The rules are about live broadcasting. This was a clip on YouTube. That's not live broadcasting. I think some people have a job they don't really understand.
If you switch your phone company, nobody else knows. You keep your number, you still call other people on their number.
If you dump Twitter you have to try and convince people to follow you on your new network, you need to add their new ids to your new account (assuming they switch), and you don't even get the chance to ask people you don't know to switch networks - not they would if you did.
Twitter may have been really cool in the early days - I don't know, I joined fairly recently. They seem to have done the same thing Netflix did - make APIs open and get people to write clients/services to increase the use of your network/services, then shut them off/fuck developers and users of third party clients off when you no longer need them.
"BT ran the test on a fiber with optical characteristics (high polarization mode dispersion) that made it unsuitable for 10GBps using current techniques"
was an implication that glass is not just glass, and that you use this or that glass for this or that feature. Are you saying there's no fiber, no matter how old or which characteristics is has, which cannot run that this (or any future) speed?
There's app.net, but nobody (statistically, I mean) uses it. Twitter works because they got there first and loads of celebs, industry leaders etc use it. If you could convince them to switch then it might work, but you'd need people to go first and pay for the ability to post once into Twitter (for now), and again into the new system.
It's a bit like Windows - you don't have to be best, you just have to be first. Well, eventually this breaks down, but this current issue won't kill Twitter because if people didn't want their phone number shared they'd have put a fake one in in the first place.
You don't need to start a browser tab, there's a chrome extension which runs in the background, even if you quit chrome, so that Hangout continues to function.
IE dominated because back then everyone used Windows. Those days are over. People are using Chrome because it's fast, actively developed and seems reasonably secure - at least, security isn't just an afterthought. I used to use Firefox but the mobile versions were always huge, slow and just not as good as the alternatives (Dolphin, stock and Chrome on any of the Android phones I used), and syncing between devices always asked for details I just didn't have. There are other non-Chrome browsers, even on mobile, so the loss of Firefox isn't really a problem.
Your implication is that Google is being evil because they're preventing Microsoft from taking market share from Google by using Google's services. It's hard to imagine a more one-sided and asinine analysis.
I think Microsoft are just upset they're screwgled because nobody wants Windows 8 or Windows phones and everyone knows it.
> But still the FB brand is renowned as being member-abusive, terrible about privacy, > cavalier about interface changes and wiping out settings, etc....on Slashdot, yes. But I doubt more than 0.0001% of its daily user base give a shit about any of those features. Be honest - privacy? It's Facebook - you tell the world what you're up to. "Member-abusive"? Yeah, I saw a Facebook user with a black eye the other day - the things they put up with to use a free website!
People don't need to get a special Facebook phone, because you can use the site of the app on loads of existing phones. It doesn't make any sense.
Depends - is he using a Microsoft product, such as the self corrupting VSS which comes with a tool (Analyze) which you're supposed to run regularly to clean up the mess VSS gets into, but which itself corrupts the source?
Whistle-blower laws? Really? There's a public interest in knowing that some developers think their implementation of C11 could have been handled differently?
> And no, they can't take legal action against him because of this post. The post was > very generic, no specific information was disclosed.
You're assuming the contracts say "don't disclose specific information" (whatever that means). It could very easily be like many, many other company's contracts and simply say something like `don't bring the company into disrepute`. And that post makes Microsoft look like a bunch of fucking muppets.
You're speculating that Google is going to block this, of course, but assuming they do, is it fair to equate them in the `dick measuring` slur? If Google subsidizes the bandwidth/storage costs of an operation via ads, and another commercial company makes that content available without Google getting any recompense, would it be childish/petulant etc for them to take technical/legal measures to prevent this?
Yeah, they keep mentioning "Linux" here too - I don't have the first clue what that is. I'm beginning to think Slashdot is some sort of tech site for people with a bit of intelligence, knowledge and self-motivation.
Depends on your budget/requirements. Why not get an S3/S4 or Nexus 4? I've stopped playing with Cyanogenmod because I have an S3 which a) isn't supported very well by Cyanogenmod, but more importantly b) doesn't need a replacement OS. The Nexus 4 is plain Android, but it's plain Android 4 which is great, and you'll get any updates first. But Android is more or less done now - once you're on some flavour of 4 (4.1/4.2) you're good to go. Fragmentation/worrying about rooting/bricking etc is only a problem/issue if you've got some older phone which is stuck on Android 2.x and you're too cheap to get a new smartphone (or just don't need one - but this is Slashdot after all!).
Slashdot Mirror
The rules are about live broadcasting. This was a clip on YouTube. That's not live broadcasting. I think some people have a job they don't really understand.
Or just alter your weightings to give ACs negative scores and set your filter level to 1. That's all it takes.
If you switch your phone company, nobody else knows. You keep your number, you still call other people on their number.
If you dump Twitter you have to try and convince people to follow you on your new network, you need to add their new ids to your new account (assuming they switch), and you don't even get the chance to ask people you don't know to switch networks - not they would if you did.
Twitter may have been really cool in the early days - I don't know, I joined fairly recently. They seem to have done the same thing Netflix did - make APIs open and get people to write clients/services to increase the use of your network/services, then shut them off/fuck developers and users of third party clients off when you no longer need them.
No it doesn't. There can't be a company in the world which doesn't have servers which are only accessible to people on their intranet.
Not to disagree with you, but I assumed that:
"BT ran the test on a fiber with optical characteristics (high polarization mode dispersion) that made it unsuitable for 10GBps using current techniques"
was an implication that glass is not just glass, and that you use this or that glass for this or that feature. Are you saying there's no fiber, no matter how old or which characteristics is has, which cannot run that this (or any future) speed?
There's app.net, but nobody (statistically, I mean) uses it. Twitter works because they got there first and loads of celebs, industry leaders etc use it. If you could convince them to switch then it might work, but you'd need people to go first and pay for the ability to post once into Twitter (for now), and again into the new system.
It's a bit like Windows - you don't have to be best, you just have to be first. Well, eventually this breaks down, but this current issue won't kill Twitter because if people didn't want their phone number shared they'd have put a fake one in in the first place.
You don't need to start a browser tab, there's a chrome extension which runs in the background, even if you quit chrome, so that Hangout continues to function.
> So 20 million Yahoo user names are revealed. Why is that interesting at all?
This is almost as bad as the pin number leak the other week:
http://pastebin.com/2qbRKh3R
I've already changed my pin because of this; I guess a lot of Yahoo users will be changing their user names now.
And here's the solution (I've just tested it - it works!) :
http://www.midtnmusic.com/how-to-view-your-google-stream-in-chronological-order/
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/google-plus-discuss/Udd-IeQCsdc/Chkw-LP2MKAJ
> The tyrant fears the laugh more than the assassin's bullet. -- Robert Heinlein
The probably fear the rebels more:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/syrian-electronic-army-has-a-little-fun-before-ine,32324/
The order wasn't broken yesterday. It's been wrong for months. I have no idea how they've not noticed this or why they haven't fixed it.
IE dominated because back then everyone used Windows. Those days are over. People are using Chrome because it's fast, actively developed and seems reasonably secure - at least, security isn't just an afterthought. I used to use Firefox but the mobile versions were always huge, slow and just not as good as the alternatives (Dolphin, stock and Chrome on any of the Android phones I used), and syncing between devices always asked for details I just didn't have. There are other non-Chrome browsers, even on mobile, so the loss of Firefox isn't really a problem.
Your implication is that Google is being evil because they're preventing Microsoft from taking market share from Google by using Google's services. It's hard to imagine a more one-sided and asinine analysis.
I think Microsoft are just upset they're screwgled because nobody wants Windows 8 or Windows phones and everyone knows it.
I'm guessing you don't like digital watches either. Some people feel comfortable wearing those too. Really.
and the week after they'll take all your source code and give it back to whichever lying downloader complains first.
> But still the FB brand is renowned as being member-abusive, terrible about privacy, ...on Slashdot, yes. But I doubt more than 0.0001% of its daily user base give a shit about any of those features. Be honest - privacy? It's Facebook - you tell the world what you're up to. "Member-abusive"? Yeah, I saw a Facebook user with a black eye the other day - the things they put up with to use a free website!
> cavalier about interface changes and wiping out settings, etc.
People don't need to get a special Facebook phone, because you can use the site of the app on loads of existing phones. It doesn't make any sense.
Depends - is he using a Microsoft product, such as the self corrupting VSS which comes with a tool (Analyze) which you're supposed to run regularly to clean up the mess VSS gets into, but which itself corrupts the source?
There's no point in arguing with someone too lazy to create an account at Slashdot. I've still no idea why ACs are tolerated here.
Whistle-blower laws? Really? There's a public interest in knowing that some developers think their implementation of C11 could have been handled differently?
> And no, they can't take legal action against him because of this post. The post was
> very generic, no specific information was disclosed.
You're assuming the contracts say "don't disclose specific information" (whatever that means). It could very easily be like many, many other company's contracts and simply say something like `don't bring the company into disrepute`. And that post makes Microsoft look like a bunch of fucking muppets.
You're speculating that Google is going to block this, of course, but assuming they do, is it fair to equate them in the `dick measuring` slur? If Google subsidizes the bandwidth/storage costs of an operation via ads, and another commercial company makes that content available without Google getting any recompense, would it be childish/petulant etc for them to take technical/legal measures to prevent this?
Yeah, they keep mentioning "Linux" here too - I don't have the first clue what that is. I'm beginning to think Slashdot is some sort of tech site for people with a bit of intelligence, knowledge and self-motivation.
Depends on your budget/requirements. Why not get an S3/S4 or Nexus 4? I've stopped playing with Cyanogenmod because I have an S3 which a) isn't supported very well by Cyanogenmod, but more importantly b) doesn't need a replacement OS. The Nexus 4 is plain Android, but it's plain Android 4 which is great, and you'll get any updates first. But Android is more or less done now - once you're on some flavour of 4 (4.1/4.2) you're good to go. Fragmentation/worrying about rooting/bricking etc is only a problem/issue if you've got some older phone which is stuck on Android 2.x and you're too cheap to get a new smartphone (or just don't need one - but this is Slashdot after all!).
I wish Samsung would release docs/source for the Exynos varieties of the Galaxy S3 so Cyanogenmod on it wasn't such a woeful experience.