Of course it's cherry picked. All record breaking events in any field are cherry picked. By definition. The category is 12 month periods. 12 month periods don't have to start in January.
I never read about it at all. It's a local rail system in the US and I'm not American. We're only discussing it at all because you brought it up in a reply to one of my posts. I'm only going from what you said. I don't really care enough to check the details myself.
I don't agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
The protesters did not apply for or get a permit for this protest and it is therefore an unlawful protest.
There's a big problem with the concept of protests being illegal unless sanctioned by government. Ref China, Russia, Syria etc.
For sure you personally might find the US government within some acceptable bounds right now, so it's reasonable to give them the right of veto over protest. But what about people who differ in that opinion? Is their opinion less important than yours? And what if in a few years time the US government is not one that you trust anymore, and they are suppressing your protest?
To me, a protest in a confined area where there is a danger of people being pushed or falling on to the tracks is a safety concern sufficient to deny large protest in that area.
If there was a serious risk of accidents happening due to the protest, then that's even more reason not to cut off the emergency communication lines.
If the protest was allowed and someone was killed the headline would have been "BART fails to act in the face of protest. Innocent rider killed".
As it was, if someone died, the headline would have been: "Cell network switch off may have cost life."
To be fair, the chances of an emergency requiring radio or cellphone on BART are far higher than in a movie theatre. And there are plenty more non-emergency but reasonable needs for communication whilst travelling.
For sure it's not many years since no one had any cellphones anyway, so it's far from disaster if people lose it for a while. But I think it's an over-reaction to take the service down because of a protest. Protests are an intrinsic part of being in a democracy and shouldn't be thought of as something to be suppressed.
The significant difference between the two is that when a movie ticket is bought, there is an implicit contract that you're not going to disturb other patrons by using cellphones. If you're unwilling to forgo them, then you shouldn't be buying a ticket.
But you don't reasonably forgo the expectation to use a cellphone when you travel on BART. Now it's part of the facilities it shouldn't be taken away without good reason. And I don't think a protest in the area is a good reason.
On the other hand, all that interference will presumably make it even better when your objective is to stop people using wireless devices in the shielded room. Like for example discouraging device use in a movie theatre.
So you have no knowledge of my life, and no experience of Facebook. If you had any ability of introspection, you'd realise just how stupid this makes your argument with someone that has extensive knowledge of both.
And to make it clear this isn't a symmetrical situation, I do have experience of IRC and email.
On that single point, you are demonstrably incorrect - these things are *possible*, as people do them.
Let's be clear exactly what they point was. "3) I manage to keep in touch with many more friends than I could possibly do before." That is true. I have around 328 people in my network on Facebook. Around half I'm in regular contact with. I could not, and did not, keep in touch with that many via IRC (virtually none of them will use it, and it's the wrong tool for the job anyway.)
And email is not the right tool for the job either. Many short, possibly trivial, messages to large numbers of people are good for keeping relationships going. Small talk at a distance, enabled by technology. The type of people that use email for the type of messages that belong in Facebook will find their messages in the spam filter before long.
I don't know how many more ways to say this. The fact is that you don't get it because you've not experienced it. You're like someone who's never seen a car saying they don't need a car because they have a hand-cart.
Even if it wasn't of zero value to me, the fact that it's populated by idiots is more than enough reason to keep well away.
It's inhabited by ordinary people. People like your family. The people you work with. The people you see in the street. If you think Facebook is populated by idiots, you think the world is populated by idiots. And maybe that means you're lacking in friends and that's why you never saw a need for Facebook.
Now, in the vary same post you're saying it's a fact that Facebook is populated by idiots, and also that you have no experience of Facebook. So you're claiming what? That you're psychic? Or that your opinion is actually just parroted from someone else? If you're an example of someone that stays away from Facebook, then clearly there are plenty of idiots outside too.
This demonstrates your inability to look at anything with even a modicum of intelligence and logic. There is no way your whining something's not possible, and my indicating that it is indeed possible, can be because of stupidity on my part.
It can when you are wrong that it was possible. Again, this is about my life, so I know and you don't. And secondly you're too stupid to understand, despite being told, that unlike IRC, Facebook is a tool with features for networking, and handles both instantaneous, and time shifted communication.
Again, you're going to reject that, because you're pride prevents you from admitting you didn't think your original post through. Or that you have no experience of Facebook. But whatever you say, you are wrong. Again, I know the circumstances of the things I posted, and you do not. It's not possible for me to be wrong and you to be right. It's not in the field of your experience.
Try fighting a battle that it's possible for you to win.
Well, according to your link, as far as usage is concerned, OSX is on 9.07% and Linux is on 1.66%. Though that is for web access to Wikipedia and other Wikimedia sites.
So it's not close at all on the desktop. One is more than 5 times the other.
Of course Linux is commonly used for servers, so that would increase it's overall share of computers.
However, this Ubuntu "news" is not much use. First of all, the 5% is only predicted. The reality for this year is half that. That's a bold prediction to say the least. And then there's the fact pointed out elsewhere that most of these PCs shipping with Ubuntu will subsequently wiped and pirated Windows installed instead.
So in reality, if you're looking at "Year of the Linux Desktop", the Wikimedia figure makes more sense. And Linux is far behind OSX.
This is so like the rhetoric when American's got pissed with France for not following the unjustified war, and decided to change the name of french fried to "freedom fries."
Yeah, why do those Frenchies hate our freedom? Lets change the name of Linux to Freedomix! That'll show them!
Most people will not know how to change the desktop manager. They'll be stuck with a piece of shit UI that is a hindrance to productivity and workflow. I am also sad that you have no discernment in the matters of UI.
Here's the irony. After 20 years Linux has finally got a GUI that's been well designed. And all the freetards on Slashdot are so conservative, they hate it.
No. And I don't use them any more. However that doesn't mean Google has stopped spying on me. Their analytics spyware is embedded in sites all over the net. There's no avoiding it, without giving up the WWW.
So what was the timeline between vulnerabilites for the releases? Oh that's right you don't know, but don't let facts get in the way of your idiot assertions.
I was the one that showed you the repository, fucktard. You were pretending to be an expert having consulted Wikipedia.
"It's now dead. Wrong again.
Dead as in no longer being developed. At all. Not since last August. Of course the obsolete web-site is still there. Are you really that dumb?
It could be that. Or it could be that you're too stupid to use Facebook.
It's just about possible to hammer a nail in with a screwdriver. Sometimes. Of the nail is small enough and the chisel big enough. If the person doing it has a hammer available, and still uses the chisel, they're a fucktard.
And there you go. I tried to stop you saying something stupid and you did it anyway.
JailBreakMe is a website that could and was updated at any time without a version number change. 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 were simply marketing. It didn't go from 1.0->2.0-->3.0 without intermediate changes.
Except that the jailbreakers have been quick in the past to find jailbreaks for new versions. 10 months of not finding a way to do it is a long time.
I don't think anyone is holding their breath expecting jailbreakme.com to work on iOS 5.0 onwards. But it's certainly in the realms of possible rather than impossible.
I don't PRESUME anything. The list is about things in my life, I have complete knowledge about everything I mentioned. Unlike you.
If you and they have an IP connection then you both could have connected to an IRC network, and kept in real-time contact with them all ever since the early 90s.
I know what IRC is, and the experience is horrible. My less geeky friends wouldn't know what it was, and would be even less likely to be prepared to use it. So no I couldn't contact them that way. And what room? Make one just for me and my friends? What about their friends that are not mine? Start multiple rooms? But then getting the message to just your own friends... It's a fucking horrible nightmare. IRC is not built for networking.If you think IRC is the answer, you don't understand the problem.
And you also presume they don't have mobile phones. Or email.
Phone: Right, so if I want to tell my friends about something, I have to make over X phone calls. Where X is an impracticably large number.
Email is the closest, it works OK for me arranging things. But as a way of exchanging things that might be of interest to friends, chatting, it's not the right tool. I always used email, and none of the things I listed would have happened through that medium.
Or membership of a forum dedicated to whatever common interest you share.
My guess is that this is why you don't understand. Those people that share a common interest with and you talk to on forums... they're not your friends. Friends are people you interact with in real life, and Facebook acts as a dedicated tool for not losing contact with them in between the times when you see them. If you don't have many real friends, you may note see the need for Facebook.
Not to mention that, in Google's case, they came to prominence through some real innovation. Microsoft borrowed an OS...
Don't forget Microsoft were already prominent before DOS. They created the first microcomputer implementation of BASIC. That was their initial product, the parallel to Google's search.
Sure they didn't invent BASIC, but then Google didn't invent internet search. They both innovated on what came before though. For that I give them both credit.
The problem is they both grew into scummy companies.
Apple is rejecting apps for allowing people to create a free account that may be updated later. Simple as that. And I think the reason you deny that so fiercely is because you realize how stupid that is
I realise that people accuse Apple of all sorts of stuff, which is often found to be nonsense when the fog clears.
Slashdot Mirror
when the 12-month period is cherry-picked
Of course it's cherry picked. All record breaking events in any field are cherry picked. By definition. The category is 12 month periods. 12 month periods don't have to start in January.
Yet another person who never read about how BART
I never read about it at all. It's a local rail system in the US and I'm not American. We're only discussing it at all because you brought it up in a reply to one of my posts. I'm only going from what you said. I don't really care enough to check the details myself.
I don't agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
The protesters did not apply for or get a permit for this protest and it is therefore an unlawful protest.
There's a big problem with the concept of protests being illegal unless sanctioned by government. Ref China, Russia, Syria etc.
For sure you personally might find the US government within some acceptable bounds right now, so it's reasonable to give them the right of veto over protest. But what about people who differ in that opinion? Is their opinion less important than yours? And what if in a few years time the US government is not one that you trust anymore, and they are suppressing your protest?
To me, a protest in a confined area where there is a danger of people being pushed or falling on to the tracks is a safety concern sufficient to deny large protest in that area.
If there was a serious risk of accidents happening due to the protest, then that's even more reason not to cut off the emergency communication lines.
If the protest was allowed and someone was killed the headline would have been "BART fails to act in the face of protest. Innocent rider killed".
As it was, if someone died, the headline would have been: "Cell network switch off may have cost life."
To be fair, the chances of an emergency requiring radio or cellphone on BART are far higher than in a movie theatre. And there are plenty more non-emergency but reasonable needs for communication whilst travelling.
For sure it's not many years since no one had any cellphones anyway, so it's far from disaster if people lose it for a while. But I think it's an over-reaction to take the service down because of a protest. Protests are an intrinsic part of being in a democracy and shouldn't be thought of as something to be suppressed.
The significant difference between the two is that when a movie ticket is bought, there is an implicit contract that you're not going to disturb other patrons by using cellphones. If you're unwilling to forgo them, then you shouldn't be buying a ticket.
But you don't reasonably forgo the expectation to use a cellphone when you travel on BART. Now it's part of the facilities it shouldn't be taken away without good reason. And I don't think a protest in the area is a good reason.
On the other hand, all that interference will presumably make it even better when your objective is to stop people using wireless devices in the shielded room. Like for example discouraging device use in a movie theatre.
Well I wish they'd paint movie theatres in non-selective paint.
And *of course* I have no experience of facebook.
So you have no knowledge of my life, and no experience of Facebook. If you had any ability of introspection, you'd realise just how stupid this makes your argument with someone that has extensive knowledge of both.
And to make it clear this isn't a symmetrical situation, I do have experience of IRC and email.
On that single point, you are demonstrably incorrect - these things are *possible*, as people do them.
Let's be clear exactly what they point was. "3) I manage to keep in touch with many more friends than I could possibly do before."
That is true. I have around 328 people in my network on Facebook. Around half I'm in regular contact with. I could not, and did not, keep in touch with that many via IRC (virtually none of them will use it, and it's the wrong tool for the job anyway.)
And email is not the right tool for the job either. Many short, possibly trivial, messages to large numbers of people are good for keeping relationships going. Small talk at a distance, enabled by technology. The type of people that use email for the type of messages that belong in Facebook will find their messages in the spam filter before long.
I don't know how many more ways to say this. The fact is that you don't get it because you've not experienced it. You're like someone who's never seen a car saying they don't need a car because they have a hand-cart.
Even if it wasn't of zero value to me, the fact that it's populated by idiots is more than enough reason to keep well away.
It's inhabited by ordinary people. People like your family. The people you work with. The people you see in the street. If you think Facebook is populated by idiots, you think the world is populated by idiots. And maybe that means you're lacking in friends and that's why you never saw a need for Facebook.
Now, in the vary same post you're saying it's a fact that Facebook is populated by idiots, and also that you have no experience of Facebook. So you're claiming what? That you're psychic? Or that your opinion is actually just parroted from someone else? If you're an example of someone that stays away from Facebook, then clearly there are plenty of idiots outside too.
This demonstrates your inability to look at anything with even a modicum of intelligence and logic. There is no way your whining something's not possible, and my indicating that it is indeed possible, can be because of stupidity on my part.
It can when you are wrong that it was possible. Again, this is about my life, so I know and you don't. And secondly you're too stupid to understand, despite being told, that unlike IRC, Facebook is a tool with features for networking, and handles both instantaneous, and time shifted communication.
Again, you're going to reject that, because you're pride prevents you from admitting you didn't think your original post through. Or that you have no experience of Facebook. But whatever you say, you are wrong. Again, I know the circumstances of the things I posted, and you do not. It's not possible for me to be wrong and you to be right. It's not in the field of your experience.
Try fighting a battle that it's possible for you to win.
Well, according to your link, as far as usage is concerned, OSX is on 9.07% and Linux is on 1.66%. Though that is for web access to Wikipedia and other Wikimedia sites.
So it's not close at all on the desktop. One is more than 5 times the other.
Of course Linux is commonly used for servers, so that would increase it's overall share of computers.
However, this Ubuntu "news" is not much use. First of all, the 5% is only predicted. The reality for this year is half that. That's a bold prediction to say the least. And then there's the fact pointed out elsewhere that most of these PCs shipping with Ubuntu will subsequently wiped and pirated Windows installed instead.
So in reality, if you're looking at "Year of the Linux Desktop", the Wikimedia figure makes more sense. And Linux is far behind OSX.
Well, obviously not more than Windows or OSX. But certainly more than AmigaOS.
This is so like the rhetoric when American's got pissed with France for not following the unjustified war, and decided to change the name of french fried to "freedom fries."
Yeah, why do those Frenchies hate our freedom? Lets change the name of Linux to Freedomix! That'll show them!
Most people will not know how to change the desktop manager. They'll be stuck with a piece of shit UI that is a hindrance to productivity and workflow. I am also sad that you have no discernment in the matters of UI.
Here's the irony. After 20 years Linux has finally got a GUI that's been well designed. And all the freetards on Slashdot are so conservative, they hate it.
Thankfully those aren't the only choices we're going to get. Other more trustworthy companies will also be developing driverless car systems.
No. And I don't use them any more. However that doesn't mean Google has stopped spying on me. Their analytics spyware is embedded in sites all over the net. There's no avoiding it, without giving up the WWW.
So what was the timeline between vulnerabilites for the releases? Oh that's right you don't know, but don't let facts get in the way of your idiot assertions.
I was the one that showed you the repository, fucktard. You were pretending to be an expert having consulted Wikipedia.
"It's now dead.
Wrong again.
Dead as in no longer being developed. At all. Not since last August. Of course the obsolete web-site is still there. Are you really that dumb?
It could be that. Or it could be that you're too stupid to use Facebook.
It's just about possible to hammer a nail in with a screwdriver. Sometimes. Of the nail is small enough and the chisel big enough. If the person doing it has a hammer available, and still uses the chisel, they're a fucktard.
And there you go. I tried to stop you saying something stupid and you did it anyway.
JailBreakMe is a website that could and was updated at any time without a version number change. 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 were simply marketing. It didn't go from 1.0->2.0-->3.0 without intermediate changes.
It's now dead.
So i'm guessing you're not familiar with times between versions of Jailbreakme then?
Before you post something stupid, you might want to look at the development history yourself. https://github.com/comex/star_
Except that the jailbreakers have been quick in the past to find jailbreaks for new versions. 10 months of not finding a way to do it is a long time.
I don't think anyone is holding their breath expecting jailbreakme.com to work on iOS 5.0 onwards. But it's certainly in the realms of possible rather than impossible.
I don't PRESUME anything. The list is about things in my life, I have complete knowledge about everything I mentioned. Unlike you.
If you and they have an IP connection then you both could have connected to an IRC network, and kept in real-time contact with them all ever since the early 90s.
I know what IRC is, and the experience is horrible. My less geeky friends wouldn't know what it was, and would be even less likely to be prepared to use it. So no I couldn't contact them that way. And what room? Make one just for me and my friends? What about their friends that are not mine? Start multiple rooms? But then getting the message to just your own friends... It's a fucking horrible nightmare. IRC is not built for networking.If you think IRC is the answer, you don't understand the problem.
And you also presume they don't have mobile phones. Or email.
Phone: Right, so if I want to tell my friends about something, I have to make over X phone calls. Where X is an impracticably large number.
Email is the closest, it works OK for me arranging things. But as a way of exchanging things that might be of interest to friends, chatting, it's not the right tool. I always used email, and none of the things I listed would have happened through that medium.
Or membership of a forum dedicated to whatever common interest you share.
My guess is that this is why you don't understand. Those people that share a common interest with and you talk to on forums... they're not your friends. Friends are people you interact with in real life, and Facebook acts as a dedicated tool for not losing contact with them in between the times when you see them. If you don't have many real friends, you may note see the need for Facebook.
Google Maps and Earth come from KeyHole Inc..
Google Maps came from Where 2 Technologies. But that doesn't change the basic point you make.
Not to mention that, in Google's case, they came to prominence through some real innovation. Microsoft borrowed an OS...
Don't forget Microsoft were already prominent before DOS. They created the first microcomputer implementation of BASIC. That was their initial product, the parallel to Google's search.
Sure they didn't invent BASIC, but then Google didn't invent internet search. They both innovated on what came before though. For that I give them both credit.
The problem is they both grew into scummy companies.
Let's also remember that Microsoft also blatantly stole. Remember Stacker?
Remember Android?
2002 I stopped using Microsoft.
2012 I stopped using Google.
Apple is rejecting apps for allowing people to create a free account that may be updated later. Simple as that. And I think the reason you deny that so fiercely is because you realize how stupid that is
I realise that people accuse Apple of all sorts of stuff, which is often found to be nonsense when the fog clears.