A "scary sounding" dog will do. Some nice size family friendly dog will have a scary bark. That's enough to make most burglars move on. If they are proficient enough to plan for dogs, then they are probably going to plan to break windows, pry doors, etc... Not casual burglars looking for a quick score.
the simplest answer is just turn the wireless off completely for a week. then work wired. or get a different brand and only use it for a small amount of time if you really need it, always turning it completely off when not using it. Eventually the hacker will realize you're not any fun.
Because GameStop only makes $5 off the most expensive exclusive games tops... And they have to compete for that $5 with Walmart and Target selling at a LOSS for kickbacks by volume later.
With a used Game they get about "normal" retail markup.... Yes, mall stores need almost 100% markup (buy for $1 sell for $2) in order to stay open. So it was PUBLISHERS that shot first by slashing margins to be punative to small shops.
So complain about Google giving away Android. THAT is creating monoculture of old, buggy, unpatched devices. The Android story mirrors the rise of MS Windows far more than iPhone does.
There is plenty of room for Apple at 25%-35% of the market. That's probably the way for them to remain at their high profit point as well. That is still a STAGGERINGLY HUGE amount of sales.
If you want to complain about monoculture, complain about the piss poor offerings from Microsoft/Nokia and RIM/Blackberry... One of them has to balls-up and compete BETWEEN between and Android... And they aren't.
It was clear from engineering testimony that Samsung copied petty stuff like color schemes for icons and how users used gestures directly from iPhone. PRIOR to iPhone, Samsung had its own touch screen phone, true. Icons were totally different, touch commands totally different. Things like "pinch to zoom" and "swiping" didn't EXIST in pre-iPhone Samsung phones. Samsung even added things to their Android that GOOGLE left out because Apple had publicly bought the companies with patents.
Samsung was OPENLY playing "Price is Right"... Getting as close as possible without going over... And Apple's lawyers busted them.
Blame the CEO of Samsung who ALLOWED the phone division to fuck with the #2 parts customer. Talk about not controlling your company.
Because STEVE wants Samsung to admit FAULT. One hand of Samsung was DELIBERATELY attacking Apple while the other was happily taking BILLIONS of their money. Steve appealed to the head of the company to fix that and the head of Samsung CHOSE not to work for his $6 Billion customer's interest.
This is the REAL problem... Apple does something like $6 billion in parts business with Samsung. Apple should have stopped accepting shipments overnight. But unfortunately the parts market is so tight there is no room for an Apple-sized customer to "talk with its feet" and Samsung's CEO Is counting on that not to get sued. Apple's mistake was being too generous with Samsung... You have to Make sure YOU OWE suppliers money... So they do when you say jump.
Once Apple has all the parts business moved, they have no other business with Samsung EXCEPT to spend decades suing them.. Even a $1billion in lawyer fees goes a long way!!! Apple is just getting warmed up. Wait till they start on Google!
The ball was rolling years before Cook was CEO. At the point he became CEO, the trial was mostly through, the money spent... You just lose face with the Court to back out now.
For the most part, court proved Steve was right. There were written Samsung developer logs where they reviewed iPhone features and clearly choose to use the "iPhone way" versus the method in their previous devices... Samsung INTENDED to copy, as close as they could, while leaving room for lawyers. Toss in that they were using Android, which was developed while the CEO of Google was on the Apple Board. And that was the last straw for Steve.. Board member AND leading supplier developing against you?? I'm surprised Steve didn't put some assassinations in his will.
Apple was EXTREMELY good in bringing Google and Samsung into iPod/iPhone early and putting lots of money on the table. iPhone users are the top users of Googles mobile search and maps... Yet Google cut Apple off from using features. Samsung was practically the sole supplier of Flash parts from the iPod nano days till now... Apple paid CASH UPFRONT for R&D when Wall Street was tanking. Apple was Samsung's #2 customer behind Sony.
His shows how deficient in Ethics the whole tech industry is. An Ethical CEO of Samsung would have stamped out the mobile unit's behavior with a phone call, not gambling if Apple was going to pull its business or not.
Taking your business away shouldn't be the only way to promote ethical behavior.. When it comes to the point you have to reengineer your supply chain to get an ethics discussion out of another CEO, why not "go nuclear". It's gonna cost Apple way more than $1 billion to move all their contracts away from Samsung and get other suppliers up to speed... Why shouldn't Apple get damages for that?
This is where Steve was really "going Nuclear". Making Tim Cook's life hell by costing Apple BILLIONS of dollars to yank all the smooth running contracts Cook engineered. Cook has to understand its not a "free market" if you can't take your business away. Bonus points if you can stick Samsung with product they cannot move or pay for!
Steve's main fault was being on the wrong side of the "need". Apple prepaid for parts, and had more production lined up than any other memory maker could supply. To punish Samsung with stopped sales would punish Apple's customers more than Samsung. In the future Tim has to let that not happen.
In the real world if MY company pulls crap like Samsung did, the Automakers pull the contract in WEEKS... And My company just doesn't get paid for the REST of it, no matter how many workers get fired, or how many parts are waiting to be sold.
It's seven or more sexual crimes with DNA evidence. It is 100% certain the DNA recovered belongs to BOTH of them as they are twins with identical DNA.
So if one won't confess, or BOTH are offending, the question is why not just put BOTH in jail so the state is 100% certain it won't happen again. DNA is involved, so this is not a case of randomly grabbing somebody... If they didn't live together, they would have separate alibis...
So which is more important? 100% sure we get the "right" brother (when it could be both) [33% wrong], or 100% sure we arrest the person(s) responsible for seven rapes? [66% right]
It's not equal because there are 3 choices. (A, B, A & B) Being innocent is only 1 of the 3 options.
Putting BOTH in jail has a 33% chance of being wrong, but 100% chance of putting the offender(s) in jail. Which honestly is better odds than the vast majority of cases with only circumstantial evidence.
You got DNA that limits the pool if choices to TWO. At least one is 100% guilty. Statistically both are 66% guilty if your choices are A, B, or A & B. we have DNA so neither is removed.
The article is light on circumstances. They must live together and have similar jobs in delivery. So it's clear one could be working while the other is raping, or one raping while delivering?
But we do know DNA identifies the twins... So an Angry Mob can make sure no more rapes occur with these genes with 100% accuracy.
No, but you can prove if BOTH are put in jail, the crimes won't be repeated.
Or just flip a coin and shoot one... "Justice" gets its due, one gets off. If "fate" picked the wrong one you can catch them if they do it again easily. Besides both carry "bad rapist genes" anyway as they are twins...
This is where the Medieval Church had things straight... They made sure you both got to confess before God before they sent you on the way... Accuracy wasn't necessary.
Apple sells more iPads than any single PC maker sells ANYTHING with Windows 7 or 8 on it. To play semantics at this point is the same as just deciding MS Office isn't going to run on Dells anymore.
There is no "business case" to avoid iOS. iOS is growing like crazy, so a SMART business is gonna figure out how to get Office to run... There are plenty of wannabe office suits on iOS now. There's a great big giant opportunity to make piles of money. $2 billion is 5%'er even in the corporate world... It shows how crazy rich Microsoft is that they can just leave that on the table getting stale because they want to make a point. Had the DOJ busted them up, they'd be fighting for every dime...
Why pay for what the other company did not LEGALLY MAINTAIN? Legally, this's company did not maintain ANY Products with the "iPhone" name since 2000, they did not DEFEND the trademark for the first 5 years Apple sold "iPhone" all over the world, and they waited till last fall to use the name for a knock-off of what Apple was selling. In most countries they would have lost fair and square...
Trademarked have to be USED for trade. This company hasn't sold anything called "iPhone" since 2000...if EVER... And didn't bother to contest the first 5 YEARS Apple was selling iPhones around the world.
Trademarks aren't patents that you keep in a drawer for 10 years... They are about IDENTIFICATION... So you have to use them... And if you don't DEFEND them, LOSE them.
Apple was already working on acquiring rights before release... They were just being held up. Again, Cisco hadn't SOLD the product in several years... It's not up to Apple to know if somebody "maybe might wanna" still use something.
This Brazillian company had a trademark but NEVER released a product until well after Apple STARTED SELLING iPhones in 2008. If it was so important, they had 5 years to bring the matter up.
Apple Tecords clearly abused the trademark process to cover personal computers that DIDN'T EXIST when they filed. It was just Steve being a poor kid that didn't have good lawyers to prevent them from sticking him.
Slashdot Mirror
You pipe over a loudspeaker
"there is going to be a test. You probably won't pass."
In GLaDOS voice!!
The most important thing is that they make noise so YOU can so something... Turn on lights, call police...
You don't want an aggressive dog because then the burglar/robber gets REAL CROOKS involved... Lawyers!
A "scary sounding" dog will do. Some nice size family friendly dog will have a scary bark. That's enough to make most burglars move on. If they are proficient enough to plan for dogs, then they are probably going to plan to break windows, pry doors, etc... Not casual burglars looking for a quick score.
randomly put in their house number! "you are at 123 main street"
alternately, leave the old one turned on but not physically connected to anything... waste more time!
the simplest answer is just turn the wireless off completely for a week. then work wired. or get a different brand and only use it for a small amount of time if you really need it, always turning it completely off when not using it. Eventually the hacker will realize you're not any fun.
Snakes on a Plane!
They could be Pythons....
Because GameStop only makes $5 off the most expensive exclusive games tops... And they have to compete for that $5 with Walmart and Target selling at a LOSS for kickbacks by volume later.
With a used Game they get about "normal" retail markup. ... Yes, mall stores need almost 100% markup (buy for $1 sell for $2) in order to stay open. So it was PUBLISHERS that shot first by slashing margins to be punative to small shops.
So complain about Google giving away Android. THAT is creating monoculture of old, buggy, unpatched devices. The Android story mirrors the rise of MS Windows far more than iPhone does.
There is plenty of room for Apple at 25%-35% of the market. That's probably the way for them to remain at their high profit point as well. That is still a STAGGERINGLY HUGE amount of sales.
If you want to complain about monoculture, complain about the piss poor offerings from Microsoft/Nokia and RIM/Blackberry... One of them has to balls-up and compete BETWEEN between and Android... And they aren't.
It was clear from engineering testimony that Samsung copied petty stuff like color schemes for icons and how users used gestures directly from iPhone. PRIOR to iPhone, Samsung had its own touch screen phone, true. Icons were totally different, touch commands totally different. Things like "pinch to zoom" and "swiping" didn't EXIST in pre-iPhone Samsung phones. Samsung even added things to their Android that GOOGLE left out because Apple had publicly bought the companies with patents.
Samsung was OPENLY playing "Price is Right" ... Getting as close as possible without going over... And Apple's lawyers busted them.
Blame the CEO of Samsung who ALLOWED the phone division to fuck with the #2 parts customer. Talk about not controlling your company.
To be fair, lawsuit is done Apple won $1 billion. Why would Tim give that up now? He wouldn't be a good CEO LOSING a billion easy dollars?
Because STEVE wants Samsung to admit FAULT. One hand of Samsung was DELIBERATELY attacking Apple while the other was happily taking BILLIONS of their money. Steve appealed to the head of the company to fix that and the head of Samsung CHOSE not to work for his $6 Billion customer's interest.
This is the REAL problem... Apple does something like $6 billion in parts business with Samsung. Apple should have stopped accepting shipments overnight. But unfortunately the parts market is so tight there is no room for an Apple-sized customer to "talk with its feet" and Samsung's CEO Is counting on that not to get sued. Apple's mistake was being too generous with Samsung... You have to Make sure YOU OWE suppliers money... So they do when you say jump.
Once Apple has all the parts business moved, they have no other business with Samsung EXCEPT to spend decades suing them.. Even a $1billion in lawyer fees goes a long way!!! Apple is just getting warmed up. Wait till they start on Google!
The ball was rolling years before Cook was CEO. At the point he became CEO, the trial was mostly through, the money spent... You just lose face with the Court to back out now.
For the most part, court proved Steve was right. There were written Samsung developer logs where they reviewed iPhone features and clearly choose to use the "iPhone way" versus the method in their previous devices... Samsung INTENDED to copy, as close as they could, while leaving room for lawyers. Toss in that they were using Android, which was developed while the CEO of Google was on the Apple Board. And that was the last straw for Steve.. Board member AND leading supplier developing against you?? I'm surprised Steve didn't put some assassinations in his will.
Apple was EXTREMELY good in bringing Google and Samsung into iPod/iPhone early and putting lots of money on the table. iPhone users are the top users of Googles mobile search and maps... Yet Google cut Apple off from using features. Samsung was practically the sole supplier of Flash parts from the iPod nano days till now... Apple paid CASH UPFRONT for R&D when Wall Street was tanking. Apple was Samsung's #2 customer behind Sony.
His shows how deficient in Ethics the whole tech industry is. An Ethical CEO of Samsung would have stamped out the mobile unit's behavior with a phone call, not gambling if Apple was going to pull its business or not.
Taking your business away shouldn't be the only way to promote ethical behavior.. When it comes to the point you have to reengineer your supply chain to get an ethics discussion out of another CEO, why not "go nuclear". It's gonna cost Apple way more than $1 billion to move all their contracts away from Samsung and get other suppliers up to speed... Why shouldn't Apple get damages for that?
This is where Steve was really "going Nuclear". Making Tim Cook's life hell by costing Apple BILLIONS of dollars to yank all the smooth running contracts Cook engineered. Cook has to understand its not a "free market" if you can't take your business away. Bonus points if you can stick Samsung with product they cannot move or pay for!
Steve's main fault was being on the wrong side of the "need". Apple prepaid for parts, and had more production lined up than any other memory maker could supply. To punish Samsung with stopped sales would punish Apple's customers more than Samsung. In the future Tim has to let that not happen.
In the real world if MY company pulls crap like Samsung did, the Automakers pull the contract in WEEKS... And My company just doesn't get paid for the REST of it, no matter how many workers get fired, or how many parts are waiting to be sold.
It's seven or more sexual crimes with DNA evidence. It is 100% certain the DNA recovered belongs to BOTH of them as they are twins with identical DNA.
So if one won't confess, or BOTH are offending, the question is why not just put BOTH in jail so the state is 100% certain it won't happen again. DNA is involved, so this is not a case of randomly grabbing somebody... If they didn't live together, they would have separate alibis...
So which is more important? 100% sure we get the "right" brother (when it could be both) [33% wrong], or 100% sure we arrest the person(s) responsible for seven rapes? [66% right]
It's not equal because there are 3 choices. (A, B, A & B) Being innocent is only 1 of the 3 options.
Putting BOTH in jail has a 33% chance of being wrong, but 100% chance of putting the offender(s) in jail. Which honestly is better odds than the vast majority of cases with only circumstantial evidence.
Let God sort them out?
You got DNA that limits the pool if choices to TWO. At least one is 100% guilty. Statistically both are 66% guilty if your choices are A, B, or A & B. we have DNA so neither is removed.
This is why justice has a scale.
There were at least seven assaults... Well past "accidental".
The article is light on circumstances. They must live together and have similar jobs in delivery. So it's clear one could be working while the other is raping, or one raping while delivering?
But we do know DNA identifies the twins... So an Angry Mob can make sure no more rapes occur with these genes with 100% accuracy.
No, but you can prove if BOTH are put in jail, the crimes won't be repeated.
Or just flip a coin and shoot one... "Justice" gets its due, one gets off. If "fate" picked the wrong one you can catch them if they do it again easily. Besides both carry "bad rapist genes" anyway as they are twins...
This is where the Medieval Church had things straight... They made sure you both got to confess before God before they sent you on the way... Accuracy wasn't necessary.
Apple sells more iPads than any single PC maker sells ANYTHING with Windows 7 or 8 on it. To play semantics at this point is the same as just deciding MS Office isn't going to run on Dells anymore.
There is no "business case" to avoid iOS. iOS is growing like crazy, so a SMART business is gonna figure out how to get Office to run... There are plenty of wannabe office suits on iOS now. There's a great big giant opportunity to make piles of money. $2 billion is 5%'er even in the corporate world... It shows how crazy rich Microsoft is that they can just leave that on the table getting stale because they want to make a point. Had the DOJ busted them up, they'd be fighting for every dime...
Why pay for what the other company did not LEGALLY MAINTAIN? Legally, this's company did not maintain ANY Products with the "iPhone" name since 2000, they did not DEFEND the trademark for the first 5 years Apple sold "iPhone" all over the world, and they waited till last fall to use the name for a knock-off of what Apple was selling. In most countries they would have lost fair and square...
Trademarked have to be USED for trade. This company hasn't sold anything called "iPhone" since 2000...if EVER... And didn't bother to contest the first 5 YEARS Apple was selling iPhones around the world.
Trademarks aren't patents that you keep in a drawer for 10 years... They are about IDENTIFICATION... So you have to use them... And if you don't DEFEND them, LOSE them.
Apple was already working on acquiring rights before release... They were just being held up. Again, Cisco hadn't SOLD the product in several years... It's not up to Apple to know if somebody "maybe might wanna" still use something.
This Brazillian company had a trademark but NEVER released a product until well after Apple STARTED SELLING iPhones in 2008. If it was so important, they had 5 years to bring the matter up.
Apple Tecords clearly abused the trademark process to cover personal computers that DIDN'T EXIST when they filed. It was just Steve being a poor kid that didn't have good lawyers to prevent them from sticking him.
He fixed that...