I'll buy all sorts of gadgets. I'm not opposed to smart-anything. But one thing I will never own is a device with a constantly listening microphone. I've tested the Alexa and it's actually scary how perceptive it is. If I whisper "alexa...", under my breath in another room, it lights up. Volume is irrelevant so long as the speech is clear. If it can hear that, what else can it hear? Everything. By design, the microphone is constantly on. You can argue that it's not always recording, but it is on, and that's bad enough.
And yes, even though I disable the "ok Google..." hotword on my phone, I know people say that the NSA/FBI/CIA/Whatever can still spy on me through it, but I view that differently. If the government's men in black want to get me, they're going to find a way get me.
One, this is oddly progressive for the predominantly republican state of Arizona.
Two, I don't think it's a good idea. Not everyone has the special talent for programming. Others (myself included) are marginally decent at it, but still have no desire to actually do it. Those who have the interest and drive to learn how to do it usually end up doing it on their own. It's not like you need to access to a school's computer lab these days, you can write code on a smartphone. Granted, that's far from optimal, but so are most school computer labs.
Is there really some huge demographic of people who are both talented and want to program, but somehow don't figure that out on their own by age 15? Seems unlikely to me. Kids with interest in this sort of stuff are already working on it themselves. The last thing they want is to sit in a classroom typing Hello World programs over and over again until everyone catches up. All that's going to to do is bore them. The same types of people who excel at programming, also get bored easily working in a classroom setting. So why taint their favorite activity?
Are you suggesting that the scientific fields are just as full of political motivation, need for personal gain, fear of embarrassment, unwillingness to admit when wrong, and truth-stretching/outright lying as every other field of work in which humans take part? And that this means that the information that they come up with should not be trusted by default? Hogwash! It can't be so!
There's no FIOS in Midwestville, Flyover where I live. That's the big advantage of the cable company over fiber optic: there's usually cable in all but the most rural of areas. Also, FIOS starts at $70 a month for 50Mbps, whereas Charter Spectrum starts at $45 for 60.
Am I allowed to defend a big company on Slashdot and not be accused of being a shill?
Charter is easily the best ISP, at least in my area (and from what I've heard, it is in many places). They're the only ones that actually gives you the advertised speeds. They guarantee 60Mbps over wired connections, not wireless, but wireless is usually damn near as good with a quality router. My guess with New York is that some of the modems they gave to customers weren't up to the latest DOCSIS specs.
Also, the wording of the article is odd. To paraphrase, it basically at one point says customers couldn't use sites like Facebook. I don't get that. Just because speeds are slow doesn't mean you flat out can't access websites. It's just suspicious wording.
I had AT&T for a little while and it sucked ass. Pay for 40Mpbs? Oh okay, here's 20 on a good day. And it was only just slightly cheaper. What are the alternatives? We all know Comcast is dog shit. I've been very happy with Charter, and it only keeps getting faster.
Funny you say that, because he actually didsteal some shit back in his youth. Obviously that was a long time ago and not very relevant anymore, but those Apple IIs disprove your theory.
Have experience with the extreme right and having a new government constructed afterwards in particular to avoid repeating that error gives Germany strength.
If you think the Nazis are an example of the "extreme right" then your arrogance and misunderstanding knows no bounds. "Nazi" meant "National Socialist German Workers Party". Remind me again, which political party is it that offers a safe haven to socialism? I certainly don't think it's the big-business first capitalist Republican one. I believe it was your original candidate, Mr. Bernie Sanders, that publicly stated he was a socialist.
From Wikipedia:
The party emerged from the German nationalist, racist and populist Freikorps paramilitary culture, which fought against the communist uprisings in post-World War I Germany.[7] The party was created as a means to draw workers away from communism and into völkisch nationalism.[8] Initially, Nazi political strategy focused on anti-big business, anti-bourgeois, and anti-capitalist rhetoric, although such aspects were later downplayed in order to gain the support of industrial entities, and in the 1930s the party's focus shifted to anti-Semitic and anti-Marxist themes.[9]
I am always still managing to be shocked at what kind of back-asswards world you lefties live in. I'm sure you'll find some way to try to twist this around and claim that the Nazis were really Republicans.
Why is it so hard to believe that I saw all the same information you did, watched all the debates start to finish, (did not get all my info from Fox News, who by the way wanted Ted Cruz originally), and just formed a different opinion?
Your arrogance is astounding.
Here's an interesting idea... Maybe, just maybe, President-elect Trump is not the raving, selfish, hate-filled, idiot the media and his opponents have painted him as. Maybe he's actually a sane and intelligent individual with good intentions, who might not be an expert in all areas of everything (nobody is), but who does have lots of experience picking and listening to experts in their respective fields.
Maybe he isn't "flip-flopping", but just realizing that a man as persuasive as him might be able to turn some of the far-right around on issues like climate change and LGBT rights. In order to persuade someone to agree with you, you have to first convince them that you actually kind of agree with them. Perhaps Trump isn't as stupid as people think, and he actually knows this.
Perhaps he isn't just saying "what's in it for me?", and he actually feels some degree of patriotism (shocking, I know, that the president of the United States might actually like this country).
Maybe I'm being naive, but I honestly don't feel like Donald Trump is a dirty, lying, crook who's manipulating the American people for himself. I just don't get that impression of him, and I've been signaled out before for my keen ability to spot a lie. If you disagree, that's fine, but that doesn't make you smarter than anyone else. It doesn't make you better than anyone else. It doesn't mean you're 'above all the sheeple'. It just means you have a different opinion.
One thing that human beings will never get over is their need to be right. If they believe Trump is a bad guy, no amount of evidence to the contrary will ever convince them. They have to feel superior, every single good thing Trump does must be part of some evil master plan of his. So go ahead and downvote me, because that's easier than admitting you could possibly have misjudged the man based on a flood of lies and misinformation spread by people who thought he was "literally Hitler".
Might be just luck, but I've never had a problem with UPS. Their deliveries are always on time at the least, and early at the best. The only courier I've had a significant problem with is USPS. Fuck USPS, it always arrives at least two days late. Then again, I've never bought anything big (physically speaking) from Amazon so I've never had to worry about that.
Nearly everyone who knows business will argue that Trump has been successful. I do not personally know a whole lot about running a corporation, so I will not sit here an pretend I do. But I have been thoroughly convinced by those who do know business very well, including close friends who deal with it daily, who have explained to me that Trump has been successful at business. If you want to discredit him, I don't think that angle is the best approach. All the experts that I personally know, whether they like Trump or not, at least agree that he is a good businessman.
Putting Trump in charge is probably similar to just deciding which bills are vetoed and which aren't via coin flip. He could make some really good decisions, or some really bad ones. He might do better than Hillary, or worse. It just depends which tweets from which people made him angry that day.
Except he has already showed that he knows how to make decisions, or at least, how to listen to people who do. Do you think he knows every aspect of business inside and out? No, no one does. It's too broad of a topic. But he knows how to pick advisors and listen to them. If he didn't he would not have been so successful in business. Do you think he just got lucky? Out of 500+ entities with his name on them, he's had, I believe, two or three bankruptcies. 99%+ success rate. And even that, bankruptcy can be argued as a legitimate business strategy. He has a track record of success.
Because he thinks it's the Toilet Paper Pirate that's been emptying the TP holders in his hotel.
Or because he actually has a grasp of what it is and how damaging to the country it could be. I know, it is utterly impossible to see past your current notions. You just can't fathom that you could possibly be wrong and that Donald Trump might actually be intelligent. Next time, instead of getting your information from memes and left-leaning news sources, just watch a Trump speech all the way through. Watch the upcoming debates. Listen to him straight from the source, not second or third hand.
A lie repeated does not become truth, though it may be believed.
Fucking pseudo-intellectual garbage. You just had that one in the chamber, didn't you? Supposedly meaningful insight, on what was clearly a humorous post. You're not some great speaker, you're some jackass on Slashdot, just like me.
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt." -Abraham Lincoln
See? I can do it too. And I can actually give credit to the better man than me who said it.
I think it is the first time he has mentioned it.
I'm more interested that he stop the TPP and renegotiate/cancel the anti American NAFTA trade giveaway.
Slashdot Mirror
Now I'm in favor of it.
And yes, even though I disable the "ok Google..." hotword on my phone, I know people say that the NSA/FBI/CIA/Whatever can still spy on me through it, but I view that differently. If the government's men in black want to get me, they're going to find a way get me.
This sounds like a job for the A-Team!
I wonder how many online orders of yours have been cancelled.
One, this is oddly progressive for the predominantly republican state of Arizona.
Two, I don't think it's a good idea. Not everyone has the special talent for programming. Others (myself included) are marginally decent at it, but still have no desire to actually do it. Those who have the interest and drive to learn how to do it usually end up doing it on their own. It's not like you need to access to a school's computer lab these days, you can write code on a smartphone. Granted, that's far from optimal, but so are most school computer labs.
Is there really some huge demographic of people who are both talented and want to program, but somehow don't figure that out on their own by age 15? Seems unlikely to me. Kids with interest in this sort of stuff are already working on it themselves. The last thing they want is to sit in a classroom typing Hello World programs over and over again until everyone catches up. All that's going to to do is bore them. The same types of people who excel at programming, also get bored easily working in a classroom setting. So why taint their favorite activity?
Are you suggesting that the scientific fields are just as full of political motivation, need for personal gain, fear of embarrassment, unwillingness to admit when wrong, and truth-stretching/outright lying as every other field of work in which humans take part? And that this means that the information that they come up with should not be trusted by default? Hogwash! It can't be so!
There's no FIOS in Midwestville, Flyover where I live. That's the big advantage of the cable company over fiber optic: there's usually cable in all but the most rural of areas. Also, FIOS starts at $70 a month for 50Mbps, whereas Charter Spectrum starts at $45 for 60.
Ezekiel 23:20
Nice sig. I just found a new favorite Bible verse.
Am I allowed to defend a big company on Slashdot and not be accused of being a shill?
Charter is easily the best ISP, at least in my area (and from what I've heard, it is in many places). They're the only ones that actually gives you the advertised speeds. They guarantee 60Mbps over wired connections, not wireless, but wireless is usually damn near as good with a quality router. My guess with New York is that some of the modems they gave to customers weren't up to the latest DOCSIS specs.
Also, the wording of the article is odd. To paraphrase, it basically at one point says customers couldn't use sites like Facebook. I don't get that. Just because speeds are slow doesn't mean you flat out can't access websites. It's just suspicious wording.
I had AT&T for a little while and it sucked ass. Pay for 40Mpbs? Oh okay, here's 20 on a good day. And it was only just slightly cheaper. What are the alternatives? We all know Comcast is dog shit. I've been very happy with Charter, and it only keeps getting faster.
Doesn't need to steal shit.
Funny you say that, because he actually did steal some shit back in his youth. Obviously that was a long time ago and not very relevant anymore, but those Apple IIs disprove your theory.
Have experience with the extreme right and having a new government constructed afterwards in particular to avoid repeating that error gives Germany strength.
If you think the Nazis are an example of the "extreme right" then your arrogance and misunderstanding knows no bounds. "Nazi" meant "National Socialist German Workers Party". Remind me again, which political party is it that offers a safe haven to socialism? I certainly don't think it's the big-business first capitalist Republican one. I believe it was your original candidate, Mr. Bernie Sanders, that publicly stated he was a socialist.
From Wikipedia: The party emerged from the German nationalist, racist and populist Freikorps paramilitary culture, which fought against the communist uprisings in post-World War I Germany.[7] The party was created as a means to draw workers away from communism and into völkisch nationalism.[8] Initially, Nazi political strategy focused on anti-big business, anti-bourgeois, and anti-capitalist rhetoric, although such aspects were later downplayed in order to gain the support of industrial entities, and in the 1930s the party's focus shifted to anti-Semitic and anti-Marxist themes.[9]
I am always still managing to be shocked at what kind of back-asswards world you lefties live in. I'm sure you'll find some way to try to twist this around and claim that the Nazis were really Republicans.
So far, you're the only one who's managed to disagree with me without insulting myself, Trump, or both. That's a big step up from everyone else here.
Or maybe I just have a different opinion than you. Maybe you're not perfectly correct on everything you think about the man.
Why is it so hard to believe that I saw all the same information you did, watched all the debates start to finish, (did not get all my info from Fox News, who by the way wanted Ted Cruz originally), and just formed a different opinion? Your arrogance is astounding.
Here's an interesting idea... Maybe, just maybe, President-elect Trump is not the raving, selfish, hate-filled, idiot the media and his opponents have painted him as. Maybe he's actually a sane and intelligent individual with good intentions, who might not be an expert in all areas of everything (nobody is), but who does have lots of experience picking and listening to experts in their respective fields.
Maybe he isn't "flip-flopping", but just realizing that a man as persuasive as him might be able to turn some of the far-right around on issues like climate change and LGBT rights. In order to persuade someone to agree with you, you have to first convince them that you actually kind of agree with them. Perhaps Trump isn't as stupid as people think, and he actually knows this.
Perhaps he isn't just saying "what's in it for me?", and he actually feels some degree of patriotism (shocking, I know, that the president of the United States might actually like this country).
Maybe I'm being naive, but I honestly don't feel like Donald Trump is a dirty, lying, crook who's manipulating the American people for himself. I just don't get that impression of him, and I've been signaled out before for my keen ability to spot a lie. If you disagree, that's fine, but that doesn't make you smarter than anyone else. It doesn't make you better than anyone else. It doesn't mean you're 'above all the sheeple'. It just means you have a different opinion.
One thing that human beings will never get over is their need to be right. If they believe Trump is a bad guy, no amount of evidence to the contrary will ever convince them. They have to feel superior, every single good thing Trump does must be part of some evil master plan of his. So go ahead and downvote me, because that's easier than admitting you could possibly have misjudged the man based on a flood of lies and misinformation spread by people who thought he was "literally Hitler".
Might be just luck, but I've never had a problem with UPS. Their deliveries are always on time at the least, and early at the best. The only courier I've had a significant problem with is USPS. Fuck USPS, it always arrives at least two days late. Then again, I've never bought anything big (physically speaking) from Amazon so I've never had to worry about that.
Nearly everyone who knows business will argue that Trump has been successful. I do not personally know a whole lot about running a corporation, so I will not sit here an pretend I do. But I have been thoroughly convinced by those who do know business very well, including close friends who deal with it daily, who have explained to me that Trump has been successful at business. If you want to discredit him, I don't think that angle is the best approach. All the experts that I personally know, whether they like Trump or not, at least agree that he is a good businessman.
Putting Trump in charge is probably similar to just deciding which bills are vetoed and which aren't via coin flip. He could make some really good decisions, or some really bad ones. He might do better than Hillary, or worse. It just depends which tweets from which people made him angry that day.
Except he has already showed that he knows how to make decisions, or at least, how to listen to people who do. Do you think he knows every aspect of business inside and out? No, no one does. It's too broad of a topic. But he knows how to pick advisors and listen to them. If he didn't he would not have been so successful in business. Do you think he just got lucky? Out of 500+ entities with his name on them, he's had, I believe, two or three bankruptcies. 99%+ success rate. And even that, bankruptcy can be argued as a legitimate business strategy. He has a track record of success.
Because he thinks it's the Toilet Paper Pirate that's been emptying the TP holders in his hotel.
Or because he actually has a grasp of what it is and how damaging to the country it could be. I know, it is utterly impossible to see past your current notions. You just can't fathom that you could possibly be wrong and that Donald Trump might actually be intelligent. Next time, instead of getting your information from memes and left-leaning news sources, just watch a Trump speech all the way through. Watch the upcoming debates. Listen to him straight from the source, not second or third hand.
This is what I always see. When confronted, conservatives tend to reply with rebuttals. Liberals tend to reply with attacks.
Conservative: "Here's some statistics and studies that prove my point..." Liberal:"Racist! Sexist! Stupid!"
Not always true, but at least in my experience it's usually true.
A lie repeated does not become truth, though it may be believed.
Fucking pseudo-intellectual garbage. You just had that one in the chamber, didn't you? Supposedly meaningful insight, on what was clearly a humorous post. You're not some great speaker, you're some jackass on Slashdot, just like me.
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt." -Abraham Lincoln
See? I can do it too. And I can actually give credit to the better man than me who said it.
Trump also opposes the TPP. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/p...
I think it is the first time he has mentioned it. I'm more interested that he stop the TPP and renegotiate/cancel the anti American NAFTA trade giveaway.
Trump has already stated that he opposes the TPP.
...And I'll say it again: Apple is literally trolling their customers. They just want to see what they can get people to pay for.
Well damn, you sure are edgy. And while we're at it, let's just kill everyone who jaywalks too.