Please, read what Assange says before writing nonsense about his believes.
Really? I call bullshit. His history shows the exact opposite. This is the fucking douche who lost his kid... for being a fucking douche, and then campaigned to make ALL CHILD CUSTODY RECORDS PUBLIC INFORMATION so he could get something to use against the mother of his child. He didn't give a flying fuck about what that meant to the children.
He believes in personal privacy for Julian Assange, no one else. If you think he wants you to have personal privacy, you're completely out of touch with reality.
The only successful tablet in the marketplace is as locked down as they come... so I'm going to guess that its a No.
If you think 'People' want to hax0r thier tablets, you're a... and let me see this as clearly as possible so you get the point... you are an ignorant fool.
'People' just want to run cool apps, browse the web, and fuck around on their tablets. 'People' don't give a flying fuck about running Android on a HP tablet, or Linux on a Nook, or installing Cydia on their iPads.
'People' are not 'Geeks'. This story seems to think that the general population cares about the same shit that geeks do. This is in fact why the other tablets keep failing and why Geeks will never rule the world. NOT EVERYONE THINKS LIKE YOU AND DOES THE SAME SHIT, in fact, most of the rest of the world doesn't want anything to do with the crap you do.
Now that everyone relies on these patents, because they were incorporated in to standards, Motorola and Samsung are waving these around to make everyone cower in fear?
You make a valid point, but get modded down because you're not anti-apple. Only anti-Apple is allowed on slashdot.
(Cue all the anti-Apple zealots ranting about the pro-Apple zealots as an excuse to make it okay)
Apple never claimed to make these widgets you speak of part of a public standard that the infrastructure depends on. Motorola and Samsung most certainly HAVE, or we wouldn't have the modern cell phono infrastructure we have now.
In using these patented technologies in a standard which supports public infrastructure, the rules of the game are slightly different, even if unwritten.
The best way to get your ass handed to you is to let your patented tech become part of a standard and get massive deployment then try to rip people off for licensing it. You'll find what happens next is people tell you to go fuck yourself and use your tech anyway, and no judge on the planet cares, and the entire industry moves away from your crap. You don't get to pretend to be fair then change your mind after everyone else jumps on your bus. What happens is that your ass gets thrown off your own bus when people get fed up with your shit.
Apple never said 'hey, use this, we'll give our GUI widgets and our physical device profiles to anyone in a non-discrimenator manner so they become a public standard we can all benefit from!'... And that my friend is the difference.
Didn't you learn what indian giving was when you were a little kid?
If its their device, it's good for Apple. Its only bad for Apple if someone else does it first, which lets face it, isn't going to happen or it would have been done by now.
Its a group of people who probably don't know each other, but all want to be associated with the same thing, that thing being the name 'Anonymous'.
The good news is, by doing so, every moron that flies the 'Anonymous' flag is part of a criminal organization and can be treated as such. No longer can you be punished JUST for your crime, you are also responsible for the actions of the organization you are part of.
Go ahead, keep being idiots and claiming yourself as part of 'Anonymous'. All it will take is one event and you'll end up in gitmo with the rest of the terrorists. Guilty of evil doings or not, when you associate yourself with a criminal organization, you're going to get treated as such. Just ask all the guys in gitmo who up until sometime in the last 10 years had never even SEEN an American how well being associated with Al-Queda worked out for them.
Resignation is an admission of guilt. You quit before you can be fired so no one can say 'he was fired' and you get all of your golden parachutes on the way out the door.
I'm sorry you don't recognize it, but I do. He made no attempt to fight the charges, so either he was guilty of that, or something worse that they held over his head and threatened to expose him for if he didn't resign... again, making him guilty.
Just for reference, scattershot is the word you're looking for. Shattershot is a Marvel comic book story arc.
too by writing a book bad-mouthing Assange
If you weren't such a raving fanboy you'd realize that bad mouthing Assange requires absolutely no effort what so ever, just speak about what he's done. He had a couple years early on where Wikileaks did a couple useful things. Before that, his history shows him as a complete and total douche in every aspect. He is one of the most selfish people I've ever seen. He thinks its a great idea to make all child custody hearing information PUBLIC RECORD so that he can try to dig up some shit against the mother of his child... ignoring the fact that it'll make all sorts of shit most kids won't want public out into the open. He cares about no one other than himself and getting attention for himself. If you can't see that, you're a complete and total idiot.
Then rape allegations
Are not really new for Assange. He has been accused of abusing women since before Wikileaks existed. The rape allegations would have been easier to write off as a lie to discredit him had he not already had a history of treating women like dogs. Go back and look at why he doesn't have custody of his own child and get a clue.
Now all this recent uproar.
What recent uproar? He has had no attention since he DID NOT GET shipped off to the US like everyone was saying was going to happen if he got arrested. In short pretty much anyone believing a word out of his mouth at this point is an idiot. He has repeatedly shown he cares about nothing more than personal attention and gaining it through any means available to him, including manipulating less intelligent people such as yourself into thinking he's a 'good guy, fighting the good fight'.
I'd blame it on the CIA... except they would have had to start fucking with him when he was still in high school, well before they knew that he was going to be an issue for the US. He's been a douche bag his entire life in everything he does, including the time well before the CIA had heard of him. There is no need for them to do anything, he does just fine on his own.
Before you start believing some random man is Godly, perhaps you should look at his background first.
Yea, I always love watching script kiddies who aren't even able to form proper sentences or know the meaning of the words they are using. Its just one step below the jackass movies, or Ow my Balls.
Start with actually having evidence of corruption.
At one point, thats what Wikileaks did. That ended some time ago and hasn't been the case for the last couple of years. NYT will be happy to publish anything that gets them some readers back, but you actually have to have some sort of proof before you send it to them. They don't particularly respond well when you drop a boat load of stolen documents on their door step and say 'theres bad stuff in here, I know it because its from politicians and I don't like politicians'.
Neither does any other rational person for that matter.
Whistle blowers really don't have a hard time getting information out, when its actually something to be concerned with. The Internet makes it absolutely trivial, as proven already. The problem is as I said, learning the difference between real corruption instead of what typically is called 'whistleblowing' which is more along the lines of 'this company/politician doesn't do what I want/insulted me/won't let me have my way/insert any other childish reason you want here as it all returns to the fact that most of these people are angsty babies.
As I said, its not hard to get the word out. The problem is that 99.999999% of the people who like to think of themselves as 'whistleblowers' are just people who steal documents and break the law because they're too stupid to realize their point of view is unique to them and not the rest of the general population.
Thats the thing, one lone nut job with a irrational story about evil company/government gets overlooked and ignored quickly. Sometimes it takes a little more time, as is the case for Wikileaks who managed to build up some credibility before making it clear they never deserved any such thing.
You'll get modded into oblivion here as everyone seems to think 'Anonymous' is the best thing to happen to the world in the last 4 billion years or so.
However, I could not agree more.
What you see here is a cat fight between two douche bags. Both groups are just a bunch of self serving pricks seeking as much attention as they can get.
The only good news is that anonymous will eventually fall apart, a bunch of script kiddies fucking around together never lasts, they'll fight amoungst themselves and tear themselves apart soon enough... interestingly enough, I pretty much expect the same thing from Wikileaks.
It makes me wonder just how many drunken clumsy incompetent idiots work in the iPhone department at Apple.
The reason (at least one of the contributing factors to that reason anyway) Apple sells millions and millions of iPhones is because they have normal everyday people using iPhones before they are released to the public. It could very well be a secretary. You want a good sampling of different types of folks playing with a consumer device to get good data.
Companies who have their devs test the software UI design before its released to the public end up like RIM and Microsoft's mobile line recent string of jokes passing as mobile OSes, DOA.
My point is simply that people need to stop pretending GPL and LGPL are 'open' or 'free' and realize they both come with serious restrictions.
Those restrictions are by design, and 100% intentional, so the end user gets more control over how the code is useful to them, but doing so puts very clear undeniable restrictions on developers. You simply can not argue these points with me, they are facts.
You can argue what the intention is, and 'whos better for society' and any number of other things, but pretending GPL is some how different than every other license just makes you look stupid in front of any normal sane, non-GPL fanboy. The GPL license is built on an agenda, just like Microsoft's licensing and Apples, its just an entirely different agenda centered around empowering the end users of the software rather than someone else such as developers (BSD license) or profit for the company that owns it (MS and Apple).
Again, this is not something that there is any sort of argument about, its fact. If you don't realize its fact, you're just too stupid to have a conversation about it.
Good for you, you think its balanced. Personally I have no opinion in that respect.
My point is simply that to say its not locked down is a lie. It is 'locked down', and it is intentional, by design, for a reason.
Why do people insist on trying to pretend GPL and LGPL are something they aren't? Why keep trying to scam people into thinking its something other than it is.
If you don't like what it is, don't use it, but if you like it and the way it work, own up to it.
but the GNU team wants an extension language that can reasonably be used to implement other languages
If thats true, then someone is a fucking moron, to put it bluntly. Might as well pick C as your extension language than and stop trying to make an extension language (which should be extremely lightweight and someone limited due to that) that can compile anything to native code on every platform.
I'd say if that statement were true, whoever made it simply doesn't know anything about software development.
If you had 18 fingers, six on each of three hands, dividing by 3, 6 and 18 would be trivial for you.
It is not that dividing by 10 is any harder or easier than dividing by 18
Wrong.
In a base 10 numbering system, 10 is easier to work with than 18. 5 and 2 are common denominators for 10, so again, easy shortcuts make it easy for us to work with them. Even numbers are easier than odd numbers in a base 2 system, performing an operation on any number and any power of 2.
We use base 10 for obvious reasons that you stated, but because we use base 10 it makes certain numbers easier to work with mentally (just like certain numbers and operations on those numbers are easier for a CPU to deal with since they use base 2.
I child born with a birth defect and one arm doesn't have a problem with base 10 numbering, our fingers and arms have nothing to do with it.
(+ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10) is much more obvious to me than 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10
Learn the difference between implicit and explicit. Explicit is always more obvious in general, the only way the second one is not more obvious to you is if you never went to any school on planet earth and started learning math by writing LISP code, which I can safely assume isn't true, and must conclude you're lying to make the point, so your point is false.
I know I am adding, why do I need to show that operator 10 times when one operator will do?
Again, implicit versus explicit. Implicit requires assumptions, which are easy to fuck up.
Do pluses hurt your eyes or something? What REALLY is the advantage to being less clear about your intentions? In the end, the code gets translated from the first to the second as the CPU doesn't work on assumptions, so the compiler has to convert it to the second anyway. So you just have some ugly syntax sugar thats different from anything else used on the planet, which again, is a point against it. Being different just because is retarded.
The real point to my post however is, if you're arguing over which language has the better syntax, you've already got it wrong. Syntax is just about the least important aspect of a language, yet its the one that starts the most arguments on the Internet.
If syntax matters to you, you're a shitty programmer.
I'm trying to think of a single instance in the history of computing where quality and popularity have been correlated.
Every single popular thing on the planet has high quality in the areas that matter to the popular opinion, your definition of quality is not the only one, and arguably its not even the right one according to popular opinion. Which, btw, I trust more than you out of the gate until proven otherwise.
There are many variables in something that determine is popularity.
Facebook is a complete and utter pile of shit from a technical perspective as well as a privacy view point, they get it wrong on both accounts far more often than right. If you measure them on these values, facebook is shit... but the population doesn't give a fuck about privacy or technical cool factor, it works, they get to feel popular themselves for being part of the crowd, and life goes on regardless of how much I think facebook sucks.
Slashdot Mirror
Please, read what Assange says before writing nonsense about his believes.
Really? I call bullshit. His history shows the exact opposite. This is the fucking douche who lost his kid ... for being a fucking douche, and then campaigned to make ALL CHILD CUSTODY RECORDS PUBLIC INFORMATION so he could get something to use against the mother of his child. He didn't give a flying fuck about what that meant to the children.
He believes in personal privacy for Julian Assange, no one else. If you think he wants you to have personal privacy, you're completely out of touch with reality.
The only successful tablet in the marketplace is as locked down as they come ... so I'm going to guess that its a No.
If you think 'People' want to hax0r thier tablets, you're a ... and let me see this as clearly as possible so you get the point ... you are an ignorant fool.
'People' just want to run cool apps, browse the web, and fuck around on their tablets. 'People' don't give a flying fuck about running Android on a HP tablet, or Linux on a Nook, or installing Cydia on their iPads.
'People' are not 'Geeks'. This story seems to think that the general population cares about the same shit that geeks do. This is in fact why the other tablets keep failing and why Geeks will never rule the world. NOT EVERYONE THINKS LIKE YOU AND DOES THE SAME SHIT, in fact, most of the rest of the world doesn't want anything to do with the crap you do.
Now that everyone relies on these patents, because they were incorporated in to standards, Motorola and Samsung are waving these around to make everyone cower in fear?
You make a valid point, but get modded down because you're not anti-apple. Only anti-Apple is allowed on slashdot.
(Cue all the anti-Apple zealots ranting about the pro-Apple zealots as an excuse to make it okay)
RAMBUS was never something public infrastructure that effected the entire world. Cell phone communications are at this point.
A little perspective might be useful to you.
Apple never claimed to make these widgets you speak of part of a public standard that the infrastructure depends on. Motorola and Samsung most certainly HAVE, or we wouldn't have the modern cell phono infrastructure we have now.
In using these patented technologies in a standard which supports public infrastructure, the rules of the game are slightly different, even if unwritten.
The best way to get your ass handed to you is to let your patented tech become part of a standard and get massive deployment then try to rip people off for licensing it. You'll find what happens next is people tell you to go fuck yourself and use your tech anyway, and no judge on the planet cares, and the entire industry moves away from your crap. You don't get to pretend to be fair then change your mind after everyone else jumps on your bus. What happens is that your ass gets thrown off your own bus when people get fed up with your shit.
Apple never said 'hey, use this, we'll give our GUI widgets and our physical device profiles to anyone in a non-discrimenator manner so they become a public standard we can all benefit from!' ... And that my friend is the difference.
Didn't you learn what indian giving was when you were a little kid?
they could have probably out-competed them in the marketplace.
Uhm, they ARE out competing them in the marketplace, the lawsuits don't change any of that so far.
If its their device, it's good for Apple. Its only bad for Apple if someone else does it first, which lets face it, isn't going to happen or it would have been done by now.
IT IS a group.
Its a group of people who probably don't know each other, but all want to be associated with the same thing, that thing being the name 'Anonymous'.
The good news is, by doing so, every moron that flies the 'Anonymous' flag is part of a criminal organization and can be treated as such. No longer can you be punished JUST for your crime, you are also responsible for the actions of the organization you are part of.
Go ahead, keep being idiots and claiming yourself as part of 'Anonymous'. All it will take is one event and you'll end up in gitmo with the rest of the terrorists. Guilty of evil doings or not, when you associate yourself with a criminal organization, you're going to get treated as such. Just ask all the guys in gitmo who up until sometime in the last 10 years had never even SEEN an American how well being associated with Al-Queda worked out for them.
The CIA has ALWAYS worked this way.
They assassinate when the person they are going after can not be made to look any worse than they are.
You assassinate drug cartel members, you discredit politicians.
The problem is on May 14th, he resigned.
Resignation is an admission of guilt. You quit before you can be fired so no one can say 'he was fired' and you get all of your golden parachutes on the way out the door.
I'm sorry you don't recognize it, but I do. He made no attempt to fight the charges, so either he was guilty of that, or something worse that they held over his head and threatened to expose him for if he didn't resign ... again, making him guilty.
No, everyone knows that the CIA does that. No one is arguing otherwise.
Its just that its pretty clear that this time, they had no need to get involved. He did all the work for them before they even knew him.
shattershot
Just for reference, scattershot is the word you're looking for. Shattershot is a Marvel comic book story arc.
too by writing a book bad-mouthing Assange
If you weren't such a raving fanboy you'd realize that bad mouthing Assange requires absolutely no effort what so ever, just speak about what he's done. He had a couple years early on where Wikileaks did a couple useful things. Before that, his history shows him as a complete and total douche in every aspect. He is one of the most selfish people I've ever seen. He thinks its a great idea to make all child custody hearing information PUBLIC RECORD so that he can try to dig up some shit against the mother of his child ... ignoring the fact that it'll make all sorts of shit most kids won't want public out into the open. He cares about no one other than himself and getting attention for himself. If you can't see that, you're a complete and total idiot.
Then rape allegations
Are not really new for Assange. He has been accused of abusing women since before Wikileaks existed. The rape allegations would have been easier to write off as a lie to discredit him had he not already had a history of treating women like dogs. Go back and look at why he doesn't have custody of his own child and get a clue.
Now all this recent uproar.
What recent uproar? He has had no attention since he DID NOT GET shipped off to the US like everyone was saying was going to happen if he got arrested. In short pretty much anyone believing a word out of his mouth at this point is an idiot. He has repeatedly shown he cares about nothing more than personal attention and gaining it through any means available to him, including manipulating less intelligent people such as yourself into thinking he's a 'good guy, fighting the good fight'.
I'd blame it on the CIA ... except they would have had to start fucking with him when he was still in high school, well before they knew that he was going to be an issue for the US. He's been a douche bag his entire life in everything he does, including the time well before the CIA had heard of him. There is no need for them to do anything, he does just fine on his own.
Before you start believing some random man is Godly, perhaps you should look at his background first.
Yea, I always love watching script kiddies who aren't even able to form proper sentences or know the meaning of the words they are using. Its just one step below the jackass movies, or Ow my Balls.
Start with actually having evidence of corruption.
At one point, thats what Wikileaks did. That ended some time ago and hasn't been the case for the last couple of years. NYT will be happy to publish anything that gets them some readers back, but you actually have to have some sort of proof before you send it to them. They don't particularly respond well when you drop a boat load of stolen documents on their door step and say 'theres bad stuff in here, I know it because its from politicians and I don't like politicians'.
Neither does any other rational person for that matter.
Whistle blowers really don't have a hard time getting information out, when its actually something to be concerned with. The Internet makes it absolutely trivial, as proven already. The problem is as I said, learning the difference between real corruption instead of what typically is called 'whistleblowing' which is more along the lines of 'this company/politician doesn't do what I want/insulted me/won't let me have my way/insert any other childish reason you want here as it all returns to the fact that most of these people are angsty babies.
As I said, its not hard to get the word out. The problem is that 99.999999% of the people who like to think of themselves as 'whistleblowers' are just people who steal documents and break the law because they're too stupid to realize their point of view is unique to them and not the rest of the general population.
Thats the thing, one lone nut job with a irrational story about evil company/government gets overlooked and ignored quickly. Sometimes it takes a little more time, as is the case for Wikileaks who managed to build up some credibility before making it clear they never deserved any such thing.
You'll get modded into oblivion here as everyone seems to think 'Anonymous' is the best thing to happen to the world in the last 4 billion years or so.
However, I could not agree more.
What you see here is a cat fight between two douche bags. Both groups are just a bunch of self serving pricks seeking as much attention as they can get.
The only good news is that anonymous will eventually fall apart, a bunch of script kiddies fucking around together never lasts, they'll fight amoungst themselves and tear themselves apart soon enough ... interestingly enough, I pretty much expect the same thing from Wikileaks.
It makes me wonder just how many drunken clumsy incompetent idiots work in the iPhone department at Apple.
The reason (at least one of the contributing factors to that reason anyway) Apple sells millions and millions of iPhones is because they have normal everyday people using iPhones before they are released to the public. It could very well be a secretary. You want a good sampling of different types of folks playing with a consumer device to get good data.
Companies who have their devs test the software UI design before its released to the public end up like RIM and Microsoft's mobile line recent string of jokes passing as mobile OSes, DOA.
The LGPL does not "infect" proprietary software linked to it.
It most certainly does.
The only time it doesn't 'infect' is if you link dynamically, which is only one way of doing it and isn't always an option.
Do you guys not know anything about the licenses you champion at all?
I implied no such behavior, twit.
My point is simply that people need to stop pretending GPL and LGPL are 'open' or 'free' and realize they both come with serious restrictions.
Those restrictions are by design, and 100% intentional, so the end user gets more control over how the code is useful to them, but doing so puts very clear undeniable restrictions on developers. You simply can not argue these points with me, they are facts.
You can argue what the intention is, and 'whos better for society' and any number of other things, but pretending GPL is some how different than every other license just makes you look stupid in front of any normal sane, non-GPL fanboy. The GPL license is built on an agenda, just like Microsoft's licensing and Apples, its just an entirely different agenda centered around empowering the end users of the software rather than someone else such as developers (BSD license) or profit for the company that owns it (MS and Apple).
Again, this is not something that there is any sort of argument about, its fact. If you don't realize its fact, you're just too stupid to have a conversation about it.
Good for you, you think its balanced. Personally I have no opinion in that respect.
My point is simply that to say its not locked down is a lie. It is 'locked down', and it is intentional, by design, for a reason.
Why do people insist on trying to pretend GPL and LGPL are something they aren't? Why keep trying to scam people into thinking its something other than it is.
If you don't like what it is, don't use it, but if you like it and the way it work, own up to it.
but the GNU team wants an extension language that can reasonably be used to implement other languages
If thats true, then someone is a fucking moron, to put it bluntly. Might as well pick C as your extension language than and stop trying to make an extension language (which should be extremely lightweight and someone limited due to that) that can compile anything to native code on every platform.
I'd say if that statement were true, whoever made it simply doesn't know anything about software development.
Um, LISP has almost no syntax idiosyncrasies - that's the point.
Are you stoned? Can I have some?
I don't care who or how loud they scream it, just saying it (or screaming it) does not make it even a little bit true.
If you had 18 fingers, six on each of three hands, dividing by 3, 6 and 18 would be trivial for you.
It is not that dividing by 10 is any harder or easier than dividing by 18
Wrong.
In a base 10 numbering system, 10 is easier to work with than 18. 5 and 2 are common denominators for 10, so again, easy shortcuts make it easy for us to work with them. Even numbers are easier than odd numbers in a base 2 system, performing an operation on any number and any power of 2.
We use base 10 for obvious reasons that you stated, but because we use base 10 it makes certain numbers easier to work with mentally (just like certain numbers and operations on those numbers are easier for a CPU to deal with since they use base 2.
I child born with a birth defect and one arm doesn't have a problem with base 10 numbering, our fingers and arms have nothing to do with it.
(+ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10) is much more obvious to me than 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10
Learn the difference between implicit and explicit. Explicit is always more obvious in general, the only way the second one is not more obvious to you is if you never went to any school on planet earth and started learning math by writing LISP code, which I can safely assume isn't true, and must conclude you're lying to make the point, so your point is false.
I know I am adding, why do I need to show that operator 10 times when one operator will do?
Again, implicit versus explicit. Implicit requires assumptions, which are easy to fuck up.
Do pluses hurt your eyes or something? What REALLY is the advantage to being less clear about your intentions? In the end, the code gets translated from the first to the second as the CPU doesn't work on assumptions, so the compiler has to convert it to the second anyway. So you just have some ugly syntax sugar thats different from anything else used on the planet, which again, is a point against it. Being different just because is retarded.
The real point to my post however is, if you're arguing over which language has the better syntax, you've already got it wrong. Syntax is just about the least important aspect of a language, yet its the one that starts the most arguments on the Internet.
If syntax matters to you, you're a shitty programmer.
I'm trying to think of a single instance in the history of computing where quality and popularity have been correlated.
Every single popular thing on the planet has high quality in the areas that matter to the popular opinion, your definition of quality is not the only one, and arguably its not even the right one according to popular opinion. Which, btw, I trust more than you out of the gate until proven otherwise.
There are many variables in something that determine is popularity.
Facebook is a complete and utter pile of shit from a technical perspective as well as a privacy view point, they get it wrong on both accounts far more often than right. If you measure them on these values, facebook is shit ... but the population doesn't give a fuck about privacy or technical cool factor, it works, they get to feel popular themselves for being part of the crowd, and life goes on regardless of how much I think facebook sucks.
Now prove me wrong, without being subjective.
So its locked down, just in a different way than you want to call it. To the rest of us, its the same locked down.
Lets not deny reality here, its locked down intentionally to ensure users a certain set of freedoms.
Awesome ... except I can also update the hash when I hax0r your initd args.
Hell, I could just throw a custom hypervisor in the boot process and you'd never even know.