Basically the only thing that the average Joe might be doing with his PC where the machine he has isn't by default "good enough", no matter how old it may be, is playing games.
The funny part is that few modern PC games need fast hardware because most of them are designed for consoles. Microsoft's push into the console market killed the need for PC upgrades by crippling PC gaming to the level of a five-year-old PC.
Pretty much every time they've tried to control the market, they've just ended up screwing themselves.
And, on reading the subject, I thought they'd just announced they were scrapping Windows 10 and starting over with a new OS derived from Windows 7 that's actually designed for desktop use.
You don't 'reignite' the PC market by shipping expensive tablet/crappy laptop hybrids that hardly anyone actually wants. The reason their 'partners' don't care is because they know those products won't affect their markets.
And how will the fake reviews drown out the torrent of bad reviews/ratings from real users?
You're new to this, aren't you?
I can't speak for the App Store, but one of the worst movies I've ever seen has a near five-star rating on Amazon, because they keep pushing fake reviews, and reporting every real review to get them removed. If those people put a tenth as much effort into making movies as they do into faking reviews, they'd be millionaires.
I'm a firm believer that advertising should not be blocked or redirected to another advertisement service. I believe this because the application developers depend on this to obtain some reward for an application they developed at no "direct" cost to the users.
Alternatively, they could get a real job, producing real products that real people are really willing to pay for.
So what you're saying is that all vpn apps sgould be banned because of potential issues?
I think he's saying that apps which claim to be a Fluffy Kitty Screensaver (or any other type that doesn't explicitly indicate that it's a VPN) that route all your stuff through their servers should be banned.
Which is true. I'd be pissed off if I found an 'ad blocker' app I'd downloaded was doing this.
No, "SJW" is a term used by people to describe those who draw attention to fucked-up things they do. Instead of feeling bad and maybe reappraising certain held attitudes, one can simply call the other person an SJW and call it a day.
No, SJW is a term the left use to describe themselves because 'Left-Wing Asshole' doesn't sound as cool.
When they infiltrate an organization, political beliefs become more important than talent, and people are promoted more because of nepotism than ability. Hence, any organization they infiltrate is looking at a downhill race to irrelevance and collapse.
No. For Amazon it's about tying people into their media infrastructure.
They don't need the Kindle for books, because just about every device has a Kindle app. They want to get cheap Kindles out there, so people then buy movies and music and books and games and... lots of other stuff from Amazon. And I see you're buying a movie, did you know can can subscribe for only $99.99 a month and get free access to everything?
Plus, with the amazing new settings interface, you can no longer open the 'cookies' window and the 'block cookies' window at the same time, to copy-and-paste hostnames from one to the other.
So if you want a content limited, pay-walled, countermeasure-riddled web -- just stick with that childish attitude. But if you want a sustainable, awesome web ecosystem -- then start proposing acceptable limitations that nurture the publishers we all love.
I remember the horrible, awful, web before advertising brought us to the Brave New World of 'content' that exists solely to make money from ads.
The reason companies advertise is to generate name recognition and ultimately sales. And if advertisements did not increase sales or derivative income companies, both large and small, would not be spending billions of dollars a year placing ads.
[citation needed]
The only thing we can really conclude is that people whose job is to convince people to buy stuff are able to convince companies to buy their services.
No. In that scenario, they'll presumably do what aircraft manufacturers do. The autodriver will turn off, and they'll blame 'driver error!' when you crash.
Slashdot Mirror
Sony would have the gaming system on which gamers spend most of their money.
Uh, you do know that the PC gaming market is larger than the console gaming market, right?
In fact, they didn't learn a fucking thing. That was obvious when they elected him to a second term.
Yeah, right. You really think Romney would have been a better choice?
Democracy means nothing when you're only given the choice between arsenic and cyanide.
Basically the only thing that the average Joe might be doing with his PC where the machine he has isn't by default "good enough", no matter how old it may be, is playing games.
The funny part is that few modern PC games need fast hardware because most of them are designed for consoles. Microsoft's push into the console market killed the need for PC upgrades by crippling PC gaming to the level of a five-year-old PC.
Pretty much every time they've tried to control the market, they've just ended up screwing themselves.
And, on reading the subject, I thought they'd just announced they were scrapping Windows 10 and starting over with a new OS derived from Windows 7 that's actually designed for desktop use.
You don't 'reignite' the PC market by shipping expensive tablet/crappy laptop hybrids that hardly anyone actually wants. The reason their 'partners' don't care is because they know those products won't affect their markets.
What exactly is the problem[sic] they're trying to solve?
Freedom.
And how will the fake reviews drown out the torrent of bad reviews/ratings from real users?
You're new to this, aren't you?
I can't speak for the App Store, but one of the worst movies I've ever seen has a near five-star rating on Amazon, because they keep pushing fake reviews, and reporting every real review to get them removed. If those people put a tenth as much effort into making movies as they do into faking reviews, they'd be millionaires.
Yes, because people pushing out crap apps to bring in ad revenue would never post fake reviews.
Encryption is either secure, or it's not. And no-one wants to use insecure encryption.
And the reason there are so many half-assed, barely useful apps on the app store is precisely because they can 'make money via ads'.
Without ads, the actual useful apps would be much easier to find than they are under the tsunami of adware crap.
It cannot inspect ssl/tls traffic unless you add certificate authorities, which may be impossible without root.
If you read the actual article, it would appear that's what they're doing.
I'm a firm believer that advertising should not be blocked or redirected to another advertisement service. I believe this because the application developers depend on this to obtain some reward for an application they developed at no "direct" cost to the users.
Alternatively, they could get a real job, producing real products that real people are really willing to pay for.
So what you're saying is that all vpn apps sgould be banned because of potential issues?
I think he's saying that apps which claim to be a Fluffy Kitty Screensaver (or any other type that doesn't explicitly indicate that it's a VPN) that route all your stuff through their servers should be banned.
Which is true. I'd be pissed off if I found an 'ad blocker' app I'd downloaded was doing this.
Yes. Blasting a black cloud of carcinogenic particulates in my face every time you accelerate is definitely eco-friendly.
No, "SJW" is a term used by people to describe those who draw attention to fucked-up things they do. Instead of feeling bad and maybe reappraising certain held attitudes, one can simply call the other person an SJW and call it a day.
No, SJW is a term the left use to describe themselves because 'Left-Wing Asshole' doesn't sound as cool.
When they infiltrate an organization, political beliefs become more important than talent, and people are promoted more because of nepotism than ability. Hence, any organization they infiltrate is looking at a downhill race to irrelevance and collapse.
No. For Amazon it's about tying people into their media infrastructure.
They don't need the Kindle for books, because just about every device has a Kindle app. They want to get cheap Kindles out there, so people then buy movies and music and books and games and... lots of other stuff from Amazon. And I see you're buying a movie, did you know can can subscribe for only $99.99 a month and get free access to everything?
I don't mind ads, I don't mind relevant ads less.
Do you mind ads that root your phone, and send all your stuff to China?
that you don't like.
Yes, exactly. By blocking ad sites, we automatically prevent our browser from going to those ad sites.
Plus, with the amazing new settings interface, you can no longer open the 'cookies' window and the 'block cookies' window at the same time, to copy-and-paste hostnames from one to the other.
Incompetence or assholery? You decide.
So if you want a content limited, pay-walled, countermeasure-riddled web -- just stick with that childish attitude. But if you want a sustainable, awesome web ecosystem -- then start proposing acceptable limitations that nurture the publishers we all love.
I remember the horrible, awful, web before advertising brought us to the Brave New World of 'content' that exists solely to make money from ads.
I'd like it back, please.
Isn't there some US law that all phones have to be able to make 911 calls?
Meanwhile, I was reading today about yet another group using ad servers to distribute their malware. This time, to Android phones.
Mozilla was screwed the day the SJWs took over.
The reason companies advertise is to generate name recognition and ultimately sales. And if advertisements did not increase sales or derivative income companies, both large and small, would not be spending billions of dollars a year placing ads.
[citation needed]
The only thing we can really conclude is that people whose job is to convince people to buy stuff are able to convince companies to buy their services.
Somebody has to run all those Starbucks...
With a $15 minimum wage, that'll just give those tech companies more business as they automate away all the low-end employees.
No. In that scenario, they'll presumably do what aircraft manufacturers do. The autodriver will turn off, and they'll blame 'driver error!' when you crash.