As usual, you're working hard to spin things in the most negative light you can.
Honestly, it's not that hard.
ARM is a power-efficient platform, but nothing prevents Intel (or someone else) from producing a power-efficient x86/x64 platform.
And you know what, insisting on doing that basically means we're stuck with the same architectures and other baggage we've had for years. It's corporate inertia and laziness.
Love 'em or hate 'em, both iOS and Android did new things on new platforms, and did them differently -- apps became smaller, with less of a footprint, and less resource hungry. We went back to small simple things which did one thing. Microsoft will have us with a 4GB install of Office because that's all they can imagine.
The entire mentality of this is "hey, we're the big players, why the fuck should we innovate when we can keep repackaging the same crap we've been selling for years?". It's the same stuff as always, when it has the potential to be more.
My work laptop and my tablet are very different animals, with very different levels of resources, on very different platforms, and used for quite different things.
What I'm hating on is the dinosaurs who are giving us the same stuff they've always given us and acting like they're doing something cool.
I think it's utterly pathetic that Intel and Microsoft just want to repackage the desktop... because I think that means they've missed the point, and are just trying to redefine the market to match what they do.
Which is why having a single OS for the mobile and desktop market means that Microsoft can't see past their own noses, and are refusing to do anything new and interesting. Just make sure we can have fucking spreadsheets.
No thanks. At least Apple and Google have done some new and interesting things, and changed the landscape. Microsoft is just trying to keep us firmly rooted in the 90s.
Well, what you call "paying attention to reality" is a side effect of terrible vision/planning. It's not an accomplishment to stop selling a product which completely missed the mark in the first place.
Microsoft thinks they can tell the market what it is they want, and the keep getting it wrong.
Hell, they release copycat products, and they still keep getting it wrong -- because thy insist on putting their own stamp on things, and are stil stuck in the "Yarg, computers are for Exchange and Office".
I'm pretty sure RT was more or less DOA. Along with their phone.
And they keep doubling down on the idea that all of these tablets will be just another x86 machine so they don't have to build anything new.
I think Microsoft has been suffering from a stunning lack of vision for years -- at least, as far as that 'vision' connects with reality. It's hard to think a company with so much resources can be so inept at understanding the markets they're trying to get into.
Given that Windows RT and RT 8.1 were designed for power economizing devices sporting 32-bit ARM architecture, and never had the same functionality -- to many users' frustration -- as full-blown Windows 8 and 8.1, it comes as little surprise that the RT versions of the operating system should be left out of the latest update loop
In the Microsoft view of the world, all devices will become power hogs which are comparable to a desktop, because they've completely missed the fucking point.
I think this is why MS's "one platform for everything" notion is complete crap... a mobile device should have less resources and hardware than a full on desktop.
But to Microsoft, they can only envision a desktop PC... which really makes all those "I'm a PC/I'm a Mac" commercials more hilarious, because it really seems like Microsoft just doesn't get it. They have yet to see past Exchange and Office and understand what most people actually do with these things.
You know, I'm long since past the point where I fetishize technology. In fact, it often bores me to death, because it seems like it's technology for the sake of technology and doesn't add value to my life -- just clutter.
I don't carry a smart phone... well, I do, but it hasn't got a data plan. It gets used to send text messages mostly. It has wifi, but it's mostly off.
I don't see personal value in controlling my lights from my smart phone -- or, for that matter, lights which change color. And definitely not color changing lights which are networked and talking to my smart phone.
Color changing networked lights connected to my smart phone learning my habits and schedule, reporting that upstream to google and doing who knows what else that it's not telling me about and signalling to my fridge that the butter should be softened because I might be home soon... well, I'm afraid you've lost me at that point.
In fact, I find the prospect downright creepy.
Sorry, but I don't see my mission in life as owning every conceivable piece of technology and integrating it so tightly into my life that a power outage is going to leave me in the fetal position in the corner as I suddenly am disconnected from the world and can't turn on the lights.
So, I'll sit on my front porch shaking my first at you guys and your doo-dads and focus on things which don't end up with me having a chip implanted up my ass which lets the toilet seat know to start pre-warming because the frequency of sphincter contractions indicates an impending poo, and tells google to give me ads for toilet paper because I'm running low.
I'm afraid I simply don't care enough to play that silly game.:-P
That's kind of my point... most of the stuff I see from futurists assumes we have the resources and luxury to start everything from scratch to build the thing of the future.
The city of the future where everything glows, is connected, and is awesome? Yeah, right, we'll start all of our cities from scratch just for your magic technology. More accurately, you have the slums where this isn't, and the shiny new stuff where the rich live.
Same for this. Does he really think people are going to replace every damned thing in their lives so that it can be automated and interconnected? I'm sorry, but only a moron believes that. If I want to "interact" with my lamp I can walk over to the damned thing.
The entire article is pipe-dreams from Google, Facebook, Yahoo and others about how they're going to usher in a marvelous new future and make use of our data.
I'm afraid my answer to those entities is "go fuck yourself", because having "clear, pragmatic, market-based regulation" is code for "how can corporate douchebags guarantee access to our data for their own ends and profits while ensuring they don't have pesky laws which limit what they can do".
I'm afraid these entities are the last ones I'd entrust with my data, or to be driving the conversation about the limitations which need to be placed on them.
So, as I've said all along... Internet of Things is designed to benefit the corporations who think it's great, is predicated on us all paying tons of money to buy crap which has this enabled, with the implicit assumption this is what the rest of us want, and that somehow this actually benefits us.
And, as usual, I find myself thinking I don't think this benefits me at all. It's just more apps and cell phones, and pointless tracking and analytics to allow asshole billionaires like Schmidt to buy another fucking yacht.
Yawn, whatever there, Eric... more bullshit futurism about how the wealthy will live.
I don't think people really want the internet of things, and every time someone says "ZOMG, look at teh future" I mostly think they're talking out of their ass.
It makes a great sales pitch, but generally futurists are snake oil salesman and marketers claiming their pet technology will change the world, but which would require zillions of dollars and some massive fundamental changes to everything around us.
And the rest of us will have plain old lamps and sofa which aren't telling everything to Google about our daily lives.
The petty ramblings of billionaire technologists really is mostly drivel.
Old men like young boobies... this is an evolutionary fact.
I once had to have "the talk" with my father... Dad, I know you want to sneak a peak at boobies when mom isn't looking, but most of those sites are really dangerous... if you're going to look at boobies, use this browser which won't run scripts or anything, and which runs as a different profile. I've bookmarked a few sites to get you started. And no matter what you the ad claims, don't click it..;-)
Well, first off, this was in the era of XP, when everybody had admin rights.
And, second... the developers who occasionally got suckered into trying to help her always said to IT "Can we just lock her machine down so she can't do any damage?".
But it was like groundhog day... just this endless loop of crap on the PC, re-install, followed by her clicking everything and getting crap on her PC. She couldn't, or wouldn't, learn not to do it.
Hopefully, wherever she is now they've locked the machine down so she can't do any damage.
"It judges risk based on human behavior and then assigns a security countermeasure for a given user."
For which I'm sure for many users that amounts to "system shut down will begin in....".
We used to have a receptionist who would install pretty much anything from anywhere. Animated dinosaur cursors? Bring 'em on. A game? Make it so. She'd click any link, any button, anywhere.
Periodically it was just easier to wipe her machine, re-install from an image, and then let her destroy it again.
I honestly never knew why they let her near a computer -- it was always so full of garbage that she couldn't do anything with it, and no amount of telling her why she shouldn't do that would work.
She clearly never used the damned thing for anything work related, she couldn't have had the time. And then when she got it so broken it was unusable, she demanded the IT guy come immediately and fix it... because she was obviously losing valuable time clicking on pointless crap on the internet.
The penis and the vroom vroom noises didn't work for you?
OK, this is like putting pink plastic hubcaps on your crappy car... it doesn't go faster, it doesn't change the fact that your car is a complete pile of crap, but somehow it conveys that you're now a "car guy", and can get some play from the hunnies.
This is exactly like cheap spinners, except, um, with sound.
Possibly like looking at your penis with a magnifying glass... sure, from a certain perspective it might look better, but you're not fooling anybody, and people will still laugh at you.
Now, there are a ton more technical challenges to ensuring all apps are automatically cross-platform compared to net neutrality. But, if it were easy and free, I would totally want that.
Sure, and ponies and unicorns are awesome, and so is staying up late on a school night, and never having to eat your vegetables... but this has nothing at all to do with reality.
The notion that BBs competitors should prop up the dying BB platform in some notional sense of fairness is stupid.
As is the notion that if I, or anybody else, comes up with a successful app that we'd be legally obligated to port it to every possible platform.
Competition is fine and dandy, but nobody has an obligation to support your product just because you want them to. And nobody is responsible to ensure that you remain as competition in that ecosystem.
This is kind of like whining that Fords isn't making spare parts for Chevy, and that somehow you're disadvantaged by that because you live closer to a Ford dealership.
BlackBerry is losing market share, and dying. And if the CEO is going to say stupid stuff like this, they should get on with the dying already.
Insisting that Apple starts porting software to the BlackBerry? Just another clueless tech CEO who doesn't understand reality.
No, he's a CEO of a failing company who is acting like a whiny moron who thinks the rest of the world should be responsible for keeping his company in business.
It amounts to "hey, we made our crap software that nobody wants available for your platform, so now you have to support our platform".
Chen even goes as far as citing Apple's iMessage tool as a service that should be made available for BlackBerry, because at present the lack of an iMessage BlackBerry app is holding the firm back
So, the biggest challenge facing Blackberry is that their competitors won't port their products to the BlackBerry platform?
This is idiocy beyond belief.
This has nothing to do with "openness and neutrality", and has everything to do with the fact that your platform is dying, and you're now expecting everyone else to solve that.
Yeah, because that could be in no way allegorical for government agencies acting according to their own personal prerogative, instead of any rational chain of command, or following the law.
Nosiree, you could never get the situation where a security/military branch lies to those who give it oversight.
Nor could they ever go to extremes to protect the citizenry, to the point of being willing to lie, cheat, steal, kill, or break the law.
They'c certainly never create secret weapons and then try to find an excuse to use them.
Sorry, but this is just nerd rage that Trek isn't living up to your personal expectations.
Not all of the movies dealt with big issues in deep ways -- Final Frontier was based on the bad hippie episode, and it was pretty hokey.
The series was dead in the water. It needed to be rebooted, and you don't do that by diving into preachy plots nobody else will watch... you do it in such a way that people actually watch the damned thing, and you have a chance to do things with it later.
It's a movie. by definition, it's escapism.
And let's not pretend for a minute that every episode of every variation on Trek was some great work of art dealing with weighty issues, or that Weasley didn't magically save the day with some contrivance or another in the last 5 minutes.
I reject all parts of those links you provide which say "but this isn't what happened in the original". Yes, they changed the timeline, the canon doesn't exist... deal with it.
I think you people take Trek way too damned seriously. Yes, it was innovative and ground breaking... but it's not holy scripture pointing us to the promised land.
Because... severing yourself from the canon isn't new or original?
Star Trek now has freedom to have any future the writers can come up with... how is that now awesome for the franchise?
I personally like the idea that it basically gives a preemptive "Shhh" to the nerds who are going to go all Comic Book Guy and say "but clearly this is in contradiction to episode 62 where Kirk says the saliva of Dactarian Moon Bats is the source of his secret powers".
Windows 10 will be free for existing Windows users running versions of the OS, going back to Windows 7. That includes Windows 7, 8, 8.1 and Windows Phone. Microsoft specified it would only be free for the first year, indicating Windows would be software that users subscribe to, rather than buy outright.
Now, TFA could be wrong too.. but it sounds like Microsoft is going for the cash grab of a subscription model for the OS.
Not sure that's going to work so well for them.
(*) Not claiming to know different, honestly have no idea.
And, we encourage crap ideas. Identifying the crap ideas is how we move forward and identify the good ideas. When you're in a free scrum, throw out all the terrible ideas you can think of -- that's why we're doing it.
However, the dynamic of how you get there makes all the difference in the world in terms of how the team works.
If you need to act like an aggressive douchebag to make yourself feel good, you probably suck as a teammate.
Maybe instead of saying "it's my right to be an asshole, suck it up princess", you should realize that you're an asshole, and nobody finds that amusing except you.
If you can't act like an adult, expect to be treated like a child.
Most organizations have little patience for someone who acts like it's the fault of the person who gets offended, when the person doing the offending is a self entitled prick. Because you're just a liability.
Disagreement is part of life. Handling it like grown ups, is also part of life.
Slashdot Mirror
Honestly, it's not that hard.
And you know what, insisting on doing that basically means we're stuck with the same architectures and other baggage we've had for years. It's corporate inertia and laziness.
Love 'em or hate 'em, both iOS and Android did new things on new platforms, and did them differently -- apps became smaller, with less of a footprint, and less resource hungry. We went back to small simple things which did one thing. Microsoft will have us with a 4GB install of Office because that's all they can imagine.
The entire mentality of this is "hey, we're the big players, why the fuck should we innovate when we can keep repackaging the same crap we've been selling for years?". It's the same stuff as always, when it has the potential to be more.
My work laptop and my tablet are very different animals, with very different levels of resources, on very different platforms, and used for quite different things.
What I'm hating on is the dinosaurs who are giving us the same stuff they've always given us and acting like they're doing something cool.
I think it's utterly pathetic that Intel and Microsoft just want to repackage the desktop ... because I think that means they've missed the point, and are just trying to redefine the market to match what they do.
Which is why having a single OS for the mobile and desktop market means that Microsoft can't see past their own noses, and are refusing to do anything new and interesting. Just make sure we can have fucking spreadsheets.
No thanks. At least Apple and Google have done some new and interesting things, and changed the landscape. Microsoft is just trying to keep us firmly rooted in the 90s.
Well, what you call "paying attention to reality" is a side effect of terrible vision/planning. It's not an accomplishment to stop selling a product which completely missed the mark in the first place.
Microsoft thinks they can tell the market what it is they want, and the keep getting it wrong.
Hell, they release copycat products, and they still keep getting it wrong -- because thy insist on putting their own stamp on things, and are stil stuck in the "Yarg, computers are for Exchange and Office".
I'm pretty sure RT was more or less DOA. Along with their phone.
And they keep doubling down on the idea that all of these tablets will be just another x86 machine so they don't have to build anything new.
I think Microsoft has been suffering from a stunning lack of vision for years -- at least, as far as that 'vision' connects with reality. It's hard to think a company with so much resources can be so inept at understanding the markets they're trying to get into.
Well, I assume YouTube videos and Facebook (or whatever the hep kiddies are running) .... but, yeah.
In the Microsoft view of the world, all devices will become power hogs which are comparable to a desktop, because they've completely missed the fucking point.
I think this is why MS's "one platform for everything" notion is complete crap ... a mobile device should have less resources and hardware than a full on desktop.
But to Microsoft, they can only envision a desktop PC ... which really makes all those "I'm a PC/I'm a Mac" commercials more hilarious, because it really seems like Microsoft just doesn't get it. They have yet to see past Exchange and Office and understand what most people actually do with these things.
You know, I'm long since past the point where I fetishize technology. In fact, it often bores me to death, because it seems like it's technology for the sake of technology and doesn't add value to my life -- just clutter.
I don't carry a smart phone ... well, I do, but it hasn't got a data plan. It gets used to send text messages mostly. It has wifi, but it's mostly off.
I don't see personal value in controlling my lights from my smart phone -- or, for that matter, lights which change color. And definitely not color changing lights which are networked and talking to my smart phone.
Color changing networked lights connected to my smart phone learning my habits and schedule, reporting that upstream to google and doing who knows what else that it's not telling me about and signalling to my fridge that the butter should be softened because I might be home soon ... well, I'm afraid you've lost me at that point.
In fact, I find the prospect downright creepy.
Sorry, but I don't see my mission in life as owning every conceivable piece of technology and integrating it so tightly into my life that a power outage is going to leave me in the fetal position in the corner as I suddenly am disconnected from the world and can't turn on the lights.
So, I'll sit on my front porch shaking my first at you guys and your doo-dads and focus on things which don't end up with me having a chip implanted up my ass which lets the toilet seat know to start pre-warming because the frequency of sphincter contractions indicates an impending poo, and tells google to give me ads for toilet paper because I'm running low.
I'm afraid I simply don't care enough to play that silly game. :-P
Not get off my damned lawn!!
That's kind of my point ... most of the stuff I see from futurists assumes we have the resources and luxury to start everything from scratch to build the thing of the future.
The city of the future where everything glows, is connected, and is awesome? Yeah, right, we'll start all of our cities from scratch just for your magic technology. More accurately, you have the slums where this isn't, and the shiny new stuff where the rich live.
Same for this. Does he really think people are going to replace every damned thing in their lives so that it can be automated and interconnected? I'm sorry, but only a moron believes that. If I want to "interact" with my lamp I can walk over to the damned thing.
The entire article is pipe-dreams from Google, Facebook, Yahoo and others about how they're going to usher in a marvelous new future and make use of our data.
I'm afraid my answer to those entities is "go fuck yourself", because having "clear, pragmatic, market-based regulation" is code for "how can corporate douchebags guarantee access to our data for their own ends and profits while ensuring they don't have pesky laws which limit what they can do".
I'm afraid these entities are the last ones I'd entrust with my data, or to be driving the conversation about the limitations which need to be placed on them.
So, as I've said all along ... Internet of Things is designed to benefit the corporations who think it's great, is predicated on us all paying tons of money to buy crap which has this enabled, with the implicit assumption this is what the rest of us want, and that somehow this actually benefits us.
And, as usual, I find myself thinking I don't think this benefits me at all. It's just more apps and cell phones, and pointless tracking and analytics to allow asshole billionaires like Schmidt to buy another fucking yacht.
Yawn, whatever there, Eric ... more bullshit futurism about how the wealthy will live.
I don't think people really want the internet of things, and every time someone says "ZOMG, look at teh future" I mostly think they're talking out of their ass.
It makes a great sales pitch, but generally futurists are snake oil salesman and marketers claiming their pet technology will change the world, but which would require zillions of dollars and some massive fundamental changes to everything around us.
And the rest of us will have plain old lamps and sofa which aren't telling everything to Google about our daily lives.
The petty ramblings of billionaire technologists really is mostly drivel.
And, by induction it's perfectly safe until proven otherwise.
Because Monsanto et al paid off the right people, so their stuff is presumed to be safe as a default.
Heresy!! How dare you suggest the people who make GMOs haven't solved all these problems?
In the absence of evidence this is risky, we have to conclude this is safe. Because that's how we've been doing it all along.
Why do you hate progress so much?
I, for one, welcome our new mutated GMO e. coli overlords.
Old men like young boobies ... this is an evolutionary fact.
I once had to have "the talk" with my father ... Dad, I know you want to sneak a peak at boobies when mom isn't looking, but most of those sites are really dangerous ... if you're going to look at boobies, use this browser which won't run scripts or anything, and which runs as a different profile. I've bookmarked a few sites to get you started. And no matter what you the ad claims, don't click it.. ;-)
Always practice safe click.
Well, first off, this was in the era of XP, when everybody had admin rights.
And, second ... the developers who occasionally got suckered into trying to help her always said to IT "Can we just lock her machine down so she can't do any damage?".
But it was like groundhog day ... just this endless loop of crap on the PC, re-install, followed by her clicking everything and getting crap on her PC. She couldn't, or wouldn't, learn not to do it.
Hopefully, wherever she is now they've locked the machine down so she can't do any damage.
It was really sad to watch.
LOL ... clearly I have more blockers enabled than would allow me to see that picture.
One of the tracking domains/ad sites I block must be serving the images.
Which places me firmly in the "don't ever trust the internet" camp.
For which I'm sure for many users that amounts to "system shut down will begin in ....".
We used to have a receptionist who would install pretty much anything from anywhere. Animated dinosaur cursors? Bring 'em on. A game? Make it so. She'd click any link, any button, anywhere.
Periodically it was just easier to wipe her machine, re-install from an image, and then let her destroy it again.
I honestly never knew why they let her near a computer -- it was always so full of garbage that she couldn't do anything with it, and no amount of telling her why she shouldn't do that would work.
She clearly never used the damned thing for anything work related, she couldn't have had the time. And then when she got it so broken it was unusable, she demanded the IT guy come immediately and fix it ... because she was obviously losing valuable time clicking on pointless crap on the internet.
The penis and the vroom vroom noises didn't work for you?
OK, this is like putting pink plastic hubcaps on your crappy car ... it doesn't go faster, it doesn't change the fact that your car is a complete pile of crap, but somehow it conveys that you're now a "car guy", and can get some play from the hunnies.
This is exactly like cheap spinners, except, um, with sound.
Possibly like looking at your penis with a magnifying glass ... sure, from a certain perspective it might look better, but you're not fooling anybody, and people will still laugh at you.
So, this is bee-sting lips, but for cars?
Pure artifice to match an arbitrary aesthetic, and nothing at all to do with reality?
LOL ... But, honey, the car doesn't make my penis bigger if it doesn't make that sound.
The idea of running the vroom vroom sounds through the car stereo to sound more manly is ... well, kinda funny.
Sure, and ponies and unicorns are awesome, and so is staying up late on a school night, and never having to eat your vegetables ... but this has nothing at all to do with reality.
The notion that BBs competitors should prop up the dying BB platform in some notional sense of fairness is stupid.
As is the notion that if I, or anybody else, comes up with a successful app that we'd be legally obligated to port it to every possible platform.
Competition is fine and dandy, but nobody has an obligation to support your product just because you want them to. And nobody is responsible to ensure that you remain as competition in that ecosystem.
This is kind of like whining that Fords isn't making spare parts for Chevy, and that somehow you're disadvantaged by that because you live closer to a Ford dealership.
BlackBerry is losing market share, and dying. And if the CEO is going to say stupid stuff like this, they should get on with the dying already.
Insisting that Apple starts porting software to the BlackBerry? Just another clueless tech CEO who doesn't understand reality.
No, he's a CEO of a failing company who is acting like a whiny moron who thinks the rest of the world should be responsible for keeping his company in business.
It amounts to "hey, we made our crap software that nobody wants available for your platform, so now you have to support our platform".
He's an idiot.
So, the biggest challenge facing Blackberry is that their competitors won't port their products to the BlackBerry platform?
This is idiocy beyond belief.
This has nothing to do with "openness and neutrality", and has everything to do with the fact that your platform is dying, and you're now expecting everyone else to solve that.
Boo fucking hoo.
Yeah, because that could be in no way allegorical for government agencies acting according to their own personal prerogative, instead of any rational chain of command, or following the law.
Nosiree, you could never get the situation where a security/military branch lies to those who give it oversight.
Nor could they ever go to extremes to protect the citizenry, to the point of being willing to lie, cheat, steal, kill, or break the law.
They'c certainly never create secret weapons and then try to find an excuse to use them.
Sorry, but this is just nerd rage that Trek isn't living up to your personal expectations.
Not all of the movies dealt with big issues in deep ways -- Final Frontier was based on the bad hippie episode, and it was pretty hokey.
The series was dead in the water. It needed to be rebooted, and you don't do that by diving into preachy plots nobody else will watch ... you do it in such a way that people actually watch the damned thing, and you have a chance to do things with it later.
It's a movie. by definition, it's escapism.
And let's not pretend for a minute that every episode of every variation on Trek was some great work of art dealing with weighty issues, or that Weasley didn't magically save the day with some contrivance or another in the last 5 minutes.
I reject all parts of those links you provide which say "but this isn't what happened in the original". Yes, they changed the timeline, the canon doesn't exist ... deal with it.
I think you people take Trek way too damned seriously. Yes, it was innovative and ground breaking ... but it's not holy scripture pointing us to the promised land.
Because ... severing yourself from the canon isn't new or original?
Star Trek now has freedom to have any future the writers can come up with ... how is that now awesome for the franchise?
I personally like the idea that it basically gives a preemptive "Shhh" to the nerds who are going to go all Comic Book Guy and say "but clearly this is in contradiction to episode 62 where Kirk says the saliva of Dactarian Moon Bats is the source of his secret powers".
"Keep in mind that legislatures pass unconstitutional laws all the time"
The mind boggling this is people seem to think that's OK. I think there should be real repercussions for lawmakers who do this crap.
Like a sound beating.
I'm running Vista right now, you insensitive clod.
(Actually, I am ... and strangely, I've always found it to be decent on my current machine. It just needed enough resources.)
Citation, please(*) ... TFA says quite explicitly:
Now, TFA could be wrong too .. but it sounds like Microsoft is going for the cash grab of a subscription model for the OS.
Not sure that's going to work so well for them.
(*) Not claiming to know different, honestly have no idea.
LOL ... you know, you sound like someone who is sooner or later going to get knocked flat on his ass.
I'm no SJW, but I sure as fuck don't defend childish assholes like you.
You're a big talker on the interwebs, but I bet you're a cowardly little shit in person who needs to act tough when there's nobody around.
Taken out by any means available? And you want to be treated like an adult instead of the whiny little prick that you are?
You're sad, and pathetic.
So go take it up the ass and chew on your pillow ... because you sound like a punk.
Well, I've been on a fair few teams.
And, we encourage crap ideas. Identifying the crap ideas is how we move forward and identify the good ideas. When you're in a free scrum, throw out all the terrible ideas you can think of -- that's why we're doing it.
However, the dynamic of how you get there makes all the difference in the world in terms of how the team works.
If you need to act like an aggressive douchebag to make yourself feel good, you probably suck as a teammate.
Maybe instead of saying "it's my right to be an asshole, suck it up princess", you should realize that you're an asshole, and nobody finds that amusing except you.
If you can't act like an adult, expect to be treated like a child.
Most organizations have little patience for someone who acts like it's the fault of the person who gets offended, when the person doing the offending is a self entitled prick. Because you're just a liability.
Disagreement is part of life. Handling it like grown ups, is also part of life.