> So when electronics were competing, their solution wasn't to put limits on it, but > rather to just banish it all. T
They're allowed stuff from 1986 and before. So they can pay $$$ for original Atari VCS2600 consoles/games,but not a cheap PC and a copy of Stella and some ROMS. Makes sense.
No, but I do thing that many, many people would have bought a Nokia quality Android phone, and Microsoft didn't want to take the chance of waiting for Elop's arguably* deliberate damage to the Nokia brand/shareprice/future to recover with a successful, popular range of phones people actually want to buy.
*In court, I'd say that I didn't really believe this.
> eg. Cellphone with 1 year warranty but sold on a 2 year contract. The carrier > expects the phone to last 2 years as thats the period of contract they sold with the > phone, so if the phone fails in that time then you can claim it was not fit for purpose.
Nice in theory. I'm in the UK and my HTC Desire broke after little over a year, in an 18 month contract. Orange refused to pay the £60 it cost HTC to repair (it was a faulty usb socket). I left Orange 6 months later and don't buy HTC stuff any more. I suppose I could have taken time off work and gone to court. There's a market here, I support, for people to do this sort of thing on people's behalf.
I'm sure they've got the next disease ready - be ready for `new cases` of a `previously unknown illness` or perhaps a single instance or two from the last 30 odd years (ie during testing).
>the RM has already been broken up and sold off in stages, each made worse: > PO Telephones became British Telecom became British Telecom Plc. in the '80s.
No. BT were a joke. I'm using a competitor. Cheaper and better.
Royal Mail are useless. I emailed Amazon begging them to use other people to deliver, not Royal Mail. This happened:
They lied about posting stuff which didn't turn up; cards appeared at my door saying `you were out` when I was not out etc.
They expect overtime when they finish their shift early (they're paid by the hour).
Get rid of them, and introduce competition. I don't need the mail much, but when I do, I want it to turn up on time, not end up lost (stolen, let's be honest)
Depends what you mean by ally. Some sort of technical definition, or the everyday one, which is basically a friend. Most US "charity" goes to Israel, they veto everything negative about Israel at the UN etc, have endless defence/tech/it/spying related arrangements with them. I'm not sure what it is to not be an ally in that context, nor how meaningful it is. Israel doesn't have a closer ally.
Is there any particular reason why people don't strengthen AES (or any other symmetric encryption) by just reencrypting 1000 times? Perhaps interleaving each encryption with encrypting with the first 1, then 2 etc. It would make next to no difference for the end user, who's going to decrypt just once, but I imagine it would add a lot more time to the cracking of the encrypted data than increasing the size of the key.
Why would I want 3D? I thought 3D was dead anyway - no-one wants it anywhere.
Microsoft, trying to innovate. How embarrassing. Surely there's another company they can buy some kinect-like tech off to at least give the impression they have a clue about what's going on in the industry?
I spent some time on that site and couldn't work that out. Note though that they didn't say he was violating anything, just that he needs to handle complaints and requests for info according to their rules.
> What's the difference between the two? In the first case I don't respond. I find out > my wife is driving, via a text from her which means she's driving, reading texts while > driving, and responding to texts while driving, and I can reasonably infer that if I send > her something else she'll respond to that too. I avoid responding.
Whilst I can imagine that may be a crime somewhere, it's a stupid piece of law.
A better law would allow that you text someone, knowing full well that they're driving, trusting that they have the common sense not to read it whilst they are driving; if they cause an accident reading/replying, that's their problem not yours, because you just sent a message.
What, the law now is that immediately upon realising they're driving you have to wait for them to text you before you can text them again? I mean, after all, you might leave it 6 hours, text them, and discover they were driving across the country. What if you text them with `after you've stopped and pulled over safely, please phone me`? What about an email to a driver with a smartphone? Turn by turn navigation? That ok? "Turn left in half a mile" is ok but a little beep to show that a text has arrived makes you guilty of some retarded "well we've got to blame someone" law?
> Conversely, one would think that thinking about religion and faith would trigger moral > behavior
One wouldn't. A 2000+ year old book (older, in some cases) fraudulently constructed by ignorant, illiterate peasant halfwits from a time before justice and democracy is not conducive to challenging beliefs or finding accurate answers to relevant problems. That's why the most religious countries are the most fucked.
I guess so. Unless you think it should be called an `undocumented API` in that case. Doesn't seem to bring much to the table; calling it something else would bring even less.
I got the nook because it's the same price as the 7 but with a bigger screen and better build quality. I don't care about which version of android it's got as long as it's not ancient. V4 is good enough for me.
No. Nerds want the very latest - 4.3, say, instead of 4.2.2, but 99.9999% of users could not care less and have absolutely no knowledge of the difference between these releases. Developers have to deal, to some extent, with fragmentation, but nowadays that's more related to screen sizes etc than Android versions.
Slashdot Mirror
> So when electronics were competing, their solution wasn't to put limits on it, but
> rather to just banish it all. T
They're allowed stuff from 1986 and before. So they can pay $$$ for original Atari VCS2600 consoles/games,but not a cheap PC and a copy of Stella and some ROMS. Makes sense.
No, but I do thing that many, many people would have bought a Nokia quality Android phone, and Microsoft didn't want to take the chance of waiting for Elop's arguably* deliberate damage to the Nokia brand/shareprice/future to recover with a successful, popular range of phones people actually want to buy.
*In court, I'd say that I didn't really believe this.
> eg. Cellphone with 1 year warranty but sold on a 2 year contract. The carrier
> expects the phone to last 2 years as thats the period of contract they sold with the
> phone, so if the phone fails in that time then you can claim it was not fit for purpose.
Nice in theory. I'm in the UK and my HTC Desire broke after little over a year, in an 18 month contract. Orange refused to pay the £60 it cost HTC to repair (it was a faulty usb socket). I left Orange 6 months later and don't buy HTC stuff any more. I suppose I could have taken time off work and gone to court. There's a market here, I support, for people to do this sort of thing on people's behalf.
I'm sure they've got the next disease ready - be ready for `new cases` of a `previously unknown illness` or perhaps a single instance or two from the last 30 odd years (ie during testing).
>the RM has already been broken up and sold off in stages, each made worse:
> PO Telephones became British Telecom became British Telecom Plc. in the '80s.
No. BT were a joke. I'm using a competitor. Cheaper and better.
Royal Mail are useless. I emailed Amazon begging them to use other people to deliver, not Royal Mail. This happened:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6768983.stm
They lied about posting stuff which didn't turn up; cards appeared at my door saying `you were out` when I was not out etc.
They expect overtime when they finish their shift early (they're paid by the hour).
Get rid of them, and introduce competition. I don't need the mail much, but when I do, I want it to turn up on time, not end up lost (stolen, let's be honest)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-188892/Quarter-million-letters-lost-week.html
> Israel is not formally an ally of the US
Depends what you mean by ally. Some sort of technical definition, or the everyday one, which is basically a friend. Most US "charity" goes to Israel, they veto everything negative about Israel at the UN etc, have endless defence/tech/it/spying related arrangements with them. I'm not sure what it is to not be an ally in that context, nor how meaningful it is. Israel doesn't have a closer ally.
Is there any particular reason why people don't strengthen AES (or any other symmetric encryption) by just reencrypting 1000 times? Perhaps interleaving each encryption with encrypting with the first 1, then 2 etc. It would make next to no difference for the end user, who's going to decrypt just once, but I imagine it would add a lot more time to the cracking of the encrypted data than increasing the size of the key.
> Do you actually know what airplane mode does?
Yes. Apparently you don't. You turn airplane mode on, then turn wifi on (which doesn't disable airplane mode).
> Any device which didn't do that would be in violation of FCC rules.
I live in the UK, and my phone was made by a Korean company, and I on holiday in Thailand, so I'm not really bothered about the FCC.
No, it doesn't. I always use Wifi abroad when I want to surf but not make/receive any calls.
Uhh.. apart from all data sent and received over WiFi.
Why would I want 3D? I thought 3D was dead anyway - no-one wants it anywhere.
Microsoft, trying to innovate. How embarrassing. Surely there's another company they can buy some kinect-like tech off to at least give the impression they have a clue about what's going on in the industry?
I spent some time on that site and couldn't work that out. Note though that they didn't say he was violating anything, just that he needs to handle complaints and requests for info according to their rules.
> What's the difference between the two? In the first case I don't respond. I find out
> my wife is driving, via a text from her which means she's driving, reading texts while
> driving, and responding to texts while driving, and I can reasonably infer that if I send
> her something else she'll respond to that too. I avoid responding.
Whilst I can imagine that may be a crime somewhere, it's a stupid piece of law.
A better law would allow that you text someone, knowing full well that they're driving, trusting that they have the common sense not to read it whilst they are driving; if they cause an accident reading/replying, that's their problem not yours, because you just sent a message.
What, the law now is that immediately upon realising they're driving you have to wait for them to text you before you can text them again? I mean, after all, you might leave it 6 hours, text them, and discover they were driving across the country. What if you text them with `after you've stopped and pulled over safely, please phone me`? What about an email to a driver with a smartphone? Turn by turn navigation? That ok? "Turn left in half a mile" is ok but a little beep to show that a text has arrived makes you guilty of some retarded "well we've got to blame someone" law?
Do tell - if I spoke about red cars, would you assume that I meant that all cars were red?
> Conversely, one would think that thinking about religion and faith would trigger moral
> behavior
One wouldn't. A 2000+ year old book (older, in some cases) fraudulently constructed by ignorant, illiterate peasant halfwits from a time before justice and democracy is not conducive to challenging beliefs or finding accurate answers to relevant problems. That's why the most religious countries are the most fucked.
I guess so. Unless you think it should be called an `undocumented API` in that case. Doesn't seem to bring much to the table; calling it something else would bring even less.
Is the phrase 'significant other' unfamiliar to you?
Even in theory, how's that supposed to work?
I got the nook because it's the same price as the 7 but with a bigger screen and better build quality. I don't care about which version of android it's got as long as it's not ancient. V4 is good enough for me.
What, like war crimes are just part of running any reasonably sized country?
Marg bar america fallafel kebab jihad....
My problem is that they are usually annoying AND friendly. Just shut the **** up and drive.
They're not ducking responsibility, they're simply not responsible.
> It may not be perfectly representative but that is the goal.
It most certainly is not.
No. Nerds want the very latest - 4.3, say, instead of 4.2.2, but 99.9999% of users could not care less and have absolutely no knowledge of the difference between these releases. Developers have to deal, to some extent, with fragmentation, but nowadays that's more related to screen sizes etc than Android versions.