Biased view I guess, but I got an activity tracker free with my previous phone, and also tried using some apps for that. Even though I initially liked monitoring things, it soon became a chore, and something that was acting against my routines. Not only it's extra time spent NOT doing any exercises, after a while no one cares anymore (including yourself), or it becomes a matter of trying to overcome your stats rather than simply exercising as routine or health. This deviation of objective acts against the activity itself.
But I'm always saying this is a personal accessment that should not be generalized for the experience of others.
Conclusion in the title cannot be taken from the study quoted.
First of all, what people say isn't always what people do. People have been anxious and suspicious about new tech forever... if we were to use such stupid metrics not to implement tech, we would never have invented the wheel, or used fire for anything. Second, even if that was the case, you can never generalize the initial state or feelings towards a given piece of technology to how it's gonna be perceived once the usage becomes widespread. Go live a few days with the Amish and see how much less time you get by staying away from technology out of fear. Third and perhaps most important: we don't yet have fully autonomous vehicles. How can you say that it won't give us any more free time if people haven't even tried it yet, nor we can even tell how they'll operate? The technology is still being developed, and it's expected that we'll get to fully autonomous vehicles in a few decades. Older generations will be anxious about it and resistant, sure, but as any technological revolution, the next generation will be the one to fully adopt it, driving in the backseat with no steering wheels.
This is all kinds of stupid. Protip: stay away from Daily Mail and it's shitty, biased and poorly written pieces. It's a fucking joke.
I'm pretty sure most cheap tablets that all kinda looks the same, have same specs, and a bunch of weird apps and processes that behave weirdly are all infected with similar stuff.
Got myself a cheap quadcore small tablet just to mess around a bit... tons of weird apps and processes running on the background, you can't uninstall them, and if you root the device and try to do it forcibly, the tablet factory resets itself. It went into the garbage bin.
I was just commenting on this few days ago, perhaps not here on Slashdot.
But I explicitly said it wouldn't impress me if Apple started removing headphone jacks on every one of their products, even those that made even less sense, just as further proof that this is a move with profit in mind, locking Apple costumers further into the walled garden. And there it is. Courage... to completely lock the system, make costumers spend more money into either your stuff or stuff that has to be licenced by them, and kill the last piece of universal standard from your products, also making it harder for people to escape the platform.
I always find these prediction kinda bogus... What I often see in predictions of robots eliminating part of the workforce is that it's talking about potential, not factuality.
It's either new trends arising in automated systems that could POTENTIALLY take some jobs on the area they were designed for, or a prediction that automation usage in areas that technology already exists for will keep rising exponentially without much consideration on scale, costs, and how much it'd take for those automation systems to actually be produced.
Lets put this in practical terms - I don't see many people firing secretaries only because they learned how to use Siri, Cortana, Alexa or Google Now. Those systems are capable of bringing information faster, as well as making it easier to fill up a schedule and stuff... but they are not capable of taking calls, acting as intermediate to solve problems, pay the bills, negotiate timelines and whatnot. And I'm not sure if 10 years will be enough to remove the human component there.
The same thing was said when these automated call systems came up, and they replaced nothing... just made costumers mad about not having someone on the other side of the line, to the point it's being prohibited for some services.
Unlike technology, humans are kinda slow to adopt new things, and they do it in a non-uniform way. So it's much like landlines and fax machines around the world... you still have plenty of countries that are still dependant on those because local communities haven't move on just yet.
Same could be said for automated car systems. If all goes well, I expect that we have part of the fleet in some cities replaced by them in 10 years or so... but it won't happen all at once, and it won't affect everyone.
And then, of course, these predictions always have a pessimistic outlook on job creation. Somehow, I don't think human societies are stagnant like that. Someone in the last days of the industrial era surely predicted that computers were going to do everything in the next century or so, and that there would be no jobs left for everyone. Much like the Internet create tons upon tons of jobs, several of them that people in the Industrial Era never could have predicted, I have a feeling that when we effectively enter a robotic + automation era, the opportunity for other types of unforeseen jobs will open up.
Finally, I also think that for some stuff robots will never be able to replace us because of the human to human interaction factor. Even though there's a whole lot more we can do efficiently without pesky meat sacks in the middle of it, I imagine that at some point in some areas we'll slowly find out that human interaction is needed - not because of efficiency, not because we can do better than robots, but mostly because of how we feel about it.
"Given the controversy surrounding YouTube in regard to demonetizing videos that are not deemed "friendly to advertisers," many YouTube creators have been or are thinking about leaving the site and joining competing services. These new tools are designed to help keep creators from departing to competing platforms"
Huh? No they are not. This has been in development for a long time, way before the demonetization "scandal" happened. And somehow, I don't think YouTube is too worried about creators departing to competing platforms. They did way worse before, and no one left. What happens again and again is the drama, bunch of people complaining about it, threatening to leave, usually not fully understanding what they are talking about, then they all realize that YouTube is the only service with such a huge audience, and then they just give up.
Which I know is bad in itself, but the top statement sounds a bit like guesswork. Did you just try to bungle together two separate things there?
YouTube Community is here because quite frankly, the current commenting system is outdated, a mess and cumbersome. Not because Google+, not because YouTube commenters are the worst, but because the system itself is horrible. You can't find anything in it, browsing through it can sometimes be impossible, the webapp is often not synced with the mobile app, you can't do much of anything other than scroll and reply to people, it's probably among the most primitive commenting systems out there. Commenters can't even see a history of their own comments. There's zero customization.
But this has been an issue and a constant complain for quite a while now, so I guess YouTube is finally doing something about it... no clue if it'll be worth anything though.
Just remember folks, if Apple repatriates a big part of the business that is currently on Ireland, this means:
- Ireland will have huge losses - jobs, tax revenue, etc; - Apple product prices could increase even more, as taxes increases and the transition will probably not be cheap. The money to cover such moves always comes from somewhere; - Sour relations with EU will probably have consequences as well;
I mean, if it really happens, it initially sounds great for the US. Big tax influx, jobs and all, though I'm not quite sure the next president will really make good use of that.:P But when such a huge ammount of money suddently moves from one country to another, the consequences tends to be extreme on both sides.
In a way, I guess it's kinda fair... tax heaven countries and states are overall damaging to the company's country/state of origin. It ultimately means that huge companies making huge profits return less for the community they have business at. But changes on that scale are still worrying.
Funny that the one calling for an "adult conversation" is exactly the one acting like a spoiled rich kid who has been crying for years now because he didn't get what he wants. The public will have an adult conversation with the FBI only when it realizes what a fucking clown James Comey is and finally takes steps to remove him from his position. We've been through all his propaganda-like defenses and overbearing one sided paranoid attacks against privacy and citizen security so far, as adults to, only to reject his ideas and applaud the few companies that are actually interested in defending privacy and a functional democracy. If the FBI cannot function without backdoors and only promote privacy erosion, it's quite clear that the problem is in policy. Either way, removing the current director and putting someone in his place who understand the basic idea that actions like he is proposing does more harm than good should be a step in the right direction.
Stop wasting your fucking time trying to attack the civil liberties of the people you are supposed to work for. Can't he see how useless this whole thing is? It's only through the force of sheer ignorance that he's still able to talk all the crap he's been talking so far, which is the worst part of it all. The moment you get backdoors to american based business is the moment criminals will flock to foreign companies to do whatever they want to - most of them actually already did, are outside of your reach, you provoked it, and there's nothing you can do in those cases. Meanwhile, businesses trying to protect industry secrets, journalists, citizens trying to protect sensitive data, victims of abuse and persecution, are all getting exposed by erosion of privacy. Law enforcement and government has proven time and time again how incapable they are of securing sensitive information. You don't get the key to the kingdom if you can't help but losing it all the fucking time.
Be an "adult" and just admit that you want the power for yourself. Or that you are completely clueless as to what you are talking about. It's over.
For almost any other meme I could say that the lawsuit was dubious, but not really for Grumpy Cat.
Of course a whole lot of people will come saying that the owners "don't deserve it", that they've done nothing to make Grumpy Cat famous, and that the cat is only famous because someone picked up an image and made a meme out of it.
These people are plain wrong. There is a reason why the cat is still known to this day, and it has a whole lot to do with how much the owners are managing her image. Contrary to other popular memes, Grumpy Cat's owners were very smart to ride the fame. They have been running blogs, merchandise, movie deals, book deals, public appearances, interviews and all the stuff you'd expect from a regular celebrity very professionally and very closely from start.
Grumpy Cat really is a brand that is taken care of and was built upon the hard work of several people, like any business.
But that does not need to be proven in this case... the beverage company already recognizes this because they made a deal there. The matter at hand seems to be either a breach of contract or unauthorized usage outside contractual stipulations, which if true will be plenty easy to prove. And the fine could get way more expensive than that. They are exploiting commercially a brand that does not belong to them.
For those wondering about the intellectual property violation at hand, here's an image of the products: http://sprudgewire.com/wp-cont... There is absolutely nothing dubious about it being related to Grumpy Cat. The decision will be whether there was a breach in contract or not.
I never played No Man's Sky, nor did I follow advertising and trailers much, but I'll say this: If No Man's Sky indeed promised a bunch of features that never made it to the game, then he'll only have the right to call costumers returning the game thieves once the studio responds criminally for false advertising. It is that simple. Take the return and shut the fuck up, or explain why you promised stuff on the game that isn't there, and what you are willing to do about it. I don't care if it's a small studio, if there wasn't enough time, or whatever excuse. Size of company does not matter when it comes to false advertisement.
Sorry, but that's the concession I'm willing to make. If the studio promised features in the game that never made it, it does not matter how much someone played it... in fact, gamers who played the game a whole lot only to find out that the stuff the studio promised wasn't there, should be even more entitled for a refund.
Now, if No Man's Sky promised NOTHING about the game beforehand, and people bought it without expectations, I'd give him the right to be outraged. Even though I'm fully aware that playing a set number of hours isn't always enough to make a proper evaluation of certain games, it'd still be a steal to play a game this many hours only to return it afterwards. But of course there's a reason why Steam is taking the request for refunds in the first place.
But hey, I guess there's a reason this idiot is a FORMER Strategic Content Director after all. No company would like a narrowminded asshole in such a position anyways. He isn't doing any favors for Sony or the studio by writting crap like that too.
Land of the free... as long as you have Big Brother always watching you. We're not too far from two minutes of hate being implemented should Trump be elected anyways... more like 4 years of hate.
This is why I was making a question just the other day about the tech being used for the autopilot.
I've read explainers, watched videos talking about the tech, it doesn't add up. Not for this case, and not for that one which ended in a fatality.
Tesla Model S is supposed to have a camera, a bunch of ultrasonic sensors, and a radar in front of the car. Those sensors either react too slow, which would make them useless, the software is bad, or quality control isn't working well enough.
Because if you think about it, no way 3 different sensor systems will fail all at once and not detect a curve or a truck coming across. I can understand a single camera not being able to distinguish between a white truck and a bright sky, or it getting confused because of reflections, bad weather conditions and whatnot... but what about the ultrasonic sensors and radar system? Are those working at all? What sort of condition is required to make 3 different colision detection systems fail all at once?
I did not find any technical explanation as to why those accidents happened. And "because the driver wasn't paying attention" is not enough from a technical standpoint. It just sounds like we're getting half the story here.
Are we to expect whinning everytime Google uses Android for something good now?
And are you really complaining that Android for Chrome OS of all things is trying to compete with Java SE? HA! Man, what a joke.
Your famously insecure platform that you kept spending money to falsely advertise as secure, while not patching it as you should, to the point you had to be sued by the FTC to come clean about it?
Fuck you Oracle. Even if your case had any hint of truth to it, you have no right to complain. There is nothing better for the public than competition to a company as irresponsible as yours.
I wanna see they going back to the courts to get owned once again... pretty clear that there are some delusional people in charge of the legal team there.
Man, this is going to piss off a whole lot of podcasters and streamers I know about.... though the ones most dedicated to that abandoned the platform long ago due to complete abandonment and a whole lot of weird glitches, bugs and problems.
But yeah... another proof that people just can't rely on Google to keep up their platforms or even develop them properly. They just keep releasing crap, abandoning development, and then shutting them down. Really doesn't inspire much confidence on the company.
You know why Rightscorp is "threatening"? Because they have no chance of winning. If they had a case they'd just directly sue instead of threatening. It's quite obvious.
But sure, let's see how Rightscorp goes against telecom giants. LET THEM FIGHT
Nothing would please me more than mutual destruction in this case. Rebuild everything from scratch.
I imagine a call for banning clueless politicians who are always framing encryption under the terrorism threat agenda would be way more benefitial to the world.
Sure sure... give us more reasons to cord cut already. Also laughable that they'd argue this would have any effect on piracy... the discussion regarding relevant content from cable networks and piracy is already over. You can get ALL the pirated content you want regardless if FCC's set top rules get implemented or not. With pirated series' episodes and whatnot getting released almost instantly through multiple channels, I can't imagine what set top boxes would be able to do to make piracy easier. At the very least, if set top box companies started pirating content directly, they'd have a target to point their lawyers at. But hey, I don't mind... I've been out of cable for years now, streaming has all I need, and the faster these conglomerates die, the better for me. They can keep shooting themselves on their foot for all I care. It's quite sad that lots of people still have to keep paying absurd prices for content they don't want just to get a couple of things (sports, shows) they do, but that model will eventually crash on it's face. Might not happen in our generation, but things are changing fast for new generations.
Smart TVs are riddled with underpowered hardware, security issues, outdated or plain abandoned apps, empty stores, and they are condemned to get completely abandoned after a while, unless you replace your TV sets as much as your smartphone or something, which doesn't seem to be something most consumers will do.
My Samsung TV came with smart tv functions (I didn't want it, but the price was right for the set), after initially testing the Samsung Hub or whatever they called it, I packed the smart tv remote and other crap that came with it (a bluetooth accessory, 3d glasses, and all that crap) away, and never looked back at them. And afaik, after a couple of years it's basically unusable - outdated, slow as molasses, and now a security issue.
The horrible mess that has been created by a bunch of TV manufaturers wanting to push proprietary shit on consumers has got to stop, that is if TV manufacturers still wants to offer usable smart tv solutions for consumers.
I dunno why Google stopped Android TV development, but that's the way to go. In fact, just throwing regular Android there would be a huge improvement over the shitshow that smart tvs currently are. I mean, nothing like Chromecast and other streaming pendrive/small tabletop devices selling like water to show how ineffective the smart tv strategy was.
Even if smart tvs worked well, were secure, and had good features overall, it's just a failed strategy. You really don't want to combine a product that is supposed to last 10 years or so, with something that will get outdated in less than a year.
Slashdot Mirror
Biased view I guess, but I got an activity tracker free with my previous phone, and also tried using some apps for that.
Even though I initially liked monitoring things, it soon became a chore, and something that was acting against my routines.
Not only it's extra time spent NOT doing any exercises, after a while no one cares anymore (including yourself), or it becomes a matter of trying to overcome your stats rather than simply exercising as routine or health. This deviation of objective acts against the activity itself.
But I'm always saying this is a personal accessment that should not be generalized for the experience of others.
I never doubted the power of HACKERMAN
How long it takes for any other country to launch these many websites. A nanosecond? Faster than the speed of light? xD
Conclusion in the title cannot be taken from the study quoted.
First of all, what people say isn't always what people do. People have been anxious and suspicious about new tech forever... if we were to use such stupid metrics not to implement tech, we would never have invented the wheel, or used fire for anything.
Second, even if that was the case, you can never generalize the initial state or feelings towards a given piece of technology to how it's gonna be perceived once the usage becomes widespread. Go live a few days with the Amish and see how much less time you get by staying away from technology out of fear.
Third and perhaps most important: we don't yet have fully autonomous vehicles. How can you say that it won't give us any more free time if people haven't even tried it yet, nor we can even tell how they'll operate? The technology is still being developed, and it's expected that we'll get to fully autonomous vehicles in a few decades. Older generations will be anxious about it and resistant, sure, but as any technological revolution, the next generation will be the one to fully adopt it, driving in the backseat with no steering wheels.
This is all kinds of stupid. Protip: stay away from Daily Mail and it's shitty, biased and poorly written pieces. It's a fucking joke.
I'm pretty sure most cheap tablets that all kinda looks the same, have same specs, and a bunch of weird apps and processes that behave weirdly are all infected with similar stuff.
Got myself a cheap quadcore small tablet just to mess around a bit... tons of weird apps and processes running on the background, you can't uninstall them, and if you root the device and try to do it forcibly, the tablet factory resets itself. It went into the garbage bin.
I was just commenting on this few days ago, perhaps not here on Slashdot.
But I explicitly said it wouldn't impress me if Apple started removing headphone jacks on every one of their products, even those that made even less sense, just as further proof that this is a move with profit in mind, locking Apple costumers further into the walled garden.
And there it is. Courage... to completely lock the system, make costumers spend more money into either your stuff or stuff that has to be licenced by them, and kill the last piece of universal standard from your products, also making it harder for people to escape the platform.
I always find these prediction kinda bogus...
What I often see in predictions of robots eliminating part of the workforce is that it's talking about potential, not factuality.
It's either new trends arising in automated systems that could POTENTIALLY take some jobs on the area they were designed for, or a prediction that automation usage in areas that technology already exists for will keep rising exponentially without much consideration on scale, costs, and how much it'd take for those automation systems to actually be produced.
Lets put this in practical terms - I don't see many people firing secretaries only because they learned how to use Siri, Cortana, Alexa or Google Now. Those systems are capable of bringing information faster, as well as making it easier to fill up a schedule and stuff... but they are not capable of taking calls, acting as intermediate to solve problems, pay the bills, negotiate timelines and whatnot. And I'm not sure if 10 years will be enough to remove the human component there.
The same thing was said when these automated call systems came up, and they replaced nothing... just made costumers mad about not having someone on the other side of the line, to the point it's being prohibited for some services.
Unlike technology, humans are kinda slow to adopt new things, and they do it in a non-uniform way. So it's much like landlines and fax machines around the world... you still have plenty of countries that are still dependant on those because local communities haven't move on just yet.
Same could be said for automated car systems. If all goes well, I expect that we have part of the fleet in some cities replaced by them in 10 years or so... but it won't happen all at once, and it won't affect everyone.
And then, of course, these predictions always have a pessimistic outlook on job creation. Somehow, I don't think human societies are stagnant like that. Someone in the last days of the industrial era surely predicted that computers were going to do everything in the next century or so, and that there would be no jobs left for everyone. Much like the Internet create tons upon tons of jobs, several of them that people in the Industrial Era never could have predicted, I have a feeling that when we effectively enter a robotic + automation era, the opportunity for other types of unforeseen jobs will open up.
Finally, I also think that for some stuff robots will never be able to replace us because of the human to human interaction factor. Even though there's a whole lot more we can do efficiently without pesky meat sacks in the middle of it, I imagine that at some point in some areas we'll slowly find out that human interaction is needed - not because of efficiency, not because we can do better than robots, but mostly because of how we feel about it.
"Given the controversy surrounding YouTube in regard to demonetizing videos that are not deemed "friendly to advertisers," many YouTube creators have been or are thinking about leaving the site and joining competing services. These new tools are designed to help keep creators from departing to competing platforms"
Huh? No they are not. This has been in development for a long time, way before the demonetization "scandal" happened.
And somehow, I don't think YouTube is too worried about creators departing to competing platforms. They did way worse before, and no one left.
What happens again and again is the drama, bunch of people complaining about it, threatening to leave, usually not fully understanding what they are talking about, then they all realize that YouTube is the only service with such a huge audience, and then they just give up.
Which I know is bad in itself, but the top statement sounds a bit like guesswork. Did you just try to bungle together two separate things there?
YouTube Community is here because quite frankly, the current commenting system is outdated, a mess and cumbersome. Not because Google+, not because YouTube commenters are the worst, but because the system itself is horrible. You can't find anything in it, browsing through it can sometimes be impossible, the webapp is often not synced with the mobile app, you can't do much of anything other than scroll and reply to people, it's probably among the most primitive commenting systems out there. Commenters can't even see a history of their own comments. There's zero customization.
But this has been an issue and a constant complain for quite a while now, so I guess YouTube is finally doing something about it... no clue if it'll be worth anything though.
Just remember folks, if Apple repatriates a big part of the business that is currently on Ireland, this means:
- Ireland will have huge losses - jobs, tax revenue, etc;
- Apple product prices could increase even more, as taxes increases and the transition will probably not be cheap. The money to cover such moves always comes from somewhere;
- Sour relations with EU will probably have consequences as well;
I mean, if it really happens, it initially sounds great for the US. Big tax influx, jobs and all, though I'm not quite sure the next president will really make good use of that. :P But when such a huge ammount of money suddently moves from one country to another, the consequences tends to be extreme on both sides.
In a way, I guess it's kinda fair... tax heaven countries and states are overall damaging to the company's country/state of origin. It ultimately means that huge companies making huge profits return less for the community they have business at.
But changes on that scale are still worrying.
FLORIDA MAN. Most badass criminal with the longest criminal file of all times. Also, the most bizarre one.
Funny that the one calling for an "adult conversation" is exactly the one acting like a spoiled rich kid who has been crying for years now because he didn't get what he wants.
The public will have an adult conversation with the FBI only when it realizes what a fucking clown James Comey is and finally takes steps to remove him from his position.
We've been through all his propaganda-like defenses and overbearing one sided paranoid attacks against privacy and citizen security so far, as adults to, only to reject his ideas and applaud the few companies that are actually interested in defending privacy and a functional democracy.
If the FBI cannot function without backdoors and only promote privacy erosion, it's quite clear that the problem is in policy. Either way, removing the current director and putting someone in his place who understand the basic idea that actions like he is proposing does more harm than good should be a step in the right direction.
Stop wasting your fucking time trying to attack the civil liberties of the people you are supposed to work for. Can't he see how useless this whole thing is? It's only through the force of sheer ignorance that he's still able to talk all the crap he's been talking so far, which is the worst part of it all.
The moment you get backdoors to american based business is the moment criminals will flock to foreign companies to do whatever they want to - most of them actually already did, are outside of your reach, you provoked it, and there's nothing you can do in those cases.
Meanwhile, businesses trying to protect industry secrets, journalists, citizens trying to protect sensitive data, victims of abuse and persecution, are all getting exposed by erosion of privacy. Law enforcement and government has proven time and time again how incapable they are of securing sensitive information. You don't get the key to the kingdom if you can't help but losing it all the fucking time.
Be an "adult" and just admit that you want the power for yourself. Or that you are completely clueless as to what you are talking about. It's over.
For almost any other meme I could say that the lawsuit was dubious, but not really for Grumpy Cat.
Of course a whole lot of people will come saying that the owners "don't deserve it", that they've done nothing to make Grumpy Cat famous, and that the cat is only famous because someone picked up an image and made a meme out of it.
These people are plain wrong. There is a reason why the cat is still known to this day, and it has a whole lot to do with how much the owners are managing her image. Contrary to other popular memes, Grumpy Cat's owners were very smart to ride the fame. They have been running blogs, merchandise, movie deals, book deals, public appearances, interviews and all the stuff you'd expect from a regular celebrity very professionally and very closely from start.
Grumpy Cat really is a brand that is taken care of and was built upon the hard work of several people, like any business.
But that does not need to be proven in this case... the beverage company already recognizes this because they made a deal there. The matter at hand seems to be either a breach of contract or unauthorized usage outside contractual stipulations, which if true will be plenty easy to prove. And the fine could get way more expensive than that. They are exploiting commercially a brand that does not belong to them.
For those wondering about the intellectual property violation at hand, here's an image of the products:
http://sprudgewire.com/wp-cont...
There is absolutely nothing dubious about it being related to Grumpy Cat. The decision will be whether there was a breach in contract or not.
I never played No Man's Sky, nor did I follow advertising and trailers much, but I'll say this:
If No Man's Sky indeed promised a bunch of features that never made it to the game, then he'll only have the right to call costumers returning the game thieves once the studio responds criminally for false advertising.
It is that simple. Take the return and shut the fuck up, or explain why you promised stuff on the game that isn't there, and what you are willing to do about it. I don't care if it's a small studio, if there wasn't enough time, or whatever excuse. Size of company does not matter when it comes to false advertisement.
Sorry, but that's the concession I'm willing to make. If the studio promised features in the game that never made it, it does not matter how much someone played it... in fact, gamers who played the game a whole lot only to find out that the stuff the studio promised wasn't there, should be even more entitled for a refund.
Now, if No Man's Sky promised NOTHING about the game beforehand, and people bought it without expectations, I'd give him the right to be outraged. Even though I'm fully aware that playing a set number of hours isn't always enough to make a proper evaluation of certain games, it'd still be a steal to play a game this many hours only to return it afterwards.
But of course there's a reason why Steam is taking the request for refunds in the first place.
But hey, I guess there's a reason this idiot is a FORMER Strategic Content Director after all. No company would like a narrowminded asshole in such a position anyways. He isn't doing any favors for Sony or the studio by writting crap like that too.
Land of the free... as long as you have Big Brother always watching you.
We're not too far from two minutes of hate being implemented should Trump be elected anyways... more like 4 years of hate.
Oracle is campaigning for accountability? Sure, I love accountability.
How about:
- Improper accounting practices on your cloud service business: http://venturebeat.com/2016/06...
- Breach of contract: http://www.pcworld.com/article...
- Putting stockholders' investments at risk: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
- Fraudulent practices/overcharging the Deparment of Justice: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr...
- Patent infringement: http://www.infoworld.com/artic...
- Project cost overrun and breach of contract again: http://wtnnews.com/articles/85...
If Oracle had any hint of accountability it would've closed doors a long time ago. What they want is money.
This is why I was making a question just the other day about the tech being used for the autopilot.
I've read explainers, watched videos talking about the tech, it doesn't add up.
Not for this case, and not for that one which ended in a fatality.
Tesla Model S is supposed to have a camera, a bunch of ultrasonic sensors, and a radar in front of the car.
Those sensors either react too slow, which would make them useless, the software is bad, or quality control isn't working well enough.
Because if you think about it, no way 3 different sensor systems will fail all at once and not detect a curve or a truck coming across.
I can understand a single camera not being able to distinguish between a white truck and a bright sky, or it getting confused because of reflections, bad weather conditions and whatnot... but what about the ultrasonic sensors and radar system? Are those working at all? What sort of condition is required to make 3 different colision detection systems fail all at once?
I did not find any technical explanation as to why those accidents happened. And "because the driver wasn't paying attention" is not enough from a technical standpoint. It just sounds like we're getting half the story here.
Are we to expect whinning everytime Google uses Android for something good now?
And are you really complaining that Android for Chrome OS of all things is trying to compete with Java SE? HA! Man, what a joke.
Your famously insecure platform that you kept spending money to falsely advertise as secure, while not patching it as you should, to the point you had to be sued by the FTC to come clean about it?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...
Fuck you Oracle. Even if your case had any hint of truth to it, you have no right to complain.
There is nothing better for the public than competition to a company as irresponsible as yours.
I wanna see they going back to the courts to get owned once again... pretty clear that there are some delusional people in charge of the legal team there.
Man, this is going to piss off a whole lot of podcasters and streamers I know about.... though the ones most dedicated to that abandoned the platform long ago due to complete abandonment and a whole lot of weird glitches, bugs and problems.
But yeah... another proof that people just can't rely on Google to keep up their platforms or even develop them properly. They just keep releasing crap, abandoning development, and then shutting them down. Really doesn't inspire much confidence on the company.
... is ask the Canadian Mounted Police.
http://www.theverge.com/2016/4...
But hey, 5000 bucks bonus.
You know why Rightscorp is "threatening"? Because they have no chance of winning.
If they had a case they'd just directly sue instead of threatening. It's quite obvious.
But sure, let's see how Rightscorp goes against telecom giants. LET THEM FIGHT
Nothing would please me more than mutual destruction in this case. Rebuild everything from scratch.
I imagine a call for banning clueless politicians who are always framing encryption under the terrorism threat agenda would be way more benefitial to the world.
The Internet of Hackable Things...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Sure sure... give us more reasons to cord cut already.
Also laughable that they'd argue this would have any effect on piracy... the discussion regarding relevant content from cable networks and piracy is already over. You can get ALL the pirated content you want regardless if FCC's set top rules get implemented or not.
With pirated series' episodes and whatnot getting released almost instantly through multiple channels, I can't imagine what set top boxes would be able to do to make piracy easier.
At the very least, if set top box companies started pirating content directly, they'd have a target to point their lawyers at.
But hey, I don't mind... I've been out of cable for years now, streaming has all I need, and the faster these conglomerates die, the better for me. They can keep shooting themselves on their foot for all I care. It's quite sad that lots of people still have to keep paying absurd prices for content they don't want just to get a couple of things (sports, shows) they do, but that model will eventually crash on it's face. Might not happen in our generation, but things are changing fast for new generations.
Smart TVs are riddled with underpowered hardware, security issues, outdated or plain abandoned apps, empty stores, and they are condemned to get completely abandoned after a while, unless you replace your TV sets as much as your smartphone or something, which doesn't seem to be something most consumers will do.
My Samsung TV came with smart tv functions (I didn't want it, but the price was right for the set), after initially testing the Samsung Hub or whatever they called it, I packed the smart tv remote and other crap that came with it (a bluetooth accessory, 3d glasses, and all that crap) away, and never looked back at them. And afaik, after a couple of years it's basically unusable - outdated, slow as molasses, and now a security issue.
The horrible mess that has been created by a bunch of TV manufaturers wanting to push proprietary shit on consumers has got to stop, that is if TV manufacturers still wants to offer usable smart tv solutions for consumers.
I dunno why Google stopped Android TV development, but that's the way to go. In fact, just throwing regular Android there would be a huge improvement over the shitshow that smart tvs currently are. I mean, nothing like Chromecast and other streaming pendrive/small tabletop devices selling like water to show how ineffective the smart tv strategy was.
Even if smart tvs worked well, were secure, and had good features overall, it's just a failed strategy. You really don't want to combine a product that is supposed to last 10 years or so, with something that will get outdated in less than a year.