....last I looked you can get Apple to replace the battery, so neither use case presents something that's impossible to have without a removable battery.
I mean, it's just a battery, why should you have to send a phone in for service to replace a battery? We don't do that with flashlights, smoke detectors, kid's toys, remote controls, cameras, game controllers, cordless phones, clocks, or almost anything else that uses a battery. Why should we do that with phones?
Personally I'm happy to carry that extra ounce of weight (if it's even that much). If other people want a non-replaceable battery that they have to pay to have swapped out, then good for them, but given the choice I'll always opt for a phone that has a replaceable battery.
You "don't want to be saddled with an external battery", but you're okay if the thing snaps into your phone rather than outside it?
Yes, now you're getting it. That's because the battery is inside the phone so I don't have to carry around another piece of gear. What part of that was so difficult to grasp?
-
It's usually technically better if the phone lasts longer on a charge, requiring less day-to-day intervention, at the cost of specialized tools and expertise when the battery finally gets too old for the user's convenience, than to make the whole phone less rigid and need more frequent recharging with an easily swapped battery.
That's just like, your opinion, man. I think it's technically better when I can just pop the old battery out and snap in a new one rather than buying a new phone or having to send it in for service. Crazy ol' me.
I mean, it's just a battery, why the hell should you have to send a phone in for service to replace a battery? We don't do that with flashlights, smoke detectors, kid's toys, remote controls, cameras, game controllers, cordless phones, clocks, or almost anything else that uses a battery. Why should we do that with phones?
If most people don't have any idea whether their phone has a removable battery, that's a very strong argument for putting non-removable batteries in most phones.
No, it's not. It just means these people don't know whether their phone has a removable battery or not. That's all it means.
A phone with a non-removable battery plus an external battery that plugs into the phone's charging port is technically superior in just about every way to a phone with two removable batteries.
Nonsense. What if I don't want to be saddled with an external battery? What if, instead of replacing the phone or sending it in for service, I could just swap out the battery myself? What's so inferior about that? I can still use an external battery if I want to, BTW.
And why would the phone have to have two removable batteries? Mine has one, and it works just fine.
The trouble with your argument is that you don't understand which laws this thing violates (forgive me if you actually do... ).
I forgive you. I actually do know which laws it appears to violate, which is why I've tried to be very clear about qualifying my statements.
So yes, it definitely seems to violate the basic laws of physics. It may be noise, it may be misinterpretation of data, or we may just not understand what the hell is going on with it yet. It may turn out that there is something we don't know or that the basic laws of physics aren't understood as fully as we think they are. It wouldn't be the first time.
Personally I'm skeptical, but I'm also willing to see where the research leads, unlike binary bozo who shits his pants at the very idea of the possibility that there may be something yet to be discovered in this tiny little universe.
Like, one sentence, a parenthetical phrase, even, describing WTF WrkRiot is, what they make, something, anything, in the first paragraph of the summary to make me care about this.
Yup. I had to search for it and still couldn't tell for sure what it is (was). It appears to have been some kind of job search board that went by the name "Jobsonic" in an earlier incarnation.
People complained about the bulk and weight of having a removable cover and another layer of hard plastic around the battery.
Stop making shit up.
I've never heard anyone complain about this, not once. I've never seen it in print, and a quick google search doesn't return any indication that any users were ever found to be complaining about the bulk and weight of having a removable cover.
I doubt anyone has ever taken the time to voice this "complaint", because it's ridiculously silly and most users wouldn't have any idea whether their device has a removable battery or not. If they did, they'd probably be happy to learn that they could replace the battery instead of replacing the whole phone.
There are a lot of loopholes in the physical laws. Fifty years ago, if you had told someone that you could take a ceramic insulator and turn it into a near-zero-resistance conductor by cooling it to near absolute zero, they would have assumed you were wrong—the laws of electricity as known at the time just didn't allow for that. And if you told them that you could float magnets on top of such a superconductor, they'd have hauled you off to a sanitarium.
A hundred years ago, if you could have somehow launched GPS satellites, everyone would think that the clocks were broken, because the time would keep drifting due to relativistic effects, and that concept didn't exist yet.
Two excellent examples of the advances in our understanding of physics. Sadly, 110010001000 won't accept even the possibility of further discoveries until they're sitting on his kitchen counter making toast or whatever. Clearly, a career in research is not in his future.
Yes. It does. The known laws of Physics are immutable.
Yes, the known laws are, but that doesn't mean we won't find something someday that bends one or more of them or adds to them.
Do you really think we know all there is to know about everything, especially physics? I don't.
Lots of people thought that physics had been basically settled after Newton, but then came quantum mechanics, which added significantly to the way we know things work. Things don't follow Newtons laws at a quantum level, even though it doesn't invalidate his work.
If you know for a fact this thing is a hoax, why aren't you out there proving it? It would save everyone a lot of time and trouble.
-
You need to stop being intellectually lazy.
Oh, I'm so sorry, I didn't realize that I was speaking to someone who knows everything there is to know in the entire universe, including all future discoveries. And I didn't know that you know for a fact that nothing groundbreaking will ever be discovered.
Perhaps you need to stop being so intellectually rigid, 110010001000. You're just as dogmatic as the Pope, possibly even more so. That's not a good thing, in case you were wondering. You remind me of my grandfather who used to tell the story about how his grandfather didn't believe in radio waves (It's a load of malarkey, you'll see!"). Turns out he was wrong, by the way.
Maybe it's a hoax, maybe it's misunderstood side effects, maybe it's misinterpretation of the data, maybe there's actually something to it. Instead of dismissing it out of hand, lets find out.
It's a bullshit hoax BECAUSE IT VIOLATES BASIC LAWS OF PHYSICS.
Well, it appears to violate the known laws of physics, but that doesn't mean that it's necessarily a hoax.
It may be that there's something going on physics-wise that's yet to be understood, or perhaps we may need to rewrite or add a few laws. I'm not a sucker looking for perpetual motion machines but I'm also not so arrogant to think that we know everything there is to know.
Personally I'm skeptical but I'm also willing to see where the research leads. Yes, it seems to violate the basic laws of physics, but we may be wrong about that or we may just not understand what the fuck is going on yet. It wouldn't be the first time.
For example, I remember when almost everyone flatly declared that blue LEDs were simply impossible, period, and a decade later they were commonplace. Not that long ago plenty of respected scientists scoffed at the whole notion of quantum physics, and now it's taken for granted as a fact.
No, the EM Drive isn't a "fuel free" engine as the press has touted, but it may be a hitherto unknown form of propulsion. We'll see, and I think before long we'll know if it's bogus or not.
"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will." – Albert Einstein, 1932
"X-rays will prove to be a hoax." – Lord Kelvin, President of the Royal Society, 1883
Let the conspiracy theories flow! This should launch a record-breaking banner crop of conspiracy addicts and cranks from every basement in the country.
The "power elite" and their Agenda 21 plan overseen by the Illuminati, the Reptilians and Bigfoot, sponsored by George Soros and Saul Alinsky and the CIA/FBI/TSA in conjunction with the Hollywood leftists and the Bilderberg group, working hand-in-hand with the Chemtrail Society and the secret Progressive Cabal, using HAARP and MK ULTRA to convince Americans that everything is normal, nothing to see, move along citizen!
Meanwhile the gay globalist, internationalist, multicultural, pro-Zionist and Technocrats have infiltrated every level of government and subverted the Catholic Church in order to get us to renounce our sacred religious beliefs and promote New World Order by the use of indoctrination camps (built by FEMA and the Masons and the Knights Templar, of course).
The only attributed claims in either of the two links provided belonged to a couple of Russians.
Except I'm not referring to that article alone or specifically. Look at the vast majority of kooky conspiracy shit and you'll find that an overwhelming preponderance is right-leaning.
From birtherism to anti-vaxxers, most of it comes from the right.
Actually, all of the conspiracy-theorists I know are all extremely left-leaning.
No offense, but you need to get out more. Oh sure, there are crazies on the left too, but for a genuine unending stream of daffy shit, the right has it won hands down. And there's some overlap, to be certain, but the right is the undisputed leader of the nutjob brigade.
"We hope to show people that it is not capable of mind control and not capable of weather control and all the other things it's been accused of..." said Sue Mitchell
How sad that so many Americans could seriously believe in this bullshit, but that's what happens when you're fed a steady diet of FOX News and a constant drumbeat of right-wing conspiracy theories.
That one of our preeminent research facilities would be compelled to hold an open house to show that they're not involved in "mind control" is a sad and embarrassing commentary on the state of this country.
Slashdot Mirror
....last I looked you can get Apple to replace the battery, so neither use case presents something that's impossible to have without a removable battery.
I mean, it's just a battery, why should you have to send a phone in for service to replace a battery? We don't do that with flashlights, smoke detectors, kid's toys, remote controls, cameras, game controllers, cordless phones, clocks, or almost anything else that uses a battery. Why should we do that with phones?
Personally I'm happy to carry that extra ounce of weight (if it's even that much). If other people want a non-replaceable battery that they have to pay to have swapped out, then good for them, but given the choice I'll always opt for a phone that has a replaceable battery.
You "don't want to be saddled with an external battery", but you're okay if the thing snaps into your phone rather than outside it?
Yes, now you're getting it. That's because the battery is inside the phone so I don't have to carry around another piece of gear. What part of that was so difficult to grasp?
-
It's usually technically better if the phone lasts longer on a charge, requiring less day-to-day intervention, at the cost of specialized tools and expertise when the battery finally gets too old for the user's convenience, than to make the whole phone less rigid and need more frequent recharging with an easily swapped battery.
That's just like, your opinion, man. I think it's technically better when I can just pop the old battery out and snap in a new one rather than buying a new phone or having to send it in for service. Crazy ol' me.
I mean, it's just a battery, why the hell should you have to send a phone in for service to replace a battery? We don't do that with flashlights, smoke detectors, kid's toys, remote controls, cameras, game controllers, cordless phones, clocks, or almost anything else that uses a battery. Why should we do that with phones?
I told ya this would never see the light of day. Toldja toldja toldja.
If most people don't have any idea whether their phone has a removable battery, that's a very strong argument for putting non-removable batteries in most phones.
No, it's not. It just means these people don't know whether their phone has a removable battery or not. That's all it means.
A phone with a non-removable battery plus an external battery that plugs into the phone's charging port is technically superior in just about every way to a phone with two removable batteries.
Nonsense. What if I don't want to be saddled with an external battery? What if, instead of replacing the phone or sending it in for service, I could just swap out the battery myself? What's so inferior about that? I can still use an external battery if I want to, BTW.
And why would the phone have to have two removable batteries? Mine has one, and it works just fine.
Sorry, but your arguments are nonsense.
Or, possibly, he knows his physics better than you do.
Yes, he very well might, which still doesn't preclude the possibility of him being wrong.
The trouble with your argument is that you don't understand which laws this thing violates (forgive me if you actually do... ).
I forgive you. I actually do know which laws it appears to violate, which is why I've tried to be very clear about qualifying my statements.
So yes, it definitely seems to violate the basic laws of physics. It may be noise, it may be misinterpretation of data, or we may just not understand what the hell is going on with it yet. It may turn out that there is something we don't know or that the basic laws of physics aren't understood as fully as we think they are. It wouldn't be the first time.
Personally I'm skeptical, but I'm also willing to see where the research leads, unlike binary bozo who shits his pants at the very idea of the possibility that there may be something yet to be discovered in this tiny little universe.
Like, one sentence, a parenthetical phrase, even, describing WTF WrkRiot is, what they make, something, anything, in the first paragraph of the summary to make me care about this.
Yup. I had to search for it and still couldn't tell for sure what it is (was). It appears to have been some kind of job search board that went by the name "Jobsonic" in an earlier incarnation.
People complained about the bulk and weight of having a removable cover and another layer of hard plastic around the battery.
Stop making shit up.
I've never heard anyone complain about this, not once. I've never seen it in print, and a quick google search doesn't return any indication that any users were ever found to be complaining about the bulk and weight of having a removable cover.
I doubt anyone has ever taken the time to voice this "complaint", because it's ridiculously silly and most users wouldn't have any idea whether their device has a removable battery or not. If they did, they'd probably be happy to learn that they could replace the battery instead of replacing the whole phone.
That's easy when nobody uses voice anymore.
I can't even remember the last person I spoke with that wasn't a telemarketer or some kind of recorded spam.
Yes, that must be why AT&T and Sprint are shutting down their voice service and going to text-only.
Even if it is a real effect, I can't see a real use for it.
This reminds me of what Michael Faraday said to a lady who scoffed when first seeing his prototype electric motor.
She said, "Of what use is that?"
"My dear Lady," Faraday replied, "Of what use is a baby?"
There are a lot of loopholes in the physical laws. Fifty years ago, if you had told someone that you could take a ceramic insulator and turn it into a near-zero-resistance conductor by cooling it to near absolute zero, they would have assumed you were wrong—the laws of electricity as known at the time just didn't allow for that. And if you told them that you could float magnets on top of such a superconductor, they'd have hauled you off to a sanitarium.
A hundred years ago, if you could have somehow launched GPS satellites, everyone would think that the clocks were broken, because the time would keep drifting due to relativistic effects, and that concept didn't exist yet.
Two excellent examples of the advances in our understanding of physics. Sadly, 110010001000 won't accept even the possibility of further discoveries until they're sitting on his kitchen counter making toast or whatever. Clearly, a career in research is not in his future.
Yes. It does. The known laws of Physics are immutable.
Yes, the known laws are, but that doesn't mean we won't find something someday that bends one or more of them or adds to them.
Do you really think we know all there is to know about everything, especially physics? I don't.
Lots of people thought that physics had been basically settled after Newton, but then came quantum mechanics, which added significantly to the way we know things work. Things don't follow Newtons laws at a quantum level, even though it doesn't invalidate his work.
If you know for a fact this thing is a hoax, why aren't you out there proving it? It would save everyone a lot of time and trouble.
-
You need to stop being intellectually lazy.
Oh, I'm so sorry, I didn't realize that I was speaking to someone who knows everything there is to know in the entire universe, including all future discoveries. And I didn't know that you know for a fact that nothing groundbreaking will ever be discovered.
Perhaps you need to stop being so intellectually rigid, 110010001000. You're just as dogmatic as the Pope, possibly even more so. That's not a good thing, in case you were wondering. You remind me of my grandfather who used to tell the story about how his grandfather didn't believe in radio waves (It's a load of malarkey, you'll see!"). Turns out he was wrong, by the way.
Maybe it's a hoax, maybe it's misunderstood side effects, maybe it's misinterpretation of the data, maybe there's actually something to it. Instead of dismissing it out of hand, lets find out.
It's a bullshit hoax BECAUSE IT VIOLATES BASIC LAWS OF PHYSICS.
Well, it appears to violate the known laws of physics, but that doesn't mean that it's necessarily a hoax.
It may be that there's something going on physics-wise that's yet to be understood, or perhaps we may need to rewrite or add a few laws. I'm not a sucker looking for perpetual motion machines but I'm also not so arrogant to think that we know everything there is to know.
Personally I'm skeptical but I'm also willing to see where the research leads. Yes, it seems to violate the basic laws of physics, but we may be wrong about that or we may just not understand what the fuck is going on yet. It wouldn't be the first time.
For example, I remember when almost everyone flatly declared that blue LEDs were simply impossible, period, and a decade later they were commonplace. Not that long ago plenty of respected scientists scoffed at the whole notion of quantum physics, and now it's taken for granted as a fact.
No, the EM Drive isn't a "fuel free" engine as the press has touted, but it may be a hitherto unknown form of propulsion. We'll see, and I think before long we'll know if it's bogus or not.
"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will ever be obtainable. It would mean that the atom would have to be shattered at will." – Albert Einstein, 1932
"X-rays will prove to be a hoax." – Lord Kelvin, President of the Royal Society, 1883
Let the conspiracy theories flow! This should launch a record-breaking banner crop of conspiracy addicts and cranks from every basement in the country.
The "power elite" and their Agenda 21 plan overseen by the Illuminati, the Reptilians and Bigfoot, sponsored by George Soros and Saul Alinsky and the CIA/FBI/TSA in conjunction with the Hollywood leftists and the Bilderberg group, working hand-in-hand with the Chemtrail Society and the secret Progressive Cabal, using HAARP and MK ULTRA to convince Americans that everything is normal, nothing to see, move along citizen!
Meanwhile the gay globalist, internationalist, multicultural, pro-Zionist and Technocrats have infiltrated every level of government and subverted the Catholic Church in order to get us to renounce our sacred religious beliefs and promote New World Order by the use of indoctrination camps (built by FEMA and the Masons and the Knights Templar, of course).
"the San Jose Mercury News asked several prominent security experts which security products they were actually using for their own data."
And while you're at it, tell us where you hide your cash and other valuables...
So tell us... who was behind the Kennedy assassination?
Reptilans from Jupiter, in conjunction with Elvis and Marilyn Monroe working from their secret Martian moonbase on Pluto. Like, duh.
And in other news, serviscope_minor makes another stupid post.
What part of, "It's not for me, but if people want to use it, then great- have at it" seemed so awful to you?
The only attributed claims in either of the two links provided belonged to a couple of Russians.
Except I'm not referring to that article alone or specifically. Look at the vast majority of kooky conspiracy shit and you'll find that an overwhelming preponderance is right-leaning.
From birtherism to anti-vaxxers, most of it comes from the right.
Actually, all of the conspiracy-theorists I know are all extremely left-leaning.
No offense, but you need to get out more. Oh sure, there are crazies on the left too, but for a genuine unending stream of daffy shit, the right has it won hands down. And there's some overlap, to be certain, but the right is the undisputed leader of the nutjob brigade.
"We hope to show people that it is not capable of mind control and not capable of weather control and all the other things it's been accused of..." said Sue Mitchell
How sad that so many Americans could seriously believe in this bullshit, but that's what happens when you're fed a steady diet of FOX News and a constant drumbeat of right-wing conspiracy theories.
That one of our preeminent research facilities would be compelled to hold an open house to show that they're not involved in "mind control" is a sad and embarrassing commentary on the state of this country.
As has been said before, "Twitter is the confetti of the internet".
I'm too long-winded to use Twitter; it takes me more than 140 characters to say "Good morning". :)
Frankly, the vast majority of what I've seen on Twitter is self-referential "look at me!" stuff.
It's not micro-blogging, it's micro-bragging. "Look at my amazing coffee/breakfast/sandwich/shoes/tattoo"....etc etc etc.
It's not for me, but if people want to use it, then great- have at it.
1) Driverless cars are NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
I expect they will happen, but not as quickly as most people are predicting.
"We won't share your data, but the people we sell it to will."
Suckers.
Anyone that believes the "We won't share your data" claim is either gullible, naive, or just plain stupid.
Of course they'll share your data, that's what their mission is: to collect your data and share it.
Stop kidding yourselves, this is what it's all about. You'd think people would have learned this by now, but noooooooooooo...
So Youtube is going to turn into some bastardized version of Facebook and Instagram? Yippee, I can hardly wait to stop going there.
Baton Rouge (where the flooding occurred) is not below sea level. It sits 56' above sea level.
Not any more, lol. ;)