it in.
This is a nice way for customers to allow people to have Wifi access without having to give everyone access to their own networks. I like that idea. Slashdotters, who traditionally have hated it when people lock down their own routers as DESTROYING TEH FREEDUMB you'd have thought would also be in favor of it.
No, no, sorry, it doesn't work that way.
If you use your browser for things other than downloading VLC, then you end up with a range of ads based upon those other things, and your attempt to download VLC is only one minor factor in the process Google et al use to determine which ads to show you.
So no, unless you exclusively use your browser for downloading VLC (or some other gamed search result) it is absolutely not the case that you will only ever see malicious ads.
I can prove this based upon my own experience, BTW. I have used by browser to download VLC, and I very, very, very, rarely see malicious ads. They're extremely uncommon.
OK, point taken, but you're very much an edge case - I'd estimate the vast majority of people use web browsers for things other than exclusively for downloading VLC. I use mine - as an example - for reading the news, a certain amount of social networking (largely Twitter), discussions (like Slashdot - how did you get here BTW?), etc.
Just in case it wasn't clear (I'm aware I have a TL;DR problem), I didn't say nobody did. I said the vast majority didn't, but the laws of numbers said it had an advantage because even a small percentage of users programming it meant a huge number of programmers and hence games.
Unfortunately I completely agree with this ;-) I was in my soon-to-be-teens when the Spectrum took off, and almost every school kid I knew had one. Virtually not a single one actually programmed them, and they gave me weird looks for even suggesting it was worth doing.
It was, essentially, used as a games console by most buyers. The alternatives at the time were other home computers, notably the C64, which did fairly well, but again was used primarily as a games console, and the Atari 2600, which never really took off here.
What made the Spectrum and C64 popular? Well, games cost somewhere between 2GBP and 10GBP, and there were a lot of them. By comparison console games generally started at 15GBP. Both home computers also had better hardware than dedicated games consoles, had more games available, and the only negative was that it took five minutes to load a game.
As far as BASIC went, it was a factor, but not in a "WOW! If I buy this I can program this myself!"
No, the ability to program home computers had two advantages: it was a selling point to parents, and it also helped increase the number of games. The percentage of home computer users who learned how to program was probably in the single digits, but with tens of millions of sales, that still added up to tens-hundreds of thousands of programmers who wanted to scratch itches and develop games. Home computers ended up with more software than the games consoles because nobody outside of a small elite group had any idea how to program the latter, and needed special equipment if they tried.
That was wonderful time. I really look forward to when we get a new generation of computers as easy to pick up and develop for as home computers were. It's a shame Microsoft didn't bundle VB with Windows back in the 1990s, and we're still stuck with relatively impenetrable - for newcomers - tools for mainstream development elsewhere.
That's true, the pre-Hoover FBI was a model of how a government agency should be: it solved every case before it, never harassed or hurt the innocent, was honest, scrupulous, efficient, dependable...
Then J. Edgar Hoover became its founding Director and it all went to hell...
Largely agree though I'm not sure about the "stupid" thing.
I haven't played V yet, but have played 3/VC/SA/4, and wouldn't describe any in the series as "stupid". They're biting depictions of US pop "crime culture" as seen from 3,000 miles away, and they belong on the shelves in any store that sells games but also sells TV box sets from The Sopranos to Miami Vice.
I'm not arguing it's perfect, that it's the funniest, that if all games were like the GTA series there wouldn't be a problem, but standalone, marketed and sold only to adults, there should be no problem with the game being sold. We see a backlash against it largely because of a combination of politicians raising its profile as some kind of embodiment of evil in video gaming, and because of the background issue of there being so many games that persist sharing GTA's social flaws, something that's becoming a prominant concern now inside and outside the industry.
Stupid? No. each game in the series I've seen does what it sets out to do, does it with wit and insight, and tries its very best to present a provoking look at an artificial world that's a little twisted to begin with.
I think they meant Target's customers, not GTA's customers.
(Nonetheless the decision is disappointing anyway)
You're forgetting he's using XML...
It's Sony Pictures we're talking about here, they probably run that operating system on all their PCs where all you need to do to download all the data on their network is plug in a USB stick, while your tech wizard back at the base hacks into the computer and installs the virus.
As long as you make sure you're in and out of the office containing the PC in the 60 second window between night watchmen checking in, there shouldn't be any problem with doing this.
They've supported HTTPS for over a decade, it's just it's a premium feature.
Newborns don't show preferences for anything at all. Hell, feeding them is a chore.
My toddler seems to be interested in a mix of girly and boy things. When she was six months she started trying to take evereything apart and very obviously wanted to know how they worked, an engineering mindset. It's anecdotal evidence, to be sure, but almost (not all, but all but one) every parent I've spoken to that has taken on a policy of letting the child steer them in his or her interests has seen their child have a mix of interests until they mix with other children, where peer pressure starts to apply.
And of course, there's that whole pink/blue thing that is a modern invention. Hard to explain that.
Nobody in their right mind would argue that girls will never be drawn to certain interests more frequently than boys and vice versa, but it's hard to see why science and engineering would be amongst those affected by this without heavy peer pressure. Girls are no less curious than boys. What is science but the ultimate embodiment of curiousity?
OK, probably not a perfect answer, but you could use probabilities to keep it largely accurate. When you're in the number range that represents 1,000s, for example, you could have an algorithm whereby each time someone views that video, there's a 1 on 1,000 chance the counter will be incremented.
I'm overthinking this, aren't I? (Personally I hate the whole "Try to convert everything into ranges" thing that's been going on; view counters probably wouldn't bother me, but it's getting annoying with dates, why not just show the damned date and time instead of "4 hours ago", "Just now", "July 2011"? Why?! Why?!)
Well, LTE is a bunch of things and was originally intended to describe the process, not the standard.
But think of it like this:
2G GSM (ie first GSM) was ISDN married with cellular. That is, the engineers who created it were tasked with creating a modern, efficient, mobile phone system that would integrate into what was supposed to be a pan-European ISDN network. Why ISDN? Because that literally was the most advanced mainstream digital phone system in the world at the time, and most of Europe planned to migrate everyone over to it, even private residences. Everything you wanted to do over the phone in the 1980s was possible (and better when) using ISDN. And so 2G GSM was built as a single line ISDN with lower bandwidth.
At the air interface end, a custom FHSS digital interface was built to support the requirements of the upper level protocols.
This worked great, except the Internet happened, and people wanted to access the 'net everywhere. So 3G GSM happened, also known as UMTS. This involved rejigging the protocols to provide what they thought mobile users wanted - two "lines", one for voice, and one variable width for data (think ISDN + DSL in terms of usage model) So it was a complete redesign.
As it was, the FHSS interface made for 2G GSM didn't work for it, so they made a new one, based - largely because of politics - on a Code Division Multiple Access system. Actually there are at least two, one called WCDMA, the other TD-CDMA I think.
This... sucked. Part of it was Code Division Multiple Access isn't all its cracked up to be, but most of it is that ISDN+DSL is not actually the model to go for. It's a kludge that expects networks in general to be divided into voice and data, when in fact we're increasingly going with data only.
Hence 4G LTE. Which is still being rolled out FWIW. But voice is now a service over IP when implemented on LTE. Which means an LTE device fits into modern networking, and in theory, ultimately, you can roam an LTE device onto your Wi-fi network and it'll just work. Eventually. It doesn't work right now.
Now, funny thing here. At this point, the air interface thing kinda changes and kinda doesn't. For actual 4G LTE, as in, IMT-Advanced LTE, they created a new OFDM based air interface with really low latency (E-UTRA.) However, the upper layers of LTE can also run over W-CDMA (the name of the air interface in UMTS - 3G GSM), and the more advanced variants, such as HSPA+, actually work well with the protocol.
So what does all this mean? Well, it means we've had three generations of GSM that are about protocol, not air interface. The air interface was changed at the same time, and each time coincided with this whole 2G/3G/4G crap, but that was a side show, the action was in the upper levels.
It is not likely at all at this stage - in the next two decades anyway - that there will be a fourth generation of GSM as far as protocols go. Everything-over-IP is the way everything is going, and LTE already does that.
So 5G will be LTE at the upper levels too. It'll have a new air interface. But right now LTE already runs over HSPA+ and E-UTRA. This'll just be another approved air interface for LTE. Which is good.
I've lived in a variety of multicultural environments in the UK in the past, and not seen anything other than normal levels of policing - which by suburban US standards (never mind urban standards) are extremely relaxed.
I'm not sure what studies you're referring to, but I would revisit them if I were you with a very skeptical eye. I'd be more inclined to think the US has a particular problem due to history and the level of corruption in local governments, which has lead to particularly bad policing, which has in turn lead to an assumption that that's just the way things should be from a populace brought up in that environment.
Even easier, Inspect Element (built in to virtually every web browser these days) and change the live HTML.
If people knew how easy it was to forge screenshots these days they'd stop believing everything that purports to be one.
He's right and you're wrong. Those two issues are not the primary purposes of the Federal Government, and even if you had been technically right (you're not, ICC is of considerable more historic purpose), you would have been handwaving as claiming two issues are "primary" does not eliminate the other unsaid issues.
I'm bemused by his answer to be honest. I was making a light hearted comment about someone's attempt to justify a party position ("Against big gubmint") by launching into a dubious official-justification "Trying to protect the constitution" rant.
So I drew a parallel with #ethics!!?!1!, and got a massive MRA rant in response, as if the intent was to make the thread symmetric. Apparent Reason 1 -> Dubious Official Position 1 -> Dubious Official Position 2 -> (Whitewashed) Apparent Reason 2.
Huh.
BTW Shadow, FWIW, the tactics of your fellow MRAs/channer trolls/opportunists/dupes lead me to actually sit down and watch Anita Sarkeesian's video series the other week. Well, I had to. And yes, it will impact some of my work in future, she makes some excellent points. Me, myself, probably won't make a difference to you, but I know plenty of others who have done the same. And by coming out into the open, you've also made it easier for us to see you, for me to, for example, warn my daughter (when she's old enough, I'm not going to scare the shit out of her right now) about the extremists in your group who write articles like "How to get away with rape" and "How to break a woman".
So thank you - to you and the people you defend and associate with - for making it easier to arm my daughter, and for ensuring I, and legions of other men who seriously had thought sexism against women was nothing like as serious as it is, open our eyes and start fighting for equality.
Actually it's about ethics in gaming journalism
Thanks! That's all useful advice. Turning of JS in Google makes it much more useful too, so I'll try the gbv trick.
Did you mean People type poorly and having spelling difficulties?
Results 1-10 of one gajillion:
(This is how Google used to work. Then they switched to automatically searching for the search query they think you want. Then they introduced the "any of these words" bullshit. And now they even change your query without telling you, leaving you literally with no relationship between what you've entered and the search results. Baffling.)