I am no Luddite. I am all for modern technology. I started programming in 1977. Any techie with a few brain cells would never pay for the privilege of using a locked-down dumbed-down toy spy computer. Did you not read "1984" ? These so-called "smart" devices are telescreens. Or are you so hoodwinked by the groupthink you can't see that?
The sheep are so scared to stop rudely shoving their thumbs on their treacherous so-called "smart" so-called "telephones," they have lost all ability to interact with the real world anyway. Your papers please. Move along, nothing to see.
Is this what we wanted personal computers to become?
Why would anyone think that even having one of these treacherous so-called "smart" so-called "telephones" powered on is anything but a complete security disaster? Those are not telephones, they are locked-down computers, not under your control, running unknown quantities of unknown blobs of proprietary software doing who-knows-what and storing it all to blackmail you later.
...his (program) was removed from the (program) Store by Apple for being too similar to (another program)
Would Microsoft have ever permitted WordPerfect or Lotus 1-2-3 in the "DOS Program Store"? Anyone developing programs for these treacherous (allegedly "smart") devices gets what they deserve. It seems the entire world is suffering some kind of brain cancer or Stockholm Syndrome with these insidious devices.
"Apps" are the exact opposite of what Personal Computers are supposed to be. Stop giving them your time and money.
For twenty years we thought "My Computer" meant *my* computer. Now we know it was Bill Gates (and Ballmer, Nadella, et al) claiming *your* computer as *theirs*. (Your computer is my computer!)
Marketing: "Computers" are scary, let's call this computer a "telephone" (a device that only handles voice) and deceive folks into trusting our treacherous spy machines and paying us handsomely each month for the privilege.
How many people honestly run a mobile device with no app store?
My flip-phone serves all the functions of a telephone (you can talk on it). Honestly, how can anyone who reads Slashdot use one of those locked-down user-hostile spy-computers that the gullible masses have been tricked into calling "smart" "telephones"? "Smart" is just a euphemism for "Treacherous." Stallman was right.
Instead of "Smart" just say "Treacherous" -- as in, treacherous appliances, treacherous toys, and treacherous "telephones" which are entirely treacherous computers that give you only the flimsiest illusion of control.
Does this include my (T-Mobile) flip-phone and my home and office VOIP telephones? In 1996, USWest (before they were Qwest or CenturyLink) gave me One Number service that would ring both my mobile (if it was on) and my land-line (if it wasn't busy) and have a single voicemail box between them. For the past 15 years, apparently, that would be too advanced of a technology for anyone to offer. Sad.
Can we please stop calling these gadgets "telephones" --? Telephones are devices with embedded systems that can handle Telephony and not much else. These so-called "smart" so-called "telephones" are actually locked-down computers for the brainless masses: computers controlled by someone else and not you.
From that perspective, since the user already has no actual control of what their device is actually doing, why would anyone not expect the treachery be relentlessly notched up beyond its already intolerable levels?
Isn't it quite a marketing coup to get folks to think of these devices as a non-threatening "telephone" when they are actually treacherous hand-held computers utterly controlled by someone else?
Any nerd should know that if it's not under BSD, GPL, or another free license, and unless you can see the source code for everything, it's probably phoning home constantly. This is what Stallman and EFF warned us about with Treacherous Computing, and anyone who uses a so-called "smart" anything is a willing enabler. Dump these parasites now.
Why on Odin's green earth would a telephone need a barometer? Does it also have a temperature probe, and wind and rain gauges? A telephone should have an earpiece and a mouthpiece and precious little else.
Having killed the rest of the electronics industry (can't find a single retailer in all of Greater Chicagoland that sells tabletop HD radios, having been told repeatedly, by high-end stereo places even, that "nobody listens to radio anymore") the so-called "smart" so-called "telephones" are now eating themselves into singularity. Everyone else even at the Linux meetings has one of those spy-machines that exclusively runs closed proprietary software. What the heck happened to reality? Is there anyone else left, immune to this brain-eating cancer?
A story earlier today mentioned "facial recognitiation" -- probably because some folks are insisting "orientated" is acceptable instead of "oriented." Now we have "a software" and "a firmware" and "several informations"... and presumably you can food yourself (if "gift" is a verb, when it should be "give") while driving on "the Interstate Highway 10 limited access highway" (instead of simply saying you were on I-10). Sigh.
Slashdot Mirror
I am no Luddite. I am all for modern technology. I started programming in 1977. Any techie with a few brain cells would never pay for the privilege of using a locked-down dumbed-down toy spy computer. Did you not read "1984" ? These so-called "smart" devices are telescreens. Or are you so hoodwinked by the groupthink you can't see that?
What telephone number do I dial to hail an "Uber" ? I do not have a so-called "smart" so-called "telephone".
Just because an Azure instance crashes, along with an entire Windows stack, does not make this a news-for-nerds story.
The sheep are so scared to stop rudely shoving their thumbs on their treacherous so-called "smart" so-called "telephones," they have lost all ability to interact with the real world anyway. Your papers please. Move along, nothing to see.
Is this what we wanted personal computers to become?
Why would anyone think that even having one of these treacherous so-called "smart" so-called "telephones" powered on is anything but a complete security disaster? Those are not telephones, they are locked-down computers, not under your control, running unknown quantities of unknown blobs of proprietary software doing who-knows-what and storing it all to blackmail you later.
Would Microsoft have ever permitted WordPerfect or Lotus 1-2-3 in the "DOS Program Store"? Anyone developing programs for these treacherous (allegedly "smart") devices gets what they deserve. It seems the entire world is suffering some kind of brain cancer or Stockholm Syndrome with these insidious devices.
"Apps" are the exact opposite of what Personal Computers are supposed to be. Stop giving them your time and money.
I have been easily reading Perl programs since Reagan was president, but Twitter is still line noise. When will there be a secret decoder ring?
For twenty years we thought "My Computer" meant *my* computer. Now we know it was Bill Gates (and Ballmer, Nadella, et al) claiming *your* computer as *theirs*. (Your computer is my computer!)
Suddenly it all makes sense.
Marketing: "Computers" are scary, let's call this computer a "telephone" (a device that only handles voice) and deceive folks into trusting our treacherous spy machines and paying us handsomely each month for the privilege.
Moron Consumers: "Ooh, shiny!"
"XP" in this context surely must mean something else, but Wikipedia and Google are no help, nor is UrbanDictionary. Can anyone enlighten us?
I don't want a car that breaks, automatically or not.
I would ask if you used a software, but instead I'll just turn off a hardware and go read a literature. *sigh*
My flip-phone serves all the functions of a telephone (you can talk on it). Honestly, how can anyone who reads Slashdot use one of those locked-down user-hostile spy-computers that the gullible masses have been tricked into calling "smart" "telephones"? "Smart" is just a euphemism for "Treacherous." Stallman was right.
Surely it should be "disoriented" or have I been misinformated? (From "orient" meaning the East, or to find the direction East).
Spurious word endings do not beautificate your language and should be omissionated.
Instead of "Smart" just say "Treacherous" -- as in, treacherous appliances, treacherous toys, and treacherous "telephones" which are entirely treacherous computers that give you only the flimsiest illusion of control.
Must have 25 years experience in Java and JavaScript, 40 years experience with IBM mainframes and IMS+CICS+TSO, and a target salary of $18,000.
Does this include my (T-Mobile) flip-phone and my home and office VOIP telephones? In 1996, USWest (before they were Qwest or CenturyLink) gave me One Number service that would ring both my mobile (if it was on) and my land-line (if it wasn't busy) and have a single voicemail box between them. For the past 15 years, apparently, that would be too advanced of a technology for anyone to offer. Sad.
Can we please stop calling these gadgets "telephones" --? Telephones are devices with embedded systems that can handle Telephony and not much else. These so-called "smart" so-called "telephones" are actually locked-down computers for the brainless masses: computers controlled by someone else and not you.
From that perspective, since the user already has no actual control of what their device is actually doing, why would anyone not expect the treachery be relentlessly notched up beyond its already intolerable levels?
(c) You want a screen at least a large as a 1948 television set.
(d) You want a keyboard that lets you actually type, as opposed to the experience of poking at a keyboard with a stick attached to your nose.
Isn't it quite a marketing coup to get folks to think of these devices as a non-threatening "telephone" when they are actually treacherous hand-held computers utterly controlled by someone else?
Any nerd should know that if it's not under BSD, GPL, or another free license, and unless you can see the source code for everything, it's probably phoning home constantly. This is what Stallman and EFF warned us about with Treacherous Computing, and anyone who uses a so-called "smart" anything is a willing enabler. Dump these parasites now.
Why on Odin's green earth would a telephone need a barometer? Does it also have a temperature probe, and wind and rain gauges? A telephone should have an earpiece and a mouthpiece and precious little else.
Having killed the rest of the electronics industry (can't find a single retailer in all of Greater Chicagoland that sells tabletop HD radios, having been told repeatedly, by high-end stereo places even, that "nobody listens to radio anymore") the so-called "smart" so-called "telephones" are now eating themselves into singularity. Everyone else even at the Linux meetings has one of those spy-machines that exclusively runs closed proprietary software. What the heck happened to reality? Is there anyone else left, immune to this brain-eating cancer?
Why would any company want C leadership these days, when C Programming Language's Tiobe Rating [has] Drop[ped] To Lowest Level in decades? Surely some Python or even a modern Perl leadership would be far superior.
A story earlier today mentioned "facial recognitiation" -- probably because some folks are insisting "orientated" is acceptable instead of "oriented." Now we have "a software" and "a firmware" and "several informations" ... and presumably you can food yourself (if "gift" is a verb, when it should be "give") while driving on "the Interstate Highway 10 limited access highway" (instead of simply saying you were on I-10). Sigh.