Re:42V will help someday...
on
42-Volt Autos
·
· Score: 1
Besides that - when did consumers ask the automaker to implement electric steering?
42V will help someday...
on
42-Volt Autos
·
· Score: 1
But, as usual , the first few thousand cars will implement marginal designs which will cause nearly as many stranded motorists, will force the auto owner to pay for exhorbitant modules which will fail repeatedly, thus giving the automaker more leverage at restricting the aftermarket supply of modules and thus further remove the backyard mechanic from repairing their own autos. Shame that technology has to do this, especially because NOT ONE consumer was allowed to respond when SAE sent out questionnaires on this proposal.... I know, I tried to offer comments.
The consumer is one party, the copyright holder is the other party, last I knew.
If you, the consumer, do not like the agreement as it is drawn up, STOP BUYING THE MATERIALS which are placed under those agreements!
If the market (consumers) goes away, it will be to the better agreements that we all went.
Linux is alive for this reason: users do not agree to code fixed to one parties development goals. People are going elsewhere.
M$ loves this kind of thing. So do many other software creators in that camp. They (and the companies backing them, driven by stockholders seeking cash revenues) think that they will learn how to draw more interest from you, by learning what you like to do when online and when on PC (but not online). In their licenses, the users usually give permission for information to be transmitted, if, in fact, you click to accept the terms of the license. Doesn't matter if can you read and understand the obfuscation of terms. So no matter who is above or below average, if you don't read the license, you are likely going to grant permission for this to happen.... so why whine about it? If you do not like this tactic, learn to ask questions before you download or install the thieving boogers.
And remember: M$ never tells you you fly is down, you have to learn to prohibit open ports, learn to block unwanted transmission of data. Every time someone clicks ok without knowing what, exactly, the software is going to do, they are placing blind trust that the provider of the software is not malicious. We all hear that this is not true, but the next answer will surprise you: 'What can I do about it.... this is all there is!'. 'Resistance is futile'. 'FUD'. Call it what you want, but people are convinced there is nothing they can do about it, they do not know there is an alternative, and from my perspective, I agree that the common M$ user would need an asociates degree in system administration to void such junk research. But the are defeatists by TRAINING.
The family which is not Computer administration savvy is a popular entity, not as rare as you'd think.
I'd conclude that the commercial $$$ driven developers are simply capitalizing on the ignorance of the consumer. But you knew that.
Slashdot Mirror
Besides that - when did consumers ask the automaker to implement electric steering?
But, as usual , the first few thousand cars will implement marginal designs which will cause nearly as many stranded motorists, will force the auto owner to pay for exhorbitant modules which will fail repeatedly, thus giving the automaker more leverage at restricting the aftermarket supply of modules and thus further remove the backyard mechanic from repairing their own autos. Shame that technology has to do this, especially because NOT ONE consumer was allowed to respond when SAE sent out questionnaires on this proposal.... I know, I tried to offer comments.
The consumer is one party, the copyright holder is the other party, last I knew. If you, the consumer, do not like the agreement as it is drawn up, STOP BUYING THE MATERIALS which are placed under those agreements! If the market (consumers) goes away, it will be to the better agreements that we all went. Linux is alive for this reason: users do not agree to code fixed to one parties development goals. People are going elsewhere.
M$ loves this kind of thing. So do many other software creators in that camp. They (and the companies backing them, driven by stockholders seeking cash revenues) think that they will learn how to draw more interest from you, by learning what you like to do when online and when on PC (but not online). In their licenses, the users usually give permission for information to be transmitted, if, in fact, you click to accept the terms of the license. Doesn't matter if can you read and understand the obfuscation of terms. So no matter who is above or below average, if you don't read the license, you are likely going to grant permission for this to happen.... so why whine about it? If you do not like this tactic, learn to ask questions before you download or install the thieving boogers. And remember: M$ never tells you you fly is down, you have to learn to prohibit open ports, learn to block unwanted transmission of data. Every time someone clicks ok without knowing what, exactly, the software is going to do, they are placing blind trust that the provider of the software is not malicious. We all hear that this is not true, but the next answer will surprise you: 'What can I do about it.... this is all there is!'. 'Resistance is futile'. 'FUD'. Call it what you want, but people are convinced there is nothing they can do about it, they do not know there is an alternative, and from my perspective, I agree that the common M$ user would need an asociates degree in system administration to void such junk research. But the are defeatists by TRAINING. The family which is not Computer administration savvy is a popular entity, not as rare as you'd think. I'd conclude that the commercial $$$ driven developers are simply capitalizing on the ignorance of the consumer. But you knew that.