Exactly. My phone already runs Symbian/S60. Why the hell would I want to buy a bigger object with the same feature set?
In my opinion, it's more likely to move in the other direction. Eventually, phones will be so powerful that we'll just run our normal Linux/BSD distros* on them, and hotels/airplanes will be equipped with wireless full size keyboards and screens.
This is fortunately also likely to end the security nightmare that is the webapps fad. No need for google docs if you have OpenOffice in your pocket. Hardware keyloggers will always be a concern, of course.
I searched for a few minutes, and found some pretty reasonable apartments for between two and three hundred. Some of the locations were remote, of course, but that doesn't matter, because this is beside the point. The taxes are heavy, and the social security system isn't perfect, but that doesn't make the country communist, and most people seem quite satisfied. I do actually live here and I must say you have a very peculiar understanding of the resources available to the average citizen.
Apparently you also have reading difficulties, since I never said anything about people who speak out for human rights. Your facts are just wrong. If anyone is a troll, it's you, because the burden of proof is on the person making the extreme statements, not vice versa. I have made no accusation other than that nothing you have said supports your premise. (Speed cameras also don't make the country a police state, even if I agree that they are a bad idea.)
Before you accuse me of bullshitting, maybe you should check your own facts. It is NOT MANDATORY for internet service providers. The blacklist is shit, its proponents are disgusting, and a lot of voters are morons, but it is NOT MANDATORY, and it does not make Finland a "police state".
And I really don't care whether you think those benefits are too much. The point is that it's not communism in disguise. Do you even know what communism is? (but apparently I'm the one who's "stupid")
Your apartment prices are also completely ridiculous, unless you insist that people with the lowest incomes should be able to live in premium locations.
"Finland is in a state of masqueraded communism, the taxes are highest in the world and living costs right up there too! For well above minimum wage job, you don't get even twice the amount of money to spend on things than on unemployment checks.
I were born in Finland, and like living here very much indeed, even so much i've denied some REALLY good positions offered to me abroad and stayed in Finland. However slowly i'm starting to rethink the sensibility of staying in Finland, due to things like this blacklist."
You think social security programs are "masqueraded communism" and are ready to leave the "police state" due to a misguided but non-mandatory blacklist? Boy will you be surprised at what's going on in the rest of the world if you ever decide to move for real. Maybe you should try something proactive like voting or running for parliament instead, if you want to make things better.
By the way, I've seen other people complain that those humongous unemployment benefits you talk about are barely enough for rent and food. The government can never win, it seems.
If 99% decide that your is how you spell you're, then yes it will unfortunately become true. However, that does not apply to technical terms. Most people probably don't know what a resistor is, but that doesn't mean everyone should follow if they start calling it capacitor.
Granted, "internet" is probably somewhere in the middle, but it's especially important in advertising to select words that are both correct and understandable. Otherwise you'll just get thousands of companies trying to subtly redefine things in their favor, resulting in a complete mess.
Also, if we accept that internet suddenly means world wide web, what will we call the network?
I admit that it's not relevant in this case, but in my opinion many of their ads are designed to leave the watcher with the impression that the iPhone is the first device that can access the internet properly. Even so, the point about Ubuntu stands.
As for examples of similar devices, Nokia's browser has been KHTML-based for at least two years.
Are you seriously trying to claim that it's OK to use the word "all" just because you haven't defined all="html,java,flash..."? Quoting dictionaries is usually stupid, but you may want to find one in this case.
Also, even if gopher were indeed the only problem, the claim is still not true. It doesn't matter if 99% of the population misunderstands it. There's no reason Apple has to use that exact wording, when it could easily be corrected.
Has Ubuntu created an advertising campaign where it implies that it's the only operating system that works properly on the internet, despite the fact that many others have more solid support apart from the user interface?
You're modded funny, but this IS another valid reason it's false advertising. If they want to decide what runs on the phone, they really can't claim it supports the whole internet. You can't have it both ways.
That comment about whether the government should really decide is very trollish. Supply and demand have in fact decided that many sites require flash*. The government is only enforcing truth in advertising. Not everything they do is automatically wrong, ok?
No, I don't think it absolutely has to have government intervention either so far. I tried to make it clear that I was objecting to their actions regardless of any need for government action.
Still, that kind of bundling was illegal in some countries until very recently, and I can't say I blame them. I would probably make the same decision myself. However, I repeat that this is only tangential to my main point. In any case we both seem to believe in a mostly free market, and only disagree in how much regulation it needs to function properly.
I could say it's a stupid model, but it's generally advisable to back up one's argument somehow.
You seem to want to take my points to extremes. Just as I didn't advocate immediate government sanctions, I didn't say that consumer protection is good because the government always knows best. Let me spell this out for you:
-the free market is based on consumers' self interest, and their making decisions that are best for themselves. -Apple removes consumer choice through restrictive agreements with telecoms, and controlling the market for software on its devices. They now can't choose both the best phone and the best operator, should their definition of best be iPhone and an unsupported operator. Similarly, they can't choose both the best browser and phone, if they like the phone but not Safari. Their decision will be suboptimal by default. -hence, Apple is violating the spirit of the free market while operating inside it.
Seriously, this is a bit more than just saying that I don't like their business model and therefore it violates the free market. Additionally:
-your argument seemed to be that no interference is good. -the government offers consumer protection. Only the most insane libertarians would argue that things wouldn't go to hell if it was removed. -therefore, interference is in fact sometimes warranted. -however, this wasn't part of my original point, so it's not necessary to argue whether it's necessary in this case.
I am not demanding, I am criticizing. I thought that was still allowed under the free market, or is it now unpatriotic? If I was a review site telling people to avoid it because it doesn't work as it should, would that also violate Apple's right to do business as it pleases?
As for governments limiting business models, it's done all the time in the name of consumer protection. You don't have to be a full monopoly to be able to distort the market. In this case, I doubt most Apple customers are aware of the implications when they buy the product. But that's another issue, because I wasn't even trying to argue it.
Apple doesn't believe in the free market. If it did, you could buy an iPhone without a contract and install any application you want - like all the other smartphones on the market.
Before anyone points out that in a free market Apple can do whatever it wants, keep in mind that this doesn't prevent it from violating the spirit of said market. Bundling products like that used to be illegal in many countries until the telecoms lobbied the governments enough. The same logic that's used for open document standards can be used here: you wouldn't want your choice of car to force you into a certain chain of gas stations.
Or your choice of mp3 player dictate your choice of player software, for that matter...
I don't know the specifics, but personally I always avoid installing software that isn't available in my distribution's repository. It's never worth the hassle unless it's something very specific, and then I'll probably compile from source. The biggest reason Windows is a pain in the ass, imho, is how many different update mechanisms are running at the same time. I have to provide the administrator password to something nearly every time I reboot my one Windows installation.
Considering using such a service on Linux has alarm bells ringing throughout my head. Especially when it was created by a company that encourages users to run as root, and attempted trademark violation against Microsoft. No thanks.
Why should Debian be like Ubuntu? New users could perfectly well use Suse, Mandrake or Red Hat before shit brown became fashionable.
While I don't actively dislike Ubuntu, I'm not a big fan because it feels like they equate usability with condescension. Many people, not limited to them, seem to think that it's impossible to create something that's both easy and powerful. I don't agree.
On the other hand, this argument also justifies its existence. The people who don't agree with me get to use what they prefer. Mostly I'm worried that a lot of new users with the potential to understand more won't realize that there are other options, since it gets so much publicity.
Or how about just initially releasing it in English for the vast majority of gamers who simply want to play the game? Even weirder is how the games are delayed even in those European countries that don't get a localized version.
Both sides are misunderstanding economics. People aren't, in fact, willing to pay that much anymore, but instead of lowering costs and selling movies online for $1 apiece they decide to waste even more money on DRM and bribing congressmen.
It's depressing that CEOs on a free market get lambasted continuously for receiving salaries based on demand, whereas actors and musicians are fawned over even more when they use their government granted monopoly power to buy 20 SUVs on one month's salary. I really hope some enterprising soul in Eastern Europe or something decides to start making quality movies in English, and puts those tossers in their place.
Only an actor could be smug enough to think he deserves that much, let alone more, for voicing a character in a video game.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. My phone already runs Symbian/S60. Why the hell would I want to buy a bigger object with the same feature set?
In my opinion, it's more likely to move in the other direction. Eventually, phones will be so powerful that we'll just run our normal Linux/BSD distros* on them, and hotels/airplanes will be equipped with wireless full size keyboards and screens.
This is fortunately also likely to end the security nightmare that is the webapps fad. No need for google docs if you have OpenOffice in your pocket. Hardware keyloggers will always be a concern, of course.
*Yes, there are more than Ubuntu!
I don't think that's quite evil enough. How about this:
***WORK PERFORMED ON MONDAY***
09:11:06 KEYBOARD INTERRUPT
09:11:06 KEYBOARD INTERRUPT
09:11:06 KEYBOARD INTERRUPT
09:11:06 KEYBOARD INTERRUPT
09:11:06 KEYBOARD INTERRUPT
09:11:07 KEYBOARD INTERRUPT
etc.
etc.
16:59:36 KEYBOARD INTERRUPT
TOTAL: Worker has worked for 32 microseconds.
I recently read this excellent book called "The Art of Deception" by some guy called Mitnick. You might want to try it out.
I searched for a few minutes, and found some pretty reasonable apartments for between two and three hundred. Some of the locations were remote, of course, but that doesn't matter, because this is beside the point. The taxes are heavy, and the social security system isn't perfect, but that doesn't make the country communist, and most people seem quite satisfied. I do actually live here and I must say you have a very peculiar understanding of the resources available to the average citizen.
Apparently you also have reading difficulties, since I never said anything about people who speak out for human rights. Your facts are just wrong. If anyone is a troll, it's you, because the burden of proof is on the person making the extreme statements, not vice versa. I have made no accusation other than that nothing you have said supports your premise. (Speed cameras also don't make the country a police state, even if I agree that they are a bad idea.)
And once again, the filtering is not mandatory. http://www.hs.fi/kotimaa/artikkeli/Osa+operaattoreista+p%C3%A4%C3%A4st%C3%A4%C3%A4+kielletyille+verkkosivuille/1135234066254
Before you accuse me of bullshitting, maybe you should check your own facts. It is NOT MANDATORY for internet service providers. The blacklist is shit, its proponents are disgusting, and a lot of voters are morons, but it is NOT MANDATORY, and it does not make Finland a "police state".
And I really don't care whether you think those benefits are too much. The point is that it's not communism in disguise. Do you even know what communism is? (but apparently I'm the one who's "stupid")
Your apartment prices are also completely ridiculous, unless you insist that people with the lowest incomes should be able to live in premium locations.
"Finland is in a state of masqueraded communism, the taxes are highest in the world and living costs right up there too! For well above minimum wage job, you don't get even twice the amount of money to spend on things than on unemployment checks.
I were born in Finland, and like living here very much indeed, even so much i've denied some REALLY good positions offered to me abroad and stayed in Finland. However slowly i'm starting to rethink the sensibility of staying in Finland, due to things like this blacklist."
You think social security programs are "masqueraded communism" and are ready to leave the "police state" due to a misguided but non-mandatory blacklist? Boy will you be surprised at what's going on in the rest of the world if you ever decide to move for real. Maybe you should try something proactive like voting or running for parliament instead, if you want to make things better.
By the way, I've seen other people complain that those humongous unemployment benefits you talk about are barely enough for rent and food. The government can never win, it seems.
If 99% decide that your is how you spell you're, then yes it will unfortunately become true. However, that does not apply to technical terms. Most people probably don't know what a resistor is, but that doesn't mean everyone should follow if they start calling it capacitor.
Granted, "internet" is probably somewhere in the middle, but it's especially important in advertising to select words that are both correct and understandable. Otherwise you'll just get thousands of companies trying to subtly redefine things in their favor, resulting in a complete mess.
Also, if we accept that internet suddenly means world wide web, what will we call the network?
I admit that it's not relevant in this case, but in my opinion many of their ads are designed to leave the watcher with the impression that the iPhone is the first device that can access the internet properly. Even so, the point about Ubuntu stands.
As for examples of similar devices, Nokia's browser has been KHTML-based for at least two years.
Are you seriously trying to claim that it's OK to use the word "all" just because you haven't defined all="html,java,flash..."? Quoting dictionaries is usually stupid, but you may want to find one in this case.
Also, even if gopher were indeed the only problem, the claim is still not true. It doesn't matter if 99% of the population misunderstands it. There's no reason Apple has to use that exact wording, when it could easily be corrected.
Has Ubuntu created an advertising campaign where it implies that it's the only operating system that works properly on the internet, despite the fact that many others have more solid support apart from the user interface?
You're modded funny, but this IS another valid reason it's false advertising. If they want to decide what runs on the phone, they really can't claim it supports the whole internet. You can't have it both ways.
That comment about whether the government should really decide is very trollish. Supply and demand have in fact decided that many sites require flash*. The government is only enforcing truth in advertising. Not everything they do is automatically wrong, ok?
*no matter how much it may annoy us.
No, I don't think it absolutely has to have government intervention either so far. I tried to make it clear that I was objecting to their actions regardless of any need for government action.
Still, that kind of bundling was illegal in some countries until very recently, and I can't say I blame them. I would probably make the same decision myself. However, I repeat that this is only tangential to my main point. In any case we both seem to believe in a mostly free market, and only disagree in how much regulation it needs to function properly.
If this is summer, my god September will be bad.
I meant no interference outside of a clear monopoly situation. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
I could say it's a stupid model, but it's generally advisable to back up one's argument somehow.
You seem to want to take my points to extremes. Just as I didn't advocate immediate government sanctions, I didn't say that consumer protection is good because the government always knows best. Let me spell this out for you:
-the free market is based on consumers' self interest, and their making decisions that are best for themselves.
-Apple removes consumer choice through restrictive agreements with telecoms, and controlling the market for software on its devices. They now can't choose both the best phone and the best operator, should their definition of best be iPhone and an unsupported operator. Similarly, they can't choose both the best browser and phone, if they like the phone but not Safari. Their decision will be suboptimal by default.
-hence, Apple is violating the spirit of the free market while operating inside it.
Seriously, this is a bit more than just saying that I don't like their business model and therefore it violates the free market. Additionally:
-your argument seemed to be that no interference is good.
-the government offers consumer protection. Only the most insane libertarians would argue that things wouldn't go to hell if it was removed.
-therefore, interference is in fact sometimes warranted.
-however, this wasn't part of my original point, so it's not necessary to argue whether it's necessary in this case.
I am not demanding, I am criticizing. I thought that was still allowed under the free market, or is it now unpatriotic? If I was a review site telling people to avoid it because it doesn't work as it should, would that also violate Apple's right to do business as it pleases?
As for governments limiting business models, it's done all the time in the name of consumer protection. You don't have to be a full monopoly to be able to distort the market. In this case, I doubt most Apple customers are aware of the implications when they buy the product. But that's another issue, because I wasn't even trying to argue it.
Apple doesn't believe in the free market. If it did, you could buy an iPhone without a contract and install any application you want - like all the other smartphones on the market.
Before anyone points out that in a free market Apple can do whatever it wants, keep in mind that this doesn't prevent it from violating the spirit of said market. Bundling products like that used to be illegal in many countries until the telecoms lobbied the governments enough. The same logic that's used for open document standards can be used here: you wouldn't want your choice of car to force you into a certain chain of gas stations.
Or your choice of mp3 player dictate your choice of player software, for that matter...
OpenBSD uses ksh. Bash isn't installed by default, and iirc goes into /usr. In any case, scripts should only assume that /bin/sh is available.
Your exploit would fail on OpenBSD. It is truly more secure.
I don't know the specifics, but personally I always avoid installing software that isn't available in my distribution's repository. It's never worth the hassle unless it's something very specific, and then I'll probably compile from source. The biggest reason Windows is a pain in the ass, imho, is how many different update mechanisms are running at the same time. I have to provide the administrator password to something nearly every time I reboot my one Windows installation.
Considering using such a service on Linux has alarm bells ringing throughout my head. Especially when it was created by a company that encourages users to run as root, and attempted trademark violation against Microsoft. No thanks.
Why should Debian be like Ubuntu? New users could perfectly well use Suse, Mandrake or Red Hat before shit brown became fashionable.
While I don't actively dislike Ubuntu, I'm not a big fan because it feels like they equate usability with condescension. Many people, not limited to them, seem to think that it's impossible to create something that's both easy and powerful. I don't agree.
On the other hand, this argument also justifies its existence. The people who don't agree with me get to use what they prefer. Mostly I'm worried that a lot of new users with the potential to understand more won't realize that there are other options, since it gets so much publicity.
And once you discover what kind of driver support they offer, you go right back to Intel.
The new Intel G45 chipset recently made me order a new motherboard just to replace my video card. It's "fast enough", one might say...
Personally, I can't wait to get all that proprietary crap out of my kernel. Shouldn't have fallen for the temptation in the first place.
Or how about just initially releasing it in English for the vast majority of gamers who simply want to play the game? Even weirder is how the games are delayed even in those European countries that don't get a localized version.
Both sides are misunderstanding economics. People aren't, in fact, willing to pay that much anymore, but instead of lowering costs and selling movies online for $1 apiece they decide to waste even more money on DRM and bribing congressmen.
It's depressing that CEOs on a free market get lambasted continuously for receiving salaries based on demand, whereas actors and musicians are fawned over even more when they use their government granted monopoly power to buy 20 SUVs on one month's salary. I really hope some enterprising soul in Eastern Europe or something decides to start making quality movies in English, and puts those tossers in their place.
Only an actor could be smug enough to think he deserves that much, let alone more, for voicing a character in a video game.
No, this is a job for the government. If anyone has the power to defeat copy protected games, it's them. Vote Fairlight in 2008!