I mean he should know better than me but... Samsung are in control of the hardware and software, there no reason why they can't write drivers all the way down to the camera itself and then expose that to their app only. Infact that's how things like the fingerprint sensor worked pre-official Android support - they had Samsung-specific API. That API happened to be open for all to use but it doesn't have to be, if they were to write their own private API that would be fine. I believe to be certified they would have to expose the camera to Android standard interface too for other apps to use, but there is nothing stopping them doing extra shiny things with their own software that Android doesn't natively support.
If you are unable to deploy because of a medical issue, then you have no business being in the Military.
Fair enough. In which case, presumably this should be a case-by-case thing, rather than a blanket ban. Pretty sure that different trans people will have different medical needs, whereas a blanket ban doesn't address that at all. What it does do is play well to the fundamental Trump base that think trans people are morally wrong and should be punished.
Its an interesting question. Women are on average not as strong as men and they are on average smaller. so fighter planes designed for women pilots would be more efficient. Should our next generation military aircraft and other roles that don't require physical strength be optimized for women, while roles that require physical strength are optimized for men.
Careful, you're perilously close to suggesting that men aren't superior to women in every single way imaginable, therefore likely to come foul of the/. "common sense" brigade.
You also aren't permitted to carry more than a small pocket knife unless you have a good reason (eg you just bought it, you're transporting it, etc). So while you don't have to register it, there are laws against just keeping dangerous items around.
Mandatory registration is usually the first step toward criminalization.
Eh? We do registration and licencing for cars/driving, and there's a fairly clear parallel here. Unless you think driving licences are an unacceptable curtailment of your freedom, I can't get worked up about this. There's plenty of terrible things that the government are doing to rile against, this isn't one.
Apple a mixed bag? Your ignorance is bliss apparently. iPhone owners get a few years more safe use from their phones as all phones newer than the 5s (sold since Sept2013) can use the latest iOS 11 & most do, having been updated since Apple made iOS 11 available in June.
Do you know how well a 5s runs OS11? Because I've seen so many iPhones that have been 'upgraded' into an unusable state because they now do everything so slowly. I'm very skeptical about this always-autoupgrade major version thing that Apple does, it's not much use when you no longer can use the damn thing effectively. Possibly we're at a state where old phones are still fast enough, but this has definitely been a problem in the past.
Peaceful protest is one thing, I'm all for it..but this is mob rule violence and destruction trying to intimidate and suppress thought.
Is it though? Do you have any links for this because the source matters. It's not uncommon for news outlets with a particular... viewpoint... deliberately focus on some minority to discredit the rest. Sometimes it's for their own nefarious purpose... sometimes it's just because that's a more interesting story than "vast majority of protesters act peaceably".
It sounds vaguely familiar to groups doing the same things just before WW2.
It just now is left instead of right, and the uniforms have changed.
I think there's the concept of punching up and punching down, one being OK in comedy and the other being bullying. Chris Rock is generally punching up.
I agree, intent does matter. Probably more than anything else, and the line that is drawn is fuzzy because it requires judgement of the author's intent, which is tricky to determine.
Meh, I don't know what to do with this sort of simplistic statement. This is a fairly good discussion of Mel Brooks and why his humour is usually considered edgey but not actually a problem.
Telling racial jokes or using racial epitaphs don't necessarily make someone a racist (as the article seems to presume). It could just mean you have a dark sense of humor, or just use humor to make a social statement.
Were Chris Rock and Richard Pryor racists because they told black jokes and used the evil "N word"? Is someone a racist when they make a racial joke ironically? Are all of Mel Brooks movies racist and hateful because they included holocaust, racial, and Jewish jokes?
I do know one thing for sure, though. If you go looking for racism and bigotry, you'll always find it--whether it's actually there or not.
There is a very obvious difference between someone talking about a group that they themselves are in, and someone talking about a group that they are not in. Chris Rock is black, Mel Brooks is jewish. Very clearly there are different standards if you're taking the mickey out of your peers than if you're making assumptions about another group. When you go after your 'own', you're somewhat criticising yourself at the same time, which is a very different tone.
Though this was hiding in a client app, and for older models of hardware as well. A bit more tricky to see than a database field as the developers will be of the mindset that the integer is 64bits, as it will be on the devices they develop on.
...the fate of the planet that we all live on is the thing we're talking about...
It will be ok. Always is. It doesn't need you to save it. Sorry. You're still important to your friends and family even though you're not the hero savior of the planet.
Aw, shucks. Thanks!
Apparently 97% climate scientists saying that humans are causing climate change
No 97% agree on any specific temperature or timeframe. I "believe" in it. I don't believe the dramatic predictions and all the storytelling.
A lot of the most dramatic predictions have already been proven wrong when the time came and the thing they predicted didn't happen.
I get that you're making this a "everybody believe what you want to believe" thing, but when the fate of the planet that we all live on is the thing we're talking about, it's a bit beyond 'personal belief'.
Apparently 97% climate scientists saying that humans are causing climate change isn't a high enough bar for you. I would put a bet on that there is nothing that could be said that would make you believe it.
I just don't understand how an otherwise developed nation still has trouble with the very simple fact of climate change. You know the rest of the world is against you on this? You know that huge numbers of very smart people think you're wrong?
It is breathtaking arrogance to think you know better than literally everyone else.
That's basically the root isn't it... it's another vector for someone with very little knowledge to lord it over people who have spent lifetimes studying this sort of thing, just because they prefer a reality where they can use their big cars and polluting lifestyle without guilt.
Any 'competent modeler' can get the model to tell him/her anything he/she wants.
That's the definition of 'competent modeler'.
Eh? So what's the take-home from this attitude then? Never change anything because you can't be sure not changing it is definitely going to be harmful? What about things that will be too late to fix when it becomes obvious?
I just don't understand how an otherwise developed nation still has trouble with the very simple fact of climate change.
Please explain in detail how climate models work and why we can be certain their predictions will come true.
In fact, you don't know. You're taking it on faith. Others choose not to.
This sort of thinking means that anything that you can't understand must be dismissed, because you can't understand it. Anyone who has spent their lives studying something highly complicated is disallowed to use their findings because you (or I) don't have the skills to understand. At some point you have to trust lots of people saying the same thing. Especially when you don't have the skills to debunk their work. And *especially* when the fate of humanity is at stake.
Corbyn can not be described really really good since he did not even manage gordon brown level for labour seats... thats the reality yes labour seats are up from before but if you start low then going up is easy,
your going to be dealing with the DUP being king/queen makers... good luck with that....
the point stands May made terrible mistakes and one of which was encryption
In terms of vote share it's one of the highest ever, but the weirdness of FPTP polling and other parties has skewed things away from them somewhat.
I still don't get why people are still in a huff with the lib dems though.
Because they betrayed their core support. They promised an end to tuition fees and then ditched it to get 15 minutes of fame.
They'd have done the same on their demand for a second Europe referendum if they'd held 30 or so now labour seats (and claim that they at least could influence the brexit negotiations)
The bigger problem I think is that the UK is not used to coalitions. So any dropping of 'campaign promises' is seen as betrayal, whereas in reality those promises are dependent on getting a majority and being able to push you agenda through unchanged. When you're the minor part of a coalition, obviously you can't have everything you want.
But politics here usually produces majorities, so we don't give any quarter for compromise. In reality in 2010 they didn't have a huge amount of option other than to go into some sort of deal, if they had declined there would have been a weak minority government for maybe 6 months, and then another election that would have expected to give the Tories atleast a small majority, given their bigger campaign funding ability.
Really, if a proportion claims to having unwanted sexual advances then who are you to tell them that that's absurd?
A rational human being?
A human being who knows absolutely nothing about the situations, people, how aggressive or inappropriate the actions were, yet still chooses to dismiss them. That thinks that his worldview overrides other people's personal experiences.
Because you're a man and don't have to deal with it every single day
But because he's a man, he does have to deal with wondering every day if he'll lose his job because he said "good morning" to somebody who didn't want to be spoken to - somehow that's more reasonable?
Don't be absurd. Nobody gets treated like that. You're just manufacturing straw men. Oh god I'm such a vicimised man! Oh woe is me! It's pathetic.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean he should know better than me but... Samsung are in control of the hardware and software, there no reason why they can't write drivers all the way down to the camera itself and then expose that to their app only. Infact that's how things like the fingerprint sensor worked pre-official Android support - they had Samsung-specific API. That API happened to be open for all to use but it doesn't have to be, if they were to write their own private API that would be fine. I believe to be certified they would have to expose the camera to Android standard interface too for other apps to use, but there is nothing stopping them doing extra shiny things with their own software that Android doesn't natively support.
Every company I've worked at has been open-plan...
So then.... you have no way of comparing because you have never had a private space?
If you are unable to deploy because of a medical issue, then you have no business being in the Military.
Fair enough. In which case, presumably this should be a case-by-case thing, rather than a blanket ban. Pretty sure that different trans people will have different medical needs, whereas a blanket ban doesn't address that at all. What it does do is play well to the fundamental Trump base that think trans people are morally wrong and should be punished.
Its an interesting question. Women are on average not as strong as men and they are on average smaller. so fighter planes designed for women pilots would be more efficient. Should our next generation military aircraft and other roles that don't require physical strength be optimized for women, while roles that require physical strength are optimized for men.
Careful, you're perilously close to suggesting that men aren't superior to women in every single way imaginable, therefore likely to come foul of the /. "common sense" brigade.
You also aren't permitted to carry more than a small pocket knife unless you have a good reason (eg you just bought it, you're transporting it, etc). So while you don't have to register it, there are laws against just keeping dangerous items around.
Mandatory registration is usually the first step toward criminalization.
Eh? We do registration and licencing for cars/driving, and there's a fairly clear parallel here. Unless you think driving licences are an unacceptable curtailment of your freedom, I can't get worked up about this. There's plenty of terrible things that the government are doing to rile against, this isn't one.
Apple a mixed bag? Your ignorance is bliss apparently. iPhone owners get a few years more safe use from their phones as all phones newer than the 5s (sold since Sept2013) can use the latest iOS 11 & most do, having been updated since Apple made iOS 11 available in June.
Do you know how well a 5s runs OS11? Because I've seen so many iPhones that have been 'upgraded' into an unusable state because they now do everything so slowly. I'm very skeptical about this always-autoupgrade major version thing that Apple does, it's not much use when you no longer can use the damn thing effectively. Possibly we're at a state where old phones are still fast enough, but this has definitely been a problem in the past.
Peaceful protest is one thing, I'm all for it..but this is mob rule violence and destruction trying to intimidate and suppress thought.
Is it though? Do you have any links for this because the source matters. It's not uncommon for news outlets with a particular... viewpoint... deliberately focus on some minority to discredit the rest. Sometimes it's for their own nefarious purpose... sometimes it's just because that's a more interesting story than "vast majority of protesters act peaceably".
It sounds vaguely familiar to groups doing the same things just before WW2.
It just now is left instead of right, and the uniforms have changed.
Well that escalated quickly.
I think there's the concept of punching up and punching down, one being OK in comedy and the other being bullying. Chris Rock is generally punching up.
I agree, intent does matter. Probably more than anything else, and the line that is drawn is fuzzy because it requires judgement of the author's intent, which is tricky to determine.
Meh, I don't know what to do with this sort of simplistic statement. This is a fairly good discussion of Mel Brooks and why his humour is usually considered edgey but not actually a problem.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Telling racial jokes or using racial epitaphs don't necessarily make someone a racist (as the article seems to presume). It could just mean you have a dark sense of humor, or just use humor to make a social statement.
Were Chris Rock and Richard Pryor racists because they told black jokes and used the evil "N word"? Is someone a racist when they make a racial joke ironically? Are all of Mel Brooks movies racist and hateful because they included holocaust, racial, and Jewish jokes?
I do know one thing for sure, though. If you go looking for racism and bigotry, you'll always find it--whether it's actually there or not.
There is a very obvious difference between someone talking about a group that they themselves are in, and someone talking about a group that they are not in. Chris Rock is black, Mel Brooks is jewish. Very clearly there are different standards if you're taking the mickey out of your peers than if you're making assumptions about another group. When you go after your 'own', you're somewhat criticising yourself at the same time, which is a very different tone.
Not hindsight, foresight.
(see reply to anonymous cow herd above).
Though this was hiding in a client app, and for older models of hardware as well. A bit more tricky to see than a database field as the developers will be of the mindset that the integer is 64bits, as it will be on the devices they develop on.
This was obviously an unforeseen bug that was nearly impossible to anticipate
Only if you're an idiot.
Good to know that my prediction for arrogant hindsight developer comment was confirmed.
...the fate of the planet that we all live on is the thing we're talking about...
It will be ok. Always is. It doesn't need you to save it. Sorry. You're still important to your friends and family even though you're not the hero savior of the planet.
Aw, shucks. Thanks!
Apparently 97% climate scientists saying that humans are causing climate change
No 97% agree on any specific temperature or timeframe. I "believe" in it. I don't believe the dramatic predictions and all the storytelling.
A lot of the most dramatic predictions have already been proven wrong when the time came and the thing they predicted didn't happen.
I hope you're right. I really do.
I get that you're making this a "everybody believe what you want to believe" thing, but when the fate of the planet that we all live on is the thing we're talking about, it's a bit beyond 'personal belief'.
Apparently 97% climate scientists saying that humans are causing climate change isn't a high enough bar for you. I would put a bet on that there is nothing that could be said that would make you believe it.
I just don't understand how an otherwise developed nation still has trouble with the very simple fact of climate change. You know the rest of the world is against you on this? You know that huge numbers of very smart people think you're wrong?
It is breathtaking arrogance to think you know better than literally everyone else.
That's basically the root isn't it... it's another vector for someone with very little knowledge to lord it over people who have spent lifetimes studying this sort of thing, just because they prefer a reality where they can use their big cars and polluting lifestyle without guilt.
Any 'competent modeler' can get the model to tell him/her anything he/she wants.
That's the definition of 'competent modeler'.
Eh? So what's the take-home from this attitude then? Never change anything because you can't be sure not changing it is definitely going to be harmful? What about things that will be too late to fix when it becomes obvious?
I just don't understand how an otherwise developed nation still has trouble with the very simple fact of climate change.
Please explain in detail how climate models work and why we can be certain their predictions will come true.
In fact, you don't know. You're taking it on faith. Others choose not to.
This sort of thinking means that anything that you can't understand must be dismissed, because you can't understand it. Anyone who has spent their lives studying something highly complicated is disallowed to use their findings because you (or I) don't have the skills to understand. At some point you have to trust lots of people saying the same thing. Especially when you don't have the skills to debunk their work. And *especially* when the fate of humanity is at stake.
This is one of the most astute summaries of the shitshow we've been in over the last year I've seen.
Corbyn can not be described really really good since he did not even manage gordon brown level for labour seats... thats the reality
yes labour seats are up from before but if you start low then going up is easy,
your going to be dealing with the DUP being king/queen makers... good luck with that....
the point stands May made terrible mistakes and one of which was encryption
In terms of vote share it's one of the highest ever, but the weirdness of FPTP polling and other parties has skewed things away from them somewhat.
Because they betrayed their core support. They promised an end to tuition fees and then ditched it to get 15 minutes of fame.
They'd have done the same on their demand for a second Europe referendum if they'd held 30 or so now labour seats (and claim that they at least could influence the brexit negotiations)
The bigger problem I think is that the UK is not used to coalitions. So any dropping of 'campaign promises' is seen as betrayal, whereas in reality those promises are dependent on getting a majority and being able to push you agenda through unchanged. When you're the minor part of a coalition, obviously you can't have everything you want.
But politics here usually produces majorities, so we don't give any quarter for compromise. In reality in 2010 they didn't have a huge amount of option other than to go into some sort of deal, if they had declined there would have been a weak minority government for maybe 6 months, and then another election that would have expected to give the Tories atleast a small majority, given their bigger campaign funding ability.
Ah, sorry, didn't pick up on the sarcasm the first time around.
Is ok, there was no sarcasm to pick up on. I may have had a bit too much coffee and /. this afternoon
I'm *extremely* myopic from my high horse!
Really, if a proportion claims to having unwanted sexual advances then who are you to tell them that that's absurd?
A rational human being?
A human being who knows absolutely nothing about the situations, people, how aggressive or inappropriate the actions were, yet still chooses to dismiss them. That thinks that his worldview overrides other people's personal experiences.
FTFY
Because you're a man and don't have to deal with it every single day
But because he's a man, he does have to deal with wondering every day if he'll lose his job because he said "good morning" to somebody who didn't want to be spoken to - somehow that's more reasonable?
Don't be absurd. Nobody gets treated like that. You're just manufacturing straw men. Oh god I'm such a vicimised man! Oh woe is me! It's pathetic.