Why would I blame the carriers? My Galaxy Nexus comes with an easy ability to unlock, and I'm on Sprint. Sprint hasn't asked any OEMs to lock down anything that I'm aware. All of the newer Samsung phones on the Sprint network can easily be unlocked.
As far as I'm aware, t-mobile doesn't care if you are unlocked either. I've never looked at Verizon or AT&T as I've never been interested in either carrier.
Or perhaps, it's just "hip" to buy an iphone, and the high price is why people want them.
When Gucci lowered the prices on their designer clothing, their sales volume dropped. Were talking volume here, not profit. By raising the prices again, they actually sold more clothing.
When you put a high price on something, in many cases it can make people desire it more. I guarantee that if apple dropped their prices, they would probably sell less as well because it wouldn't be this trendy thing that only the "hip" or "sophisticated" people have any more.
Anyways, over 500 years of market history will tell you that supply and demand isn't fiction. Only a die hard communist chooses to ignore that.
Ouch. They say broadband is bad in the US, but in Arizona my ISP gives a 30mbit connection for $60 with a 250gb cap that they've never actually enforced (and I regularly exceed it every month, sometimes doubling or tripling it.)
Whats strange is there's no real competition here either.
I know in the Spanish world, you can add as many negatives as you want to a sentence, and it always results in a negative. I imagine this to be the same for other romantic languages (e.g. French, Portugese, Romanian, Italian) though I've never studied them in detail. It is worth pointing out though, that Spanish is the second most spoken language in the world.
Then again, English is Germanic in origin, with a lot of French and some Latin added. German shares a lot of traits with Scandinavian languages and surrounding areas (e.g. Belgium) so it may very well be the double negative is positive rule there. I wouldn't know as I've never studied any of them at all.
In my opinion, HTC has dramatically fallen out of favor among the enthusiast community due to heavy lockdown and closed source drivers. This is in fact the reason I have sworn off ever buying another HTC phone again. That might be spilling over to the regular consumers.
In my case it has, because I've recommended to everybody that I have talked to android about to stay away from HTC.
I don't really understand this. Many here are sympathetic with illegal immigrants, yet vehemently oppose H1-B.
Illegal immigrants have been rather hostile here in Arizona. I'm not making this up, they've actually invaded farmer's homes and murdered them while using their house as a temporary staging ground for either human smuggling or drug smuggling. Let's not even mention the literally miles of trash that they leave in washes around the border.
Sure, they might do some jobs the rest of us won't, but they aren't ideal citizens and end up being much more of a burden than a benefit. I've worked with them a lot, they can't even spell in their own language or even pronounce it right (and Spanish is a very easy language to both spell and pronounce.) When they have kids, they automatically become citizens, and are immediately eligible for welfare, food stamps, and literally the best medicaid program in the US, in addition to free or subsidized section 8 housing.
An H1-B visa (which I do support) recipient actually does work that is very valuable, and doesn't rely on government benefits. I've seen company recruiters that are trying desperately to hire IT people, and actively recruits from local schools, but the talent just isn't there. It's not about getting cheap labor, because they pay H1-B people very well. It would be easier to hire local talent, if it existed to begin with.
They can get away with that by use of false flags. Not necessarily feigning attacks, but making it look as though the enemy is still trying to invade, but the fearless leader is the only thing holding them back.
I use both hyperv and vmware (workstation and ESXi) regularly. I can say without a doubt that VMware shits all over hyperv, too many reasons to list really.
At the maricopa colleges, they were using Hyper-V to set up student labs because it came with their existing microsoft licenses at no extra cost. However it was riddled with problems. Shit would break all the time, and a ton of little things like shared clipboard are non existent.
They switched to ESXi 5 and it works great, not to mention they can now use their SAN proper, as hyper-v has basically no support for SAN without you providing your own abstraction.
This is hyper-v from 2008 R2, by the way. I don't know if 2012 is any different, but I doubt it has come that far given that 2008 R2 is only about 2 years old, and I'd say it is a good 8 years behind where vmware currently is.
People spread the gerbil thing about Richard Gere, and he even knows many who did it (Stalone is one of them,) yet it's been established that he has no legal recourse.
And besides, he'd make himself look incredibly stupid if he did try to fight it.
If that is truly the reason for alarmism, then I color me way confused.
I mean what, we stop global warming by disrupting our existing infrastructure and depressing the economy, or else global warming will end up depressing the economy and disrupting our existing infrastructure?
No matter what, the climate WILL change. It will always change. Even if we all threw out technology and lived in little mud huts eating beetles, the climate will still change anyways whether we like it or not.
I don't think huawei would deliberately do that, what I do think though is that they are horribly insecure due to cheap engineering. They can release the source code all they want, but it might take years for anybody to make sure its clean. Not only that, but it often turns out that they use cheap components as well that die fast. The company I worked for found a lot of parts coming out of china that were missing the substrate in their IC's.
One way to give your detractors more attention than they otherwise would have gotten is to attack them (this article is a case in point.) Worse is that if he loses the case (which given his public figure status, is easily possible) he'll just add to their credibility.
Disclaimer: I myself generally distrust climate alarmists. The earth has had periods of MUCH warmer climates, and life thrived in all of them. Hell, lets even look at more recent history: some archeologists have found evidence that during the medieval warm period, there were farms in areas that are now considered far too inhospitable for agriculture due to the cold climate. Further, what we're seeing now may very well be yet another temperate anomaly, only now our measurements are more accurate so it seems different.
Samsung components are well known to be of higher quality than virtually all of their competitors, usually they're the first to break higher DPI barriers (they were the first to create the "retina" display, both for the iphone and the ipad) and non-Samsung high DPI displays are known to commonly suffer from ghosting, banding, and flashlighting.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that high volume contracts don't come with set "termination" fees. Instead, if one party breaches the contract by not sticking to their obligations, the other one sues for whatever profit they will have lost. The actual damages they sue for ends up being figured out by lawyers either in court or in a settlement.
I think it is more likely that the teachers unions are the ones lobbying against this. Remember, they've already tried to ban online education in another state:
I agree with the premise of your book that god is indeed a delusion. However, I think the message comes across as a bit harsh. I've met people who claim to belong to a religion are quite intelligent. When people ask me what my views are, I'll tel them, but I won't bother trying to convince them to believe what I do, because doing so is almost always an act of futility.
I get annoyed when people stand out on street corners and preach damnation unless you convert, and on the same token I also get annoyed when fellow atheists actively insult anybody who believes in a religion. To me, there isn't any difference between the two. Besides, I think that explaining your position rather than proselytizing it is more likely to get somebody to at least look at your viewpoint without dismissing it outright.
That said, have you considered maybe toning it down a bit? If that seems like a bad idea to you, then what is your general opinion of atheists like myself?
A lot of environmentalists complain about how we use too many materials in our every day lives which end up going to waste (they mostly tend to complain about plastic, though the more ignorant ones also complain about paper, not realizing that we actually grow paper on farms; it doesn't come from cutting down forests. Creating paper isn't going to make us run out of trees any faster than eating potatoes is going to make us run out of potato plants.)
Wouldn't it also follow that if you limit the size of containers, then you require more containers overall?
Ummm...water and juice are both 100% chemicals. The classic definition of a chemical is a substance that was created through a process of configuring molecular structures. Water and juice both fit that bill. I think what you're looking for is the difference between chemicals existing in nature, and ones that are synthesized by man. When you think about it, any form of cooking or fermenting we do results in synthesized chemicals, even something as basic as baking bread or making wine.
What I'm getting at is that the notion of something being a chemical making it bad for you is just retarded. If you're truly paranoid about synthesized chemicals, I might point out that even organic farms use pesticides. Your body itself is really just a bunch of chemical reactions taking place in a controlled manner. You can solve both of these problems for yourself by just never eating again.
Also, lemonade tends to have a lot more sugar in it than diet soda.
Who gets to decide what is fair? Who decides what is ethical?
Personally I'd rather that be up to me rather than the government. The majority of corporations out there are ethical far beyond the standards required by law. Take for example, those who I know slashdot loves to target, big pharma, specifically Johnson and Johnson. When some psychopath put cyanide pills in the bottles and replaced them back on the shelf, they knew the incident was isolated to a very specific area. Yet just to be sure, they recalled all tylenol bottles across the US, costing them untold millions of dollars when there was really no ethical standard requiring it, rather they just wanted to be sure.
I trust private entities over the government. If you don't like them, you can always boycott them or disassociate yourself with them. If you boycott the government though, you go to jail.
I'm a libertarian because I believe that we know what is best for us, not the government. So what if somebody wants to drink soda or eat food with salt, that's their decision. Same thing if they want to own firearms. That doesn't mean I'm a republican either. I believe that marriage for example isn't something that the government should be involved in to begin with, and I also believe in the full legalization of all drugs, and legalization of brothels.
Here, have a look at some pictures of what happened when East Germany went from socialized ownership to privatized ownership:
You know why we eat high fructose corn syrup, where the rest of the world eats sugar? Because of sugar tariffs that are supposed to keep farmers jobs, even though they don't actually benefit them in any way. If the market decided what we ate, it would be sugar. Instead the government effectively tells us that we must eat high fructose corn syrup, or pay up.
That's why I'm a libertarian. I lose karma all the time for making libertarian statements on here, but so what, it's worth it.
Decentralized DNS would inevitably bring back the late 90's market of snatching up and hoarding domain names and hawking them on ebay for millions. Want to pick up a new domain name for your business, but somebody else already has it with just a website that says "this domain is for sale"? I hope you have really good financing.
Or worse, when somebody loses their domain key, then nobody gets that domain. And when computers get fast enough to forge those keys in short order (maybe not at the time of their creation, but 20 years from then...)
Slashdot Mirror
Why would I blame the carriers? My Galaxy Nexus comes with an easy ability to unlock, and I'm on Sprint. Sprint hasn't asked any OEMs to lock down anything that I'm aware. All of the newer Samsung phones on the Sprint network can easily be unlocked.
As far as I'm aware, t-mobile doesn't care if you are unlocked either. I've never looked at Verizon or AT&T as I've never been interested in either carrier.
Or perhaps, it's just "hip" to buy an iphone, and the high price is why people want them.
When Gucci lowered the prices on their designer clothing, their sales volume dropped. Were talking volume here, not profit. By raising the prices again, they actually sold more clothing.
When you put a high price on something, in many cases it can make people desire it more. I guarantee that if apple dropped their prices, they would probably sell less as well because it wouldn't be this trendy thing that only the "hip" or
"sophisticated" people have any more.
Anyways, over 500 years of market history will tell you that supply and demand isn't fiction. Only a die hard communist chooses to ignore that.
Ouch. They say broadband is bad in the US, but in Arizona my ISP gives a 30mbit connection for $60 with a 250gb cap that they've never actually enforced (and I regularly exceed it every month, sometimes doubling or tripling it.)
Whats strange is there's no real competition here either.
I know in the Spanish world, you can add as many negatives as you want to a sentence, and it always results in a negative. I imagine this to be the same for other romantic languages (e.g. French, Portugese, Romanian, Italian) though I've never studied them in detail. It is worth pointing out though, that Spanish is the second most spoken language in the world.
Then again, English is Germanic in origin, with a lot of French and some Latin added. German shares a lot of traits with Scandinavian languages and surrounding areas (e.g. Belgium) so it may very well be the double negative is positive rule there. I wouldn't know as I've never studied any of them at all.
In my opinion, HTC has dramatically fallen out of favor among the enthusiast community due to heavy lockdown and closed source drivers. This is in fact the reason I have sworn off ever buying another HTC phone again. That might be spilling over to the regular consumers.
In my case it has, because I've recommended to everybody that I have talked to android about to stay away from HTC.
I don't really understand this. Many here are sympathetic with illegal immigrants, yet vehemently oppose H1-B.
Illegal immigrants have been rather hostile here in Arizona. I'm not making this up, they've actually invaded farmer's homes and murdered them while using their house as a temporary staging ground for either human smuggling or drug smuggling. Let's not even mention the literally miles of trash that they leave in washes around the border.
Sure, they might do some jobs the rest of us won't, but they aren't ideal citizens and end up being much more of a burden than a benefit. I've worked with them a lot, they can't even spell in their own language or even pronounce it right (and Spanish is a very easy language to both spell and pronounce.) When they have kids, they automatically become citizens, and are immediately eligible for welfare, food stamps, and literally the best medicaid program in the US, in addition to free or subsidized section 8 housing.
An H1-B visa (which I do support) recipient actually does work that is very valuable, and doesn't rely on government benefits. I've seen company recruiters that are trying desperately to hire IT people, and actively recruits from local schools, but the talent just isn't there. It's not about getting cheap labor, because they pay H1-B people very well. It would be easier to hire local talent, if it existed to begin with.
They can get away with that by use of false flags. Not necessarily feigning attacks, but making it look as though the enemy is still trying to invade, but the fearless leader is the only thing holding them back.
I use both hyperv and vmware (workstation and ESXi) regularly. I can say without a doubt that VMware shits all over hyperv, too many reasons to list really.
At the maricopa colleges, they were using Hyper-V to set up student labs because it came with their existing microsoft licenses at no extra cost. However it was riddled with problems. Shit would break all the time, and a ton of little things like shared clipboard are non existent.
They switched to ESXi 5 and it works great, not to mention they can now use their SAN proper, as hyper-v has basically no support for SAN without you providing your own abstraction.
This is hyper-v from 2008 R2, by the way. I don't know if 2012 is any different, but I doubt it has come that far given that 2008 R2 is only about 2 years old, and I'd say it is a good 8 years behind where vmware currently is.
People spread the gerbil thing about Richard Gere, and he even knows many who did it (Stalone is one of them,) yet it's been established that he has no legal recourse.
And besides, he'd make himself look incredibly stupid if he did try to fight it.
If that is truly the reason for alarmism, then I color me way confused.
I mean what, we stop global warming by disrupting our existing infrastructure and depressing the economy, or else global warming will end up depressing the economy and disrupting our existing infrastructure?
Seems like a wash.
No matter what, the climate WILL change. It will always change. Even if we all threw out technology and lived in little mud huts eating beetles, the climate will still change anyways whether we like it or not.
I don't think huawei would deliberately do that, what I do think though is that they are horribly insecure due to cheap engineering. They can release the source code all they want, but it might take years for anybody to make sure its clean. Not only that, but it often turns out that they use cheap components as well that die fast. The company I worked for found a lot of parts coming out of china that were missing the substrate in their IC's.
He's a public figure though. Otherwise Obama and Romney could both stop their campaigns and retire off of lawsuits.
(Cue the "But my candidate wouldn't do that, only the other guy would!" responses.)
One way to give your detractors more attention than they otherwise would have gotten is to attack them (this article is a case in point.) Worse is that if he loses the case (which given his public figure status, is easily possible) he'll just add to their credibility.
Disclaimer: I myself generally distrust climate alarmists. The earth has had periods of MUCH warmer climates, and life thrived in all of them. Hell, lets even look at more recent history: some archeologists have found evidence that during the medieval warm period, there were farms in areas that are now considered far too inhospitable for agriculture due to the cold climate. Further, what we're seeing now may very well be yet another temperate anomaly, only now our measurements are more accurate so it seems different.
And yes, I do believe in global warming.
Samsung components are well known to be of higher quality than virtually all of their competitors, usually they're the first to break higher DPI barriers (they were the first to create the "retina" display, both for the iphone and the ipad) and non-Samsung high DPI displays are known to commonly suffer from ghosting, banding, and flashlighting.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that high volume contracts don't come with set "termination" fees. Instead, if one party breaches the contract by not sticking to their obligations, the other one sues for whatever profit they will have lost. The actual damages they sue for ends up being figured out by lawyers either in court or in a settlement.
I think it is more likely that the teachers unions are the ones lobbying against this. Remember, they've already tried to ban online education in another state:
http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/10/13/2214254/teacher-union-tries-to-block-online-courses
In this case, they've simply found an existing law that helps them actually do so.
Sickbeard does a much better job than all of those. Does for me anyways.
I agree with the premise of your book that god is indeed a delusion. However, I think the message comes across as a bit harsh. I've met people who claim to belong to a religion are quite intelligent. When people ask me what my views are, I'll tel them, but I won't bother trying to convince them to believe what I do, because doing so is almost always an act of futility.
I get annoyed when people stand out on street corners and preach damnation unless you convert, and on the same token I also get annoyed when fellow atheists actively insult anybody who believes in a religion. To me, there isn't any difference between the two. Besides, I think that explaining your position rather than proselytizing it is more likely to get somebody to at least look at your viewpoint without dismissing it outright.
That said, have you considered maybe toning it down a bit? If that seems like a bad idea to you, then what is your general opinion of atheists like myself?
A lot of environmentalists complain about how we use too many materials in our every day lives which end up going to waste (they mostly tend to complain about plastic, though the more ignorant ones also complain about paper, not realizing that we actually grow paper on farms; it doesn't come from cutting down forests. Creating paper isn't going to make us run out of trees any faster than eating potatoes is going to make us run out of potato plants.)
Wouldn't it also follow that if you limit the size of containers, then you require more containers overall?
Food for thought.
Ummm...water and juice are both 100% chemicals. The classic definition of a chemical is a substance that was created through a process of configuring molecular structures. Water and juice both fit that bill. I think what you're looking for is the difference between chemicals existing in nature, and ones that are synthesized by man. When you think about it, any form of cooking or fermenting we do results in synthesized chemicals, even something as basic as baking bread or making wine.
What I'm getting at is that the notion of something being a chemical making it bad for you is just retarded. If you're truly paranoid about synthesized chemicals, I might point out that even organic farms use pesticides. Your body itself is really just a bunch of chemical reactions taking place in a controlled manner. You can solve both of these problems for yourself by just never eating again.
Also, lemonade tends to have a lot more sugar in it than diet soda.
Who gets to decide what is fair? Who decides what is ethical?
Personally I'd rather that be up to me rather than the government. The majority of corporations out there are ethical far beyond the standards required by law. Take for example, those who I know slashdot loves to target, big pharma, specifically Johnson and Johnson. When some psychopath put cyanide pills in the bottles and replaced them back on the shelf, they knew the incident was isolated to a very specific area. Yet just to be sure, they recalled all tylenol bottles across the US, costing them untold millions of dollars when there was really no ethical standard requiring it, rather they just wanted to be sure.
I trust private entities over the government. If you don't like them, you can always boycott them or disassociate yourself with them. If you boycott the government though, you go to jail.
I'm a libertarian because I believe that we know what is best for us, not the government. So what if somebody wants to drink soda or eat food with salt, that's their decision. Same thing if they want to own firearms. That doesn't mean I'm a republican either. I believe that marriage for example isn't something that the government should be involved in to begin with, and I also believe in the full legalization of all drugs, and legalization of brothels.
Here, have a look at some pictures of what happened when East Germany went from socialized ownership to privatized ownership:
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/05/08/photographs-of-east-germany-locations-captured-decades-apart/
You know why we eat high fructose corn syrup, where the rest of the world eats sugar? Because of sugar tariffs that are supposed to keep farmers jobs, even though they don't actually benefit them in any way. If the market decided what we ate, it would be sugar. Instead the government effectively tells us that we must eat high fructose corn syrup, or pay up.
That's why I'm a libertarian. I lose karma all the time for making libertarian statements on here, but so what, it's worth it.
Decentralized DNS would inevitably bring back the late 90's market of snatching up and hoarding domain names and hawking them on ebay for millions. Want to pick up a new domain name for your business, but somebody else already has it with just a website that says "this domain is for sale"? I hope you have really good financing.
Or worse, when somebody loses their domain key, then nobody gets that domain. And when computers get fast enough to forge those keys in short order (maybe not at the time of their creation, but 20 years from then...)
Where did they get those funds from?
One day they woke it up, so it could live forever. It's such a shame the same will never happen to you.