All that should tell us is that the whole thing is pointless. If we have to cavity search every geriatric and infant that goes through the screening process to have a 0.01% chance of having a positive hit that 99.99% of the time ends up being a false positive, the whole process is a huge waste of time and resources.
If we really wanted to save lives, we could instead maybe use some of these billions of dollars to install better guard rails on highways or something.
The reason it works this way is because Android has a concept of "desktops." You can have an application installed on the phone that doesn't show up on the desktop -- say, something that you don't use very often. When you long-click something on the desktop, it asks if you want to remove it just from the desktop.
Now, I'll agree that it would be great to have a direct link to uninstall the application straight from the desktop/launcher icon. However, I *definitely* wouldn't trade that ability for the ability to organize my own phone's desktop, which Apple doesn't see fit to allow their users to do.
But all in all, I'll give you a +1 for effort for attempting to quantify one of these "better UI design decisions." It all comes out in the wash though, because there are a number of things that are better on Android as well (a single hardware back button usable from any application comes to mind, rather than each iOS application getting to choose how to handle "back" functionality individually)
If you want to root your Android phone, buy an Android phone that can be rooted. Pretty goddamn simple. It's disingenuous to point out a completely locked down phone and say, "see? Android isn't open!" Buy an HTC device or buy a completely unlocked phone from Google and quit bitching.
Also, can you point to the source of an easily unlockable iOS device that has a plethora of alternate OS distributions available for it, all compiled directly from the original OS source? No? Then it seems your entire point is completely moot.
People that support illegal immigration just cant seem to grasp that they are supporting a system that exploits people that have no protection under the law.
Wait, wait, wait.
People who support illegal immigration? Who are those people? Who's getting up and saying we need more illegal immigrants? I'm sure you'll be able to find loonies out there somewhere that might have this position, but they're loonies.
You're being intellectually dishonest by painting everyone who's against *demonizing* illegal immigrants and against *bad* immigration laws as being "pro illegal immigration." But then, I guess it's standard practice to characterize the opposition in the most unreasonable way possible these days.
It's not substantially different than installing an interrupt handler back in the DOS days and then having it called back after some "magic" happens. Granted, that's a much, much lower level example than adding an onclick event handler to a button, but at some level "magic" is going to happen in just about any programming scenario.
The only way this report would be useful is if it included problem rates broken down by each manufacturer and model. As it is, it's really only useful to people who want to point out how awful Android is.
I just got a copy of my birth certificate; the private company that had been outsourced to handle all documents in my birth state charged me $50 -- of course, only about $20 of it was for the certificate, the rest was for shipping and handling fees. Gotta make a profit somewhere, obviously.
Are you similarly outraged about copyright infringers? They're also committing crimes.
Just because the law says something doesn't mean it's a just law. Simply breaking a law doesn't automatically make a person some sort of criminal unworthy of human compassion.
tl;dr I will fully support the legalization of marijuana once it is possible to prevent people from driving high.
Well, short of installing breathalyzers on every vehicle in the U.S., we can't prevent people from driving drunk, yet you seem to be ok with alcohol being legal.
There are plenty of agnostics who feel that maryjane has no place in legal society.
Interesting substitution of the word "legal" for the word "free" in that sentence. I suppose it's about the only thing you can do to make it sound correct.
Conservatives are far more likely to live in states that receive more from the federal government than they pay out. To some degree, that money that red state conservatives claim as their "own" is coming from the parts of the country that are actually productive -- by and large, the bluer states.
While I'm not going to dispute the fact that red states do get huge handouts, I don't think it's fair -- at all -- to call them unproductive. Where do you think most of our food comes from? The main reason that the red states receive so much federal money is due to farm subsidies; a big reason that the blue states (say, New York) are so wealthy is because they're home to most of the banks that were responsible for the financial shenanigans that siphon money away from everyone and into the accounts of a few very large institutions. If we just reevaluated our priorities to decide that growing food is as important as inventing new ways to screw people out of money without providing any real value, the red states wouldn't be nearly as poor as they are.
Unfortunately, the people with all the money decide what is worth money, and they've basically decided that the only professions that are of any real value are the ones that manipulate money, or executive officers for very large corporations. (Sorry, but if you're making $200k as a programmer or sysadmin or doctor or whatever, that's great -- but it's still chump change compared to what the real players make.)
And have you forgotten about how we got along just fine with AAA, AA, C, D, and 9 volt batteries for many, many years, and manufacturers just had to design their products around the batteries that were available?
The reason there's no "one type of battery on the market," in regards to PCs and other devices with proprietary batteries, is that it's too lucrative to sell your own proprietary batteries. Same with $50 charging cables and other such bullshit. If a standards body came out and said, "here are 10 different form factors and specifications for rechargable batteries," and manufacturers actually *used* them, we'd actually see competition and cheaper battery prices.
And no, we haven't forgotten about the exploding batteries from Sony. How does that bolster your point? They were proprietary batteries not made to any standard.
Except from the sounds of it, this wasn't some rich and powerful entity cudgeling the little guy -- it was some douchebag photographer with a vastly overinflated need to protect his work.
The issue isn't money. Once you understand that, the rest of your argument makes no sense.
In the US, as a percentage of GDP, we pay more than twice than any of these 'socialist' countries with universal health care, yet we have a lower life expectancy. We have higher infant mortality rates, and a less healthy population.
We already spend the money -- the problem is that we're not getting very much for our dollar. Your analogy with the apple would be more like "You have 4000 apples and 2000 starving people. Instead of giving each person 2 apples, we're going to give 100 apples to 35 people, half an apple to 900 people, and then just throw the rest away and leave more than half the people to starve."
I paid my own way through college driving tow trucks and paid for my own health insurance.
This must have been a *long* time ago because there's practically no way you could do this today, or at any point in the last 15-20 years. Unless, of course, you worked that tow truck gig for a decade taking 1-2 classes per semester to finally get your degree.
Is that what the GP implied? No. If you're going to respond, respond to the fucking point. Don't be deliberately dense and dodge the issue like a tool.
Many, many people are unhappy with their health care. Something like 70% of the entire US population supported health care reform back in June 2009 before the "death panel" soundbites. If you can honestly say that every person you know is happy with their health care, that means you know a very narrow range of people. But most likely, you're just full of shit.
That's great...so why can't they provide raw, unprocessed data that shows it to be so? Whenever I look at any raw temperature dataset, I just can't see the 'warming trend' they're claiming.
You've convinced me, random Slashdot Dude! AGW is a hoax! All of the raw data, which you claim is unavailable, shows you that there is no "warming trend" when you look at it. So you claim that there's enough data for you to come to your own conclusion, but that you can't see other raw, unprocessed data that might support the claims of the 97% of climate scientists, so AGW is false! Please tell us, what confidence interval do you have that there is no warming trend, so that we can relay this important information to other AGW believers to help convince them? Can we see your statistical methods?
But basically, you get to have it both ways, awesome! There is no data for other, real scientists to work on, but there is enough data for you to do your own armchair Slashdot analysis! Priceless!
At one point I was willing to trust the scientists, but after Climategate I just don't trust their integrity, data, and methodology. The science has been oversold and politicized.
So 'Climategate' gave you the excuse you needed to solidify the conclusion you'd already come to, even though the 'Climategate' scientists were ultimately found to have done absolutely nothing wrong or even shady? Go figure.
Slashdot Mirror
All that should tell us is that the whole thing is pointless. If we have to cavity search every geriatric and infant that goes through the screening process to have a 0.01% chance of having a positive hit that 99.99% of the time ends up being a false positive, the whole process is a huge waste of time and resources.
If we really wanted to save lives, we could instead maybe use some of these billions of dollars to install better guard rails on highways or something.
--Jeremy
The reason it works this way is because Android has a concept of "desktops." You can have an application installed on the phone that doesn't show up on the desktop -- say, something that you don't use very often. When you long-click something on the desktop, it asks if you want to remove it just from the desktop.
Now, I'll agree that it would be great to have a direct link to uninstall the application straight from the desktop/launcher icon. However, I *definitely* wouldn't trade that ability for the ability to organize my own phone's desktop, which Apple doesn't see fit to allow their users to do.
But all in all, I'll give you a +1 for effort for attempting to quantify one of these "better UI design decisions." It all comes out in the wash though, because there are a number of things that are better on Android as well (a single hardware back button usable from any application comes to mind, rather than each iOS application getting to choose how to handle "back" functionality individually)
--Jeremy
If you want to root your Android phone, buy an Android phone that can be rooted. Pretty goddamn simple. It's disingenuous to point out a completely locked down phone and say, "see? Android isn't open!" Buy an HTC device or buy a completely unlocked phone from Google and quit bitching.
Also, can you point to the source of an easily unlockable iOS device that has a plethora of alternate OS distributions available for it, all compiled directly from the original OS source? No? Then it seems your entire point is completely moot.
--Jeremy
As sm62704's sig used to say a long time ago, his original account was mcgrew and he lost the password. It has apparently been recovered.
So as he said, "Ewe muss bee knew hear"
People that support illegal immigration just cant seem to grasp that they are supporting a system that exploits people that have no protection under the law.
Wait, wait, wait.
People who support illegal immigration? Who are those people? Who's getting up and saying we need more illegal immigrants? I'm sure you'll be able to find loonies out there somewhere that might have this position, but they're loonies.
You're being intellectually dishonest by painting everyone who's against *demonizing* illegal immigrants and against *bad* immigration laws as being "pro illegal immigration." But then, I guess it's standard practice to characterize the opposition in the most unreasonable way possible these days.
Fucking racist.
--Jeremy
It's not substantially different than installing an interrupt handler back in the DOS days and then having it called back after some "magic" happens. Granted, that's a much, much lower level example than adding an onclick event handler to a button, but at some level "magic" is going to happen in just about any programming scenario.
--Jeremy
The only way this report would be useful is if it included problem rates broken down by each manufacturer and model. As it is, it's really only useful to people who want to point out how awful Android is.
--Jeremy
I just got a copy of my birth certificate; the private company that had been outsourced to handle all documents in my birth state charged me $50 -- of course, only about $20 of it was for the certificate, the rest was for shipping and handling fees. Gotta make a profit somewhere, obviously.
--Jeremy
Are you similarly outraged about copyright infringers? They're also committing crimes.
Just because the law says something doesn't mean it's a just law. Simply breaking a law doesn't automatically make a person some sort of criminal unworthy of human compassion.
--Jeremy
For the record, pulling someone over because based on looks is strictly forbidden in the law.
But pulling someone over for driving erratically isn't. Good luck proving that you weren't driving erratically.
Your selective distrust of the government is incredibly amusing.
--Jeremy
so by your logic, because 'some' officers 'may' abuse this law, we should not have it?
Yup.
by that logic, we should not have highways, because some people abuse them by speeding.
Random Joe Blow speeders aren't in positions of power to incarcerate people. Awful analogy.
--Jeremy
tl;dr I will fully support the legalization of marijuana once it is possible to prevent people from driving high.
Well, short of installing breathalyzers on every vehicle in the U.S., we can't prevent people from driving drunk, yet you seem to be ok with alcohol being legal.
--Jeremy
There are plenty of agnostics who feel that maryjane has no place in legal society.
Interesting substitution of the word "legal" for the word "free" in that sentence. I suppose it's about the only thing you can do to make it sound correct.
--Jeremy
Conservatives are far more likely to live in states that receive more from the federal government than they pay out. To some degree, that money that red state conservatives claim as their "own" is coming from the parts of the country that are actually productive -- by and large, the bluer states.
While I'm not going to dispute the fact that red states do get huge handouts, I don't think it's fair -- at all -- to call them unproductive. Where do you think most of our food comes from? The main reason that the red states receive so much federal money is due to farm subsidies; a big reason that the blue states (say, New York) are so wealthy is because they're home to most of the banks that were responsible for the financial shenanigans that siphon money away from everyone and into the accounts of a few very large institutions. If we just reevaluated our priorities to decide that growing food is as important as inventing new ways to screw people out of money without providing any real value, the red states wouldn't be nearly as poor as they are.
Unfortunately, the people with all the money decide what is worth money, and they've basically decided that the only professions that are of any real value are the ones that manipulate money, or executive officers for very large corporations. (Sorry, but if you're making $200k as a programmer or sysadmin or doctor or whatever, that's great -- but it's still chump change compared to what the real players make.)
--Jeremy
Social programs are the cheapest and best way to make a long term positive effect on society.
How absurd! This has been proven wrong both in practice and in theory. It's been widely discredited.
Wait, when did this happen? Oh, that's right, it didn't.
--Jeremy
And have you forgotten about how we got along just fine with AAA, AA, C, D, and 9 volt batteries for many, many years, and manufacturers just had to design their products around the batteries that were available?
The reason there's no "one type of battery on the market," in regards to PCs and other devices with proprietary batteries, is that it's too lucrative to sell your own proprietary batteries. Same with $50 charging cables and other such bullshit. If a standards body came out and said, "here are 10 different form factors and specifications for rechargable batteries," and manufacturers actually *used* them, we'd actually see competition and cheaper battery prices.
And no, we haven't forgotten about the exploding batteries from Sony. How does that bolster your point? They were proprietary batteries not made to any standard.
--Jeremy
There is a reason - cost.
You must think that the markup on Apple's $80 power cables is only about 10%.
Hint: it really doesn't cost that much to make cables with magnets in them.
--Jeremy
Except from the sounds of it, this wasn't some rich and powerful entity cudgeling the little guy -- it was some douchebag photographer with a vastly overinflated need to protect his work.
--Jeremy
The RIAA doesn't pay out fire insurance claims to reimburse people for their burned LPs, so your point is moot.
--Jeremy
No. They were both about totalitarianism; Animal Farm was also a commentary on Orwell's experience with communist regimes.
--Jeremy
The issue isn't money. Once you understand that, the rest of your argument makes no sense.
In the US, as a percentage of GDP, we pay more than twice than any of these 'socialist' countries with universal health care, yet we have a lower life expectancy. We have higher infant mortality rates, and a less healthy population.
We already spend the money -- the problem is that we're not getting very much for our dollar. Your analogy with the apple would be more like "You have 4000 apples and 2000 starving people. Instead of giving each person 2 apples, we're going to give 100 apples to 35 people, half an apple to 900 people, and then just throw the rest away and leave more than half the people to starve."
--Jeremy
I paid my own way through college driving tow trucks and paid for my own health insurance.
This must have been a *long* time ago because there's practically no way you could do this today, or at any point in the last 15-20 years. Unless, of course, you worked that tow truck gig for a decade taking 1-2 classes per semester to finally get your degree.
--Jeremy
Is that what the GP implied? No. If you're going to respond, respond to the fucking point. Don't be deliberately dense and dodge the issue like a tool.
Many, many people are unhappy with their health care. Something like 70% of the entire US population supported health care reform back in June 2009 before the "death panel" soundbites. If you can honestly say that every person you know is happy with their health care, that means you know a very narrow range of people. But most likely, you're just full of shit.
--Jeremy
That's great...so why can't they provide raw, unprocessed data that shows it to be so? Whenever I look at any raw temperature dataset, I just can't see the 'warming trend' they're claiming.
You've convinced me, random Slashdot Dude! AGW is a hoax! All of the raw data, which you claim is unavailable, shows you that there is no "warming trend" when you look at it. So you claim that there's enough data for you to come to your own conclusion, but that you can't see other raw, unprocessed data that might support the claims of the 97% of climate scientists, so AGW is false! Please tell us, what confidence interval do you have that there is no warming trend, so that we can relay this important information to other AGW believers to help convince them? Can we see your statistical methods?
But basically, you get to have it both ways, awesome! There is no data for other, real scientists to work on, but there is enough data for you to do your own armchair Slashdot analysis! Priceless!
--Jeremy
At one point I was willing to trust the scientists, but after Climategate I just don't trust their integrity, data, and methodology. The science has been oversold and politicized.
So 'Climategate' gave you the excuse you needed to solidify the conclusion you'd already come to, even though the 'Climategate' scientists were ultimately found to have done absolutely nothing wrong or even shady? Go figure.
--Jeremy