Well, we have these new things called "banks" that hold your money for you securely. But you might have missed them if you haven't been paying attention for the last 500 years...
Problem is, the riot act might be useful when there are 100 rioters and a similar number of police, but with 100,000 people in the streets there is no way to "arrest anyone who refused to leave"... all the police could really focus on was containing the riot to a limited area and keeping themselves from major injury.
Vancouver is similar to the worst US cities before the housing bust. It costs 11 times the average income to buy the average house. This would put servicing housing debt at 72% of your gross income.
1) that's still not as bad as New York City, and I don't see massive sports-related riots there when the Yankees lose.
2) look at the rioters - the average age was probably under 24 - I don't care where you are, 24 year olds are not buying homes these days
3) the same thing happened when the Canucks lost in '94, and housing prices were not much of an issue back then
Pissed off, impressionable, DRUNK hockey fans caused the riot. Occam's razor - why try to read social injustice and malaise into an act when booze and testosterone will do just fine...
He doesn't have to define humane - it's already defined into law. A law that livestock operators know well, and are responsible for obeying.
And in this case it wasn't healthy, pampered cows being slaughtered for food, it was a bunch of sick, frostbitten, starved calves that had been so poorly cared for, they were bludgeoned to death and dumped. I think only a psychopath would not agree that behavior is inhumane and unacceptable.
"Crimes" against a nation's people? For *linking* to copyrighted content!?
Since (according to the Berne convention) copyrights are automatic, that means pretty much every website on the Internet is copyrighted. Which means every hyperlink to a page that you don't own is potential copyright infringement. I think it would be safe to say that under this definition, almost every website on the planet is now guilty of a crime.
Yeah, it immediately reminded me of the 40+ page EULA I had to agree to just to update my already-purchased-apps from the iTunes store. Not to mention they seem to update this absurd EULA about every week, asking you to approve it every time. I'm pretty sure I have now agreed to become a human centipede.
What Franken *should* be doing is passing legislation that makes any EULA that can't reasonably be expected to be read by the average consumer (say, a 40 page document displayed on an iPhone screen and updated once a week) invalid and unenforceable...
It's not a pay service, it's an ad-supported service. I don't see what's wrong with that - instead of some project coming out of NASA's budget, a company is showing you ads to pay for it.
Though I wish they had found a better advertiser than Transformers 3. I'm half-expecting Michael Bay to blow up the moon mid-eclipse now...
It will work on T-Mobile's network since both are GSM phones. But since T-Mobile uses a different technology for 3G speeds, it will only work at Edge (2G) networking speeds. But for many people that will be fine.
2G and no visual voicemail. Plus, T-Mobile just got bought by AT&T, so it's all going to be the same network soon, anyway. If you are in the US, buying an unlocked iPhone 4 from Apple is a complete waste of money. The only reason I could see getting one is if you are already on a contract with T-Mobile and really want an iPhone, but in that case you're probably better off paying an early termination fee and signing up with AT&T for a discounted phone.
Now, you can ask question about Bitcoin of Amir Taaki, a developer of client interfaces and stock trading software for Bitcoin, and owner and operator of trading exchange Britcoin.co.uk.
The whole post reads like it was automatically translated from Japanese...
FasTrack is an automated toll collection system used in the California Bay Area. Other US states have similar devices for tollways, etc. It basically just charges an account via RFID so you don't have to stop to pay tolls when driving.
My point was that putting a device on your windshield doesn't necessarily mean you are being spied on... but I guess if the Chinese govt did it, I might be a bit more more suspicious...
So is my Fastrack. Maybe I'm naive, but I never seriously considered it was being used to spy on me... (though now that I think of it, it's probably more likely than not;)
Again people are missing my point... the (potential) monopoly this thread was talking about (going all the way back to the comment that Apple devs aren't constrained by the same rules, and can use private APIs) was on the *developer* side - not end device users.
Apple is clearly leveraging their power over developers, that's what the article and thousands of other complaints about arbitrary or restrictive app approval policies are about. There is currently only one serious market for mobile app developers, and that's iOS devices via the iTunes app store. It doesn't matter why it's the only market from the developer's point of view - it is, and it's tightly controlled. And in this case Apple may have rejected an app while adding it to the OS themselves, which as someone pointed out isn't all that different from the IE vs Netscape issue.
And saying "that's not Apple's problem, the developers should go somewhere else" is not an reasonable answer. You might as well say that Netscape, Opera (or any other company MS screwed, and there are plenty) should have just gone off and built word processors or cars...
For a service oriented businesses the increased traffic could make up for the decreased margin.
I read a story a few weeks ago about a British portrait photographer who miscalculated (again on bad advice from a Groupon sales rep) and ended up owing people about 4 months worth of portraits and prints at such a huge discount she'd be making about $3 an hour for the first 1/3 of the year.
Even with several employees helping, it can be a problem - if a hair salon sold enough coupons to fill the chairs for no revenue, they will need to schedule more employees to work to meet the demand, rather than only paying those needed for regular paying customer traffic; also (as in the story referenced in the summary) if too many non-paying deal seekers show up, it may actually drive away the regulars. Same thing with a restaurant - employee payroll is a major cost, so they try to carefully schedule just enough cooks, waiters, etc to serve expected customers.
I do think there are limited circumstances where a Groupon-type deal would actually benefit a business - I guess the real problem is Groupon reps don't just target those businesses, they seem to target a lot of struggling small businesses desperate or naive enough to consider making such a bad business decision. I wouldn't be surprised if lawsuits start popping up related to this...
I wouldn't worry too much about consumers throughout the US not caring about saving (the current "bubble" is NOT in a general boom economy like last time!) What I'd worry about is the companies offering the deals realizing that selling hundreds of discounts that after a 1/2 off rebate and Groupon's cut give them about 30% of their normal revenue. That's a pretty steep discount for a bit of advertising, and I can't see Groupon continuing to find that many suckers, er businesses at that margin...
If no one will buy apps on Android devices, it is not a viable alternative for professional developers or companies who build apps as their source of income. As many have said MONOPOLIES ARE NOT ABOUT MARKET SHARE. They are about CONTROL of a market, and Apple clearly has control of the mobile app market (let alone the downloadable music market).
But in this case the important market statistic is not the number of *smartphones* sold, it's the number of smartphone *apps* sold. The monopoly in question is developer access to the platform, not customer access.
Besides, who really give a crap about market share by units? Market share by profit margin is all that really matters. Apple makes a metric crapload of money on each device (the Android manufacturers make a lot less, and Google makes almost nothing).
And more relevant to this thread, Apple has almost 70% of the smartphone app market by number of apps, and over 90% of the market by sales. Statistics over the last year have clearly shown Android users just don't like paying for apps the way iPhone users do. That's more than enough leverage over app developers.
Still, my Dell laptop is 5 years old and I finally put Windows 7 and Office 2010 on it a couple months ago. I'd be pissed if I was no longer able to run the most recent software on it, since it runs them just fine.
MS didn't change processor architecture. Apple did. That's the only reason for the difference.
It's a reason, but not the only reason. The original point was that Apple stops supporting its hardware sooner than others. Doesn't matter why. True in this case, was true in the 80's when they dropped IIe/IIgs support on the floor for the Mac, and true today (as everyone with iPhone 2G/3G or gen1 AppleTV has knows well).
Not that I care any more, really, I learned my lesson a long time ago and the only Apple products I buy are with the understanding they may be obsolete, unsupported, or require significant cost for repair or replacement of "non user-maintainable parts" with a few years...
Slashdot Mirror
Well, we have these new things called "banks" that hold your money for you securely. But you might have missed them if you haven't been paying attention for the last 500 years...
They did read the riot act, followed by plenty of tear gas and flash bombs. Several news articles have mentioned that...
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/06/15/bc-stanley-cup-fans-post-game-7.html
Problem is, the riot act might be useful when there are 100 rioters and a similar number of police, but with 100,000 people in the streets there is no way to "arrest anyone who refused to leave"... all the police could really focus on was containing the riot to a limited area and keeping themselves from major injury.
Vancouver is similar to the worst US cities before the housing bust. It costs 11 times the average income to buy the average house. This would put servicing housing debt at 72% of your gross income.
1) that's still not as bad as New York City, and I don't see massive sports-related riots there when the Yankees lose.
2) look at the rioters - the average age was probably under 24 - I don't care where you are, 24 year olds are not buying homes these days
3) the same thing happened when the Canucks lost in '94, and housing prices were not much of an issue back then
Pissed off, impressionable, DRUNK hockey fans caused the riot. Occam's razor - why try to read social injustice and malaise into an act when booze and testosterone will do just fine...
Perhaps, but you'll probably find that they don't count with anywhere near the same power since they're not owned by large corporations
No large corporations? With websites I can link? Really?
Great, see what you made me do? That's probably 15 years in prison for me, minimum.
He doesn't have to define humane - it's already defined into law. A law that livestock operators know well, and are responsible for obeying.
And in this case it wasn't healthy, pampered cows being slaughtered for food, it was a bunch of sick, frostbitten, starved calves that had been so poorly cared for, they were bludgeoned to death and dumped. I think only a psychopath would not agree that behavior is inhumane and unacceptable.
"Crimes" against a nation's people? For *linking* to copyrighted content!?
Since (according to the Berne convention) copyrights are automatic, that means pretty much every website on the Internet is copyrighted. Which means every hyperlink to a page that you don't own is potential copyright infringement. I think it would be safe to say that under this definition, almost every website on the planet is now guilty of a crime.
Good idea. Also, make sure the the billboards say "text 99999 now to support Distracted Driving Awareness Month!"
Yeah, it immediately reminded me of the 40+ page EULA I had to agree to just to update my already-purchased-apps from the iTunes store. Not to mention they seem to update this absurd EULA about every week, asking you to approve it every time. I'm pretty sure I have now agreed to become a human centipede.
What Franken *should* be doing is passing legislation that makes any EULA that can't reasonably be expected to be read by the average consumer (say, a 40 page document displayed on an iPhone screen and updated once a week) invalid and unenforceable...
I looked up some of Klobuchar's other gems... luckily most haven't made it past committee...
* making it illegal to sell recycled metal without proper written or electronic documentation
* temporarily suspend the duties on aluminum vacuum mugs, children's plastic wallets, soap pumps, and many other bizarre items
* designating April as "Distracted Driving Awareness Month" ...and so many more...
Basically, we know where she stands on the "quantity vs. quality" argument...
Facebook? I think it's been pretty clearly proven last week that they aren't even smart enough to use Twitter...
...is now a felony. Whereas before it was just a misdemeanor.
It's not a pay service, it's an ad-supported service. I don't see what's wrong with that - instead of some project coming out of NASA's budget, a company is showing you ads to pay for it.
Though I wish they had found a better advertiser than Transformers 3. I'm half-expecting Michael Bay to blow up the moon mid-eclipse now...
It will work on T-Mobile's network since both are GSM phones. But since T-Mobile uses a different technology for 3G speeds, it will only work at Edge (2G) networking speeds. But for many people that will be fine.
2G and no visual voicemail. Plus, T-Mobile just got bought by AT&T, so it's all going to be the same network soon, anyway. If you are in the US, buying an unlocked iPhone 4 from Apple is a complete waste of money. The only reason I could see getting one is if you are already on a contract with T-Mobile and really want an iPhone, but in that case you're probably better off paying an early termination fee and signing up with AT&T for a discounted phone.
Then I think he's a bit unclear on PKI - it's pretty hard to use it without encrypting *anything* (ie. the hash of the message).
Now, you can ask question about Bitcoin of Amir Taaki, a developer of client interfaces and stock trading software for Bitcoin, and owner and operator of trading exchange Britcoin.co.uk.
The whole post reads like it was automatically translated from Japanese...
But that's a totally reasonable usage - even in the Chinese case, it would be fine if they just tracked when you entered/left the mainland from HK.
The point to the spying is that it also tracked and eavesdropped on you everywhere ELSE you went. I'd be a bit surprised if Fastrack, etc did that :)
FasTrack is an automated toll collection system used in the California Bay Area. Other US states have similar devices for tollways, etc. It basically just charges an account via RFID so you don't have to stop to pay tolls when driving.
My point was that putting a device on your windshield doesn't necessarily mean you are being spied on... but I guess if the Chinese govt did it, I might be a bit more more suspicious...
So is my Fastrack. Maybe I'm naive, but I never seriously considered it was being used to spy on me... (though now that I think of it, it's probably more likely than not ;)
I don't know... that's not exactly the body type I'd picture pushing the Wheel of Pain...
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_c4lzk84-Q5U/S_MZB0_tV2I/AAAAAAAAASM/dM18eyQS5kw/s1600/wheel_of_pain.jpg
Again people are missing my point... the (potential) monopoly this thread was talking about (going all the way back to the comment that Apple devs aren't constrained by the same rules, and can use private APIs) was on the *developer* side - not end device users.
Apple is clearly leveraging their power over developers, that's what the article and thousands of other complaints about arbitrary or restrictive app approval policies are about. There is currently only one serious market for mobile app developers, and that's iOS devices via the iTunes app store. It doesn't matter why it's the only market from the developer's point of view - it is, and it's tightly controlled. And in this case Apple may have rejected an app while adding it to the OS themselves, which as someone pointed out isn't all that different from the IE vs Netscape issue.
And saying "that's not Apple's problem, the developers should go somewhere else" is not an reasonable answer. You might as well say that Netscape, Opera (or any other company MS screwed, and there are plenty) should have just gone off and built word processors or cars...
For a service oriented businesses the increased traffic could make up for the decreased margin.
I read a story a few weeks ago about a British portrait photographer who miscalculated (again on bad advice from a Groupon sales rep) and ended up owing people about 4 months worth of portraits and prints at such a huge discount she'd be making about $3 an hour for the first 1/3 of the year.
Even with several employees helping, it can be a problem - if a hair salon sold enough coupons to fill the chairs for no revenue, they will need to schedule more employees to work to meet the demand, rather than only paying those needed for regular paying customer traffic; also (as in the story referenced in the summary) if too many non-paying deal seekers show up, it may actually drive away the regulars. Same thing with a restaurant - employee payroll is a major cost, so they try to carefully schedule just enough cooks, waiters, etc to serve expected customers.
I do think there are limited circumstances where a Groupon-type deal would actually benefit a business - I guess the real problem is Groupon reps don't just target those businesses, they seem to target a lot of struggling small businesses desperate or naive enough to consider making such a bad business decision. I wouldn't be surprised if lawsuits start popping up related to this...
[and semi-OT, speaking of lawsuits - this is a fascinating article on the Groupon chairman's sketchy past and lawsuit trouble... http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/06/10/groupon-eric-lefkofsky/ ]
I wouldn't worry too much about consumers throughout the US not caring about saving (the current "bubble" is NOT in a general boom economy like last time!) What I'd worry about is the companies offering the deals realizing that selling hundreds of discounts that after a 1/2 off rebate and Groupon's cut give them about 30% of their normal revenue. That's a pretty steep discount for a bit of advertising, and I can't see Groupon continuing to find that many suckers, er businesses at that margin...
I don't think you understood my point...
If no one will buy apps on Android devices, it is not a viable alternative for professional developers or companies who build apps as their source of income. As many have said MONOPOLIES ARE NOT ABOUT MARKET SHARE. They are about CONTROL of a market, and Apple clearly has control of the mobile app market (let alone the downloadable music market).
But in this case the important market statistic is not the number of *smartphones* sold, it's the number of smartphone *apps* sold. The monopoly in question is developer access to the platform, not customer access.
Besides, who really give a crap about market share by units? Market share by profit margin is all that really matters. Apple makes a metric crapload of money on each device (the Android manufacturers make a lot less, and Google makes almost nothing).
And more relevant to this thread, Apple has almost 70% of the smartphone app market by number of apps, and over 90% of the market by sales. Statistics over the last year have clearly shown Android users just don't like paying for apps the way iPhone users do. That's more than enough leverage over app developers.
Still, my Dell laptop is 5 years old and I finally put Windows 7 and Office 2010 on it a couple months ago. I'd be pissed if I was no longer able to run the most recent software on it, since it runs them just fine.
MS didn't change processor architecture. Apple did. That's the only reason for the difference.
It's a reason, but not the only reason. The original point was that Apple stops supporting its hardware sooner than others. Doesn't matter why. True in this case, was true in the 80's when they dropped IIe/IIgs support on the floor for the Mac, and true today (as everyone with iPhone 2G/3G or gen1 AppleTV has knows well).
Not that I care any more, really, I learned my lesson a long time ago and the only Apple products I buy are with the understanding they may be obsolete, unsupported, or require significant cost for repair or replacement of "non user-maintainable parts" with a few years...