These are consumer products where 95% of the people with them have no idea what you are talking about, nor should they have to.
Absolutely, sure. But what you said above would likewise be true of even Apple, if they stopped doing iPhones for some reason. Yet the Android platform could legitimately outlive even Google's death.
I guess I think you're barking up the wrong tree, because while this would impact nearly anyone, it ought to impact Android the least - by design.
All it takes is a few vendors to drop the ball with bad implementations, or go out of business dropping support to create a bad association with Android.
If this happened, couldn't one just roll their own Android platform for it?
Isn't that kind of the point of the whole 'open source' angle?
I'm not an Android guy, so I'll just assume there's a reason why this is non-obvious...
I assume that samzenpus is a pedophile and can attest that neither he or his sexually deviant buddies use pedobear except as an internet joke.
I almost, almost, almost went there. Glad to see someone else drew that conclusion, because that really is just about the only position one could take to refute this claim. Hilarity ensues...
This summary is blatantly false after even only thirty seconds of looking at its links - for example:
The Pedo Bear began as an online Japanese cartoon character, and is known for his "lecherous nature" towards prepubescent children. Recently, pedophiles have adopted the bear as a mascot.
The summary omits that transition part, wherein the only valid application of Pedobear is that of a joke, and pedophiles haven't picked it up and ran with it. Now, should samzenpus somehow know that the police are wrong about this, then I'd expect to see some kind of supporting link in the same summary. Barring that, the 'golly-gee those are dumb cops' angle is intellectually insulting, isn't it?
I know we don't read TFA around here, I really do, but I just had to say something this time. Topic and content aren't even on the same logical planet...
And the immigration department cut off funding to the Canadian Arab Federation on grounds that its president regards Hamas and Hezbollah as "legitimate organizations."
A lock on the pilot's door would have solved the box cutter problem. Again, if terrorists were similarly inclined today, they could readily strangle and gouge their way into the exact same situation.
Our security theater of today is almost exclusively arbitrary. I'm purporting that non-dangerous tourist items being allowed on planes, particularly private planes, is not at all unreasonable, and this is why I empathize with Steve Jobs.
You're jumping the shark here. I'm suggesting that anyone ban Frank T Lofaro, I'm just pointing out that his comments are poisonous. Even in the form of a joke.
Bashing is fun, I know, but I swore off the stuff a few years back. Sometimes I relapse, but I'm only human.
That being said, I still prefer actual discussion with content in it, thanks.
Quite a lot, really. Again, you don't quite seem to know what these are. When we were kids, we had several, and attempted to get them to stick into things. It was basically impossible, on anything short of a dart board, unless you found some that were very, very sharp and pointy.
I'd let my 8 year old have a throwing star unsupervised. Not so much a razor blade.
My point is simply that even your fingers have decidedly more killing power than shuriken.
Your argument that only opinions with legal authority are worthy of analysis and rebuttal is equally idiotic. Further, it is off topic.
If Fox is convicted of any of a number of anti-American laws mentioned, yes, its activities could be curtailed to a certain extent.
Have any charges been yet brought? Because the topic to which I'm responding is:
Fox News is often full of abusive language towards the President. Can we ban them?:)
THAT is the topic here, and I have yet to see anything criminal within the realm of Fox's 'abusive language'.
Any rebuttal based on anything other than 'abusive language' is out of bounds.
In short, go bash Fox in someone else's thread. I'm responding to the chilling effect of eliminating parts of the press simply because we don't like them.
Lucky for Fox sheep, Obama isn't the dictator they ignorantly accuse him of being.
I think you'll find that Fox isn't the enemy here. It's the lack of liberals that's creating the 'dictator' emotion. Fox is just taking it all the way to the bank.
I have only sons, AC, and several of my very good friends are 'dirty Puerto Ricans'. As citizens, perhaps unsurprisingly, they don't care much for Mexicans themselves. Also illegal Mexican aliens ARE legally only visiting, are they not?
And again, if they have no political clout, why are they an election issue?
Color me a racist and a fanatic if you'd like, dear Coward, but at least TRY to touch on the points as you do so.
Finally, try being man enough to log in first. You'll find it liberating.
Really enlightening stuff. Fox News isn't really the problem with the 'because he is black' angle. Polarization is. And Obama is rather blind for not seeing that an endorsement for 'change' didn't necessarily mean 'liberal change'. Only 20% of those polled, on both sides of the isle, actually endorsed that sort of thing in 2009. Thusly, the whole 'secret agenda' thing has a lot more basis than it seems to at first glance.
Fox is feeding on this, to be sure, and inflaming it, but the actual emotions appear to be based on more reasonable things.
Do you really think we're unable to think for ourselves?
If you're asserting that there has been absolutely zero psychological programming directed at you, then I absolutely do question your judgement. As would any reasonable person.
The first thing you're taught is how to stop thinking. Then they build you up to think the way they want you to think. This is a well-established fact.
Are you really comparing the military to prison?
Are you really building men out of straw? I already made the comparison that's valid here. Both have rigid authority structures, both modify behavior, and both have pronounced impact on young minds. There are other organizations as well, like cults, Buddhist temples, and whatnot. I made no further comparison than that.
While you make a good point, I think it is more about their votes than their rights. Never mind that it should be impossible for an illegal to vote, we're going to pander to them anyway.
The purpose of the fifth amendment isn't to allow people to get off, it's to prevent the government from beating confessions out of people.
That's but a teeny, tiny facet of it. Protection against compulsory testimony also promises the use of evidence to convict you of actual wrong-doing. So while they cannot arbitrarily beat confessions out of you, neither can they hold you in contempt, nor prosecute you for obstruction. They have to look elsewhere for their convictions.
An officer who asks 'do you know why I stopped you' is in effect trampling on your rights. Or at least attempting to do so.
Slashdot Mirror
These are consumer products where 95% of the people with them have no idea what you are talking about, nor should they have to.
Absolutely, sure. But what you said above would likewise be true of even Apple, if they stopped doing iPhones for some reason. Yet the Android platform could legitimately outlive even Google's death.
I guess I think you're barking up the wrong tree, because while this would impact nearly anyone, it ought to impact Android the least - by design.
As long as you're tied to your vendors to provide your upgrades to you, you might as well be as closed source as anything that Microsoft puts out.
Why is this the case?
Why not get the updates from the manufacturer?
All it takes is a few vendors to drop the ball with bad implementations, or go out of business dropping support to create a bad association with Android.
If this happened, couldn't one just roll their own Android platform for it?
Isn't that kind of the point of the whole 'open source' angle?
I'm not an Android guy, so I'll just assume there's a reason why this is non-obvious...
I assume that samzenpus is a pedophile and can attest that neither he or his sexually deviant buddies use pedobear except as an internet joke.
I almost, almost, almost went there. Glad to see someone else drew that conclusion, because that really is just about the only position one could take to refute this claim. Hilarity ensues...
This summary is blatantly false after even only thirty seconds of looking at its links - for example:
The Pedo Bear began as an online Japanese cartoon character, and is known for his "lecherous nature" towards prepubescent children.
Recently, pedophiles have adopted the bear as a mascot.
The summary omits that transition part, wherein the only valid application of Pedobear is that of a joke, and pedophiles haven't picked it up and ran with it. Now, should samzenpus somehow know that the police are wrong about this, then I'd expect to see some kind of supporting link in the same summary. Barring that, the 'golly-gee those are dumb cops' angle is intellectually insulting, isn't it?
I know we don't read TFA around here, I really do, but I just had to say something this time. Topic and content aren't even on the same logical planet...
Not only is this not funny, nor informative, but shockingly dangerous.
Suggesting we ban press outlets is decidedly anti-American, whether you personally consider them of any value or not. Change the channel, not the law.
So we can assume you're already petitioning for an appeal on behalf of this kid?
Nope, but mostly on the grounds that it didn't actually happen.
I'd feel sorry for him, too, and wish that someone had better informed him of the laws before he tried to get on his plane as well.
Why would you assume otherwise?
I honestly didn't know that. That's sad.
And the immigration department cut off funding to the Canadian Arab Federation on grounds that its president regards Hamas and Hezbollah as "legitimate organizations."
Um, weren't they duly elected by their people?
Poor Canada.
No, I got it, but it is largely incorrect.
A lock on the pilot's door would have solved the box cutter problem. Again, if terrorists were similarly inclined today, they could readily strangle and gouge their way into the exact same situation.
Our security theater of today is almost exclusively arbitrary. I'm purporting that non-dangerous tourist items being allowed on planes, particularly private planes, is not at all unreasonable, and this is why I empathize with Steve Jobs.
Grrrr! I'm NOT suggesting...
You're jumping the shark here. I'm suggesting that anyone ban Frank T Lofaro, I'm just pointing out that his comments are poisonous. Even in the form of a joke.
Bashing is fun, I know, but I swore off the stuff a few years back. Sometimes I relapse, but I'm only human.
That being said, I still prefer actual discussion with content in it, thanks.
Quite a lot, really. Again, you don't quite seem to know what these are. When we were kids, we had several, and attempted to get them to stick into things. It was basically impossible, on anything short of a dart board, unless you found some that were very, very sharp and pointy.
I'd let my 8 year old have a throwing star unsupervised. Not so much a razor blade.
My point is simply that even your fingers have decidedly more killing power than shuriken.
Not only did I note it, but I'm disagreeing with the humor of it. I even said so in the first five words of my post.
This is sort of like 'dead baby' jokes to me - too serious a subject to enjoy in this manner.
Your argument that only opinions with legal authority are worthy of analysis and rebuttal is equally idiotic. Further, it is off topic.
If Fox is convicted of any of a number of anti-American laws mentioned, yes, its activities could be curtailed to a certain extent.
Have any charges been yet brought? Because the topic to which I'm responding is:
Fox News is often full of abusive language towards the President. Can we ban them? :)
THAT is the topic here, and I have yet to see anything criminal within the realm of Fox's 'abusive language'.
Any rebuttal based on anything other than 'abusive language' is out of bounds.
In short, go bash Fox in someone else's thread. I'm responding to the chilling effect of eliminating parts of the press simply because we don't like them.
Lucky for Fox sheep, Obama isn't the dictator they ignorantly accuse him of being.
Go read the paper I've linked here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1786900&cid=33579428
I think you'll find that Fox isn't the enemy here. It's the lack of liberals that's creating the 'dictator' emotion. Fox is just taking it all the way to the bank.
Check it out!
Press outlets should not be allowed to spread patently false information.
Why not? Every single one does it regularly, both intentionally and accidentally.
I have only sons, AC, and several of my very good friends are 'dirty Puerto Ricans'. As citizens, perhaps unsurprisingly, they don't care much for Mexicans themselves. Also illegal Mexican aliens ARE legally only visiting, are they not?
And again, if they have no political clout, why are they an election issue?
Color me a racist and a fanatic if you'd like, dear Coward, but at least TRY to touch on the points as you do so.
Finally, try being man enough to log in first. You'll find it liberating.
So you're not aware of what shuriken are? Or you're asserting that they match somehow the destructive capabilities of a bomb?
And because you apply this label, they ought to loose their First Amendment protections???
Now that they're leading protests for... I guess they're protesting that Obama is black.
Read this, then come back here:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1643323
Really enlightening stuff. Fox News isn't really the problem with the 'because he is black' angle. Polarization is. And Obama is rather blind for not seeing that an endorsement for 'change' didn't necessarily mean 'liberal change'. Only 20% of those polled, on both sides of the isle, actually endorsed that sort of thing in 2009. Thusly, the whole 'secret agenda' thing has a lot more basis than it seems to at first glance.
Fox is feeding on this, to be sure, and inflaming it, but the actual emotions appear to be based on more reasonable things.
Anyway, read the paper.
Do you really think we're unable to think for ourselves?
If you're asserting that there has been absolutely zero psychological programming directed at you, then I absolutely do question your judgement. As would any reasonable person.
The first thing you're taught is how to stop thinking. Then they build you up to think the way they want you to think. This is a well-established fact.
Are you really comparing the military to prison?
Are you really building men out of straw? I already made the comparison that's valid here. Both have rigid authority structures, both modify behavior, and both have pronounced impact on young minds. There are other organizations as well, like cults, Buddhist temples, and whatnot. I made no further comparison than that.
Why? Squatter's rights is a Civil Right now?
The same arguments could be made for any other kind of mind-altering, highly-institutionalized scenarios, like prison.
Or college.
It could, but in the opposite direction. College tends to encourage acting out, exploring drugs/alcohol, etc.
While you make a good point, I think it is more about their votes than their rights. Never mind that it should be impossible for an illegal to vote, we're going to pander to them anyway.
The purpose of the fifth amendment isn't to allow people to get off, it's to prevent the government from beating confessions out of people.
That's but a teeny, tiny facet of it. Protection against compulsory testimony also promises the use of evidence to convict you of actual wrong-doing. So while they cannot arbitrarily beat confessions out of you, neither can they hold you in contempt, nor prosecute you for obstruction. They have to look elsewhere for their convictions.
An officer who asks 'do you know why I stopped you' is in effect trampling on your rights. Or at least attempting to do so.
Except they're likely not weapons at all. Just sharp pieces of metal. Tourist grist, and little else.
Or are you asserting that Jobs is a trained Ninja and was likewise smuggling a file to sharpen them?