and that's not a busy one as I've deliberately set filters to minimise how much reaches my inbox.
Really doesn't matter. Your phone has to periodically wake up, establish connections with the server, and retrieve and parse some data. It takes CPU and battery.
I'd love for there to be more emphasis on smartphone battery life than on more cores/higher speed at this point, but it just doesn't seem to be a high priority to any manufacturer. The simple reality is, though, smartphones have much more complex innards than your old dumbphone and consequently take more power to drive.
I guess my privacy is also being invaded when my employer sends my W2 into the IRS. Hasn't ever bothered me much though.
The simple fact of the matter is that there's some shit you have to put up with when you live in a civilized society. Giving details of your finances to the government is one such thing. Doesn't seem unreasonable to me, because without the government, there'd be no transactions in dollars to report.
now remember that ebay is in probably 95% of the countries on the planet.
So? Are you implying that because a corporation is multinational, they shouldn't have to comply with each individual country's (in this case, proposed) legislation because it's difficult?
Why should ebay do the polices job in over 200 countries?
For the same reason my contract employers have to fill out IRS paperwork when they pay me.
I'm a conservative with so many libertarian leanings I's switch if the LP wasn't overrun with Idiotarian Libertarians who seem to only care about being worse surrender monkeys than than Dems and legalizing weed.
Actually laughed out loud at this, and that's an extreme rarity. Thanks.
Sure, it wasn't against the rules -- but it definitely ruined the fun of anyone who just wanted to take a break fora bit of PvP when leveling up a new character. I had a few characters that would have been entertaining to play in the battlegrounds between level 10 and 49, but the prevalence of twinks meant that half the time you'd be fighting characters with 3x your health that did twice your damage. Completely pointless and boring.
What's sad is that there are so many people who get off on winning such one-sided contests.
2) 3) and 4) all need to be prepended with: in the morning, while in bed, after the woman had already had sex with him the previous night. 2) 3) and 4) are also all things that many other women enjoy. Also note that neither of the 'victims' actually had any problems with these events until several days later when they met each other and decided that, oh hey, he's kind of a douchebag. Rape!
Makes the other charges sound significantly less scary. Lies by omission are still lies.
You know, since it's not RAPE to force myself on her if she at SOME point consented to me doing anything sexual with her whatsoever. I guess we could call it the "I got needs that these bitches need to satisfy" defense. I'm sure it'll be airtight.
The other charges are even more ludicrous. Pressing his erect penis against her while they were in bed counts as 'molestation'? Similarly with laying on top of the other one? (Just laying on top of her -- not forcing anything on her). A lot of women actually enjoy that stuff!
Sex is enough of a legal minefield in the US; I pity Swedish guys. You can have consensual sex with someone, wake up in the morning and express indication that you'd like more (and be met with denial), then part ways amicably and a few days later the woman can decide, "you know what, I didn't like being rubbed up against. Rape!" It's a mockery of actual rape cases.
How is it biased against the deaf to acknowledge that it's more expensive to put them through college? If you can't hear, you need an interpreter to translate lectures to sign language. Since interpreters don't work for free, you can assume that somebody is paying them. Thus more expensive. This isn't a judgement of worth or waste or good or evil or anything -- it's simply a fact. You don't have to get all defensive when someone points out facts.
It's a stupid design choice, especially since pretty much every other manufacturer has managed to solve it.
I've got a MacBook Pro that's a couple of years old, and while it's technically got user servicable parts, absolutely none of them are accessible from outside the case. You have to tear the whole thing down to do something as simple as replacing the hard drive. I have a spare SSD that I'd have installed in the thing a long time ago if it were as simple a task as it is on every other laptop I've ever owned.
But keep telling yourself: lack of a feature is a feature! All the other fanbois will agree with you.
This is not, in any way, even remotely a solution for the common user.
What, you expect developers to say, "Hey, Apple pulled our app from the store, but no worries! All you have to do is sign up for a developer account and pay $99/year to install it or get updates!"
This case is a perfect example of why having a walled garden as the *only* delivery mechanism for software on a device is a bad idea, and is bad for customers.
You can argue on and on about why/how this won't actually affect this particular user, but the whole thing wouldn't even matter if there were an "allow untrusted sources" checkbox somewhere in the iOS settings. Yet you, and Apple, still try to claim that this lack-of-a-feature is actually a feature.
Enjoy those shackles. They're going to keep getting tighter. They'll be nice and padded, because Apple is a kind master, but as soon as they can lock everything down completely, you'll never get to take them off.
Then you're in the realm of religion. You know the device you use has a problem, so you assume the problem must be worse on the other device, even though you have no evidence of it.
And you'd know *all* about religion, what with Apple being a sacred cow to you.
Market actually allows the vendors to specify which versions of Android the update is compatible with, but unfortunately a lot of (most?) authors just seem to claim its compatible with everything without checking
In general, if it's not compatible, you can't even *build* the app against an older API. You'd have to go out of your way to write code that was incompatible with the target API but would still build. I'm not sure what you're experiencing, but it seems to be a case of FUD. The only time I've had issues with apps was due to hardware incompatibilities at the driver level; things like OpenGL initialization code that would work fine on most devices would hork on specific manufacturer's chipsets because the driver expected something more.
If you have some specific examples of apps that quit working when a new version of Android came out, that'd be interesting to see -- otherwise you just have an anecdote that isn't terribly useful to determine how well compatibility between API versions works.
First, you can't do something in the name of atheism because atheism doesn't have any tenets, it has no commandments, and it isn't a philosophy. It's simply a lack of belief in gods. Atheists and atheist organizations are certainly capable of committing atrocities just like religious ones; what they can't do is claim that god told them to do it.
Unfortunately the other team does believe in the rightness of lying in service to a political cause (or at least the ability to doublethink it away) and that speaks volumes about the rest of their moral code. The first lie is always to yourself.
Lie: "Death panels." Doublethink: "Sanctity of life" vs. death penalty and support of war.
A common tactic used by pedophiles is to trivialise the offense by broadening the definition until it becomes meaningless, for example the congressman who was caught sending sexually explicit texts to 14yo boys
That's not pedophilia. It's still wrong, but it's absolutely *not* pedophilia. Pedophilia is an attraction to pre-pubescent (or pre-pubescent-looking) children. If you're attracted to tits and shapely hips, you're not a pedophile. If you're attracted to fully functional penises, you're not a pedophile.
The reason I piss in the wind to point this out is that misusing the word 'pedophile' cheapens its meaning. Calling someone who has a relationship/flirts with teenagers a pedophile lumps them in with people who molest 4-year-olds, when reality is that the things are *completely different*.
Apple doesn't just try to put you out of business by building a better product; they try to claim sole ownership of entire markets and *litigate* you out of business.
There's obviously no proof. It's simply that there's an obvious pattern of high-UID accounts that have a posting history of one or two comments (usually first post; in this case, first reply to first post) that fit a profile of pro-MS/Apple and anti-Google sentiments. They're frequently off topic as well; this one is unusual in that it actually managed to stay on-topic.
For the record, I agree with what this DemomanDeveloper account said, but it sounds a lot like what ProDeveloper (just created a few days ago) would have said. Or any number of others that reek of sockpuppet anti-Google accounts.
The thing downgrading the conversation is the high-UID sockpuppets and when they come to their own defense as ACs. It's a waste of time, it's obvious to anyone with half a brain that they're all coming from the same place; I have a hard time believing that it's a case of shilling though, because there's no way someone would pay for a campaign that was this ineffective. I mean, it's so incompetent that even the sockpuppet accounts' *usernames* fit a profile a lot of times. Likely just some sad basement-dweller with absolutely no creativity to come up with distinct material that *really* hates Google.
I notice that they (well, you) have toned it way back lately; I appreciate it. It's made Slashdot much more enjoyable again.
There is so much wrong with this post that there's really nowhere to begin in refuting it. A couple others already have, w.r.t. preemptive multitasking. I'll take this bit on.
Once IE eventually won market dominance (over 90%) and the competition had been pretty much vanquished from the market, what did Microsoft do? They rested on the laurels. For nearly 1.5 years, they did not make a single improvement to IE
It was a lot longer than 1.5 years. IE6 went unimproved for more like a half-decade before IE7 finally came out.
Your recollection of the history of computing is pretty weak.
Eh, I have Sprint, and unlimited data is nice... but in my area, the speeds are so pathetic that it's basically like trying to empty an oil drum through a coffee stir. I could probably do it over the course of a month, but it'd take a lot of effort.
Slashdot Mirror
I only have one email account syncing
That's one more than your dumbphone had.
and that's not a busy one as I've deliberately set filters to minimise how much reaches my inbox.
Really doesn't matter. Your phone has to periodically wake up, establish connections with the server, and retrieve and parse some data. It takes CPU and battery.
I'd love for there to be more emphasis on smartphone battery life than on more cores/higher speed at this point, but it just doesn't seem to be a high priority to any manufacturer. The simple reality is, though, smartphones have much more complex innards than your old dumbphone and consequently take more power to drive.
--Jeremy
I guess my privacy is also being invaded when my employer sends my W2 into the IRS. Hasn't ever bothered me much though.
The simple fact of the matter is that there's some shit you have to put up with when you live in a civilized society. Giving details of your finances to the government is one such thing. Doesn't seem unreasonable to me, because without the government, there'd be no transactions in dollars to report.
--Jeremy
now remember that ebay is in probably 95% of the countries on the planet.
So? Are you implying that because a corporation is multinational, they shouldn't have to comply with each individual country's (in this case, proposed) legislation because it's difficult?
Why should ebay do the polices job in over 200 countries?
For the same reason my contract employers have to fill out IRS paperwork when they pay me.
-Jeremy
I'm a conservative with so many libertarian leanings I's switch if the LP wasn't overrun with Idiotarian Libertarians who seem to only care about being worse surrender monkeys than than Dems and legalizing weed.
Actually laughed out loud at this, and that's an extreme rarity. Thanks.
--Jeremy
Sure, it wasn't against the rules -- but it definitely ruined the fun of anyone who just wanted to take a break fora bit of PvP when leveling up a new character. I had a few characters that would have been entertaining to play in the battlegrounds between level 10 and 49, but the prevalence of twinks meant that half the time you'd be fighting characters with 3x your health that did twice your damage. Completely pointless and boring.
What's sad is that there are so many people who get off on winning such one-sided contests.
--Jeremy
2) 3) and 4) all need to be prepended with: in the morning, while in bed, after the woman had already had sex with him the previous night. 2) 3) and 4) are also all things that many other women enjoy. Also note that neither of the 'victims' actually had any problems with these events until several days later when they met each other and decided that, oh hey, he's kind of a douchebag. Rape!
Makes the other charges sound significantly less scary. Lies by omission are still lies.
--Jeremy
You know, since it's not RAPE to force myself on her if she at SOME point consented to me doing anything sexual with her whatsoever. I guess we could call it the "I got needs that these bitches need to satisfy" defense. I'm sure it'll be airtight.
That's not the point, but nice strawman.
--Jeremy
The other charges are even more ludicrous. Pressing his erect penis against her while they were in bed counts as 'molestation'? Similarly with laying on top of the other one? (Just laying on top of her -- not forcing anything on her). A lot of women actually enjoy that stuff!
Sex is enough of a legal minefield in the US; I pity Swedish guys. You can have consensual sex with someone, wake up in the morning and express indication that you'd like more (and be met with denial), then part ways amicably and a few days later the woman can decide, "you know what, I didn't like being rubbed up against. Rape!" It's a mockery of actual rape cases.
--Jeremy
How is it biased against the deaf to acknowledge that it's more expensive to put them through college? If you can't hear, you need an interpreter to translate lectures to sign language. Since interpreters don't work for free, you can assume that somebody is paying them. Thus more expensive. This isn't a judgement of worth or waste or good or evil or anything -- it's simply a fact. You don't have to get all defensive when someone points out facts.
--Jeremy
It's a stupid design choice, especially since pretty much every other manufacturer has managed to solve it.
I've got a MacBook Pro that's a couple of years old, and while it's technically got user servicable parts, absolutely none of them are accessible from outside the case. You have to tear the whole thing down to do something as simple as replacing the hard drive. I have a spare SSD that I'd have installed in the thing a long time ago if it were as simple a task as it is on every other laptop I've ever owned.
But keep telling yourself: lack of a feature is a feature! All the other fanbois will agree with you.
--Jeremy
This is not, in any way, even remotely a solution for the common user.
What, you expect developers to say, "Hey, Apple pulled our app from the store, but no worries! All you have to do is sign up for a developer account and pay $99/year to install it or get updates!"
--Jeremy
Woo hoo! A developer can sideload if they pay a developer tax!
That's irrelevant to this discussion though, because what good does that do for the users?
--Jeremy
This case is a perfect example of why having a walled garden as the *only* delivery mechanism for software on a device is a bad idea, and is bad for customers.
You can argue on and on about why/how this won't actually affect this particular user, but the whole thing wouldn't even matter if there were an "allow untrusted sources" checkbox somewhere in the iOS settings. Yet you, and Apple, still try to claim that this lack-of-a-feature is actually a feature.
Enjoy those shackles. They're going to keep getting tighter. They'll be nice and padded, because Apple is a kind master, but as soon as they can lock everything down completely, you'll never get to take them off.
--Jeremy
Then you're in the realm of religion. You know the device you use has a problem, so you assume the problem must be worse on the other device, even though you have no evidence of it.
And you'd know *all* about religion, what with Apple being a sacred cow to you.
--Jeremy
Market actually allows the vendors to specify which versions of Android the update is compatible with, but unfortunately a lot of (most?) authors just seem to claim its compatible with everything without checking
In general, if it's not compatible, you can't even *build* the app against an older API. You'd have to go out of your way to write code that was incompatible with the target API but would still build. I'm not sure what you're experiencing, but it seems to be a case of FUD. The only time I've had issues with apps was due to hardware incompatibilities at the driver level; things like OpenGL initialization code that would work fine on most devices would hork on specific manufacturer's chipsets because the driver expected something more.
If you have some specific examples of apps that quit working when a new version of Android came out, that'd be interesting to see -- otherwise you just have an anecdote that isn't terribly useful to determine how well compatibility between API versions works.
--Jeremy
First, you can't do something in the name of atheism because atheism doesn't have any tenets, it has no commandments, and it isn't a philosophy. It's simply a lack of belief in gods. Atheists and atheist organizations are certainly capable of committing atrocities just like religious ones; what they can't do is claim that god told them to do it.
Second, let me cure some of your ignorance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany#Nazi_Attitudes_towards_Christianity
--Jeremy
Unfortunately the other team does believe in the rightness of lying in service to a political cause (or at least the ability to doublethink it away) and that speaks volumes about the rest of their moral code. The first lie is always to yourself.
Lie: "Death panels." Doublethink: "Sanctity of life" vs. death penalty and support of war.
Your move.
--Jeremy
The sort of thing that leads to revolutions followed closely by mass graves when a critical mass tire of slapping the lies down.
You're concerned about that, yet you've had a .sig calling for the destruction of democrats for ... how long?
--Jeremy
you really think it's that simple?
Yet you seem to think that it's as simple as "eliminate child porn, kiddie diddlers will disappear".
--Jeremy
A common tactic used by pedophiles is to trivialise the offense by broadening the definition until it becomes meaningless, for example the congressman who was caught sending sexually explicit texts to 14yo boys
That's not pedophilia. It's still wrong, but it's absolutely *not* pedophilia. Pedophilia is an attraction to pre-pubescent (or pre-pubescent-looking) children. If you're attracted to tits and shapely hips, you're not a pedophile. If you're attracted to fully functional penises, you're not a pedophile.
The reason I piss in the wind to point this out is that misusing the word 'pedophile' cheapens its meaning. Calling someone who has a relationship/flirts with teenagers a pedophile lumps them in with people who molest 4-year-olds, when reality is that the things are *completely different*.
--Jeremy
Minor correction:
Apple doesn't just try to put you out of business by building a better product; they try to claim sole ownership of entire markets and *litigate* you out of business.
--Jeremy
There's obviously no proof. It's simply that there's an obvious pattern of high-UID accounts that have a posting history of one or two comments (usually first post; in this case, first reply to first post) that fit a profile of pro-MS/Apple and anti-Google sentiments. They're frequently off topic as well; this one is unusual in that it actually managed to stay on-topic.
For the record, I agree with what this DemomanDeveloper account said, but it sounds a lot like what ProDeveloper (just created a few days ago) would have said. Or any number of others that reek of sockpuppet anti-Google accounts.
The thing downgrading the conversation is the high-UID sockpuppets and when they come to their own defense as ACs. It's a waste of time, it's obvious to anyone with half a brain that they're all coming from the same place; I have a hard time believing that it's a case of shilling though, because there's no way someone would pay for a campaign that was this ineffective. I mean, it's so incompetent that even the sockpuppet accounts' *usernames* fit a profile a lot of times. Likely just some sad basement-dweller with absolutely no creativity to come up with distinct material that *really* hates Google.
I notice that they (well, you) have toned it way back lately; I appreciate it. It's made Slashdot much more enjoyable again.
--Jeremy
There is so much wrong with this post that there's really nowhere to begin in refuting it. A couple others already have, w.r.t. preemptive multitasking. I'll take this bit on.
Once IE eventually won market dominance (over 90%) and the competition had been pretty much vanquished from the market, what did Microsoft do? They rested on the laurels. For nearly 1.5 years, they did not make a single improvement to IE
It was a lot longer than 1.5 years. IE6 went unimproved for more like a half-decade before IE7 finally came out.
Your recollection of the history of computing is pretty weak.
--Jeremy
Sure... I think you just want unlimited data.
Eh, I have Sprint, and unlimited data is nice ... but in my area, the speeds are so pathetic that it's basically like trying to empty an oil drum through a coffee stir. I could probably do it over the course of a month, but it'd take a lot of effort.
--Jeremy
Technically, they can't be proven wrong, so they might as well be right in the eyes of their customers.
Just like pretty much every religion.
--Jeremy