Define "small widgets of code for smartphones." The word widget has been used to refer to a small application (hey, you could also call it an "app!"), but when you say "widget of code," I think of something which can't stand alone. A "widget of code," it seems to me, would be akin to a reusable module (subroutine/object/whatever) which one might use as part of an app. No one calls those "apps."
An iPhone app is like any other application - it's a standalone (other than the OS) program. "hello world" is an app, as is Microsoft Word (or your choice of bloatware).
The author's complaint about Google is like complaining that Word isn't in your Start menu, because it's just a shortcut there, not the application.
Then Apple took ownership, trimmed it to three letters, and within months the word 'app' became synonymous with small widgets of code for smartphones.
That claim is simply made up of whole cloth. The author has apparently never heard the phrase "killer app," which goes back to way before iPhones or smartphones.
"App" is a common and logical shortening of "application," and has been in widespread use for a long time.
It's not "space" by the common understanding of the term. If, by "space," you mean simply existing in space-time, so the atmosphere doesn't matter, then nothing can be sent into space, since it was always present in space.
OTOH, the OP was incorrect in implying an error. The article only claims "edge of space," which seems accurate enough to describe a height where the contrast between the earth's atmosphere and space can be clearly seen.
Russia never used imperial units ("imperial" normally meaning customary British imperial), and the traditional Russian units (arshins, etc.) haven't been used for a long time. The Soviets went metric in 1924.
"Balanced people certainly don't think MS is any more evil than Google or Facebook."
Huh?
MS is the new IBM (established, but staid and losing relevancy). Apple is the new MS (proprietary market share). Google is the new Apple (innovative, with a somewhat fanatic following). Facebook is the new Google (up and coming, but no concept of reality). It's just the wheel.
Oh, you're right, in that they're all degrees of evil. IMO, Google slightly less than the others (hard to argue with free and transparent).
but the SEND/RECEIVE pins between modem and computer are always named from the perspective of the computer. There's precedent to use server-centric nomenclature.
No, they are named from the perspective of the DTE (Data Terminal Equipment). When the RS-232 standard was created, that meant a terminal or a computer. It was "reverse named" from the perspective of a DCE (Data Communications Equipment), which was often a modem.
Mapping that to client/server fails, because both the display terminal (which would probably be considered the client) and the computer (the "server") were DTE, so one could equally well say that there's precedent to use client-centric nomenclature.
they do it in a more clueful way. There are Android apps (like email and phone), which are open source and come as part of Android, then there are Google branded apps (like Gmail and Maps), which are closed source and come from Google. I think I've gotten the examples right - even Google can't keep straight which are which. There's a bug reporter for Android apps, but not for Google apps. People were putting bug reports for "branded" apps on the Android apps bug reporter, and it took the Android team over a year to let people know that "they" weren't responsible for those apps. With that kind of disorganization, it's amazing that Android works as well as it does.
From a user's perspective, of course, it's a phone running Android from Google, and all the preinstalled apps are part of Android. But, there's some kind of artificial division between the people doing Android and the people doing Google apps for Android. I'm guessing that's because somewhere there's a developer in the Open Handset Alliance who isn't from Google and who isn't dedicated to customizing Android for a specific manufacturer/phone.
No, you're not a ham. I've communicated half way 'round the world with a portable, battery operated set, using a 50' piece of wire.
Yes, you need a license to be "legal," but anyone can buy the hardware, and operate from anywhere, which can easily happen during political unrest. If there's a political uprising, do you seriously think lack of a license is going to get in someone's way? And do you seriously think that "keeping the internet [sic] running" is fundamental to communications? You've been spoiled by technology. A spark gap transmitter and crystal receiver is all that's needed to communicate over long ranges.
Slashdot Mirror
They're just being logical. Given:
1. Obama isn't President because he wasn't born in the USA.
2. Obama was born in Hawaii.
The correct logical conclusion is that Hawaii is not a US state.
Yes, who's going to be first to complain about Asshat Lacy practicing law without a license?
"Death by Darwinism."
Define "small widgets of code for smartphones." The word widget has been used to refer to a small application (hey, you could also call it an "app!"), but when you say "widget of code," I think of something which can't stand alone. A "widget of code," it seems to me, would be akin to a reusable module (subroutine/object/whatever) which one might use as part of an app. No one calls those "apps."
An iPhone app is like any other application - it's a standalone (other than the OS) program. "hello world" is an app, as is Microsoft Word (or your choice of bloatware).
The author's complaint about Google is like complaining that Word isn't in your Start menu, because it's just a shortcut there, not the application.
That claim is simply made up of whole cloth. The author has apparently never heard the phrase "killer app," which goes back to way before iPhones or smartphones.
"App" is a common and logical shortening of "application," and has been in widespread use for a long time.
Name one completely unique product _from anyone_ in the past 50 years of technology, which isn't based on prior tech.
"Yes, we have no bananas."
A Cisco ad!
It's not "space" by the common understanding of the term. If, by "space," you mean simply existing in space-time, so the atmosphere doesn't matter, then nothing can be sent into space, since it was always present in space.
OTOH, the OP was incorrect in implying an error. The article only claims "edge of space," which seems accurate enough to describe a height where the contrast between the earth's atmosphere and space can be clearly seen.
Russia never used imperial units ("imperial" normally meaning customary British imperial), and the traditional Russian units (arshins, etc.) haven't been used for a long time. The Soviets went metric in 1924.
You're confusing law with ethics. They're barely related.
"Balanced people certainly don't think MS is any more evil than Google or Facebook."
Huh?
MS is the new IBM (established, but staid and losing relevancy). Apple is the new MS (proprietary market share). Google is the new Apple (innovative, with a somewhat fanatic following). Facebook is the new Google (up and coming, but no concept of reality). It's just the wheel.
Oh, you're right, in that they're all degrees of evil. IMO, Google slightly less than the others (hard to argue with free and transparent).
and for anyone who doubts that, I have two words: Harbor Freight.
No, they are named from the perspective of the DTE (Data Terminal Equipment). When the RS-232 standard was created, that meant a terminal or a computer. It was "reverse named" from the perspective of a DCE (Data Communications Equipment), which was often a modem.
Mapping that to client/server fails, because both the display terminal (which would probably be considered the client) and the computer (the "server") were DTE, so one could equally well say that there's precedent to use client-centric nomenclature.
It's Animal 57.
Alert, "Goth" is nothing like gothic, "punk" isn't a bunch of punks who got together, and "Nerds" is a candy.
they do it in a more clueful way. There are Android apps (like email and phone), which are open source and come as part of Android, then there are Google branded apps (like Gmail and Maps), which are closed source and come from Google. I think I've gotten the examples right - even Google can't keep straight which are which. There's a bug reporter for Android apps, but not for Google apps. People were putting bug reports for "branded" apps on the Android apps bug reporter, and it took the Android team over a year to let people know that "they" weren't responsible for those apps. With that kind of disorganization, it's amazing that Android works as well as it does.
From a user's perspective, of course, it's a phone running Android from Google, and all the preinstalled apps are part of Android. But, there's some kind of artificial division between the people doing Android and the people doing Google apps for Android. I'm guessing that's because somewhere there's a developer in the Open Handset Alliance who isn't from Google and who isn't dedicated to customizing Android for a specific manufacturer/phone.
"His sole beef is that it's impossible to prove or disprove."
Just like AGW, which people keep saying is widely accepted science.
"They begin to associate objects in the room with high pain..."
They just need to create different associations.
40 kW average? Home? That would be 83 amp service @480V, for a single computer. How many of these supercomputers do you have?
How many of them blew up?
Or, in a /. comment, where not even an i tag seems to work anymore, while b still does.
No, you're not a ham. I've communicated half way 'round the world with a portable, battery operated set, using a 50' piece of wire.
Yes, you need a license to be "legal," but anyone can buy the hardware, and operate from anywhere, which can easily happen during political unrest. If there's a political uprising, do you seriously think lack of a license is going to get in someone's way? And do you seriously think that "keeping the internet [sic] running" is fundamental to communications? You've been spoiled by technology. A spark gap transmitter and crystal receiver is all that's needed to communicate over long ranges.
...like a radio isn't mobile.
Yea. All those soldiers with HF RDFs, which I guess you're claiming are standard issue in the Egyptian army.