Re:That is a battle which was lost 20 years ago
on
Got (Buffer) Bloat?
·
· Score: 1
Having never worked with the originals (Kerberos and Andrew File System), I don't know if this was a problem added in the "standardization" or if it came with the territory.
I can't speak about historical implementations, but the current (and I assume most modern implementations elsewhere) implementations of Kerberos used by Microsoft and the FreeBSD project can be configured for a system with a 5 line config file that could be generated from the output of a hostname -f call if the client is otherwise configured properly (Has its domain name set properly). It does require a proper DNS setup which can be obnoxious if you try to configure it by hand, but there again, its an implementation issue. Microsoft's implementation (part of ActiveDirectory) pretty much just works out of the box and requires pretty much no effort to use.
Of course, you still have to sync user ids:) Which is also simple with nss_ldap and ActiveDirectory+Service for Unix, but thats pretty trivial and could be done with a generic script that would work for almost everyone in the world out of the box.
There may be decent UNIX implementations of Kerberos and LDAP out there as well, but Microsoft has at least one implementation that doesn't suck to actually implement for no apparent reason.
I have never dealt with AFS, but making everything on my network use kerberos was pretty easy, but until its the standard way of authenticating I wouldn't expect anyone other than MS to put real effort into making it easy for an idiot... or just not a pain in the ass.
Personally I've never seen a buffer in software designed they way they described. I've never heard of hardware acting that way, but as you said they certainly know more than I.
I stopped reading when they said 'it waits for the buffer to fill up until sending', which is true on a per packet level for a lot of things at a end point, in transit everything I've ever dealt with will forward packets without waiting UNTIL the output link becomes too congested to do so, THEN buffering starts happening. So the issue doesn't come into play until you are near saturation. When you hit that point, you're going to want buffering or the latency will be way worse when you start having to wait for retransmission.
Actually. I did stop reading titles and summaries.
Its pretty much accepted at this point that slashdot no longer does any sanity checks on posts or are intentionally posting stories which are flat out lies posted to support trolling for page views.
Reading the summary or title is almost certainly going to give you the wrong idea about the actual article.
It also ignores the fact that books are made out of what would otherwise be waste product of the sawmills that cut the lumber we use throughout the rest of society
I thought experiments were carried out during the alpha phase, and the beta phase was only supposed to be used to fix bugs...
No, experiments are carried out during the prototype stage, defining any changes to your intended feature set before you start focus on the main development work.
The development stage you are organizing everything, getting some sort of sanity to all the random ideas ironing out issues left over from the prototype stage. Here you deal with any major issues and resolve things that will result in massive change that you missed in prototyping. You already screwed up if you're making a massive UNPLANNED overhaul of something in this stage. If you planned to rewrite a subsystem or part for some reason during prototyping or preproduction planning then its acceptable to do so.
The alpha stage is where you are pretty much in a feature freeze, with the exception that you're giving this to a wider range of early adoptors to ensure you haven't screwed up something that your limited internal groups didn't notice. You should be trying not to make changes to features that are more than bug fixes here.
The beta stage is a feature frozen, fix bugs only, no other changes till a release is cut.
Release Canidates are the last bits where almost nothing at all changes and no one but a very limited selection of people will ever notice any sort of difference.
Unfortunately, Mozilla takes its cue from Microsoft and calls things in the prototype and early development stages 'beta'. This shows in the finished product.
This might look like a long process that would take too much time in todays instant gratification world, but its not, you simply don't plan as many features between releases. You may not have 20 new features in your release notes, but having 3 releases with 5 features each, for 15 new features that WORK RIGHT and an application that is coherent will result in far more user satisfaction. You can jump on the race for having the highest version number if you want, but you don't change the process in order to do so. You'll cut off your nose to spite your face, and again, it shows in the product.
While the version number IS a stupid thing to worry about in and of itself, what they are doing with it on the other hand is an indication of what the leadership of Mozilla is thinking.
The general thought (at least my general thought) is that their playing a marketing game to win users by bumping version numbers rather than actually providing features. There are two reasons to do this. The first is, its an easy thing to do to get marketing attention. Fair enough. The second, and more worrisome is that they are doing the version number bump because its an easy thing to do AND since they aren't CAPABLE of providing new features in a timely manner and stable, they'll just do it and hang on while hoping something changes.
Typically, when you see software do this, you know the ship is on its way to the bottom if not already half way there. Googles version changes are just them making some silly statement about version numbers by basically making them meaningless, which while they currently aren't 'well defined' in general you know that a 1.0 to 2.0 bump is a much bigger, more likely to be incompatible change than a 1.1 to 1.2 bump. This indicates they are intentionally trying to be confusing. Thats bad in and of itself, whats worse is why are they are doing it? They don't appear to need to play any tricks, Chrome is standing on its own just fine.
So the number itself doesn't matter, but how its treated does.
Do it all the time, down to roughly freezing. After that its too cold for me to spend time in the shop and I'm too cheap to heat it. The regular tube lights take a few minutes to warm up, and I can notice them doing so, but the CFL only take slightly longer for the initial light, after that the hit full brightness pretty quick.
As has been well established, there are great differences in the quality of CFL products, even from the same manufacture at this point.
I realize this goes against the point of CLI, but I use mplayer because it's just a whole lot easier than messing with complicated GUI's.
It doesn't 'go against CLI'.
Its not a contest.
Doing photo touchups from the command line would suck ass, on the other hand finding all files on the system owned by uid 10412 or a user named BitStream, group 412, that have the suid bit and are world executable set, sorted by size, with duplicate named files removed and nothing larger than 50 megs but bigger than 3k... that works from the command line.
Both jobs are a rather complex set of commands, but nothing that couldn't be done in the other system effectively, but probably far more time consuming.
I've learned that in the past couple of years you should be assuming the summary is 100% false and the opposite to be true, then you'll not look like an ass nearly as often.
This is one of those cases where the summary is a blatent troll that could only be more inaccurate if they also managed to get the names of the companies wrong too.
Use Mint. It's like Ubuntu, only with less commercialization and more useful stuff.
For a lot of people, those last two statements are mutually exclusive as there isn't a viable non-commercial alternative to far too many things for that statement to hold true outside a very specific niche.
I fully support OSS software, but you start in what those kind of comments and I'm done listening too you. It shows you to be an irrational fanboy with no grasp on the fact that it does take effort to produce software. The dollar amount to attach to it may be debatable but the effort part isn't, if you want to blatantly disregard it, or are too ignorant to recognize it, you aren't worth wasting my time.
Let me get this straight, you let them use a law that was intended to provide you access to information as an excuse to prevent you from getting access to information about your child?
Let me step back a little further... you let them deny you access to your child? How many people did you kill before you stopped?
That would be since your name is one them and, as we all know, email is basically and electronic postcard.
The ability for someone to see the contents of those records in transit is irrelevant because the owner of the information has requested it be sent that way. Nice try, but that argument is roughly the same as telling the patient they won't understand them so its dangerous to give them to the patient. The user has requested them, you are required to supply them, period.
You can however, simply say 'we'll mail them to you for a fee of $XXX, and thats the only way we send records'. You're trying to add 'security restrictions' where none exist. There are rules for storage, and you're expected to make minor reasonable efforts too keep the records safe, but the rules are pretty lax and they end the instant the patient requests you provide the information.
HIPAAs primary purpose was to ensure that patients got access to their data and that it wasn't held ransom by providers who wanted to make sure you couldn't use another doctor. 'Security' was and is a secondary (arguably just as important) function. It basically changed the idea that your provider owned medical data about you to YOU own ALL medical data about YOU, the provider doesn't.
Yea, well patients seemed to think it was important enough to pass a law because we already established they were more concerned about 'patient care' (translation, making sure you couldn't take your records elsewhere ensuring you would stay rather than get retested for everything AGAIN at an additional cost).
The law exists because 'they' clearly aren't concerned and we 'the patients' are fucking concerned.
They lost their right to make a decision in this matter when they clearly illustrated they weren't trustworthy enough or competent enough to make that decision.
We've already been burned by their 'concern', and we've made it illegal for their 'concern' to be part of the picture.
They had their chance, they blew it, now they have to do what we fucking told them to do or pay the price for not doing so.
Why isn't it? We've made LAWS saying that this stuff IS important.
And also having worked in government public health, it is something taken very seriously. Lifes ARE on the line. Example: A database with aids patient information being 'leaked' in the wrong part of the wrong state/country to the wrong people very well might end up with people being beat to a bloody pulp because some ignorant fuck finds out some guy has AIDS and assumes that means he's also gay AND deserves a beating.
Theres of course all the issues of discrimination due to ignorance when it comes to medicine as well, especially with things relating to mental health.
So yes, I expect them to follow the law and if that means occasionally it hurts people then we either change the law or we accept that the good it does outweighs problems it causes.
You however, DO NOT GET TO DECIDE because THE PUBLIC COLLECTIVELY HAS DECIDED.
You're looking at it through a tiny instant in time through a tiny pinhole and ignoring everything else trying to come up with an instance to justify your reaction to his statement, the problem is that you are completely unqualified (I say that based on the fact that you raised the question alone) to make that decision, which is why it isn't your decision and there are laws relating to it.
Again. YOU DON'T GET TO DECIDE WHICH LAWS TO FOLLOW AND WHEN YOU FOLLOW THEM, but you do get to vote for the people who make the laws. Change the laws or follow them, nothing else is acceptable.
However, Blizzard is in the extremely rare situation of being developer and publisher with boatloads of money to sit on. They also have somewhat of an Apple effect in that whatever they do will get eaten up whole by legions of rabid fans, whether the game is good or not.
Perhaps that is a result of 'waiting till its ready', not the other way around?
Uhm, I'm not sure what world you live in, but 'open mobile devices' are extremely rare in the US and always have been. Carriers have always controlled or at least attempted to control what software ran on phones and where you got it from.
Apple is far more 'open' than just about anything previously seen on a US carrier. You can rant and scream about how closed they are and act as if they just cut your balls off, but you just look stupid since whatever phone you owned prior too and after the iPhone's creation almost certainly comes more locked down than an iPhone. The notable exceptions being the Freerunner, which no US carrier would touch with someone elses dick, and the Google Nexus. WinMo was pretty loose about apps, but carriers did their best to direct you to their ripoff markets as well with their default roms that you promptly wanted to jailbreak. RIM still doesn't make a smart phone, though they do have a few that pretend to be, the BlackBerry certainly didn't compare to even an iPhone for any reason except remote wipe to begin with.
There never was 'openness' on mobile devices in the US, so if you aren't from the US, fine, but if you are, there were new 'good ol days', nothing has changed for the worse, only for the better.
But, I'll point out that I also get to do the things Apple does decree I can do, like make one app, that will run on 3 different devices (ipod, phone, pad) and a few minor revisions of those devices in one sitting, and in another 30 I can submit it to a marketplace FULL OF PEOPLE WANTING TO THROW MONEY AT ME FOR EVEN THE SIMPLEST APPS.
So awesome, you can go do all that kickass shit on your phone, I'll sell iPhone apps and make so much money I can pay someone else to do all that shit on the phone for me and not even think about it.
Technically superior almost universally means you missed the point of the product, and if you take even the briefest look at history, its almost never that the superior technology wins, its the one that does at least what people really need, and does what they want well (from the way the feel), it doesn't matter if some engineer thinks its done inefficiently.
Finally... proprietary screws? Seriously? I had a fucking screwdriver for the iPhone screws before they even switched to it...THATS how proprietary they are, I probably have 50 bolts with that type of head in my shop and they've been there for the past several years. You're just a fanboy if this is a point you're trying to use in an argument. I won't bother cutting up the rest of your points, but this one is just so retarded it needs reiterated that its utterly retarded.
If you're Joe Average, it's pretty much impossible to accept credit cards - the requirements for a merchant account can be excruiatingly high (minimum transactions a month, minimum amount charged a month, possible data security, etc).
If by excruciatingly high you mean as easy as $25/month and giving someone the account number to put the funds in/withdraw from... then yea, its hard. Yes, they withdraw funds from the account... if you haven't sold enough stuff to cover the $25/monthly service fee.
Me personally, I just want to authorize.net and signed up. Now I can take credit cards on my phone and process everything right then and there, I can also handle automatic recurring payments and echecks, do address verifications... every single thing anyone else can do for CC processing. Of course, I do have to get the CC#, so if you want something without giving a CC# then you're going to need a trusted third party like paypal or google checkout.
SOMEONE actually has to know where the money is coming from and where its going. There are no anonymous financial transactions, not even with cash.
If you want lower prices, you just have to do enough volume.
Like most things in life, its not hard, it just requires that you put at least A LITTLE REAL EFFORT into find it.
No, they get through materials that were THOUGHT to be inescapable. You're trying to define air tight as inescapable, which is clearly wrong. 'Air tight' simply means that given a specific set of conditions, the container will not transfer 'air'.
It very well might transfer oil however. For instance, set a bottle of vegetable oil somewhere for long enough and the oil will escape slowly, even though air will not. At least thats the perception. Reality is generally entirely different than perception.
The weight of a gram of matter is relative to the gravitational forces exerted on it. A gram of mass that weighs a pound on Earth does not weigh a pound on the moon.
Cubic centimeter is a unit of volume. It may contain one gram of matter, or it may not, as the density of the matter determines how much mass will fit into the cubic centimeter, and likewise it may weigh one pound or it may weigh an intentesimally large/small value, depending on what forces are acting on it. Near the neutron star one cubic centimeter of any mass is probably compressed to be very dense and likewise very heavy. In open space, not so much.
Or you took your original reference pictures in the shade and the 'raised temperature' happened because you took the pictures in the Sun.
Or about a billion other reasons why the differences showed up that are more likely since she's a slut and probably pretty good at taking her birth control.
I can make random shit up that is apparently true when you have basically 0 factual information about what you are 'studying'. When you make it all up as you go its pretty easy to make all the pieces fit, you have to be a real idiot for your conclusions to fall apart when you're making up all the supporting evidence as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Having never worked with the originals (Kerberos and Andrew File System), I don't know if this was a problem added in the "standardization" or if it came with the territory.
I can't speak about historical implementations, but the current (and I assume most modern implementations elsewhere) implementations of Kerberos used by Microsoft and the FreeBSD project can be configured for a system with a 5 line config file that could be generated from the output of a hostname -f call if the client is otherwise configured properly (Has its domain name set properly). It does require a proper DNS setup which can be obnoxious if you try to configure it by hand, but there again, its an implementation issue. Microsoft's implementation (part of ActiveDirectory) pretty much just works out of the box and requires pretty much no effort to use.
Of course, you still have to sync user ids :) Which is also simple with nss_ldap and ActiveDirectory+Service for Unix, but thats pretty trivial and could be done with a generic script that would work for almost everyone in the world out of the box.
There may be decent UNIX implementations of Kerberos and LDAP out there as well, but Microsoft has at least one implementation that doesn't suck to actually implement for no apparent reason.
I have never dealt with AFS, but making everything on my network use kerberos was pretty easy, but until its the standard way of authenticating I wouldn't expect anyone other than MS to put real effort into making it easy for an idiot ... or just not a pain in the ass.
Have you considered they still could be wrong?
Personally I've never seen a buffer in software designed they way they described. I've never heard of hardware acting that way, but as you said they certainly know more than I.
I stopped reading when they said 'it waits for the buffer to fill up until sending', which is true on a per packet level for a lot of things at a end point, in transit everything I've ever dealt with will forward packets without waiting UNTIL the output link becomes too congested to do so, THEN buffering starts happening. So the issue doesn't come into play until you are near saturation. When you hit that point, you're going to want buffering or the latency will be way worse when you start having to wait for retransmission.
Actually. I did stop reading titles and summaries.
Its pretty much accepted at this point that slashdot no longer does any sanity checks on posts or are intentionally posting stories which are flat out lies posted to support trolling for page views.
Reading the summary or title is almost certainly going to give you the wrong idea about the actual article.
I challenge you to prove me wrong.
It also ignores the fact that books are made out of what would otherwise be waste product of the sawmills that cut the lumber we use throughout the rest of society
Since its fairly easy to upload GPS information to the phone of your own creating and fake the timestamps, its not like its admissible anyway.
I thought experiments were carried out during the alpha phase, and the beta phase was only supposed to be used to fix bugs...
No, experiments are carried out during the prototype stage, defining any changes to your intended feature set before you start focus on the main development work.
The development stage you are organizing everything, getting some sort of sanity to all the random ideas ironing out issues left over from the prototype stage. Here you deal with any major issues and resolve things that will result in massive change that you missed in prototyping. You already screwed up if you're making a massive UNPLANNED overhaul of something in this stage. If you planned to rewrite a subsystem or part for some reason during prototyping or preproduction planning then its acceptable to do so.
The alpha stage is where you are pretty much in a feature freeze, with the exception that you're giving this to a wider range of early adoptors to ensure you haven't screwed up something that your limited internal groups didn't notice. You should be trying not to make changes to features that are more than bug fixes here.
The beta stage is a feature frozen, fix bugs only, no other changes till a release is cut.
Release Canidates are the last bits where almost nothing at all changes and no one but a very limited selection of people will ever notice any sort of difference.
Unfortunately, Mozilla takes its cue from Microsoft and calls things in the prototype and early development stages 'beta'. This shows in the finished product.
This might look like a long process that would take too much time in todays instant gratification world, but its not, you simply don't plan as many features between releases. You may not have 20 new features in your release notes, but having 3 releases with 5 features each, for 15 new features that WORK RIGHT and an application that is coherent will result in far more user satisfaction. You can jump on the race for having the highest version number if you want, but you don't change the process in order to do so. You'll cut off your nose to spite your face, and again, it shows in the product.
While the version number IS a stupid thing to worry about in and of itself, what they are doing with it on the other hand is an indication of what the leadership of Mozilla is thinking.
The general thought (at least my general thought) is that their playing a marketing game to win users by bumping version numbers rather than actually providing features. There are two reasons to do this. The first is, its an easy thing to do to get marketing attention. Fair enough. The second, and more worrisome is that they are doing the version number bump because its an easy thing to do AND since they aren't CAPABLE of providing new features in a timely manner and stable, they'll just do it and hang on while hoping something changes.
Typically, when you see software do this, you know the ship is on its way to the bottom if not already half way there. Googles version changes are just them making some silly statement about version numbers by basically making them meaningless, which while they currently aren't 'well defined' in general you know that a 1.0 to 2.0 bump is a much bigger, more likely to be incompatible change than a 1.1 to 1.2 bump. This indicates they are intentionally trying to be confusing. Thats bad in and of itself, whats worse is why are they are doing it? They don't appear to need to play any tricks, Chrome is standing on its own just fine.
So the number itself doesn't matter, but how its treated does.
Do it all the time, down to roughly freezing. After that its too cold for me to spend time in the shop and I'm too cheap to heat it. The regular tube lights take a few minutes to warm up, and I can notice them doing so, but the CFL only take slightly longer for the initial light, after that the hit full brightness pretty quick.
As has been well established, there are great differences in the quality of CFL products, even from the same manufacture at this point.
I realize this goes against the point of CLI, but I use mplayer because it's just a whole lot easier than messing with complicated GUI's.
It doesn't 'go against CLI'.
Its not a contest.
Doing photo touchups from the command line would suck ass, on the other hand finding all files on the system owned by uid 10412 or a user named BitStream, group 412, that have the suid bit and are world executable set, sorted by size, with duplicate named files removed and nothing larger than 50 megs but bigger than 3k ... that works from the command line.
Both jobs are a rather complex set of commands, but nothing that couldn't be done in the other system effectively, but probably far more time consuming.
Thats if you assume the summary to be true.
I've learned that in the past couple of years you should be assuming the summary is 100% false and the opposite to be true, then you'll not look like an ass nearly as often.
This is one of those cases where the summary is a blatent troll that could only be more inaccurate if they also managed to get the names of the companies wrong too.
Use Mint. It's like Ubuntu, only with less commercialization and more useful stuff.
For a lot of people, those last two statements are mutually exclusive as there isn't a viable non-commercial alternative to far too many things for that statement to hold true outside a very specific niche.
Me.
I fully support OSS software, but you start in what those kind of comments and I'm done listening too you. It shows you to be an irrational fanboy with no grasp on the fact that it does take effort to produce software. The dollar amount to attach to it may be debatable but the effort part isn't, if you want to blatantly disregard it, or are too ignorant to recognize it, you aren't worth wasting my time.
Let me get this straight, you let them use a law that was intended to provide you access to information as an excuse to prevent you from getting access to information about your child?
Let me step back a little further ... you let them deny you access to your child? How many people did you kill before you stopped?
That would be since your name is one them and, as we all know, email is basically and electronic postcard.
The ability for someone to see the contents of those records in transit is irrelevant because the owner of the information has requested it be sent that way. Nice try, but that argument is roughly the same as telling the patient they won't understand them so its dangerous to give them to the patient. The user has requested them, you are required to supply them, period.
You can however, simply say 'we'll mail them to you for a fee of $XXX, and thats the only way we send records'. You're trying to add 'security restrictions' where none exist. There are rules for storage, and you're expected to make minor reasonable efforts too keep the records safe, but the rules are pretty lax and they end the instant the patient requests you provide the information.
HIPAAs primary purpose was to ensure that patients got access to their data and that it wasn't held ransom by providers who wanted to make sure you couldn't use another doctor. 'Security' was and is a secondary (arguably just as important) function. It basically changed the idea that your provider owned medical data about you to YOU own ALL medical data about YOU, the provider doesn't.
Yea, well patients seemed to think it was important enough to pass a law because we already established they were more concerned about 'patient care' (translation, making sure you couldn't take your records elsewhere ensuring you would stay rather than get retested for everything AGAIN at an additional cost).
The law exists because 'they' clearly aren't concerned and we 'the patients' are fucking concerned.
They lost their right to make a decision in this matter when they clearly illustrated they weren't trustworthy enough or competent enough to make that decision.
We've already been burned by their 'concern', and we've made it illegal for their 'concern' to be part of the picture.
They had their chance, they blew it, now they have to do what we fucking told them to do or pay the price for not doing so.
Why isn't it? We've made LAWS saying that this stuff IS important.
And also having worked in government public health, it is something taken very seriously. Lifes ARE on the line. Example: A database with aids patient information being 'leaked' in the wrong part of the wrong state/country to the wrong people very well might end up with people being beat to a bloody pulp because some ignorant fuck finds out some guy has AIDS and assumes that means he's also gay AND deserves a beating.
Theres of course all the issues of discrimination due to ignorance when it comes to medicine as well, especially with things relating to mental health.
So yes, I expect them to follow the law and if that means occasionally it hurts people then we either change the law or we accept that the good it does outweighs problems it causes.
You however, DO NOT GET TO DECIDE because THE PUBLIC COLLECTIVELY HAS DECIDED.
You're looking at it through a tiny instant in time through a tiny pinhole and ignoring everything else trying to come up with an instance to justify your reaction to his statement, the problem is that you are completely unqualified (I say that based on the fact that you raised the question alone) to make that decision, which is why it isn't your decision and there are laws relating to it.
Again. YOU DON'T GET TO DECIDE WHICH LAWS TO FOLLOW AND WHEN YOU FOLLOW THEM, but you do get to vote for the people who make the laws. Change the laws or follow them, nothing else is acceptable.
However, Blizzard is in the extremely rare situation of being developer and publisher with boatloads of money to sit on. They also have somewhat of an Apple effect in that whatever they do will get eaten up whole by legions of rabid fans, whether the game is good or not.
Perhaps that is a result of 'waiting till its ready', not the other way around?
Uhm, I'm not sure what world you live in, but 'open mobile devices' are extremely rare in the US and always have been. Carriers have always controlled or at least attempted to control what software ran on phones and where you got it from.
Apple is far more 'open' than just about anything previously seen on a US carrier. You can rant and scream about how closed they are and act as if they just cut your balls off, but you just look stupid since whatever phone you owned prior too and after the iPhone's creation almost certainly comes more locked down than an iPhone. The notable exceptions being the Freerunner, which no US carrier would touch with someone elses dick, and the Google Nexus. WinMo was pretty loose about apps, but carriers did their best to direct you to their ripoff markets as well with their default roms that you promptly wanted to jailbreak. RIM still doesn't make a smart phone, though they do have a few that pretend to be, the BlackBerry certainly didn't compare to even an iPhone for any reason except remote wipe to begin with.
There never was 'openness' on mobile devices in the US, so if you aren't from the US, fine, but if you are, there were new 'good ol days', nothing has changed for the worse, only for the better.
I won't argue one bit of your statement.
But, I'll point out that I also get to do the things Apple does decree I can do, like make one app, that will run on 3 different devices (ipod, phone, pad) and a few minor revisions of those devices in one sitting, and in another 30 I can submit it to a marketplace FULL OF PEOPLE WANTING TO THROW MONEY AT ME FOR EVEN THE SIMPLEST APPS.
So awesome, you can go do all that kickass shit on your phone, I'll sell iPhone apps and make so much money I can pay someone else to do all that shit on the phone for me and not even think about it.
Technically superior almost universally means you missed the point of the product, and if you take even the briefest look at history, its almost never that the superior technology wins, its the one that does at least what people really need, and does what they want well (from the way the feel), it doesn't matter if some engineer thinks its done inefficiently.
Finally ... proprietary screws? Seriously? I had a fucking screwdriver for the iPhone screws before they even switched to it ...THATS how proprietary they are, I probably have 50 bolts with that type of head in my shop and they've been there for the past several years. You're just a fanboy if this is a point you're trying to use in an argument. I won't bother cutting up the rest of your points, but this one is just so retarded it needs reiterated that its utterly retarded.
. PayPal still has not said whether this requirement is part of the standard agreement; my guess is if it were they would have said so.
It is, and they did say so, but you just didn't read that part. Its pretty clearly stated in the ToS and in the previous article about this subject.
If you're Joe Average, it's pretty much impossible to accept credit cards - the requirements for a merchant account can be excruiatingly high (minimum transactions a month, minimum amount charged a month, possible data security, etc).
If by excruciatingly high you mean as easy as $25/month and giving someone the account number to put the funds in/withdraw from ... then yea, its hard. Yes, they withdraw funds from the account ... if you haven't sold enough stuff to cover the $25/monthly service fee.
Me personally, I just want to authorize.net and signed up. Now I can take credit cards on my phone and process everything right then and there, I can also handle automatic recurring payments and echecks, do address verifications ... every single thing anyone else can do for CC processing. Of course, I do have to get the CC#, so if you want something without giving a CC# then you're going to need a trusted third party like paypal or google checkout.
SOMEONE actually has to know where the money is coming from and where its going. There are no anonymous financial transactions, not even with cash.
If you want lower prices, you just have to do enough volume.
Like most things in life, its not hard, it just requires that you put at least A LITTLE REAL EFFORT into find it.
BTW, Being Human ... not fucking scifi, its fantasy.
No, they get through materials that were THOUGHT to be inescapable. You're trying to define air tight as inescapable, which is clearly wrong. 'Air tight' simply means that given a specific set of conditions, the container will not transfer 'air'.
It very well might transfer oil however. For instance, set a bottle of vegetable oil somewhere for long enough and the oil will escape slowly, even though air will not. At least thats the perception. Reality is generally entirely different than perception.
A gram is a mass measurement, not weight.
The weight of a gram of matter is relative to the gravitational forces exerted on it. A gram of mass that weighs a pound on Earth does not weigh a pound on the moon.
Cubic centimeter is a unit of volume. It may contain one gram of matter, or it may not, as the density of the matter determines how much mass will fit into the cubic centimeter, and likewise it may weigh one pound or it may weigh an intentesimally large/small value, depending on what forces are acting on it. Near the neutron star one cubic centimeter of any mass is probably compressed to be very dense and likewise very heavy. In open space, not so much.
Gram is not a measurement of weight.
Or shes got a yeast infection.
Or she's got a viral infection.
Or she's got a bacterial infection.
Or you took your original reference pictures in the shade and the 'raised temperature' happened because you took the pictures in the Sun.
Or about a billion other reasons why the differences showed up that are more likely since she's a slut and probably pretty good at taking her birth control.
I can make random shit up that is apparently true when you have basically 0 factual information about what you are 'studying'. When you make it all up as you go its pretty easy to make all the pieces fit, you have to be a real idiot for your conclusions to fall apart when you're making up all the supporting evidence as well.