I appreciate your insights, but your assumption that this has something to do with being 'good for Google' is hogwash -- they already had SPDY and HTTP/2 doesn't implement everything SPDY has. I see Google being a good citizen here and joining the new standard instead of continuing to push their own protocol they obviously preferred.
Re:IE once again kills innovation
on
HTTP/2 Finalized
·
· Score: 1
Google's SPDY support was already implemented by many servers optionally; I'm sure HTTP/2 can be done the same way.
I can repeat it for you; one side (Microsoft) has built a certain software (Windows) which has been adopted by billions of people worldwide. The other side has nothing but flamewars.
Its not true though, is it? Just because something is adopted doesn't mean its best, or even good -- it just means it was adopted at all. You see the fallacy now, right?
Microsoft didn't release Windows 8 because they thought it sucked. Same for Vista, and Windows Me. They thought they were good; and Dell, HP, Acer, etc. installed them on PCs because that's what you do, not because they were *good* but because nothing else did what was necessary at the time.
Systemd is *functional* but it has horrible problems, not the least of which is with PR and responding to bug reports which it simply denies are bugs or exist at all. Its in use because nothing else does what it does as well as it does it -- that doesn't mean it deserves praise.
I use gnome on one PC because I want to know for sure when I post how bad it sucks that I'm right. Fedora 20 for the record; and Gnome 3 manages to crash on me multiple times an hour some days doing nothing exciting (and with 16GB of RAM).
I find it entertaining that people even post drivel like this. Why is it that the hate and venom must not be justified? Why not judge software on its merits, situations on the facts? I don't give a rat's backside who spews more venom; I care if the software works and if they actually fix problems or not.
Its equally possible that the systemd people are wonderful and being hated on by idiots as that they're all jerks being hated on by righteous geniuses. You shouldn't pick sides based on who's yelling.
For this reason I often also report officers who've already stopped a vehicle, because they may loop around and set up again; if they weren't just mobile to begin with.
May I direct you to the other closed-source firmware story of the day about DLink routers having remote DNS admin capabilities without password? You can't trust remote admin features on hardware when you can't see or have someone you trust see the software its running.
Waze also tends to give me much better directions than any other app, and much better ETAs as well.
So long as user reporting and map chat is there, there will always be a way to report officer locations; no matter what they do with the official feature.
What's much more entertaining to me is that more often than not, the police reporting function isn't that valuable because the officer will have caught someone and moved on to a new spot by the time I see the notice.
We don't; have you ever even tried to get involved in your community's police decisions? Its hard. The police convince citizens that certain things are important; we use them as the experts to determine their own worth and then pay them for that expertise and for the work in question. Police services are very rarely doing what citizens have asked them to do but instead what they've determined is the best way to keep their jobs.
You obviously don't write software for a living. It takes effort to redirect people to an unmaintained code base and have them both write and investigate possible side-effects of their patch and then deploy it in a format that's usable by all the manufacturers with devices out there. Its an actual cost to an actual company doing actual business that just isn't worthwhile.
Being an open OS, there's nothing stopping Motorola, Samsung or LG from patching their own versions of 4.3 either, just as they modified it with their UI and other extensions. Feel free to whine to them instead; unless you bought a Nexus device, they sold you the phone, Google didn't.
Yes, it is, you can download the source code, root your phone, compile and install your own fix any time you want. Paranoid Android, Cyanogen and a dozen other options exist. Human laziness and the fact that manufacturers are trying to lock you out of doing such things notwithstanding, Android is pretty open.
My point was that only the Galaxy Nexus *could* get updated by Google, because they have the ability to do so. I think you believe too strongly in conspiracy theories to realize this is about not wasting energy on something that's nearly pointless to try and fix.
Their tablets have more RAM than the Galaxy Nexus; though you can easily install Cyanogen or Paranoid Android on it instead.
Like everyone else reporting on this story, it completely misses the point -- there's no *point* in Google writing a patch, none of the hardware companies involved would ever bother to deploy it. They have *no* control over that bit of code in your phone unless you're running a Nexus device.
Except that you've given every one of these people a free pass if you hack their computers because the court can no longer prove the data was there to begin with and not just planted.
Slashdot Mirror
No, its an ambiguous word and I've complained about it in life on numerous occasions.
Except that MB is a metric term that was co-opted in computing for no good reason (base 2 calculation rounding), and correcting it makes sense.
1 million bits is a megabit. 1 million bytes is a megabyte.
I appreciate your insights, but your assumption that this has something to do with being 'good for Google' is hogwash -- they already had SPDY and HTTP/2 doesn't implement everything SPDY has. I see Google being a good citizen here and joining the new standard instead of continuing to push their own protocol they obviously preferred.
Google's SPDY support was already implemented by many servers optionally; I'm sure HTTP/2 can be done the same way.
That's an interestingly biased comparison.
I can repeat it for you; one side (Microsoft) has built a certain software (Windows) which has been adopted by billions of people worldwide. The other side has nothing but flamewars.
Its not true though, is it? Just because something is adopted doesn't mean its best, or even good -- it just means it was adopted at all. You see the fallacy now, right?
Microsoft didn't release Windows 8 because they thought it sucked. Same for Vista, and Windows Me. They thought they were good; and Dell, HP, Acer, etc. installed them on PCs because that's what you do, not because they were *good* but because nothing else did what was necessary at the time.
Systemd is *functional* but it has horrible problems, not the least of which is with PR and responding to bug reports which it simply denies are bugs or exist at all. Its in use because nothing else does what it does as well as it does it -- that doesn't mean it deserves praise.
http://www.opentext.com/what-w...
Disclaimer: my cousin works there.
Citation please? I don't smoke either option but cannabis is an entirely different animal to tobacco and their outputs are quite different.
Yes, we all wish people would learn to read actual research and realize they're spewing crap -- like yourself.
When you smoke pure tobacco, you're still doing massive damage to yourself. Lots of studies, lots of research, not hard to find.
I use gnome on one PC because I want to know for sure when I post how bad it sucks that I'm right. Fedora 20 for the record; and Gnome 3 manages to crash on me multiple times an hour some days doing nothing exciting (and with 16GB of RAM).
I find it entertaining that people even post drivel like this. Why is it that the hate and venom must not be justified? Why not judge software on its merits, situations on the facts? I don't give a rat's backside who spews more venom; I care if the software works and if they actually fix problems or not.
Its equally possible that the systemd people are wonderful and being hated on by idiots as that they're all jerks being hated on by righteous geniuses. You shouldn't pick sides based on who's yelling.
Its pretty easy if the voice recognition never leaves the television.
For this reason I often also report officers who've already stopped a vehicle, because they may loop around and set up again; if they weren't just mobile to begin with.
Does everything seriously need a breadcrumb these days? The back button works just fine; every browser has one.
Use a cell phone camera and take a photo and post that if you think the digital menu is the way to go.
That said, Foscam allows good old fashioned ftp uploads if you really want a webcam.
The reply is to a Linus quote, and he would never have said GNU/Linux, he would just mean Linux, which Android is in spades.
May I direct you to the other closed-source firmware story of the day about DLink routers having remote DNS admin capabilities without password? You can't trust remote admin features on hardware when you can't see or have someone you trust see the software its running.
Waze also tends to give me much better directions than any other app, and much better ETAs as well.
So long as user reporting and map chat is there, there will always be a way to report officer locations; no matter what they do with the official feature.
What's much more entertaining to me is that more often than not, the police reporting function isn't that valuable because the officer will have caught someone and moved on to a new spot by the time I see the notice.
We don't; have you ever even tried to get involved in your community's police decisions? Its hard. The police convince citizens that certain things are important; we use them as the experts to determine their own worth and then pay them for that expertise and for the work in question. Police services are very rarely doing what citizens have asked them to do but instead what they've determined is the best way to keep their jobs.
stop being a troll on the internet.
You obviously don't write software for a living. It takes effort to redirect people to an unmaintained code base and have them both write and investigate possible side-effects of their patch and then deploy it in a format that's usable by all the manufacturers with devices out there. Its an actual cost to an actual company doing actual business that just isn't worthwhile.
Being an open OS, there's nothing stopping Motorola, Samsung or LG from patching their own versions of 4.3 either, just as they modified it with their UI and other extensions. Feel free to whine to them instead; unless you bought a Nexus device, they sold you the phone, Google didn't.
Yes, it is, you can download the source code, root your phone, compile and install your own fix any time you want. Paranoid Android, Cyanogen and a dozen other options exist. Human laziness and the fact that manufacturers are trying to lock you out of doing such things notwithstanding, Android is pretty open.
My point was that only the Galaxy Nexus *could* get updated by Google, because they have the ability to do so. I think you believe too strongly in conspiracy theories to realize this is about not wasting energy on something that's nearly pointless to try and fix.
Their tablets have more RAM than the Galaxy Nexus; though you can easily install Cyanogen or Paranoid Android on it instead.
Like everyone else reporting on this story, it completely misses the point -- there's no *point* in Google writing a patch, none of the hardware companies involved would ever bother to deploy it. They have *no* control over that bit of code in your phone unless you're running a Nexus device.
Except that you've given every one of these people a free pass if you hack their computers because the court can no longer prove the data was there to begin with and not just planted.