I realize xkcd goes over the heads of many people, but the *joke* is that if you reduce the sample size enough (in this case, down to 2 days), you can make an extrapolation say whatever you want. If you need it explained in a webcomic, here you go.
We have detailed climate data going back to 1850, which means an 80 year extrapolation into the future isn't exactly a shot in the dark.
Of course there's evidence of this, it just changes every couple of years.
Disney's Carousel of Progress pretty much nailed this, and I'd venture a guess most people watching it don't even realize it. In the "turn of the century" scene, the teenage boy is looking at a risqué photograph on a stereoscope. In the 1940s scene, the teenage daughter is gossiping with her friend on the telephone.
There was this article I recall reading where this family decided any post-80s technology was banned from their home. Thing is, the 80s had VHS (and a rental store in almost every strip mall), Walkmans, pocket TVs, handheld gaming devices (and the first Gameboy, in '89), and... cell phones (granted, they were huge and didn't do anything other than make extremely costly phone calls). It was also pretty likely in the pre-Internet era that at least one of your friends would have access to filthy magazines (Playboy has been around since the '50s!).
So yeah, it's just bad parents who just remember growing up without smartphones - not the hours spent playing Nintendo, reading comics, watching VHS tapes, sitting in the corner listing to their Walkman, etc.
There's no insight, no tech content, no explanation - just a childish swipe at the elected president
Shouldn't have to explain this, but contaminated baby food is precisely one of those situations where the government should step in and "interfere" with capitalism. In case you haven't been paying attention, the Obama administration is over and while you're free to blame whatever you want on him, work towards resolving issues has to be performed by the *current* administration.
The Trump administration could actually be considered pro-contamination, without much of a stretch. It's reasonable to assume they won't consider leaded baby food to be anything worth dealing with, so it will be at least 3.5 to 7.5 years before there's a potential for progress to be made on this issue.
Also, how fucked up do you have to be to defend lead in baby food? It's as twisted as watching Republicans come up with excuses for why healthcare shouldn't be a basic human right. Some people just shouldn't be healthy because they don't make enough money? If only there was a religion which believed you honored their deity by treating the poor with dignity... Nah, that'd never catch on.
Among the options Germany is considering is "source telecom surveillance", where authorities install software on phones to relay messages before they are encrypted. That is now illegal.
Wow, just wow. This is something you'd expect from China, not somewhere in the supposedly enlightened western civilization. It's things like this which make me think maybe those second amendment nuts really aren't so crazy. Give up one right, and pretty soon it's a slippery slope right to big brother being installed on your phone.
"You know, we just used so many metaphors I forgot what the hell we were talking about."
This is/. for crissakes - we don't need basic computer security explained as a barely coherent rant equating it to automotive maintenance. Most of the readership here understands that you keep your machines updated or they're likely to be pwned.
Couldn't they just do the same things people up north do to keep the snow from flooding their basements, install a pump? Maybe a few pumps, so there's some redundancy in the system?
But no... they need a multi-million dollar new tunnel. And here in the good old USA, the city won't even fix the fricken potholes.
From a psychological viewpoint you only ever have a small chance of getting someone to change an avowed POV. Do you think that calling these _voters_ idiots and racists is the most effective use of that chance?
Or you could try to convince some of the approximately 90 million Americans who *didn't* vote that they should give a damn.
There's this old saying about never teaching a pig to sing, because it wastes your time and annoys the pig. Trying to get someone to change their already-established political views is likely on a similar level of futility.
I am not a US citizen, but I can see how media (also here) has a fixed agenda to use Trump for all bad things in this world. This is very obvious.
The media here is less about trying to convince one side to vote for the other and more about being an echo chamber of what you wanna hear, so you don't change the channel. In other words, they're preaching to their respective choirs.
If you ask me, traditional media had very little to do with Trump winning. Trump won because we (collectively, as Americans) have this idea of American exceptionalism. Trump did a great job appealing to that sense of entitlement. His supporters latched onto it and spread it in a shockingly effective grassroots movement through social media.
You mistakenly presume that there is any sort of government censorship of Republicans by "left-wing thugs" to begin with.
Don't know about government censorship, but their certainly is censorship on Slashdot by Trump supporters with mod points and an axe to grind. Just about everything I post which is critical of Trump gets modded down. It's like these people are simply incapable of having a debate.
Prove everyone wrong by providing rational discourse and not just using every buzzword that has been used to describe him for the last year.
Oh yeah, like that works. If you want to learn all about cognitive dissonance, try changing the minds of Trump supporters. Start with the studies showing coal is filthy, nasty fuel and the Trump crowd just dismisses the science as made-up. Tell them gender/marriage equality is important and you'll get responses that run the gauntlet from "Skydaddy says it's wrong" to "I think Trump doesn't actually have any problems with *those people*" (denial).
Healthcare, jobs, China, the "Muslim Ban", the wall, shit just goes on and on. You make a rational argument as to why Trump's policies sound like they're something he came up with during a drunken poker game, back it up with citations to peer-reviewed factual data, and in response you hear why you're just a snowflake who hates America.
Nope, I'm convinced the best course of action is to get the complacent like-minded people off their ass and in to the polls the next election. That's far more likely to be successful than trying to play damage control with a bunch of deplorables.
No, it means hillary was such an undesirable candidate that even that act wouldn't turn people toward her.
It was still possible to vote against Trump and not vote for Hillary. Granted, it would've also been just as effective to not vote at all, as third party votes are more-or-less a waste.
And if you're talking about people who are completely unwilling to listen to a viewpoint that contradicts their world view, you might want to see which group of people are the ones trying to shut down opposing viewpoints at university speechs with violent riots and threats.
Seems like a bad idea to use captive audiences for that sort of thing regardless of which side of the political spectrum you sit on. Simple fix to that: no partisan speakers at university events/graduations. Problem solved.
But that small percent needed to swing a vote in key states on the other hand, maybe don't insinuate they may be a deplorable?
More than a few Trump supporters started wearing the "deplorable" insult as if it were a badge of honor. The Hillary supporters did the same thing with the Bad Hombres/Nasty Woman remarks from Trump.
I'll agree that yeah, the Democrats need to run a better campaign, but if Trump has proven anything, it's that Americans have pretty tough stomachs for raunchy, insult-laden campaigns.
Clearly that's true to some degree no doubt, but continuing to act as if that's the rational behind all or even a majority of Trump voters (who were not necessarily Trump supporters, there's a difference) isn't exactly endearing the left to anyone outside the echo chambers, or helping to set up whoever runs in 2020 to do better. If there's on thing the middle/low class white people aren't going to want to hear (again) it is someone from a classist institute like Harvard telling them they are racist.
For fuck's sake, someone always has to bring up how the "left" would win over Trump supporters, if the left could just stop being so insulting towards them. Think about this for a second: These are people who ignored every single repulsive aspect of Trump's policies and the campaign he ran. They willingly voted for a man who said, and I quote "I could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters." Here's a hint: That means even Trump realizes his own supporters are drinking the kool aid.
These are people who are either completely unwilling to listen to a viewpoint which contradicts their world view, or they actually agree with the deplorable things that come out of Trump's mouth. You're just not going to win over those people; you just have to hope they don't bother to vote, and your side has a better turnout.
There are proof electronic cigarettes are at least 97% less harmfull then smoking, so please stop it publishing crap like this.
They do the exact same thing with artificial sweeteners. There's always some horribly flawed study going around claiming how they don't actually help you lose weight, cause insulin spikes or are just bad because they're all chemical-y. Never mind the fact we already know too much real sugar is horrible for your health, and artificial sweeteners have a proven record of safety in real-world use.
Thing is, the people pushing this kind of agenda feel an approach of "harm reduction" is inadequate, and that you shouldn't have sweetened products at all. Or smoke. They probably don't like sex either. The world would be a much better place if people gave up on the idea of trying to "save" others from themselves.
You already lost the left some ~1000 seats in Federal and State level governance. What, you want to try to lose the rest? Keep insulting them. Keep calling them names.
We've got a sad state of affairs in this country if people are actually choosing their candidates based on the level of butthurt they're receiving from the opposing party's supporters. In that case, stick a fork in the USA, we're done.
Seriously, go ahead. I'm going to be fine and I have Canadian citizenship to fall back on.
So, support Trump's pro-coal agenda, move to Canada when it warms up? Sounds like it could be the plot of a bad Sci-Fi movie, maybe we could get Charlie Sheen.
The worst part is that you posted your post while feeling egotistical, right, and important.
Actually, since it was the middle of the night, I mostly just felt tired.
We're not on the same side, actually. I'm on the American left. You don't even know what left means.
Even the "left" isn't black and white.
You've got the "Let's give everyone a universal basic income and let them smoke pot all day!" left. Then there's the "Let's raise the minimum wage to $15/hr! Never mind by raising the minimum *cost* of labor to $15, we've only succeeded in reducing the buying power of $15! Inflation FTW!" left. There's the "Tax everything that is bad for you" left. There's the "Tax everything else too!" left. There's the "Everything causes cancer!" left. etc...
When it comes to politics, if you're not gravitating somewhere near the middle ground, you risk looking like a nut even to people on your own "side".
The wall is not a simple matter. First, you have to understand that illegal immigration is becoming a big business in part because of the legalization of marijuana in some states.
The problem of illegal immigration is due to the border (and nearby) states not devoting enough resources to fight the problem at the local level. Let's be honest too, if an ocean can't keep out illegals (airplanes, boats, a long ride on a sea turtle), a wall isn't going to make much difference.
It's just an expensive bridge-to-nowhere. Anyone saying the money poured into its construction would help the economy doesn't understand the "broken window fallacy". Every dollar spent on the wall could've gone towards a real investment in our country's future, such as education grants.
#1 Trump won because the best the Democratic Party could offer was Hilary Clinton.
Ad nauseam...
Yes, we have a lesser of two evils party system in this country. Both the Democrats and Republicans play the game of telling their respective bases what they want to hear and then find out how much of it they bought, on election day. Funny thing is though, some of the wining side's agenda actually becomes reality.
So as a voter, it's still to your advantage to vote for whatever bullshit sounds best to you, because *some* of it will stick.
I'm not too familiar with the Raspberry Pi, but a cursory view of the specs tells me even a huge botnet of 'em still wouldn't make you wealthy through mining crypto any sooner than the heat death of the universe. Most crypto mining these days is done on specialized hardware or large banks of high-end video cards. Seems to be the reason why most malicious software intent on acquiring wealth through Bitcoins simply encrypts your files for ransom.
At the root level, you and I want the same things, probably.
It's pretty hard to see eye-to-eye with most Trump supporters, simply because they've got their head jammed so far up their own ass. No, really - we're talking justifying support for things such as: kicking people with pre-existing conditions off of healthcare, trashing the environment, a "Muslim ban", turning back the clock on marriage & gender equality, and don't even get me started on that wall.
Granted, not everything Trump stands for is horribly reprehensible. He did a great job channeling Ray Zalinsky from Tommy Boy in convincing an ignorant voter base that he'll be the champion of the good old American working man. We can all pretty much agree that the average straight, white, American male has been through some tough times, and it's probably a relief for him to have someone he can relate to, back in the oval office. Can't imagine why anyone would want to go out and protest that - how intolerant can you get?
it's just a medium for ideas, like books or democracy, although a darned good one, and frankly one that has caused more democratization of more ideas than anything since the printing press.
Thanks to the will of the mob, rumors, misinformation, and sensationalized bullshit can spread faster, further and wider than ever. I'm sure the most brilliant minds believed giving the power of instantly networked information to everyone would lead to a new age of enlightenment, but you can't fight human nature. People prefer having their superstitions and incorrect beliefs reinforced, rather than challenged.
Today, we live in an age where pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo is placed on equal footing with real, established science. Where rumors and hearsay gain as much notoriety as researched fact. People can choose to believe that vaccines cause autism, GMO food contains toxins, and aspartame causes cancer - because that's what their friends on social media are sharing.
This Pirate Bay guy is correct that something has gone horribly wrong with the internet thanks to social media, but he may be pointing his finger at the wrong monster.
Actually if all the men who were boycotting Target over the men in the women's bathroom issue would just go to Target and use the women's bathroom every time they had to go, Target would change its policy in a BIG hurry.
Target has loss prevention cameras all over the store, so they probably have a pretty good idea how much "traffic" the restrooms get. I'm sure if this was a real issue, the cameras wouldn't lie. This is just another case where some people look at a mole hill and see a mountain.
"But Apple is a private company and can cens^H^H^H^H do what they want herp derp."
They can do whatever they want until market forces convince them otherwise. You can bitch, whine, moan and complain about their app store polices, their glued-together fabrication process, and their locked-down mobile OS, but as long as the masses keep lining up to buy their new shinies every year - Apple doesn't care.
Let's also be realistic here: How many people are actually going to miss this shitty little "racist" cartoon frog game? You can't even find a really good quality copy of Song of the South on public torrent trackers, and that's something which is relatively well known (Disney even has a damn water ride based on it!), and not even really all that racist.
Slashdot Mirror
This alarmism is based on an extrapolation of current conditions
I realize xkcd goes over the heads of many people, but the *joke* is that if you reduce the sample size enough (in this case, down to 2 days), you can make an extrapolation say whatever you want. If you need it explained in a webcomic, here you go.
We have detailed climate data going back to 1850, which means an 80 year extrapolation into the future isn't exactly a shot in the dark.
Of course there's evidence of this, it just changes every couple of years.
Disney's Carousel of Progress pretty much nailed this, and I'd venture a guess most people watching it don't even realize it. In the "turn of the century" scene, the teenage boy is looking at a risqué photograph on a stereoscope. In the 1940s scene, the teenage daughter is gossiping with her friend on the telephone.
There was this article I recall reading where this family decided any post-80s technology was banned from their home. Thing is, the 80s had VHS (and a rental store in almost every strip mall), Walkmans, pocket TVs, handheld gaming devices (and the first Gameboy, in '89), and... cell phones (granted, they were huge and didn't do anything other than make extremely costly phone calls). It was also pretty likely in the pre-Internet era that at least one of your friends would have access to filthy magazines (Playboy has been around since the '50s!).
So yeah, it's just bad parents who just remember growing up without smartphones - not the hours spent playing Nintendo, reading comics, watching VHS tapes, sitting in the corner listing to their Walkman, etc.
There's no insight, no tech content, no explanation - just a childish swipe at the elected president
Shouldn't have to explain this, but contaminated baby food is precisely one of those situations where the government should step in and "interfere" with capitalism. In case you haven't been paying attention, the Obama administration is over and while you're free to blame whatever you want on him, work towards resolving issues has to be performed by the *current* administration.
The Trump administration could actually be considered pro-contamination, without much of a stretch. It's reasonable to assume they won't consider leaded baby food to be anything worth dealing with, so it will be at least 3.5 to 7.5 years before there's a potential for progress to be made on this issue.
Also, how fucked up do you have to be to defend lead in baby food? It's as twisted as watching Republicans come up with excuses for why healthcare shouldn't be a basic human right. Some people just shouldn't be healthy because they don't make enough money? If only there was a religion which believed you honored their deity by treating the poor with dignity... Nah, that'd never catch on.
From TFA:
Among the options Germany is considering is "source telecom surveillance", where authorities install software on phones to relay messages before they are encrypted. That is now illegal.
Wow, just wow. This is something you'd expect from China, not somewhere in the supposedly enlightened western civilization. It's things like this which make me think maybe those second amendment nuts really aren't so crazy. Give up one right, and pretty soon it's a slippery slope right to big brother being installed on your phone.
Anyone got a good car analogy for this?
No, but I've got a great movie quote:
"You know, we just used so many metaphors I forgot what the hell we were talking about."
This is /. for crissakes - we don't need basic computer security explained as a barely coherent rant equating it to automotive maintenance. Most of the readership here understands that you keep your machines updated or they're likely to be pwned.
Couldn't they just do the same things people up north do to keep the snow from flooding their basements, install a pump? Maybe a few pumps, so there's some redundancy in the system?
But no... they need a multi-million dollar new tunnel. And here in the good old USA, the city won't even fix the fricken potholes.
From a psychological viewpoint you only ever have a small chance of getting someone to change an avowed POV. Do you think that calling these _voters_ idiots and racists is the most effective use of that chance?
Or you could try to convince some of the approximately 90 million Americans who *didn't* vote that they should give a damn.
There's this old saying about never teaching a pig to sing, because it wastes your time and annoys the pig. Trying to get someone to change their already-established political views is likely on a similar level of futility.
I am not a US citizen, but I can see how media (also here) has a fixed agenda to use Trump for all bad things in this world. This is very obvious.
The media here is less about trying to convince one side to vote for the other and more about being an echo chamber of what you wanna hear, so you don't change the channel. In other words, they're preaching to their respective choirs.
If you ask me, traditional media had very little to do with Trump winning. Trump won because we (collectively, as Americans) have this idea of American exceptionalism. Trump did a great job appealing to that sense of entitlement. His supporters latched onto it and spread it in a shockingly effective grassroots movement through social media.
the silent majority
...is a misnomer.
63 million votes were cast for Trump
73.5 million people voted against Trump
approximately 90 million eligible Americans - did not vote at all.
The real "silent majority" didn't bother to vote.
source
You mistakenly presume that there is any sort of government censorship of Republicans by "left-wing thugs" to begin with.
Don't know about government censorship, but their certainly is censorship on Slashdot by Trump supporters with mod points and an axe to grind. Just about everything I post which is critical of Trump gets modded down. It's like these people are simply incapable of having a debate.
Prove everyone wrong by providing rational discourse and not just using every buzzword that has been used to describe him for the last year.
Oh yeah, like that works. If you want to learn all about cognitive dissonance, try changing the minds of Trump supporters. Start with the studies showing coal is filthy, nasty fuel and the Trump crowd just dismisses the science as made-up. Tell them gender/marriage equality is important and you'll get responses that run the gauntlet from "Skydaddy says it's wrong" to "I think Trump doesn't actually have any problems with *those people*" (denial).
Healthcare, jobs, China, the "Muslim Ban", the wall, shit just goes on and on. You make a rational argument as to why Trump's policies sound like they're something he came up with during a drunken poker game, back it up with citations to peer-reviewed factual data, and in response you hear why you're just a snowflake who hates America.
Nope, I'm convinced the best course of action is to get the complacent like-minded people off their ass and in to the polls the next election. That's far more likely to be successful than trying to play damage control with a bunch of deplorables.
No, it means hillary was such an undesirable candidate that even that act wouldn't turn people toward her.
It was still possible to vote against Trump and not vote for Hillary. Granted, it would've also been just as effective to not vote at all, as third party votes are more-or-less a waste.
And if you're talking about people who are completely unwilling to listen to a viewpoint that contradicts their world view, you might want to see which group of people are the ones trying to shut down opposing viewpoints at university speechs with violent riots and threats.
Seems like a bad idea to use captive audiences for that sort of thing regardless of which side of the political spectrum you sit on. Simple fix to that: no partisan speakers at university events/graduations. Problem solved.
But that small percent needed to swing a vote in key states on the other hand, maybe don't insinuate they may be a deplorable?
More than a few Trump supporters started wearing the "deplorable" insult as if it were a badge of honor. The Hillary supporters did the same thing with the Bad Hombres/Nasty Woman remarks from Trump.
I'll agree that yeah, the Democrats need to run a better campaign, but if Trump has proven anything, it's that Americans have pretty tough stomachs for raunchy, insult-laden campaigns.
Clearly that's true to some degree no doubt, but continuing to act as if that's the rational behind all or even a majority of Trump voters (who were not necessarily Trump supporters, there's a difference) isn't exactly endearing the left to anyone outside the echo chambers, or helping to set up whoever runs in 2020 to do better. If there's on thing the middle/low class white people aren't going to want to hear (again) it is someone from a classist institute like Harvard telling them they are racist.
For fuck's sake, someone always has to bring up how the "left" would win over Trump supporters, if the left could just stop being so insulting towards them.
Think about this for a second: These are people who ignored every single repulsive aspect of Trump's policies and the campaign he ran. They willingly voted for a man who said, and I quote "I could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose any voters." Here's a hint: That means even Trump realizes his own supporters are drinking the kool aid.
These are people who are either completely unwilling to listen to a viewpoint which contradicts their world view, or they actually agree with the deplorable things that come out of Trump's mouth. You're just not going to win over those people; you just have to hope they don't bother to vote, and your side has a better turnout.
In the US, about 16 deaths a month (~200/year) occur because the roads are built such that wildlife can get on them.
Our absolutely horrible healthcare system kills quite a few people too. The current administration seems to be intent on making the problem worse.
But nope, terrorism and drugs... Those are the boogiemen you keep hearing about, and the sheeple keep eating it up.
There are proof electronic cigarettes are at least 97% less harmfull then smoking, so please stop it publishing crap like this.
They do the exact same thing with artificial sweeteners. There's always some horribly flawed study going around claiming how they don't actually help you lose weight, cause insulin spikes or are just bad because they're all chemical-y. Never mind the fact we already know too much real sugar is horrible for your health, and artificial sweeteners have a proven record of safety in real-world use.
Thing is, the people pushing this kind of agenda feel an approach of "harm reduction" is inadequate, and that you shouldn't have sweetened products at all. Or smoke. They probably don't like sex either. The world would be a much better place if people gave up on the idea of trying to "save" others from themselves.
You already lost the left some ~1000 seats in Federal and State level governance. What, you want to try to lose the rest? Keep insulting them. Keep calling them names.
We've got a sad state of affairs in this country if people are actually choosing their candidates based on the level of butthurt they're receiving from the opposing party's supporters. In that case, stick a fork in the USA, we're done.
Seriously, go ahead. I'm going to be fine and I have Canadian citizenship to fall back on.
So, support Trump's pro-coal agenda, move to Canada when it warms up? Sounds like it could be the plot of a bad Sci-Fi movie, maybe we could get Charlie Sheen.
The worst part is that you posted your post while feeling egotistical, right, and important.
Actually, since it was the middle of the night, I mostly just felt tired.
We're not on the same side, actually. I'm on the American left. You don't even know what left means.
Even the "left" isn't black and white.
You've got the "Let's give everyone a universal basic income and let them smoke pot all day!" left.
Then there's the "Let's raise the minimum wage to $15/hr! Never mind by raising the minimum *cost* of labor to $15, we've only succeeded in reducing the buying power of $15! Inflation FTW!" left.
There's the "Tax everything that is bad for you" left.
There's the "Tax everything else too!" left.
There's the "Everything causes cancer!" left.
etc...
When it comes to politics, if you're not gravitating somewhere near the middle ground, you risk looking like a nut even to people on your own "side".
The wall is not a simple matter. First, you have to understand that illegal immigration is becoming a big business in part because of the legalization of marijuana in some states.
The problem of illegal immigration is due to the border (and nearby) states not devoting enough resources to fight the problem at the local level. Let's be honest too, if an ocean can't keep out illegals (airplanes, boats, a long ride on a sea turtle), a wall isn't going to make much difference.
It's just an expensive bridge-to-nowhere. Anyone saying the money poured into its construction would help the economy doesn't understand the "broken window fallacy". Every dollar spent on the wall could've gone towards a real investment in our country's future, such as education grants.
#1 Trump won because the best the Democratic Party could offer was Hilary Clinton.
Ad nauseam...
Yes, we have a lesser of two evils party system in this country. Both the Democrats and Republicans play the game of telling their respective bases what they want to hear and then find out how much of it they bought, on election day. Funny thing is though, some of the wining side's agenda actually becomes reality.
So as a voter, it's still to your advantage to vote for whatever bullshit sounds best to you, because *some* of it will stick.
I'm not too familiar with the Raspberry Pi, but a cursory view of the specs tells me even a huge botnet of 'em still wouldn't make you wealthy through mining crypto any sooner than the heat death of the universe. Most crypto mining these days is done on specialized hardware or large banks of high-end video cards. Seems to be the reason why most malicious software intent on acquiring wealth through Bitcoins simply encrypts your files for ransom.
At the root level, you and I want the same things, probably.
It's pretty hard to see eye-to-eye with most Trump supporters, simply because they've got their head jammed so far up their own ass. No, really - we're talking justifying support for things such as: kicking people with pre-existing conditions off of healthcare, trashing the environment, a "Muslim ban", turning back the clock on marriage & gender equality, and don't even get me started on that wall.
Granted, not everything Trump stands for is horribly reprehensible. He did a great job channeling Ray Zalinsky from Tommy Boy in convincing an ignorant voter base that he'll be the champion of the good old American working man. We can all pretty much agree that the average straight, white, American male has been through some tough times, and it's probably a relief for him to have someone he can relate to, back in the oval office. Can't imagine why anyone would want to go out and protest that - how intolerant can you get?
Nothing new here, even with the iPhone 7, the variant with the Intel modem is slower. Heck, the iPhone 6S had two different CPU suppliers, and battery life differences cropped up over that. Oh yeah, and the original iPhone had some LCD screens with a negative black issue.
I'm sure the faithful will still line up to play the iPhone 8 lottery. Do you feel lucky?
it's just a medium for ideas, like books or democracy, although a darned good one, and frankly one that has caused more democratization of more ideas than anything since the printing press.
Thanks to the will of the mob, rumors, misinformation, and sensationalized bullshit can spread faster, further and wider than ever. I'm sure the most brilliant minds believed giving the power of instantly networked information to everyone would lead to a new age of enlightenment, but you can't fight human nature. People prefer having their superstitions and incorrect beliefs reinforced, rather than challenged.
Today, we live in an age where pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo is placed on equal footing with real, established science. Where rumors and hearsay gain as much notoriety as researched fact. People can choose to believe that vaccines cause autism, GMO food contains toxins, and aspartame causes cancer - because that's what their friends on social media are sharing.
This Pirate Bay guy is correct that something has gone horribly wrong with the internet thanks to social media, but he may be pointing his finger at the wrong monster.
Actually if all the men who were boycotting Target over the men in the women's bathroom issue would just go to Target and use the women's bathroom every time they had to go, Target would change its policy in a BIG hurry.
Target has loss prevention cameras all over the store, so they probably have a pretty good idea how much "traffic" the restrooms get. I'm sure if this was a real issue, the cameras wouldn't lie. This is just another case where some people look at a mole hill and see a mountain.
"But Apple is a private company and can cens^H^H^H^H do what they want herp derp."
They can do whatever they want until market forces convince them otherwise. You can bitch, whine, moan and complain about their app store polices, their glued-together fabrication process, and their locked-down mobile OS, but as long as the masses keep lining up to buy their new shinies every year - Apple doesn't care.
Let's also be realistic here: How many people are actually going to miss this shitty little "racist" cartoon frog game? You can't even find a really good quality copy of Song of the South on public torrent trackers, and that's something which is relatively well known (Disney even has a damn water ride based on it!), and not even really all that racist.