The question is, is he mentally ill, or is he a rocket enthusiast who found a bunch of people dumb enough to give him money if he gave flat Earth theory some lip service?
I *think* now Android and iOS/Android users will both pay for In App Purchases, but iOS users are more likely to pay for an app that costs more than $0 to download.
Still, when I read that it might just be whale vs whale for In App Purchases rather than representative of regular users.
I know everybody is all about permanent ownership, but short phone games lead themselves to small unique experiences where I'd really love to play some, cycle through to the next and experience new stuff. Long lived phone games live off by providing an addictive experience, not necessarily a fun one, and by having games that don't do In App Purchases we can avoid them.
Quite frankly, any revenue stream for game developers that don't rely on disposable IAP is good in my books.
So the traditional food pyramid is actually a lot more bunk then people realise, but also you can say that without being the worst kind of creature on the internet.
Possibly, but I think you'll need to cite examples other than this.
This being Google trying to sandbox extensions a little more at the cost of ad-blockers, then backtracking. While there was a report that showed blockers having little negative effect (and mostly overall positive effect) Google's announcement of winding their changes back happened only hours later. I doubt their internal technical strategy can pivot that quickly so I assume the strategy had already changed but this accelerated their announcement.
I agree with all of your points. The big issue we hit before was Microsoft dominated the early browser wars and things dragged along so slowly because 90s early 2000s Microsoft saw the web as competition rather than a benefit. A good web was bad for Microsoft. And the amount of browser hacks you needed to make HTML look good on all browsers, sheesh that was a nightmare.
Google on the other hand have a very vested interest in the internet as a whole being responsive and active and people can still split off Chromium if a need arises. This is actually one monoculture that I think will actually be better for everyone.
Yeah, Java's byte code was an amazing concept to assist with the compile once run anywhere (and a lot faster than interpreted languages would). BUT it came with the cost of limiting themselves to 256 possible different operations, which means no room to deal with unsigned bytes. This probably didn't seem like a big problem in the era when Java was made - I doubt they ever had heavy graphics processing in mind. I def agree that Java's Lambda Expression almost looks like another obscure language bolted on.
I like Java, in its place in history. I really wouldn't like to use it now.
I know your comment was meant as a joke, but this actually gives Apple the ability to only sell their most expensive newest iPhones "iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max and iPhone XR, will still be sold in those stores". So Germany is specifically going to be more on the frontier of iPhone technology, assuming anybody wants to pay that much for a phone these days.
Disclaimer: I really like Apple products, but now more than ever, their prices can't be justified.
What about somebody who gets 90% on their tests but their parents fund them and pay for a private tutor vs A person who gets 80% on their tests but also works two jobs to cover living expenses and fees?
Seriously, that would have fixed 90% of the stuff that got him into trouble. There's still serious questions about working conditions, but that's not what's getting them into trouble.
On the complete off chance somebody comes back to the archives to read this I was unclear in the above message.
The fingerprint and face data never leaves the secure enclave chip on the phone. Other health data (heart rate, exercise, etc) is the stuff that can be shared to third party apps only if the user allows it.
Like the a great philosopher once said: A measure of a man is which mobile phone he or she chooses. If she chooses the wrong one* then charity work, political views, family values and artistic endeavours are moot, they chose the wrong phone and have therefore condemned us all and should not be considered human.
* Note that apparently the wrong phone stores the finger print / face data in a secure enclave designed never to be able to transmit that data off the phone (and yes I believe that because hackers managed to do a bit of reverse engineering on the software - not the data - that's run in the enclave), 3rd party apps can only access that data with the user's permission, run by a company that has consistently butted heads with law enforcement overreach. Also the investor/think tank group National Center for Public Policy Research that was asking Apple to give up on their sustainability plans and focus purely on profit were shut down at a shareholder meeting.
Hey Apple isn't perfect, but, you said a lot of stuff that sounds smart but it wrong.
The American government recently is also pushing coal. And this news article is about Apple investing in renewables in China which hopefully gives renewables in China a boost.
While Apple invests very little in manufacturing outside of China, they have invested a lot in campuses, data centres, software developers, retailers in America and other western cities - all of which are using renewable energy (or at least the usual allocation of renewable energy, an electron is an electron and all that).
There are plenty of good reasons that Apple might not be the company for you, but I don't think the reasons you just gave justifies it.
The good news is that overlaps a lot with peak energy use, so supply and demand should roughly even each other out and solar wont price itself out of the market.
Also plenty of people are working on "magic batteries", see the recent slashdot stories specifically about that.
If Google are to be believed, they don't do it blindly: "We have systems in place that catch vandalism before it impacts search results, but occasionally errors get through, and that happened here." If they did do it blindly I'm sure we would have seen much worse before now.
If you serve up petabytes of information everyday, occasionally something bad is going to slip through.
More accurate to say "Hacker turns cartridge into cartridge that can send bizarre output into a NES using all kinds of crazy tricks" and is able to get higher resolution output on a machine never meant to be capable of it.
I mean, it is technically one of those wastes of time as emulating a full SNES with video out would have been much easier - but it's a really cool the way he's done it. No need to always jump to the most cynical interpretation.
So because you can do something to one part of nature and it has an affect on another part of nature... we shouldn't worry about the affects we're having on nature?
Slashdot Mirror
Cut out the creepy Japanese underage sexualising stuff, leave the rest.
Seriously, cut that stuff out.
The question is, is he mentally ill, or is he a rocket enthusiast who found a bunch of people dumb enough to give him money if he gave flat Earth theory some lip service?
I *think* now Android and iOS/Android users will both pay for In App Purchases, but iOS users are more likely to pay for an app that costs more than $0 to download.
Still, when I read that it might just be whale vs whale for In App Purchases rather than representative of regular users.
I strongly agree.
I know everybody is all about permanent ownership, but short phone games lead themselves to small unique experiences where I'd really love to play some, cycle through to the next and experience new stuff.
Long lived phone games live off by providing an addictive experience, not necessarily a fun one, and by having games that don't do In App Purchases we can avoid them.
Quite frankly, any revenue stream for game developers that don't rely on disposable IAP is good in my books.
So the traditional food pyramid is actually a lot more bunk then people realise, but also you can say that without being the worst kind of creature on the internet.
Nope, you can't blame SJWs for absolutely everything you know. Religious people banning stuff existed well before modern organised "SJW" movements.
Possibly, but I think you'll need to cite examples other than this.
This being Google trying to sandbox extensions a little more at the cost of ad-blockers, then backtracking.
While there was a report that showed blockers having little negative effect (and mostly overall positive effect) Google's announcement of winding their changes back happened only hours later. I doubt their internal technical strategy can pivot that quickly so I assume the strategy had already changed but this accelerated their announcement.
I agree with all of your points.
The big issue we hit before was Microsoft dominated the early browser wars and things dragged along so slowly because 90s early 2000s Microsoft saw the web as competition rather than a benefit. A good web was bad for Microsoft.
And the amount of browser hacks you needed to make HTML look good on all browsers, sheesh that was a nightmare.
Google on the other hand have a very vested interest in the internet as a whole being responsive and active and people can still split off Chromium if a need arises.
This is actually one monoculture that I think will actually be better for everyone.
I'm pretty sure the FDA has the authority to ban the sale of violating products in stores.
Yeah, Java's byte code was an amazing concept to assist with the compile once run anywhere (and a lot faster than interpreted languages would).
BUT it came with the cost of limiting themselves to 256 possible different operations, which means no room to deal with unsigned bytes. This probably didn't seem like a big problem in the era when Java was made - I doubt they ever had heavy graphics processing in mind.
I def agree that Java's Lambda Expression almost looks like another obscure language bolted on.
I like Java, in its place in history. I really wouldn't like to use it now.
The same way that people eventually die from natural causes, so how can someone shooting people be related to people dying now?
I know your comment was meant as a joke, but this actually gives Apple the ability to only sell their most expensive newest iPhones "iPhone XS, iPhone XS Max and iPhone XR, will still be sold in those stores".
So Germany is specifically going to be more on the frontier of iPhone technology, assuming anybody wants to pay that much for a phone these days.
Disclaimer: I really like Apple products, but now more than ever, their prices can't be justified.
Are you sure NASA safety protocols are at the mercy of the wants of vulture investors?
Do we need admissions to be that blind?
What about somebody who gets 90% on their tests but their parents fund them and pay for a private tutor vs
A person who gets 80% on their tests but also works two jobs to cover living expenses and fees?
So you believe Apple joining on the SSL everywhere bandwagon is because... they're actively working against privacy?
Seriously, that would have fixed 90% of the stuff that got him into trouble.
There's still serious questions about working conditions, but that's not what's getting them into trouble.
Do you have a citation?
All I can find about those words is that Marc Morano founder of ClimateDepot claimed that the UN admitted that.
I can't find anything directly attributed to the UN committee to verify that claim.
On the complete off chance somebody comes back to the archives to read this I was unclear in the above message.
The fingerprint and face data never leaves the secure enclave chip on the phone.
Other health data (heart rate, exercise, etc) is the stuff that can be shared to third party apps only if the user allows it.
Like the a great philosopher once said:
A measure of a man is which mobile phone he or she chooses. If she chooses the wrong one* then charity work, political views, family values and artistic endeavours are moot, they chose the wrong phone and have therefore condemned us all and should not be considered human.
* Note that apparently the wrong phone stores the finger print / face data in a secure enclave designed never to be able to transmit that data off the phone (and yes I believe that because hackers managed to do a bit of reverse engineering on the software - not the data - that's run in the enclave), 3rd party apps can only access that data with the user's permission, run by a company that has consistently butted heads with law enforcement overreach.
Also the investor/think tank group National Center for Public Policy Research that was asking Apple to give up on their sustainability plans and focus purely on profit were shut down at a shareholder meeting.
Hey Apple isn't perfect, but, you said a lot of stuff that sounds smart but it wrong.
The American government recently is also pushing coal.
And this news article is about Apple investing in renewables in China which hopefully gives renewables in China a boost.
While Apple invests very little in manufacturing outside of China, they have invested a lot in campuses, data centres, software developers, retailers in America and other western cities - all of which are using renewable energy (or at least the usual allocation of renewable energy, an electron is an electron and all that).
There are plenty of good reasons that Apple might not be the company for you, but I don't think the reasons you just gave justifies it.
The good news is that overlaps a lot with peak energy use, so supply and demand should roughly even each other out and solar wont price itself out of the market.
Also plenty of people are working on "magic batteries", see the recent slashdot stories specifically about that.
If Google are to be believed, they don't do it blindly:
"We have systems in place that catch vandalism before it impacts search results, but occasionally errors get through, and that happened here."
If they did do it blindly I'm sure we would have seen much worse before now.
If you serve up petabytes of information everyday, occasionally something bad is going to slip through.
More accurate to say "Hacker turns cartridge into cartridge that can send bizarre output into a NES using all kinds of crazy tricks" and is able to get higher resolution output on a machine never meant to be capable of it.
I mean, it is technically one of those wastes of time as emulating a full SNES with video out would have been much easier - but it's a really cool the way he's done it.
No need to always jump to the most cynical interpretation.
So because you can do something to one part of nature and it has an affect on another part of nature... we shouldn't worry about the affects we're having on nature?
Here's a more more interesting question:
Do you want a justice system that says:
For the crime of breaking an entering:
White person : 2 years
Black person : 4 years
Asian person : 1 year
etc
Do you imagine the groups on the larger sentencing of that spectrum having faith in the justice system?