Remember what Slashdot said about the iPod, iPhone, and iPad?
ALL of these are *different hardware devices* from a PC. Their interfaces are new, because the device is different. That's fair enough. Windows 8 is talking about taking the interface for an *existing device* (the PC) and fucking around with it in a most unwelcome way. That's a big difference.
If Windows 8 were just a table OS, fair enough. As it is, Microsoft should really be telling people to stick with Windows7 for the PC - I suspect I'll find myself formatting and installing that (or Linux) if I find myself with a pre-installed Windows 8.
What's stopping you from, say, firing up a word processor on an iPad (or Galaxy Tab, if you prefer), and using a Bluetooth keyboard paired with it, to write a novel?
And thus transforming it back into a pc again? Maybe you could have a stand to dock the laptop screen in, emulating the pc screen, and then a pc mouse. 'Tablet' is just basically a form factor. By the time you've gotten it back to a form factor suitable for writing a novel, it's easier to look at it as a pc in a small case than a tablet with peripherals.
Except people are afraid that they'll be locked away in Guantanamo Bay for showing people how to circumvent federal security measured put in place to thwart terrorists.
And people are seeing them naked when in fact they're wearing clothes.
Whereas if you tell some people to wear a seatbelt or a helmet for safety during their drive from Omaha to Kansas City, they'll consider it a trampling of their rights and bitterly oppose any law that forces them to do so. On top of that, driving is less safe than flying.
It's just bizarre.
No, it's human psychology.
We tend to feel more 'in control' when we're driving and so will think that we can decide on what safety measures are appropriate for us. However if a plane is hijacked and crashed, we feel that we will be totally out of control and so it's more frightening.
The fix is to remove the police campaign abilities
100% agree, but Theresa May (alone) isn't "the problem" - she's just Home Secretary. I can't remember in my lifetime ANY Home Secretaries that have given a shit about civil liberties. Either they're weak-willed and cave into ACPO as you said, or they're strong willed and think up the Orwellian ideas themselves (think David Blunkett, Michael Howard). There's no such thing as a good Home Secretary.
Supplement with wind and solar (in fact, even replace completely with wind and solar if the technology advances to the point at which it's practical to do so
Why? When you get to safe nuclear fission and even nuclear fusion, there's pretty much NO benefit to using wind and solar. They provide small amounts of power with an unreliable baseload, and we have enough nuclear material to keep us in nuclear power for 100000s of years.
In short, I have every respect for Islam, but I have nothing but disrespect for your way of thinking of your religion. Fuck you you backwards ignorant tribal assholes. You don't stand for Islam. Any REAL Muslim with REAL CONFIDENCE in their religion would not care what some doubtful journalist tweets. Any cowardly, spineless, and completely without confidence person, who does not represent anything good about Islam, would get upset so easily.
You don't understand Islam. If you did, you wouldn't have any respect for it. The Saudis are practising Islam 'correcly'.
Communistic regimes have been another subset of totalitarianism, as religion is. It is the totalitarian nature of various murderous Communist regimes (worship and follow a leader or a small set of leaders unquestioningly) that has caused deaths, not the fact that it was a non-religious version of totalitarianism.
... and before virtually every mainstream reporter started automatically condemning any violence (certainly any shooting). Basically, you fire a gun at an important person, and you get arrested and never allowed to partake in free society again.
Our social interactions have become a perverted version of what we've evolved for, and patterns of interaction through technology abuse the neurological mechanisms responsible for controlling communication and other social aspects of the mind
I don't really understand why modern social interactions are 'preverting' or 'abusing' our evolutionary neurological mechanisms. Care to expand on that? It seems to me that we're communicating in different ways, and over greater distances... but that doesn't really mean your statement is true.
Our morals/ethics are not equipped for situations that have no analogy whatsoever to anything in our evolutionary past. If we extend ourselves, we would have to extend our morals and ethics too, and the latter extension is basically arbitrary.
Virtually all of our morals and ethics beyond "don't kill too many people" (which must be hardwired into the surviving because the others died when they killed each other) are an arbitrary creation of culture. I think you could even make a (relatively miserable) society survive with a morality that stealing and raping was OK. It would just be far from the most happy society - as indeed today's societies are in many ways.
Refinement: copyright duration is 10 years - period. We need politicians with the balls to just fucking do this and tell the copyright cartel to fuck off. Oh, and a political system (particularly in the US) that isn't built around the requirement for politicians to take constant, large bribes (this is not hyperbole).
on topic: g+ will be seen as the new myspace soon enough. nice going, goog. you're on your way to being irrelevant (again).
What? This is utter bullshit. G+ isn't a millionth as shitty as Myspace was, and in fact has some nice features that Facebook doesn't (eg. Circles, Hangouts).
And if you were thinking of voting for Obama to fight SOPA, don't. Quote:
I will go anywhere in the world to open new markets for American products. And I will not stand by when our competitors donâ(TM)t play by the rules. Weâ(TM)ve brought trade cases against China at nearly twice the rate as the last administration â" and itâ(TM)s made a difference. (Applause.) Over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires. But we need to do more. Itâ(TM)s not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. Itâ(TM)s not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because theyâ(TM)re heavily subsidized.
Exactly. And in this case, the defendant had previously infringed on the copyright of the plaintiff, and went out the reimplement the photograph just to avoid further licensing fees. The judge is simply reminding the defendant, "yeah, you can't do that now."
Then that sucks. I don't agree that this definition of copyright is remotely in the public interest, and I think it should be revoked.
So not only is Google inflating the number of users on their social network so they can boast millions of users, they are forcing everyone to make a profile that is public by default.
Slashdot Mirror
Be it to check wikipedia, look up some random cat video someone mentioned, display the rules of the game we're playing, ...
I would use my Android smartphone for all of those, and it fits in my pocket.
Remember what Slashdot said about the iPod, iPhone, and iPad?
ALL of these are *different hardware devices* from a PC. Their interfaces are new, because the device is different. That's fair enough. Windows 8 is talking about taking the interface for an *existing device* (the PC) and fucking around with it in a most unwelcome way. That's a big difference.
If Windows 8 were just a table OS, fair enough. As it is, Microsoft should really be telling people to stick with Windows7 for the PC - I suspect I'll find myself formatting and installing that (or Linux) if I find myself with a pre-installed Windows 8.
What's stopping you from, say, firing up a word processor on an iPad (or Galaxy Tab, if you prefer), and using a Bluetooth keyboard paired with it, to write a novel?
And thus transforming it back into a pc again? Maybe you could have a stand to dock the laptop screen in, emulating the pc screen, and then a pc mouse. 'Tablet' is just basically a form factor. By the time you've gotten it back to a form factor suitable for writing a novel, it's easier to look at it as a pc in a small case than a tablet with peripherals.
It's like the emperor's new clothes...
Except people are afraid that they'll be locked away in Guantanamo Bay for showing people how to circumvent federal security measured put in place to thwart terrorists.
And people are seeing them naked when in fact they're wearing clothes.
Whereas if you tell some people to wear a seatbelt or a helmet for safety during their drive from Omaha to Kansas City, they'll consider it a trampling of their rights and bitterly oppose any law that forces them to do so. On top of that, driving is less safe than flying.
It's just bizarre.
No, it's human psychology.
We tend to feel more 'in control' when we're driving and so will think that we can decide on what safety measures are appropriate for us. However if a plane is hijacked and crashed, we feel that we will be totally out of control and so it's more frightening.
No way. Some of us like the original effects. I don't want TNG to look like fucking Enterprise. I'm keeping my DVD collection, thank you very much.
What's the point in only starring the first letter of the acronym? MPAA has two different letters.
Then they'll rename it the Protecting Efforts to Distribute Offerings to Stabilised Current eUroprean Markets Act.
The pedos' cum act? That's not a great name.
My future grandchildren are the ones who will have to pay for this stupidity.
And theirs.
Personally I predict Republicans are going to be very disappointed if they don't nominate Romney.
It comes to something when Romney, the quarter-billionaire who believes in slashing taxes for the rich, is seen as the 'moderate' candidate.
In other words, there is no such thing as a true, fixed interpretation of a religion or ideology
Well, it's hard to interpret Islam as anything BUT hypocritical.
Here is my Tetris implementation:
However, it only works on custom Javascript interpreters which have a global a() function that implements a full game of Tetris.
The fix is to remove the police campaign abilities
100% agree, but Theresa May (alone) isn't "the problem" - she's just Home Secretary. I can't remember in my lifetime ANY Home Secretaries that have given a shit about civil liberties. Either they're weak-willed and cave into ACPO as you said, or they're strong willed and think up the Orwellian ideas themselves (think David Blunkett, Michael Howard). There's no such thing as a good Home Secretary.
Supplement with wind and solar (in fact, even replace completely with wind and solar if the technology advances to the point at which it's practical to do so
Why? When you get to safe nuclear fission and even nuclear fusion, there's pretty much NO benefit to using wind and solar. They provide small amounts of power with an unreliable baseload, and we have enough nuclear material to keep us in nuclear power for 100000s of years.
Well-regulated nuclear power is green energy, in my book.
In short, I have every respect for Islam, but I have nothing but disrespect for your way of thinking of your religion. Fuck you you backwards ignorant tribal assholes. You don't stand for Islam. Any REAL Muslim with REAL CONFIDENCE in their religion would not care what some doubtful journalist tweets. Any cowardly, spineless, and completely without confidence person, who does not represent anything good about Islam, would get upset so easily.
You don't understand Islam. If you did, you wouldn't have any respect for it. The Saudis are practising Islam 'correcly'.
Communistic regimes have been another subset of totalitarianism, as religion is. It is the totalitarian nature of various murderous Communist regimes (worship and follow a leader or a small set of leaders unquestioningly) that has caused deaths, not the fact that it was a non-religious version of totalitarianism.
Hey, lawyers: You Forgot Poland!
... and before virtually every mainstream reporter started automatically condemning any violence (certainly any shooting). Basically, you fire a gun at an important person, and you get arrested and never allowed to partake in free society again.
Our social interactions have become a perverted version of what we've evolved for, and patterns of interaction through technology abuse the neurological mechanisms responsible for controlling communication and other social aspects of the mind
I don't really understand why modern social interactions are 'preverting' or 'abusing' our evolutionary neurological mechanisms. Care to expand on that? It seems to me that we're communicating in different ways, and over greater distances... but that doesn't really mean your statement is true.
Our morals/ethics are not equipped for situations that have no analogy whatsoever to anything in our evolutionary past. If we extend ourselves, we would have to extend our morals and ethics too, and the latter extension is basically arbitrary.
Virtually all of our morals and ethics beyond "don't kill too many people" (which must be hardwired into the surviving because the others died when they killed each other) are an arbitrary creation of culture. I think you could even make a (relatively miserable) society survive with a morality that stealing and raping was OK. It would just be far from the most happy society - as indeed today's societies are in many ways.
Refinement: copyright duration is 10 years - period. We need politicians with the balls to just fucking do this and tell the copyright cartel to fuck off. Oh, and a political system (particularly in the US) that isn't built around the requirement for politicians to take constant, large bribes (this is not hyperbole).
on topic: g+ will be seen as the new myspace soon enough. nice going, goog. you're on your way to being irrelevant (again).
What? This is utter bullshit. G+ isn't a millionth as shitty as Myspace was, and in fact has some nice features that Facebook doesn't (eg. Circles, Hangouts).
And if you were thinking of voting for Obama to fight SOPA, don't. Quote:
Exactly. And in this case, the defendant had previously infringed on the copyright of the plaintiff, and went out the reimplement the photograph just to avoid further licensing fees. The judge is simply reminding the defendant, "yeah, you can't do that now."
Then that sucks. I don't agree that this definition of copyright is remotely in the public interest, and I think it should be revoked.
So not only is Google inflating the number of users on their social network so they can boast millions of users, they are forcing everyone to make a profile that is public by default.
Great point. I just +1'd your post.