Weren't they denying that would happen a few months ago? Regardless, they better not name it Galaxy Note 7 even with the refurbished thing added on. Bans will still be on, they coudn't - understandably - do a thorough 100% recall, and they'll have to prove that the devices work safely, obviously.
I'm all in favor of that device not being completely scrapped because it's a mountain of extra e-waste to be dealt with, but it would just be a better move to name it something else and then release it on the market.
Dang, at this point I dunno if Microsoft releasing a holographic phone would do much considering how late to the game Windows Mobile, 10 or whatever they are putting there is. Don't get me wrong, I had a Windows Mobile phone (Lumia 1020)... but what's the point of it if it's only going to have outdated, abandoned or replacement apps that are always going to be behind the curve when it comes to functionality?
Possible route for success, at least on the enterprise side, is keep it up with Continuum and make a phone that carries full Windows 10 that works well as a phone, but can also be used as a light desktop. They have to go a similar route Blackberry did in the past, and at this point with intrusive ads, telemetry and other crap they are shoving into Windows 10 I'm not sure Microsoft is even capable of going that route.
Not that I think police should be underequiped, inefficient, and with gear and vehicles in unuseable state like it happens here in Brazil, but I don't think MRAPs, tanks, and anti-explosive robots have a place in small counties and whatnot. xD In fact, here in Brazil we do have a few armored trucks for slum incursions and such, but you know... rare exceptions.
Nice logic there MIT. So, it's better to give them all the keys with the expectation that this administration will somehow make a better more consistent privacy law instead of keeping at least some guarantees that ISPs, the ones that are between you and everything you do on the Internet, won't exploit your data for profit?
What a bunch of bullshit. Look, this isn't your dreamy utopia. Not everything needs to have a "consistent approach", that will never happen, nor we expect it to happen, specially with a government that is essencially stripping citizens of every right they have in favor of corporations and lobbyists.
Keep thinking like that and you'll end up in a dictatorship, whoever blabbed that nonsense.
Do what I say, not what I do. I mean, of course Samsung really needs a new battery check process, doesn't mean others also need it. In order for anyone to follow Samsung's advices, they need first to prove it's worth for other companies, not only that it's needed for themselves not to f*ck up things further. And in the end, it was a design flaw that caused the whole deal. Samsung rushed the process, cut corners (figuratively AND literally) to release the phone faster, ignored warnings, which ultimately lead to the Note 7 disaster. They don't have any moral high ground to stand on.
Other companies would follow if Samsung had lower rates of failures, not the opposite. So if they can prove their new process guarantees a lower percentage of battery issues, then fine, it's a win. But until then, I don't see why any other company would go for it.
If anything, more people should be aware of Rotten Tomatoes or we need more streamlined widespread movie reviews websites so that directors stop spending so much money on such garbage movies.... No matter how much directors and Hollywood complains about critics and stuff like piracy, there has never been a time when they had such a wide and accepting market in history. You make a crap movie that borrows characters from another medium which fans hated, and you are still able to turn a profit... it's ridiculous. There are so many comics based, recycled franchises, shitty sequels, westernalized stuff, retelling and unoriginal content that I don't even know what an original story is anymore. Just search for "movies 2017". Most of the good movies I watch these days never got a chance to shine because of all that crap that Hollywood keeps spewing. And yet, some people involved still have the nerve to complain.
No one wants to side with a potential child pornographer, but law is definitely taking a turn for the worse if something like this is allowed to happen... they can't force the accused to produce proof of the crime against himself so he's charged with something else? This is basically abuse of power.
According to the original article, they have a testimonial from a sister, they have been able to figure out keys from other devices and forensics traced his traffic to known child pornography websites, so he most likely is the real deal. But justice still presumes innocence until proven guilty, and the justification for being this heavy handed does not work... as if cryptography becoming a prevalent thing justifies courts being able to force people to produce proof against themselves.
Did criminals denying charges made torture legal for them to fess up? Because it's basically the same thing here.
This is, again, a failure on persecuting the guy. They didn't have enough circumstatial evidence of what he did, so the court is forcing him to produce it himself at the risk of being framed for other crimes.
Now, most of us might not care if he suffers other penalties or not, as he most likely deserves all this, but we might not want a justice system that feels it's ok to do stuff like that.
Yet another bill that makes no sense... I dunno how long people need to keep saying the exact same thing about these bills, but as always, it all comes down to who defines ""inaccurate," "irrelevant," "inadequate" or "excessive" statements". You cannot pass laws based on such broad and subjective terms as it'll always end up being exploited by the exact people who shouldn't.
The worst part of Windows 10 is the telemetry stuff along with dial home crap. I don't know if this is a region thing or because I extensively thrawled configuration options, but I don't have any ads whatsoever on my Windows 10.
But Microsoft needs to change direction on this urgently. Fire everyone involved with these hamfisted stupid decisions before they completely ruin the reputation of an OS that otherwise would be just fine.
Ridiculous unacceptable stuff like the completely unethical forced upgrade strategy, all this crap about not being able to fully opt out of telemetry and dial home stuff, and now the ads everywhere where it does not belong. Hell, not even Chromecast would put ads on places like file manager, task bar and notification area. No sane OS ever would. This is pop-up ads with malware infected Flash stuff level.
The worst part of it all is that aside from those, Windows 10 is actually a good OS. But whoever is dictating to shove so much unacceptable crap in it is risking not only to make this the worst most scummy OS in history, but also to completely ruin Windows and Microsoft's reputation. I know there are plenty of Microsoft and Windows haters here on slashdot, but whether you like it or not, plenty of people still use and like Windows. Now, stuff like BSoD, malware and virus can be acceptable to a point from a technical standpoint. Vista and Me had a whole lot of problems making them some of the most hated versions of the OS, but those problems are in a whole category apart from Windows 10 problems.
All of the major problems in Windows 10 are not only intentional, they serve no other purpose than profiting from users. They have no other practical purpose than making money out of the misery, irritation, poor perception and degradation of user experience. It's like Microsoft is purposedly putting a BSoD scheme on the OS to take money from users. It's unethical, unacceptable and indefensible. It's abuse of power and they know it.
A freaking scummy practice that I would've expected from some freemium mobile app coming from some unknown chinese developer willing to make a quick buck, not an OS used by a huge ammount of professionals in business settings. What value has the Windows name for Microsoft to risk making it look this bad just to profit some more from users? If things continue this way, I dunno why a huge number of users would risk going for a Windows 11 or so. It puts a whole host of things that Microsoft invested truckloads a money at risk. Should I even consider going for a Microsoft backed Augmented or Mixed reality device if it's expected from the company to shove intrusive ads and turn their hardware into spying devices? Should I buy a console system that will try to harvest all the money the company can from me? Should I buy into this Continuum concept of one device for everything if this device is expected to keep pestering me with ads and sending my data back for whatever purpose? F that shit.
Tablets and phablets didn't kill netbooks alone, pricing and other options did.
I imagine some Linux hardcore users would want a cheap-o laptop with paltry specs to tinker with, but the majority of the market is not interested in that. With netbooks, you could at most browse a bit, check e-mails and do the very basic stuff that any smartphone or tablet can do better today, even the extremely cheap ones. And then, with the advent of Chromebooks, you can even get a Windows 10 laptop positioned to compete with it, with prices under 200 bucks.
I don't think a single guy experience on trying to use an Android tablet for productivity and finding it "awkward" is reason enough to ressurect a line of products that are justifiably dead. Honestly, plenty of people can use Android tablets for productivity well enough, and keyboard accessories ranging from horrible to excellent are already out there. Go on eBay and search for Android laptop if form factor is an issue. Android already has a cleaner and more intuitive interface, and apps like the full Microsoft Office suite, with data synchronization and other native features to boot.
Nowadays you can also get cheap Windows laptops, tiny desktops like a Kangaroo PC (there's even a Kangaroo laptop with a weird design), stick computers or even something like Gole 1 that can dual boot between Windows and Android. You can build your own portable with something like a Raspberry Pi. Not to mention Chromebooks among other devices for productivity.
Honestly, I think it's kinda stupid to try to revive netbooks at this point, personal opinion as a business thing. It'll be an extremely niche market that will fail to scale. I'd be all for a Linux tablet though, for personal usage. Not that I think there's a market for that too. What Linux needs these days is to get ported, adapted and get support for devices like smartphones and tablets, not to keep trying to go back in time. Yes, I know Android is based on Linux, but I'm talking about other distros. I know Ubuntu has a version for mobile devices, but those are too limited and impossible to find in the market.
I'm not a hater or anything like that. I've just converted an old laptop that was laying around into an Ubuntu machine to tinker with. I just don't see a market for netbooks anymore. What we had back then were schools and businesses willing to pay a little for underpowered laptops running Linux for the very basics... but that has changed.
Furthermore, you know what Netbooks sound like for your average consumer? Extremely underpowered and horrible to deal with devices. Garbage. Expired electronics. Failed strategy. Outdated and deprecated. Something lying in a storage space somewhere with a ton of dust on top. A waste of not a whole lot of money. Outside of Linux evangelists, that's what I mostly hear. Would you want a netbook for work/school/business? Ewww no, gtfo of here with that.
I can almost guarantee you that most people, if offered a netbook, would rather: 1. Spend a bit more on a more capable device - Chromebook, Linux or Windows; 2. Get a bluetooth/OtG keyboard and mouse and use their own smartphones/tablets instead; 3. Get nothing and keep using whatever they have instead of having to carry an extra device running an OS that they'll need to learn how to deal with.
Netbooks are dead, let them go gracefully. If you are going to release a new product with similar objectives, call it something else.
I think the problem with the ideas is that too many people interpret it differently as the subject is still too vague.
And I take Gates' suggestion as an early attempt and not a perfect solution. The core idea seems to be to discourage companies from firing all their factory floor staff to replace them with robots. Yes, it's not a great solution, it will mostly delay the innevitable, but it might buy some needed time for us to adapt.
Let's put it into more realistic and plain terms: what happens when Uber fires all their current workers and replaces them all with automated cars? What could we do when/if a time comes when most factory jobs gets completely automated? We're talking about 10+ million jobs there.
Other suggestions on the table: universal income. That could happen, but it'll take a very long time.
No need for alarmism though. I've said it once and will say it again: I highly doubt that an automation/robot revolution will happen overnight. I mean, robots with a more "general purpose" approach are already out there, but they are extremely expensive to get, maintain, and use. When those robots become cheaper and ultimately more cost efficient than a huge portion of workers, it'll still take plenty of time for factories and other places to be implemented.
But of course, we need to start thinking now on policies to reduce that impact because policies can also be plenty slow to implement. Society will absorb part of the impact with creation of new types of jobs and migration to other jobs, as it has happened in the past in every revolution, but it's better to have something in place instead of facing the crisis head on.
I've never even heard of it... And here's the weirdest part: Back around 2013 I got myself a Lumia 1020 and followed Microsoft centric blogs like Windows Central among other Microsoft resources. And I had accounts in weird new social network attempts like Ello.
Just visited the page, it kinda looks like a more barebones version of Google+. Awkward...
1) The CIA has the ability to break into Android and iPhone handsets, and all kinds of computers. It's basically, if it's Internet connected, it's probably vulnerable to some degree. But I wanna see the CIA remotely invading my unconnected Windows 7 PC used for maintenance purposes. Unless they get a warrant and physically get to my computer, they can't.
2) Doing so would make apps like Signal, Telegram and WhatsApp entirely insecure. Wrong. Encryption is used on these device to protect messages DURING transit and it's not only from the CIA or for criminal purposes. So yeah, it's still secure if you are not being actively targeted by the CIA, and if you keep your devices outside the reach of malicious actors.
3) The CIA could use smart TVs to listen in on conversations that happened around them. This just adds up to not buying smart TVs at all, or at least don't connect them to the Internet. Several big brands like Samsung, LG, Vizio among others have been caught red handed harvesting information using smart TV functions for all sorts of purposes, so this recommendation came before the CIA papers leak. It might not have shown up in papers just yet, but this also applies to your IoT devices and whatnot. Do NOT get a Google Home, Alexa or whatever always listening device you can avoid it. Your privacy will be put at risk as potentially your security also will.
4) The agency explored hacking into cars and crashing them, allowing "nearly undetectable assassinations." Hackers are also into this, and it'll remain an issue as long as car manufacturers continue to ignore major security flaws in their systems. Just so people know, most cars these days are wholly insecure. Hacking could come with something hard to accomplish like connecting a device into the electronic diagnostic systems on you car, needing physical access, to shoving malware on your Android based car system and taking control remotely from there. Unfortunately, it's one of those cases where a fatality will need to happen for car manufacturers to be blasted for malpractice and change their ways.
5) The CIA hid vulnerabilities that could be used by hackers from other countries or governments. This, along with several other cases like the iPhone thing and the more recent of a pedophile being released because a government agency didn't want to release the tools used for his arrest to the public just shows how governmental agencies are not focused on security and worries on the public, they are focused on power. This is the core issue with NSA, CIA, FBI and other public agencies promoting erosion or privacy: they want the power to spy on everyone and anyone, which gives them control to do anything.
All of the revelations and the spying programs governmental agencies have reveals one big problem in itself: the US will soon become a country where something like Watergate, or something more recent like the Snowden leaks, could never happen. How long do people think that an empowered state that is able to spy on everyone including journalists (which btw, the current government sees as "the enemy") will use these tools to actively persecute, blackmail and shut up anyone who has something negative to say about the administration? You are basically diving into a well disguised totalitarian regime. And with morons currently running the country it's going to be very hard to convince them that these powers have nothing to do with making police work easier, or going after terrorists, and all to do with these agencies having enough power to do just about everything they want.
There already have been plenty of reports on police mishandling public cameras and using tools for stuff like stalking people, going after ex-girlfriends and stuff like that. Going from there to actively blackmailing people, using the information collected for their own profit, all the way into covering scandals and shutting off corruption case investigations is not a joke. Yes, no one is interested in your boring life and your boring messages or e-mails, but there is a reason why privacy is the cornerstone of democracies. If you don't fight for it and lose, the consequences will come crashing down soon enough, and then there's nothing you can do anymore.
I'd give Microsoft a chance with new versions of IE or Edge, but they never f*cking learn. https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... No pitty. Better luck on the next time Microsoft renames the browser yet again to try to erase it's bad fame.
Very pleased to know lots of companies are not following Apple's lead blindly anymore.
Both the Moto Z and the chinese brands that released smartphones without a headphone jack (I'm not talking about LeEco though, there were models from 2015 that didn't have it) had a clear justification for it: the smartphone was too thin to house a headphone jack module. Perhaps they could've put a 2.5mm jack in place like dumbphones in the past, but I dunno how the chassis would hold for that, so I can't tell.
But Apple decided to go without it even though the iPhone 7 has the exact same dimentions of the iPhone 6. They can make all excuses they want to, the fact is that a huge part of the market still wants them there. Courage, because there was no space, because they want to move forward, blah blah... mostly because they have a stake in Beats audio, they want to push a proprietary wireless standard, and they want to force users to spend more on crap they don't need while keeping all the profits.
Regardless, I see no problems in people getting one if they don't use a headphone jack for anything... but it's quite obvious how Apple wants to further close the ecossystem and "walled garden". I want not part in that crap. Even their so acclaimed great wireless audio solution is about to be trampled over by the new Bluetooth 5 standard that will be coming out this year.
It's an interesting move, but it doesn't sound like something that would have a major effect.
Personally, I like to keep functions separated and configurable... just because accidental gestures and commands are a plague to me.:P My current phone, OnePlus 3, has the 2 touch buttons, they can be flipped, and regular functions like double tap or long press can be configured to do a bunch of different things the way you want... and they can also be disabled in favor of onscreen buttons too.
I already ended up disabling most of these regular functions because I accidentaly trigger them all the time. Oh well, clumsy fingers.
Mistake is pointing out a corporation slave/stooge like this guy as the FCC chairman. Look at all the tears I have for the poor poor ISPs who don't have money to put food on the table of their families. What a load of bull. Net neutrality works well and fine in several countries, the only reason why it's bothersome in the US is because it gets in the way of scummy tactics to profit more from consumers and control what sort of content people will be able to watch, empowering monopolies even more.
My current TV is a 55" flatscreen that has been serving me well... it serves me even better now that I disabled the "smart tv" functions. xD
Here's the thing though: the way it's set up in my living room works well because it's parallel to the balcony. Unless the curved TV is made of some magical material, it'll probably reflect more light than the current setup. And no, I wouldn't trade my glossy screen for a matte one.:P
That's all, of course, not even considering price difference. My ideal TV would be a big one without any of the extra frills that the TV industry came up in the past... what? 10 years? I ended up buying a 3D smart TV because it was in promotion and it came with a second 32" TV free, which was just perfect for my needs. What I really wanted though was a big screen that had enough ports on the back with fullHD resolution and good enough quality. That's it.
No need for curve, no need for 3D, no need for crappy smart TV software that's both insecure and never updated, no need for embedded camera, voice commands, remote control that acts like a mouse... none of that crap.
Honestly, I also don't need 4K or HDR, nor I'll be paying the extra price that comes with those features. I feel like I already pushed things a bit by wanting a fullHD TV when I already had a regular HD 720p TV, but since I'm using it as a computer monitor at times I thought it was still justifiable.
Truth of the matter is that TV manufacturers have to keep pushing there extraneous features because they need to keep selling units. And hey, it's fine if it makes a difference for you, but I really don't care about those things at all.
I imagine that the next TV I'll buy will have to probably be like a magnetic flexible sheet that you can carry around and throw in whatever room you wanted too. That is, of course, if my current TV lasts that long, which it probably won't. Oh well.
Slashdot Mirror
Hollywood can die and be rebuild for all I care, it's slim pickings with huge cancerous tumors right now.
Weren't they denying that would happen a few months ago?
Regardless, they better not name it Galaxy Note 7 even with the refurbished thing added on.
Bans will still be on, they coudn't - understandably - do a thorough 100% recall, and they'll have to prove that the devices work safely, obviously.
I'm all in favor of that device not being completely scrapped because it's a mountain of extra e-waste to be dealt with, but it would just be a better move to name it something else and then release it on the market.
Dang, at this point I dunno if Microsoft releasing a holographic phone would do much considering how late to the game Windows Mobile, 10 or whatever they are putting there is.
Don't get me wrong, I had a Windows Mobile phone (Lumia 1020)... but what's the point of it if it's only going to have outdated, abandoned or replacement apps that are always going to be behind the curve when it comes to functionality?
Possible route for success, at least on the enterprise side, is keep it up with Continuum and make a phone that carries full Windows 10 that works well as a phone, but can also be used as a light desktop. They have to go a similar route Blackberry did in the past, and at this point with intrusive ads, telemetry and other crap they are shoving into Windows 10 I'm not sure Microsoft is even capable of going that route.
... but I'm not too sure people in the US should be laughing at that. :P
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://reason.com/blog/2016/0...
Not that I think police should be underequiped, inefficient, and with gear and vehicles in unuseable state like it happens here in Brazil, but I don't think MRAPs, tanks, and anti-explosive robots have a place in small counties and whatnot. xD
In fact, here in Brazil we do have a few armored trucks for slum incursions and such, but you know... rare exceptions.
Nice logic there MIT. So, it's better to give them all the keys with the expectation that this administration will somehow make a better more consistent privacy law instead of keeping at least some guarantees that ISPs, the ones that are between you and everything you do on the Internet, won't exploit your data for profit?
What a bunch of bullshit. Look, this isn't your dreamy utopia. Not everything needs to have a "consistent approach", that will never happen, nor we expect it to happen, specially with a government that is essencially stripping citizens of every right they have in favor of corporations and lobbyists.
Keep thinking like that and you'll end up in a dictatorship, whoever blabbed that nonsense.
Do what I say, not what I do.
I mean, of course Samsung really needs a new battery check process, doesn't mean others also need it.
In order for anyone to follow Samsung's advices, they need first to prove it's worth for other companies, not only that it's needed for themselves not to f*ck up things further.
And in the end, it was a design flaw that caused the whole deal. Samsung rushed the process, cut corners (figuratively AND literally) to release the phone faster, ignored warnings, which ultimately lead to the Note 7 disaster.
They don't have any moral high ground to stand on.
Other companies would follow if Samsung had lower rates of failures, not the opposite. So if they can prove their new process guarantees a lower percentage of battery issues, then fine, it's a win. But until then, I don't see why any other company would go for it.
If anything, more people should be aware of Rotten Tomatoes or we need more streamlined widespread movie reviews websites so that directors stop spending so much money on such garbage movies....
No matter how much directors and Hollywood complains about critics and stuff like piracy, there has never been a time when they had such a wide and accepting market in history.
You make a crap movie that borrows characters from another medium which fans hated, and you are still able to turn a profit... it's ridiculous.
There are so many comics based, recycled franchises, shitty sequels, westernalized stuff, retelling and unoriginal content that I don't even know what an original story is anymore. Just search for "movies 2017".
Most of the good movies I watch these days never got a chance to shine because of all that crap that Hollywood keeps spewing. And yet, some people involved still have the nerve to complain.
...but the Asus PadPhone is a 5 years old product by now. No need to patent it, just pay for royalties.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Also, isn't it kinda weird how Apple is adamantly against a touchscreen MacBook, yet they go and patent something like this?
...in a 1000 years or so, perhaps yeah
Burglars couldn't care less about your Bluetooth vulnerabilities when they can use a mask and be quick about it. :P
No one wants to side with a potential child pornographer, but law is definitely taking a turn for the worse if something like this is allowed to happen... they can't force the accused to produce proof of the crime against himself so he's charged with something else? This is basically abuse of power.
According to the original article, they have a testimonial from a sister, they have been able to figure out keys from other devices and forensics traced his traffic to known child pornography websites, so he most likely is the real deal. But justice still presumes innocence until proven guilty, and the justification for being this heavy handed does not work... as if cryptography becoming a prevalent thing justifies courts being able to force people to produce proof against themselves.
Did criminals denying charges made torture legal for them to fess up? Because it's basically the same thing here.
This is, again, a failure on persecuting the guy. They didn't have enough circumstatial evidence of what he did, so the court is forcing him to produce it himself at the risk of being framed for other crimes.
Now, most of us might not care if he suffers other penalties or not, as he most likely deserves all this, but we might not want a justice system that feels it's ok to do stuff like that.
Yet another bill that makes no sense...
I dunno how long people need to keep saying the exact same thing about these bills, but as always, it all comes down to who defines ""inaccurate," "irrelevant," "inadequate" or "excessive" statements". You cannot pass laws based on such broad and subjective terms as it'll always end up being exploited by the exact people who shouldn't.
The worst part of Windows 10 is the telemetry stuff along with dial home crap.
I don't know if this is a region thing or because I extensively thrawled configuration options, but I don't have any ads whatsoever on my Windows 10.
But Microsoft needs to change direction on this urgently. Fire everyone involved with these hamfisted stupid decisions before they completely ruin the reputation of an OS that otherwise would be just fine.
Ridiculous unacceptable stuff like the completely unethical forced upgrade strategy, all this crap about not being able to fully opt out of telemetry and dial home stuff, and now the ads everywhere where it does not belong. Hell, not even Chromecast would put ads on places like file manager, task bar and notification area. No sane OS ever would. This is pop-up ads with malware infected Flash stuff level.
The worst part of it all is that aside from those, Windows 10 is actually a good OS. But whoever is dictating to shove so much unacceptable crap in it is risking not only to make this the worst most scummy OS in history, but also to completely ruin Windows and Microsoft's reputation. I know there are plenty of Microsoft and Windows haters here on slashdot, but whether you like it or not, plenty of people still use and like Windows. Now, stuff like BSoD, malware and virus can be acceptable to a point from a technical standpoint. Vista and Me had a whole lot of problems making them some of the most hated versions of the OS, but those problems are in a whole category apart from Windows 10 problems.
All of the major problems in Windows 10 are not only intentional, they serve no other purpose than profiting from users. They have no other practical purpose than making money out of the misery, irritation, poor perception and degradation of user experience. It's like Microsoft is purposedly putting a BSoD scheme on the OS to take money from users. It's unethical, unacceptable and indefensible. It's abuse of power and they know it.
A freaking scummy practice that I would've expected from some freemium mobile app coming from some unknown chinese developer willing to make a quick buck, not an OS used by a huge ammount of professionals in business settings. What value has the Windows name for Microsoft to risk making it look this bad just to profit some more from users? If things continue this way, I dunno why a huge number of users would risk going for a Windows 11 or so. It puts a whole host of things that Microsoft invested truckloads a money at risk. Should I even consider going for a Microsoft backed Augmented or Mixed reality device if it's expected from the company to shove intrusive ads and turn their hardware into spying devices? Should I buy a console system that will try to harvest all the money the company can from me? Should I buy into this Continuum concept of one device for everything if this device is expected to keep pestering me with ads and sending my data back for whatever purpose? F that shit.
Tablets and phablets didn't kill netbooks alone, pricing and other options did.
I imagine some Linux hardcore users would want a cheap-o laptop with paltry specs to tinker with, but the majority of the market is not interested in that.
With netbooks, you could at most browse a bit, check e-mails and do the very basic stuff that any smartphone or tablet can do better today, even the extremely cheap ones. And then, with the advent of Chromebooks, you can even get a Windows 10 laptop positioned to compete with it, with prices under 200 bucks.
I don't think a single guy experience on trying to use an Android tablet for productivity and finding it "awkward" is reason enough to ressurect a line of products that are justifiably dead. Honestly, plenty of people can use Android tablets for productivity well enough, and keyboard accessories ranging from horrible to excellent are already out there. Go on eBay and search for Android laptop if form factor is an issue. Android already has a cleaner and more intuitive interface, and apps like the full Microsoft Office suite, with data synchronization and other native features to boot.
Nowadays you can also get cheap Windows laptops, tiny desktops like a Kangaroo PC (there's even a Kangaroo laptop with a weird design), stick computers or even something like Gole 1 that can dual boot between Windows and Android.
You can build your own portable with something like a Raspberry Pi.
Not to mention Chromebooks among other devices for productivity.
Honestly, I think it's kinda stupid to try to revive netbooks at this point, personal opinion as a business thing. It'll be an extremely niche market that will fail to scale.
I'd be all for a Linux tablet though, for personal usage. Not that I think there's a market for that too. What Linux needs these days is to get ported, adapted and get support for devices like smartphones and tablets, not to keep trying to go back in time. Yes, I know Android is based on Linux, but I'm talking about other distros. I know Ubuntu has a version for mobile devices, but those are too limited and impossible to find in the market.
I'm not a hater or anything like that. I've just converted an old laptop that was laying around into an Ubuntu machine to tinker with. I just don't see a market for netbooks anymore. What we had back then were schools and businesses willing to pay a little for underpowered laptops running Linux for the very basics... but that has changed.
Furthermore, you know what Netbooks sound like for your average consumer? Extremely underpowered and horrible to deal with devices. Garbage. Expired electronics. Failed strategy. Outdated and deprecated. Something lying in a storage space somewhere with a ton of dust on top. A waste of not a whole lot of money. Outside of Linux evangelists, that's what I mostly hear. Would you want a netbook for work/school/business? Ewww no, gtfo of here with that.
I can almost guarantee you that most people, if offered a netbook, would rather:
1. Spend a bit more on a more capable device - Chromebook, Linux or Windows;
2. Get a bluetooth/OtG keyboard and mouse and use their own smartphones/tablets instead;
3. Get nothing and keep using whatever they have instead of having to carry an extra device running an OS that they'll need to learn how to deal with.
Netbooks are dead, let them go gracefully. If you are going to release a new product with similar objectives, call it something else.
We're still reporting on this scam as if it was a real thing? Wow...
Monorail... monorail... MONORAILLLLL
I think the problem with the ideas is that too many people interpret it differently as the subject is still too vague.
And I take Gates' suggestion as an early attempt and not a perfect solution. The core idea seems to be to discourage companies from firing all their factory floor staff to replace them with robots. Yes, it's not a great solution, it will mostly delay the innevitable, but it might buy some needed time for us to adapt.
Let's put it into more realistic and plain terms: what happens when Uber fires all their current workers and replaces them all with automated cars?
What could we do when/if a time comes when most factory jobs gets completely automated? We're talking about 10+ million jobs there.
Other suggestions on the table: universal income. That could happen, but it'll take a very long time.
No need for alarmism though. I've said it once and will say it again: I highly doubt that an automation/robot revolution will happen overnight. I mean, robots with a more "general purpose" approach are already out there, but they are extremely expensive to get, maintain, and use. When those robots become cheaper and ultimately more cost efficient than a huge portion of workers, it'll still take plenty of time for factories and other places to be implemented.
But of course, we need to start thinking now on policies to reduce that impact because policies can also be plenty slow to implement. Society will absorb part of the impact with creation of new types of jobs and migration to other jobs, as it has happened in the past in every revolution, but it's better to have something in place instead of facing the crisis head on.
Implying that Facebook ever had self respect...
I've never even heard of it...
And here's the weirdest part: Back around 2013 I got myself a Lumia 1020 and followed Microsoft centric blogs like Windows Central among other Microsoft resources. And I had accounts in weird new social network attempts like Ello.
Just visited the page, it kinda looks like a more barebones version of Google+. Awkward...
1) The CIA has the ability to break into Android and iPhone handsets, and all kinds of computers.
It's basically, if it's Internet connected, it's probably vulnerable to some degree. But I wanna see the CIA remotely invading my unconnected Windows 7 PC used for maintenance purposes. Unless they get a warrant and physically get to my computer, they can't.
2) Doing so would make apps like Signal, Telegram and WhatsApp entirely insecure.
Wrong. Encryption is used on these device to protect messages DURING transit and it's not only from the CIA or for criminal purposes. So yeah, it's still secure if you are not being actively targeted by the CIA, and if you keep your devices outside the reach of malicious actors.
3) The CIA could use smart TVs to listen in on conversations that happened around them.
This just adds up to not buying smart TVs at all, or at least don't connect them to the Internet. Several big brands like Samsung, LG, Vizio among others have been caught red handed harvesting information using smart TV functions for all sorts of purposes, so this recommendation came before the CIA papers leak.
It might not have shown up in papers just yet, but this also applies to your IoT devices and whatnot. Do NOT get a Google Home, Alexa or whatever always listening device you can avoid it. Your privacy will be put at risk as potentially your security also will.
4) The agency explored hacking into cars and crashing them, allowing "nearly undetectable assassinations."
Hackers are also into this, and it'll remain an issue as long as car manufacturers continue to ignore major security flaws in their systems. Just so people know, most cars these days are wholly insecure. Hacking could come with something hard to accomplish like connecting a device into the electronic diagnostic systems on you car, needing physical access, to shoving malware on your Android based car system and taking control remotely from there. Unfortunately, it's one of those cases where a fatality will need to happen for car manufacturers to be blasted for malpractice and change their ways.
5) The CIA hid vulnerabilities that could be used by hackers from other countries or governments.
This, along with several other cases like the iPhone thing and the more recent of a pedophile being released because a government agency didn't want to release the tools used for his arrest to the public just shows how governmental agencies are not focused on security and worries on the public, they are focused on power. This is the core issue with NSA, CIA, FBI and other public agencies promoting erosion or privacy: they want the power to spy on everyone and anyone, which gives them control to do anything.
All of the revelations and the spying programs governmental agencies have reveals one big problem in itself: the US will soon become a country where something like Watergate, or something more recent like the Snowden leaks, could never happen. How long do people think that an empowered state that is able to spy on everyone including journalists (which btw, the current government sees as "the enemy") will use these tools to actively persecute, blackmail and shut up anyone who has something negative to say about the administration? You are basically diving into a well disguised totalitarian regime. And with morons currently running the country it's going to be very hard to convince them that these powers have nothing to do with making police work easier, or going after terrorists, and all to do with these agencies having enough power to do just about everything they want.
There already have been plenty of reports on police mishandling public cameras and using tools for stuff like stalking people, going after ex-girlfriends and stuff like that. Going from there to actively blackmailing people, using the information collected for their own profit, all the way into covering scandals and shutting off corruption case investigations is not a joke. Yes, no one is interested in your boring life and your boring messages or e-mails, but there is a reason why privacy is the cornerstone of democracies. If you don't fight for it and lose, the consequences will come crashing down soon enough, and then there's nothing you can do anymore.
I'd give Microsoft a chance with new versions of IE or Edge, but they never f*cking learn.
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor...
No pitty. Better luck on the next time Microsoft renames the browser yet again to try to erase it's bad fame.
...well, John, goodenough
Very pleased to know lots of companies are not following Apple's lead blindly anymore.
Both the Moto Z and the chinese brands that released smartphones without a headphone jack (I'm not talking about LeEco though, there were models from 2015 that didn't have it) had a clear justification for it: the smartphone was too thin to house a headphone jack module.
Perhaps they could've put a 2.5mm jack in place like dumbphones in the past, but I dunno how the chassis would hold for that, so I can't tell.
But Apple decided to go without it even though the iPhone 7 has the exact same dimentions of the iPhone 6. They can make all excuses they want to, the fact is that a huge part of the market still wants them there. Courage, because there was no space, because they want to move forward, blah blah... mostly because they have a stake in Beats audio, they want to push a proprietary wireless standard, and they want to force users to spend more on crap they don't need while keeping all the profits.
Regardless, I see no problems in people getting one if they don't use a headphone jack for anything... but it's quite obvious how Apple wants to further close the ecossystem and "walled garden". I want not part in that crap. Even their so acclaimed great wireless audio solution is about to be trampled over by the new Bluetooth 5 standard that will be coming out this year.
It's an interesting move, but it doesn't sound like something that would have a major effect.
Personally, I like to keep functions separated and configurable... just because accidental gestures and commands are a plague to me. :P
My current phone, OnePlus 3, has the 2 touch buttons, they can be flipped, and regular functions like double tap or long press can be configured to do a bunch of different things the way you want... and they can also be disabled in favor of onscreen buttons too.
I already ended up disabling most of these regular functions because I accidentaly trigger them all the time. Oh well, clumsy fingers.
Mistake is pointing out a corporation slave/stooge like this guy as the FCC chairman.
Look at all the tears I have for the poor poor ISPs who don't have money to put food on the table of their families.
What a load of bull.
Net neutrality works well and fine in several countries, the only reason why it's bothersome in the US is because it gets in the way of scummy tactics to profit more from consumers and control what sort of content people will be able to watch, empowering monopolies even more.
My current TV is a 55" flatscreen that has been serving me well... it serves me even better now that I disabled the "smart tv" functions. xD
Here's the thing though: the way it's set up in my living room works well because it's parallel to the balcony. Unless the curved TV is made of some magical material, it'll probably reflect more light than the current setup. And no, I wouldn't trade my glossy screen for a matte one. :P
That's all, of course, not even considering price difference. My ideal TV would be a big one without any of the extra frills that the TV industry came up in the past... what? 10 years? I ended up buying a 3D smart TV because it was in promotion and it came with a second 32" TV free, which was just perfect for my needs. What I really wanted though was a big screen that had enough ports on the back with fullHD resolution and good enough quality. That's it.
No need for curve, no need for 3D, no need for crappy smart TV software that's both insecure and never updated, no need for embedded camera, voice commands, remote control that acts like a mouse... none of that crap.
Honestly, I also don't need 4K or HDR, nor I'll be paying the extra price that comes with those features. I feel like I already pushed things a bit by wanting a fullHD TV when I already had a regular HD 720p TV, but since I'm using it as a computer monitor at times I thought it was still justifiable.
Truth of the matter is that TV manufacturers have to keep pushing there extraneous features because they need to keep selling units. And hey, it's fine if it makes a difference for you, but I really don't care about those things at all.
I imagine that the next TV I'll buy will have to probably be like a magnetic flexible sheet that you can carry around and throw in whatever room you wanted too. That is, of course, if my current TV lasts that long, which it probably won't. Oh well.