The fact of the matter is that the majority of people on the old Netflix plan only used the streaming service or the DVD plan because it came free with the one they wanted. They never had any interest in paying for the other service, so when Netflix decided to start charging for it, they naturally dropped the one they didn't use.
There was a smaller group that liked both, and decided that even with a 60% price increase, that it was worth it.
There was an even smaller group that liked both, but were frustrated with the streaming selection, annoyed at the screwed up website. They were already looking at other options, but nothing came close to the combined value of DVDs and streaming. When the price increase came, this changed and other options started looking more competitive so they left. But again this was a very small group.
I wouldn't call people who don't want to pay for a service they hardly use spoiled. I wouldn't call people who can find a better deal spoiled. I call it obvious, and if Netflix had done any customer research they would have as well.
With the Nook Color, you don't have access to any content delivered by Amazon, such as their streaming video and movie service
Fair point. You can easily side-load the Amazon Video and Kindle Android Apps onto the Nook, but then again you will eventually be able to root the Kindle as well, so it is fairest to compare the device in their stock state.
you wouldn't be able to access any existing Amazon content you own (such as books)
You consider that an advantage of the Kindle hardware, I consider it a disadvantage of the entire Amazon ecosystem.
and you wouldn't get their accelerated browser (which supposedly works well now that they've fixed it).
The Nook browser works better even without offloading the task to a server, so that's not an advantage.
(It's also $50 more expensive, for what that is worth)
The Nook Color is the same price, and has better responsiveness and battery life than the Kindle Fire despite having a slower processor (all other specs are just as good). The Nook Tablet is $50 more expensive and has better hardware specs across the board.
Except by all accounts, nearly none of these problems exist for the Nook Color which is the same price. The Nook Color is slower than an iPad, but it is generally responsive and fairly well polished, especially after a year of updates. The Kindle Fire by comparison is a shoddy rushed product.
So this is like buying a Kia when you could have gotten a better Hyundai for the same price.
I haven't read Microsoft's new terms, so I can't comment on them, but the iOS app store is incompatible with the terms of the GPL.
The App Store terms and conditions does allow for a third party license agreement (including FLOSS licenses) to be substituted for their default LICENSED APPLICATION END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT. However only that one section of the terms and services is substituted; the rest of it remains in force. The GPL prohibits you from placing any further restrictions than those in the GPL, and the App Store terms and conditions does just that: In particular
USE OF APP AND BOOK PRODUCTS AND THE APP AND BOOK SERVICES You agree that the App and Book Services and certain App and Book Products include security technology that limits your use of App and Book Products and that, whether or not App and Book Products are limited by security technology, you shall use App and Book Products in compliance with the applicable usage rules established by Apple and its principals (âoeUsage Rulesâ), and that any other use of the App and Book Products may constitute a copyright infringement
CHANGES Apple reserves the right at any time to modify this Agreement and to impose new or additional terms or conditions on your use of the App and Book Services. Such modifications and additional terms and conditions will be effective immediately and incorporated into this Agreement. Your continued use of the App and Book Services will be deemed acceptance thereof.
Other FLOSS licenses are compatible with the app store, and other GPL developers don't care about the incompatibility, and thus don't press the issue, but the VLC developer was correct in his claim that the GPL was being violated.
Not to mention that Jobs was very vocal about his intentions to sue Android into the ground before he died. Hell, the day he announced the iPhone in 2007 he announced that Apple had applied for over 200 patents on the phone and was ready to enforce them. He tried to do the same thing with the Macintosh look-and-feel lawsuits back in the day but failed. It's clear that he went through great effort make sure Apple had a stronger legal position this time around.
This is absolutely his idea. Anyone trying to pin it the transition to Cook is delusional.
Yeah, a while back they changed our timekeeping application from an in-house web-app that was simple, fast and just worked to a PeopleSoft monstrosity. It was less capable (wouldn't remember descriptions of project numbers) and required you to wait 3-30 seconds after entering each field, and would occasionally time-out during this interval clearing everything you had entered. One particularly bad week I spent over two hours attempting to enter my time before giving up and faxing it to Payroll. They were not amused at this or at my inquiries for a project/task number to charge for all the time I wasted.
I agree with you that this is a complete travest. However, I would be very surprised if they got any results in court.
The courts have long held that as long as the government has a warrant they can seize any property, freeze any bank accounts, and demolish anything they want in the course of an investigation and don't have to provide any compensation if it turned out you were innocent. Even if you were never suspected of a crime, your property was only tangentially related to the investigation, and seizing it will make you destitute they can still take it, hold it for as long as they want and not pay you a dime. Thank you war on drugs.
This is exactly the solution I would have proposed, except it goes against the users requirements.
Disabling TTY access requires changes to the OS configuration which he is not allowed to make. Furthermore in Ubuntu, you can't just kill the current X session and start a new one from the command line with the application as the window manager, because it will helpfully restart X when it crashes (or is intentionally killed). You would either need to create a special user whose default WM is the application you want to run, or you would need to reconfigure the OS graphical login settings, neither of which he is allowed to do.
User applications are intentionally prevented from locking down a machine, otherwise any old piece of malware could do so. The only way to really lock it down to modify the OS configuration. That is why all the other answers are suggesting round-about ways to achieve the same goal. IMHO adamdoyle's is the best.
I don't understand why this theory is "implausible" and why the article is so dismissive of it. Dark Matter was created for the sole purpose of explaining the orbital momentum of stars. There is NO other evidence for it.
There is lot of other evidence for non-baryonic Dark Matter: * Lack of MACHO gravitational lensing * Existence of unexpected gravitational lensing in Bullet Cluster. * CMBR measurements * and more. It isn't hard to modify equations to match the galaxy rotation curves, and if that was the only evidence for dark matter it wouldn't be so strongly favored.
Enabling people to do things more efficiently means that you don't need to pay as many people to do the same job. Money that would have been spent reinventing the wheel can now be spent on other things, like the actual goal of the company/organization, or paying IT to improve their services rather than just tread water.
Increases in efficiency are the only thing that have ever raised the standard of living. What is tricky is how the fruits of these improvements are distributed. That is where concern and energy should be placed, not trying to hold back progress.
I know that Bob is a regular troll here, but I'm a sucker and will respond anyway.
As an active individual I have no desire to adjust my life around a television schedule, nor pay $50+ a month for a cable service that I rarely use. Cutting that expense to $8 a month makes much more sense for a casual TV/movie consumer. It allows me to not worry about getting "behind" in a series as I can watch it at my own pace, and leave the house at any time without concern about what I am missing. It allows me to have down time when I need it (and as you should very well know, having relaxing time is very important for physical and mental health).
Yeah, and TSMC is the foundry that ATI has used for years (and still does). The plan with the APUs has always been to move ATI's GPU to AMD's^W Global Foundry's process. They have given up on that and decided to move AMD's CPU to the TSMC process instead. It's a pretty big turn of events.
If the idiots in congress had actually done something (other than raise taxes) back in the early 80's when the NCSSR declared that social security would become insolvent, or in 1994 when Gingrich et.al. were making noise about it, or maybe even as late as 2000 when Gore made it a core part of his platform, then we could have had serious social security reform. The baby boomers would have had time to adjust their retirement plans and deal with the changes.
It's too late now. The boomers are already retiring, and it isn't right to pull the rug out from underneath them after the government has been promising them their money back (they paid into the program after all). Raising taxes is the only option for social security now. Which sucks for my generation, but at least I have time to plan around it.
That's funny. Not to long ago Oracle stated that they have proof that Intel was killing Itanium and that HP was harming their own customers by not admitting it. Now they say that the exact opposite is true; that HP is paying to ensure that Itanium stays alive. Either this change occurred after Oracle dropped their support for Itanium (unlikely), or Oracle just admitted that they have been printing libelous statements about HP, in addition to breaking their contract with them.
But it comes down to the people. Like it or not - Bitch all you want but the fact of the matter is that our elected officials reflect the people. Our politicians act the way they do because that's how they get elected. period.
No they don't. This is demonstrated fact.
Say the House in your state allows 100 representatives. The current system of choosing these 100 representative is to slice up the state into 100 districts, each of which chooses a single representative in a winner take all election. Suppose the Green party has a 10% support of voters across the state. Unless enough of them live in a single district such that they represent more than 50% of the vote in that district, they will not get a single representative.
Even among the major parties, if you have a Democratic leaning state with 60% of the population voting democrat, you will find that more than 60% of the representatives are Democrats because of the same effect. Our current system of voting only represents geographic diversity, not diversity within a region.
Apart from starting a huge hippy commune, the supporters of the Green party will never get the representation they deserve. Even then, chances are that the incumbents will simply change the boundaries of the district that the commune is in to include enough people from neighboring communities to ensure that the Greens don't get enough votes. Likewise for the Libertarians, who have had very limited success thus far with their Free State initiative.
On the other hand, if you had a proportional election across the entire state this wouldn't be a problem. That has the downside that individual politicians get lost in the sea of the party. Alternately, if you did away with voting districts, and just had each county elect a handful of representatives*, then you will still be voting for individuals, but would give much greater chance for third parties and result in a House that is more representative of the views of the people.
* In the case where the counties are huge (which is a problem in itself), still have districting, but make the districts 3-4 times larger than they currently are and elect 3-4 times the number of representatives per district.
There have already been four credible ideas posted in this discussion as to why the measurements we are seeing could differ from prior ones, without either being wrong. Different energies, different neutron flavors, interactions with gravity, interactions with mass, etc. Neutrons are still not completely understood, and since their predictions/discovery we have had to change the standard model twice (that I am aware of) to match new observations, and we will likely have to again in light of growing evidence of flavor oscillations. Non-baryonic matter is very much at the ragged edge of what experimental physics can observe, and finding unexpected things should be expected.
I'm skeptical of their results, and think that there is probably something that hasn't been accounted for in their timing. But if you flat-out dismiss new evidence because it doesn't agree with your models based on past evidence, then you have crossed the bounds from scientific skepticism to personal belief.
TFA describes how they eavesdropped on the communication between the user and Apple's server.
Yes, by installing bogus certificates on the iPhone. If you are able to do that (manually or remotely), then you are already able to view all the unencrypted content anyway (manually or remotely respectively) so the ability to eavesdrop in that case does not decrease security. If you are not able to add your own certificate, then the authentication they have in place is sufficient to prevent eavesdropping.
All encryption protects the channel, not the endpoints.
I haven't used that device in particular, but from the windows tablets I have used, if you are doing any kind of drawing or notetaking an active digitizer is much nicer than a resistive touch screen. It is more precise and doesn't get confused when you lay the side of your hand on the display. IMHO, resistive touch screens are an attempt to provide a compromise between stylus and finger use, but do a worse job at both compared to active or capacitive touch screens.
Furthermore, for any type of handwriting latency is a huge deal. I have never seen an Android tablet that had low enough latency to make handwriting bearable. I hate to say it, but for people who need a stylus a good quality windows tablet is the way to go.
Recording is nice because you get all the content, however, it is much slower to retrieve that content than flipping through notes. I've known several people who tried recording lectures, and only one who actually used them after-words. I for one hate it when information online is only provided in video form. Having my notes in that form would drive me crazy. Video is best as a supplement for notes in situations where you have a professor that covers material not in the book, doesn't post good lecture notes, and insists on lecturing faster than you can write. In other situations it is just a hassle.
And like others mentioned, not all schools/professors allow recording of lectures.
and not using one would allow her to use an iPad.
So? Why choose a device that doesn't meet your needs and work around it, when there are devices that do?
Unless she is getting her degree in the humanities, there will be parts of the lecture that include equations, graphs, and diagrams that are hard to input with a keyboard. Nothing beats handwriting for that sort of content.
No, I think you missed his point. The setup they are using is completely adequate for securing the privacy of communication between the user and Apple's server. It is just inadequate for preventing connections from non-approved applications.
So his point was that whether you consider it "pretty useless protection" or not depends on what you are trying to protect.
Slashdot Mirror
The fact of the matter is that the majority of people on the old Netflix plan only used the streaming service or the DVD plan because it came free with the one they wanted. They never had any interest in paying for the other service, so when Netflix decided to start charging for it, they naturally dropped the one they didn't use.
There was a smaller group that liked both, and decided that even with a 60% price increase, that it was worth it.
There was an even smaller group that liked both, but were frustrated with the streaming selection, annoyed at the screwed up website. They were already looking at other options, but nothing came close to the combined value of DVDs and streaming. When the price increase came, this changed and other options started looking more competitive so they left. But again this was a very small group.
I wouldn't call people who don't want to pay for a service they hardly use spoiled. I wouldn't call people who can find a better deal spoiled. I call it obvious, and if Netflix had done any customer research they would have as well.
With the Nook Color, you don't have access to any content delivered by Amazon, such as their streaming video and movie service
Fair point. You can easily side-load the Amazon Video and Kindle Android Apps onto the Nook, but then again you will eventually be able to root the Kindle as well, so it is fairest to compare the device in their stock state.
you wouldn't be able to access any existing Amazon content you own (such as books)
You consider that an advantage of the Kindle hardware, I consider it a disadvantage of the entire Amazon ecosystem.
and you wouldn't get their accelerated browser (which supposedly works well now that they've fixed it).
The Nook browser works better even without offloading the task to a server, so that's not an advantage.
(It's also $50 more expensive, for what that is worth)
The Nook Color is the same price, and has better responsiveness and battery life than the Kindle Fire despite having a slower processor (all other specs are just as good). The Nook Tablet is $50 more expensive and has better hardware specs across the board.
Except by all accounts, nearly none of these problems exist for the Nook Color which is the same price. The Nook Color is slower than an iPad, but it is generally responsive and fairly well polished, especially after a year of updates. The Kindle Fire by comparison is a shoddy rushed product.
So this is like buying a Kia when you could have gotten a better Hyundai for the same price.
I haven't read Microsoft's new terms, so I can't comment on them, but the iOS app store is incompatible with the terms of the GPL.
The App Store terms and conditions does allow for a third party license agreement (including FLOSS licenses) to be substituted for their default LICENSED APPLICATION END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT. However only that one section of the terms and services is substituted; the rest of it remains in force. The GPL prohibits you from placing any further restrictions than those in the GPL, and the App Store terms and conditions does just that: In particular
USE OF APP AND BOOK PRODUCTS AND THE APP AND BOOK SERVICES
You agree that the App and Book Services and certain App and Book Products include security technology that limits your use of App and Book Products and that, whether or not App and Book Products are limited by security technology, you shall use App and Book Products in compliance with the applicable usage rules established by Apple and its principals (âoeUsage Rulesâ), and that any other use of the App and Book Products may constitute a copyright infringement
CHANGES
Apple reserves the right at any time to modify this Agreement and to impose new or additional terms or conditions on your use of the App and Book Services. Such modifications and additional terms and conditions will be effective immediately and incorporated into this Agreement. Your continued use of the App and Book Services will be deemed acceptance thereof.
Other FLOSS licenses are compatible with the app store, and other GPL developers don't care about the incompatibility, and thus don't press the issue, but the VLC developer was correct in his claim that the GPL was being violated.
Not to mention that Jobs was very vocal about his intentions to sue Android into the ground before he died. Hell, the day he announced the iPhone in 2007 he announced that Apple had applied for over 200 patents on the phone and was ready to enforce them. He tried to do the same thing with the Macintosh look-and-feel lawsuits back in the day but failed. It's clear that he went through great effort make sure Apple had a stronger legal position this time around.
This is absolutely his idea. Anyone trying to pin it the transition to Cook is delusional.
Yeah, a while back they changed our timekeeping application from an in-house web-app that was simple, fast and just worked to a PeopleSoft monstrosity. It was less capable (wouldn't remember descriptions of project numbers) and required you to wait 3-30 seconds after entering each field, and would occasionally time-out during this interval clearing everything you had entered. One particularly bad week I spent over two hours attempting to enter my time before giving up and faxing it to Payroll. They were not amused at this or at my inquiries for a project/task number to charge for all the time I wasted.
Yes, they did have a warrant. There was standard due process, that is, an in-house judge rubber-stamped the request.
I agree with you that this is a complete travest. However, I would be very surprised if they got any results in court.
The courts have long held that as long as the government has a warrant they can seize any property, freeze any bank accounts, and demolish anything they want in the course of an investigation and don't have to provide any compensation if it turned out you were innocent. Even if you were never suspected of a crime, your property was only tangentially related to the investigation, and seizing it will make you destitute they can still take it, hold it for as long as they want and not pay you a dime. Thank you war on drugs.
This is exactly the solution I would have proposed, except it goes against the users requirements.
Disabling TTY access requires changes to the OS configuration which he is not allowed to make. Furthermore in Ubuntu, you can't just kill the current X session and start a new one from the command line with the application as the window manager, because it will helpfully restart X when it crashes (or is intentionally killed). You would either need to create a special user whose default WM is the application you want to run, or you would need to reconfigure the OS graphical login settings, neither of which he is allowed to do.
User applications are intentionally prevented from locking down a machine, otherwise any old piece of malware could do so. The only way to really lock it down to modify the OS configuration. That is why all the other answers are suggesting round-about ways to achieve the same goal. IMHO adamdoyle's is the best.
Hopefully that will mean we get more myth busting in our backyard.
I don't understand why this theory is "implausible" and why the article is so dismissive of it. Dark Matter was created for the sole purpose of explaining the orbital momentum of stars. There is NO other evidence for it.
There is lot of other evidence for non-baryonic Dark Matter:
* Lack of MACHO gravitational lensing
* Existence of unexpected gravitational lensing in Bullet Cluster.
* CMBR measurements
* and more.
It isn't hard to modify equations to match the galaxy rotation curves, and if that was the only evidence for dark matter it wouldn't be so strongly favored.
I assumed it was intended to be pronounced like Yahtzee, which is both memorable and quite descriptive of the quality of results you can expect.
Enabling people to do things more efficiently means that you don't need to pay as many people to do the same job. Money that would have been spent reinventing the wheel can now be spent on other things, like the actual goal of the company/organization, or paying IT to improve their services rather than just tread water.
Increases in efficiency are the only thing that have ever raised the standard of living. What is tricky is how the fruits of these improvements are distributed. That is where concern and energy should be placed, not trying to hold back progress.
I know that Bob is a regular troll here, but I'm a sucker and will respond anyway.
As an active individual I have no desire to adjust my life around a television schedule, nor pay $50+ a month for a cable service that I rarely use. Cutting that expense to $8 a month makes much more sense for a casual TV/movie consumer. It allows me to not worry about getting "behind" in a series as I can watch it at my own pace, and leave the house at any time without concern about what I am missing. It allows me to have down time when I need it (and as you should very well know, having relaxing time is very important for physical and mental health).
Yeah, and TSMC is the foundry that ATI has used for years (and still does). The plan with the APUs has always been to move ATI's GPU to AMD's^W Global Foundry's process. They have given up on that and decided to move AMD's CPU to the TSMC process instead. It's a pretty big turn of events.
If the idiots in congress had actually done something (other than raise taxes) back in the early 80's when the NCSSR declared that social security would become insolvent, or in 1994 when Gingrich et.al. were making noise about it, or maybe even as late as 2000 when Gore made it a core part of his platform, then we could have had serious social security reform. The baby boomers would have had time to adjust their retirement plans and deal with the changes.
It's too late now. The boomers are already retiring, and it isn't right to pull the rug out from underneath them after the government has been promising them their money back (they paid into the program after all). Raising taxes is the only option for social security now. Which sucks for my generation, but at least I have time to plan around it.
That's funny. Not to long ago Oracle stated that they have proof that Intel was killing Itanium and that HP was harming their own customers by not admitting it. Now they say that the exact opposite is true; that HP is paying to ensure that Itanium stays alive. Either this change occurred after Oracle dropped their support for Itanium (unlikely), or Oracle just admitted that they have been printing libelous statements about HP, in addition to breaking their contract with them.
I hope the assholes pay for both.
But it comes down to the people. Like it or not - Bitch all you want but the fact of the matter is that our elected officials reflect the people. Our politicians act the way they do because that's how they get elected. period.
No they don't. This is demonstrated fact.
Say the House in your state allows 100 representatives. The current system of choosing these 100 representative is to slice up the state into 100 districts, each of which chooses a single representative in a winner take all election. Suppose the Green party has a 10% support of voters across the state. Unless enough of them live in a single district such that they represent more than 50% of the vote in that district, they will not get a single representative.
Even among the major parties, if you have a Democratic leaning state with 60% of the population voting democrat, you will find that more than 60% of the representatives are Democrats because of the same effect. Our current system of voting only represents geographic diversity, not diversity within a region.
Apart from starting a huge hippy commune, the supporters of the Green party will never get the representation they deserve. Even then, chances are that the incumbents will simply change the boundaries of the district that the commune is in to include enough people from neighboring communities to ensure that the Greens don't get enough votes. Likewise for the Libertarians, who have had very limited success thus far with their Free State initiative.
On the other hand, if you had a proportional election across the entire state this wouldn't be a problem. That has the downside that individual politicians get lost in the sea of the party. Alternately, if you did away with voting districts, and just had each county elect a handful of representatives*, then you will still be voting for individuals, but would give much greater chance for third parties and result in a House that is more representative of the views of the people.
* In the case where the counties are huge (which is a problem in itself), still have districting, but make the districts 3-4 times larger than they currently are and elect 3-4 times the number of representatives per district.
Yeah, thanks for catching that. I meant neutrinos both times.
There have already been four credible ideas posted in this discussion as to why the measurements we are seeing could differ from prior ones, without either being wrong. Different energies, different neutron flavors, interactions with gravity, interactions with mass, etc. Neutrons are still not completely understood, and since their predictions/discovery we have had to change the standard model twice (that I am aware of) to match new observations, and we will likely have to again in light of growing evidence of flavor oscillations. Non-baryonic matter is very much at the ragged edge of what experimental physics can observe, and finding unexpected things should be expected.
I'm skeptical of their results, and think that there is probably something that hasn't been accounted for in their timing. But if you flat-out dismiss new evidence because it doesn't agree with your models based on past evidence, then you have crossed the bounds from scientific skepticism to personal belief.
TFA describes how they eavesdropped on the communication between the user and Apple's server.
Yes, by installing bogus certificates on the iPhone. If you are able to do that (manually or remotely), then you are already able to view all the unencrypted content anyway (manually or remotely respectively) so the ability to eavesdrop in that case does not decrease security. If you are not able to add your own certificate, then the authentication they have in place is sufficient to prevent eavesdropping.
All encryption protects the channel, not the endpoints.
I haven't used that device in particular, but from the windows tablets I have used, if you are doing any kind of drawing or notetaking an active digitizer is much nicer than a resistive touch screen. It is more precise and doesn't get confused when you lay the side of your hand on the display. IMHO, resistive touch screens are an attempt to provide a compromise between stylus and finger use, but do a worse job at both compared to active or capacitive touch screens.
Furthermore, for any type of handwriting latency is a huge deal. I have never seen an Android tablet that had low enough latency to make handwriting bearable. I hate to say it, but for people who need a stylus a good quality windows tablet is the way to go.
Recording is nice because you get all the content, however, it is much slower to retrieve that content than flipping through notes. I've known several people who tried recording lectures, and only one who actually used them after-words. I for one hate it when information online is only provided in video form. Having my notes in that form would drive me crazy. Video is best as a supplement for notes in situations where you have a professor that covers material not in the book, doesn't post good lecture notes, and insists on lecturing faster than you can write. In other situations it is just a hassle.
And like others mentioned, not all schools/professors allow recording of lectures.
and not using one would allow her to use an iPad.
So? Why choose a device that doesn't meet your needs and work around it, when there are devices that do?
Unless she is getting her degree in the humanities, there will be parts of the lecture that include equations, graphs, and diagrams that are hard to input with a keyboard. Nothing beats handwriting for that sort of content.
No, I think you missed his point. The setup they are using is completely adequate for securing the privacy of communication between the user and Apple's server. It is just inadequate for preventing connections from non-approved applications.
So his point was that whether you consider it "pretty useless protection" or not depends on what you are trying to protect.