Good thing the *only* permission someone might be interested in denying is the location service, otherwise iOS might not be suitable for every person's needs.
While many people give standing ovations when politicians spew rhetoric about "change" (Clinton and Obama are famous for this) the reality is that they really don't want it.
I'm going to call bullshit on this. There are a *lot* of people who genuinely want change.
Furthermore, to suggest that they only want change "for the sake of change" is just silly. It implies that they're happy with the status quo, but just want to change something for no reason. You won't find very many people in the US that are happy with the status quo right now. That's one reason I find the "how do you like your change now?" crowd hilarious: it implies that they thought everything was going great back when we were having too-big-to-fail bailouts, which we all know was not the case. It's the whole reason the Tea Party even came into existence -- they wanted (wait for it) change.
Anyway, your whole post basically amounts one big poisoning-the-well argument, which is a logical fallacy.
This isn't uncommon knowledge. Here are some links:
This shows Indiana as receiving $1.05 per dollar sent to the IRS, which is admittedly not bad compared to many other states. California only gets back $0.78 per dollar sent.
And this talks about more specific places the money has been spent.
Both of these articles are a little old, but I haven't seen anything more recent that suggests that the trend has changed.
Yeah, because releasing a bunch of pot smokers back into the world is going to make it a much more violent, dangerous place. Give me a fucking break. The article specifically states (and anyone paying attention already knew) that they're releasing nonviolent, nonserious, nonsexual offenders. And on top of that, they're being pushed back to county facilities, not just released into the wild. Of course the counties will then likely be forced to release some of them, seeing as how they don't have any money or space either.
I pity you paranoid fools who think we're living in some sort of extremely dangerous time. Crime is way down, yet you think you need a gun to be safe. It must suck to be living in such a scary world.
The US wrote Japan's obscenity laws, y'know, after we bombed them. We used it as an opportunity to add a bunch of things we'd missed when writing our own.
Complaining about wealth distribution is a lie rabble rousers use to rouse the rabble. Standard of living is what's important - and in the US it's very high.
So it's ok if 0.01% control nearly all the wealth, are able to field the candidates they want, buy the laws they want, and keep the vast majority from ever experiencing any sort of financial independence, as long as everyone can afford to buy a 40" TV?
Why would they be pissed off at the universities for the rising costs of tuition when it's frequently state governments cutting funding for education that forces the tuition increases? Sure, they could spend all their endowments over the next few years to keep tuition low, then when they run out nobody could get scholarships at all, but I'm not sure that's the best course of action.
Maybe their critical thinking skills aren't as bad as you think. Maybe they can be pissed about more than one thing at a time, and the Wall Street issue is the one that means the most to them. Maybe unless you go and interview every single one of them, trying to characterize the entire group as a bunch of clueless idiots is just blowing a lot of smoke?
I'm guessing you don't spend a lot of time with anyone on "the left." There are plenty of us who are unhappy with Obama, but still see him as an improvement over what Bush was (not difficult, admittedly) and over what McCain/Palin would almost certainly have been. Just because we're not clamoring for impeachment doesn't mean we all think everything's hunky dory.
Not really. An overwhelming majority of the population is pissed at Wall Street, and an overwhelming majority of the population supports increasing the tax burden on the rich to match (at least) the same tax rate as the middle class pays.
When it's a Tea Party populist movement, it's a good thing. But when Obama is a "populist president," it's a bad thing. When it's some unapproved mass of people protesting Wall Street (you know, one of the very things that the Republican and Tea Party claim to not like) they don't speak for you. It's great how you guys get to play both sides of the fence.
What's really fucking sad is that you guys can't even see that we're all on the same side.
Umm, I think you mean 10 bits per color channel, because 10 bits per pixel is precisely 1024 colors (or 1024 color map entries, if you're going with a palette-based display mode).
You can be forgiven because it is all too obvious that you don't know your head from your ass.
Quoted for irony. Of course, I think the GP was being somewhat intentionally dense, but your correction is hilarious.
Ahh yes, so if you define "working" in a very specific way, you can then claim that "working with diminished capacity" is effectively the same thing as "doesn't work at all."
Dell doesn't have a misleading "Designed by Dell in California" as the first thing you see when you open up their packaging; it's a lot easier to forgive them for not acting like their manufacturing process is all roses and rainbows.
So, if there was not Steve Jobs, do you really think we had now afordable music for download?
Yes. It was inevitable. Apple got in near the front of the line.
Multi touch gestures?
You mean buying a company with some multi-touch patents is 'doing it first' and that nobody else would have ever done it if Apple hadn't?
Do you really think Android would exist if there was no iOS?
Yeah, Android was in development well before anybody even knew what iOS was. Certainly iOS influenced Android, but then Android has also influenced iOS.
Your post is a perfect example of ignorance of the history of computing of people who worship Jobs. The most annoying thing about all of this is that it was mostly designers and engineers that actually *did* all of this stuff; Jobs was just the one up on stage demoing it and getting all the credit. Something he got plenty of practice at in the early days of Apple with Woz.
The problem is it's all the discredited views that are modded up:
NOTE TO PARENT POSTER: the fact that in your opinion these are discredited views does not make them so.
I also notice that no statements that support any of the ideas you typically espouse are listed amongst your "discredited" views. Do you honestly believe you're that flawless?
There are plenty of "Derr derr derr Android Market cesspool" posts that get to +5 as well. Get over your persecution complex and lose the confirmation bias.
There are some people that say the same things over and over and over again and never bring anything new to the table. It would be nice, in my opinion, to be able to ignore them.
Similarly, there are some posters who tend to post something idiotic, then spend dozens of posts in that thread defending their idiotic position. It would be nice to put those people on ignore, and have entire threads of bullshit just disappear.
I browse at -1, which makes reading through comments somewhat slow and cumbersome. It would be nice to be able to ignore some of the stuff that you *know* you have no interest in reading. I have my foes upmodded (or did, back before I switched to browsing at -1), as I generally see them as people who are able to make a decent point, but have opinions that differ from my own. But there are some people who *never* make good points, and there needs to be a list for "I have no interest in reading anything this person writes." I'm sure I'd make it onto plenty of people's ignore lists myself if it were implemented, but it's still something that would enhance the browsing experience.
This especially comes up within certain subjects - anything anti-piracy will get modded to -1, as does anything that says good things about Microsoft.
I don't find this to be true at all. There are a few anti-piracy advocates that manage to not come across as shills, and they generally get moderated accordingly. If all they do is repeat already discredited talking points, then they deservedly get modded to -1. Similarly, if you can say something pro-Microsoft without coming across as a "Microsoft is awesome, everything else sucks" fanboi, you'll frequently score positive mods. If all you do is bash Linux or OSX in comparison to Windows, then you'll be posting at -1.
Nevermind things like WGA, TPM, DRM, the omni-present EULAs in nearly everything that the majority of humanity used, making backups of one's media was considered to be "theft", Windows(!?) was actually poised to take over the server room, decoding an encrypted file or a proprietary chip meant litigation and/or jail time, and many, many other examples...
You take the good with the bad. With the advent and popularity of newer fashionable devices that are straightjacketed general purpose computers, we have a little less good to go with the bad.
My 4 year old couldn't stand it either. Her main issue was flash game compatibility (really all she uses the computer for) and because she couldn't get the volume right. It was as if the volume scale was linear rather than logarithmic. It took about a day for her to royally fuck up her Ubuntu install.
There you have it, folks: AC's 4-year old daughter isn't a big fan of Ubuntu. Adjust your recommendations accordingly.
Slashdot Mirror
Good thing the *only* permission someone might be interested in denying is the location service, otherwise iOS might not be suitable for every person's needs.
--Jeremy
Yes, we should obviously give up all of our civil rights to make it easy for authorities to investigate and prosecute edge cases.
--Jeremy
While many people give standing ovations when politicians spew rhetoric about "change" (Clinton and Obama are famous for this) the reality is that they really don't want it.
I'm going to call bullshit on this. There are a *lot* of people who genuinely want change.
Furthermore, to suggest that they only want change "for the sake of change" is just silly. It implies that they're happy with the status quo, but just want to change something for no reason. You won't find very many people in the US that are happy with the status quo right now. That's one reason I find the "how do you like your change now?" crowd hilarious: it implies that they thought everything was going great back when we were having too-big-to-fail bailouts, which we all know was not the case. It's the whole reason the Tea Party even came into existence -- they wanted (wait for it) change.
Anyway, your whole post basically amounts one big poisoning-the-well argument, which is a logical fallacy.
--Jeremy
This isn't uncommon knowledge. Here are some links:
This shows Indiana as receiving $1.05 per dollar sent to the IRS, which is admittedly not bad compared to many other states. California only gets back $0.78 per dollar sent.
And this talks about more specific places the money has been spent.
Both of these articles are a little old, but I haven't seen anything more recent that suggests that the trend has changed.
--Jeremy
Yeah, because releasing a bunch of pot smokers back into the world is going to make it a much more violent, dangerous place. Give me a fucking break. The article specifically states (and anyone paying attention already knew) that they're releasing nonviolent, nonserious, nonsexual offenders. And on top of that, they're being pushed back to county facilities, not just released into the wild. Of course the counties will then likely be forced to release some of them, seeing as how they don't have any money or space either.
I pity you paranoid fools who think we're living in some sort of extremely dangerous time. Crime is way down, yet you think you need a gun to be safe. It must suck to be living in such a scary world.
--Jeremy
The US wrote Japan's obscenity laws, y'know, after we bombed them. We used it as an opportunity to add a bunch of things we'd missed when writing our own.
--Jeremy
Complaining about wealth distribution is a lie rabble rousers use to rouse the rabble. Standard of living is what's important - and in the US it's very high.
So it's ok if 0.01% control nearly all the wealth, are able to field the candidates they want, buy the laws they want, and keep the vast majority from ever experiencing any sort of financial independence, as long as everyone can afford to buy a 40" TV?
--Jeremy
Why would they be pissed off at the universities for the rising costs of tuition when it's frequently state governments cutting funding for education that forces the tuition increases? Sure, they could spend all their endowments over the next few years to keep tuition low, then when they run out nobody could get scholarships at all, but I'm not sure that's the best course of action.
Maybe their critical thinking skills aren't as bad as you think. Maybe they can be pissed about more than one thing at a time, and the Wall Street issue is the one that means the most to them. Maybe unless you go and interview every single one of them, trying to characterize the entire group as a bunch of clueless idiots is just blowing a lot of smoke?
--Jeremy
I'm guessing you don't spend a lot of time with anyone on "the left." There are plenty of us who are unhappy with Obama, but still see him as an improvement over what Bush was (not difficult, admittedly) and over what McCain/Palin would almost certainly have been. Just because we're not clamoring for impeachment doesn't mean we all think everything's hunky dory.
--Jeremy
Not really. An overwhelming majority of the population is pissed at Wall Street, and an overwhelming majority of the population supports increasing the tax burden on the rich to match (at least) the same tax rate as the middle class pays.
--Jeremy
When it's a Tea Party populist movement, it's a good thing. But when Obama is a "populist president," it's a bad thing. When it's some unapproved mass of people protesting Wall Street (you know, one of the very things that the Republican and Tea Party claim to not like) they don't speak for you. It's great how you guys get to play both sides of the fence.
What's really fucking sad is that you guys can't even see that we're all on the same side.
--Jeremy
Umm, I think you mean 10 bits per color channel, because 10 bits per pixel is precisely 1024 colors (or 1024 color map entries, if you're going with a palette-based display mode).
You can be forgiven because it is all too obvious that you don't know your head from your ass.
Quoted for irony. Of course, I think the GP was being somewhat intentionally dense, but your correction is hilarious.
--Jeremy
Ahh yes, so if you define "working" in a very specific way, you can then claim that "working with diminished capacity" is effectively the same thing as "doesn't work at all."
Interesting how you fanbois think.
--Jeremy
OS X is not a walled garden in any sense of the phrase.
--Jeremy
Dell doesn't have a misleading "Designed by Dell in California" as the first thing you see when you open up their packaging; it's a lot easier to forgive them for not acting like their manufacturing process is all roses and rainbows.
--Jeremy
So, if there was not Steve Jobs, do you really think we had now afordable music for download?
Yes. It was inevitable. Apple got in near the front of the line.
Multi touch gestures?
You mean buying a company with some multi-touch patents is 'doing it first' and that nobody else would have ever done it if Apple hadn't?
Do you really think Android would exist if there was no iOS?
Yeah, Android was in development well before anybody even knew what iOS was. Certainly iOS influenced Android, but then Android has also influenced iOS.
Your post is a perfect example of ignorance of the history of computing of people who worship Jobs. The most annoying thing about all of this is that it was mostly designers and engineers that actually *did* all of this stuff; Jobs was just the one up on stage demoing it and getting all the credit. Something he got plenty of practice at in the early days of Apple with Woz.
--Jeremy
The problem is it's all the discredited views that are modded up:
NOTE TO PARENT POSTER: the fact that in your opinion these are discredited views does not make them so.
I also notice that no statements that support any of the ideas you typically espouse are listed amongst your "discredited" views. Do you honestly believe you're that flawless?
--Jeremy
Derr derr derr Walled Garden
There are plenty of "Derr derr derr Android Market cesspool" posts that get to +5 as well. Get over your persecution complex and lose the confirmation bias.
--Jeremy
There are some people that say the same things over and over and over again and never bring anything new to the table. It would be nice, in my opinion, to be able to ignore them.
Similarly, there are some posters who tend to post something idiotic, then spend dozens of posts in that thread defending their idiotic position. It would be nice to put those people on ignore, and have entire threads of bullshit just disappear.
I browse at -1, which makes reading through comments somewhat slow and cumbersome. It would be nice to be able to ignore some of the stuff that you *know* you have no interest in reading. I have my foes upmodded (or did, back before I switched to browsing at -1), as I generally see them as people who are able to make a decent point, but have opinions that differ from my own. But there are some people who *never* make good points, and there needs to be a list for "I have no interest in reading anything this person writes." I'm sure I'd make it onto plenty of people's ignore lists myself if it were implemented, but it's still something that would enhance the browsing experience.
--Jeremy
This especially comes up within certain subjects - anything anti-piracy will get modded to -1, as does anything that says good things about Microsoft.
I don't find this to be true at all. There are a few anti-piracy advocates that manage to not come across as shills, and they generally get moderated accordingly. If all they do is repeat already discredited talking points, then they deservedly get modded to -1. Similarly, if you can say something pro-Microsoft without coming across as a "Microsoft is awesome, everything else sucks" fanboi, you'll frequently score positive mods. If all you do is bash Linux or OSX in comparison to Windows, then you'll be posting at -1.
--Jeremy
Yeah they are so much worse than Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot.
The reason(s) these historical figures were debilitating had nothing to do with their religion, or lack thereof.
Thanks, try again!
--Jeremy
Nevermind things like WGA, TPM, DRM, the omni-present EULAs in nearly everything that the majority of humanity used, making backups of one's media was considered to be "theft", Windows(!?) was actually poised to take over the server room, decoding an encrypted file or a proprietary chip meant litigation and/or jail time, and many, many other examples...
You take the good with the bad. With the advent and popularity of newer fashionable devices that are straightjacketed general purpose computers, we have a little less good to go with the bad.
--Jeremy
It can be a legitimate 3rd party download site that all the Androids gush about.
I'll still happily live with the risks, and tell anyone who thinks I should subject myself to a walled garden to fuck right off.
--Jeremy
My 4 year old couldn't stand it either. Her main issue was flash game compatibility (really all she uses the computer for) and because she couldn't get the volume right. It was as if the volume scale was linear rather than logarithmic. It took about a day for her to royally fuck up her Ubuntu install.
There you have it, folks: AC's 4-year old daughter isn't a big fan of Ubuntu. Adjust your recommendations accordingly.
--Jeremy
What do you mean by "Amazon gives you an old fashioned MP3 for music"?
He means that you get an MP3 when you download a music file. There's no secret meaning in those words.
You can even re-encode tracks into MP3 if you so desire.
Ahh yes, the joys of re-encoding one lossy format into another. So now you get the artifact characteristics from BOTH encoders! What's not to love?
--Jeremy