I made the choice to buy those expensive Samsung chargers, and I would have to take that in to consideration if I chose to buy an HTC. It's my choice, and my problem.
You think that government isn't behind the US system? Everything that the communications companies do is constrained by government rules and regulations. The fact that those rules and regulations are ill-advised is the fault of the government, not the companies.
I don't know. Why do we need anti-monopoly laws? Do you think that those monopolies could have been created without the government making the rules that allowed it? Government is behind all of it; government directed not by villains but by well-intentioned individuals created all of this mess.
You didn't read what I wrote. If Apple, Samsun, Sony, HTC, Motorola and Nokia all used proprietary connectors, I would buy whichever of them I preferred and not worry about it.
Opinions differ. Government is always the very worst answer to any problem. Always. Most of the problems that we have are the result of government trying to solve problems. Which always creates new problems. And rather than go back and tweak their original "solution" they pass new laws and regulations to ameliorate the damage that their original actions caused. Fortunately, not everything else works that way.
I have no problem with proprietary. There are advantages as well as disadvantages. If you prefer not to use proprietary, then buy only products which don't use proprietary. If there are enough people who want to do that, there will be vendors aplenty to sell you products. If not, then you're in a minority too small to be worth anyone's business.
Did you prefer BluRay or HD-DVD?
Don't depend on other people to solve your problems for you, and in particular don't count on Government to force everyone to do what you think they should. If enough people like a solution, there will be no reason for government to impose it, and if they don't then it is unconscionable for government to impose it. Pretty simple, really.
The government should not "protect large companies from consumers' best interests", but it should allow the market to determine standards. If you don't like a product because it doesn't work with what your other products, don't buy it. Pretty simple, really. If people don't buy a manufacturers products the manufacturer will either adapt or go out of business. If enough people buy his products to keep him in business, it's no concern of yours or anyone else what either he or his customers do.
Actually, the left in any country is the equivalent of the creationists. They believe in totally contrary-to-fact principles because they want to believe them, and they expect everyone else to act in accordance with those principles regardless of what they believe. Absolute nonsense.
It's really very simple to determine what someone is worth: anyone is worth exactly what someone else is willing to give them either in exchange for their goods and services or simply because they want to give them something for reasons of their own. No one is entitled to anything more than that. Any other idea is simply wrong, and as ridiculous as creationism.
Voters aren't informed enough about anything. They can't be, and never will be. Voters will always make their choices based on irrelevant factors and misinformation. That's the way it is. No amount of education will ever change that.
In the end, the iPhone has turned out to be a real disaster. It's Steve Jobs' Segway. He signed the deal with Satan himself (AT&T), and done onerous things which has absolutely killed all the fan base that Apple spent years building up.
Wow! Your insight has provided you a golden opportunity to get rich! All you have to do is sell Apple short, sit back and wait for the money to roll in!
Can't believe slashdot has so many people commenting stupidly on something they didn't even read.
New here?
Re:Paul, are you well? Update the errata!
on
MySQL Cookbook
·
· Score: 1
Interesting. I sent in a correction to "MySQL: the definitive guide" a few months ago (about ten, actually) and got an immediate acknowledgement. Yesterday I got another email saying that the errata had been updated to include my submission. I checked, and it's there.
The long-running operations may seem to annoy you more, but they are unlikely to affect your personal productivity. You can do something else while you're waiting for them to finish.
The little things that occur while you are actively trying to get things done through the interface can distract you from what you are really doing. If you are concentrating on getting a piece of code just right, or shading that graphic just so a tiny delay in the user interface can take you right out of the zone. And that very definitely affects your productivity.
Just think of all of history's warfare that could have been prevented if if were a legal requirement that translations always be presented side-by-side with the original.
I'm more inclined to believe that there would have been even more warfare. It's usually the failure to understand what the other side really demands and intends that delays the onset of hostilities.
Or perhaps you believe that everything would be well and good if we could all just get along? Of course, by getting along you mean that everybody else agrees with you and all of your right-thinking associates, right? I mean, after all, how could anyone fail to understand how right your positions are once they understand what you mean.
I thought this was common knowledge - I've been arguing that the effects of Sarbanes-Oxley are detrimental for some time now.
Q: What is Sarbanes-Oxley?
A: It is a bill enacted by the Congress of the United States.
Q: But isn't it absurd?
A: It is a bill enacted by the Congress of the United States; of course it's absurd. That's a tautology.
f he's completely innocent, Steve Jobs will have to leave Apple as a CEO - perhaps he will get an advisory role instead.
You're probably right, but I'm a sucker. Care to place a little monetary action on the question? Nothing that would hurt -- maybe a buck-and-a-half or so?
Just so that one or the other of us can claim to be right when it's all over and the other will have to appear hat in hand with the cold cash and an admission of utter failure to accurately assess the situation.
One source, who has seen a demonstration of the service, said it was an improvement over iTunes.
And the source would probably say that XP is an improvement over OS X. For some reason, the only assessments I seem to trust are those who have in the past agreed with my own and those usually seem to be in the minority. In this case I have no way of knowing who the source might be, so I'll withhold judgement.
Fair enough, though when "if mindshare is the criterion then Windows wins" moves past the conditional and assumes the position, it certainly becomes a boo-boo.
My "ifs" never move past the conditional; they are very reliable; that's why I use them.:)
What's to defend? Whenever a free microkernel design comes remotely close to the mindshare of Linux, there may be a basis for discussion.
I hate to point this out, but if mindshare is the criterion then Windows wins. Considering that the average person is almost always wrong, I tend to think that mindshare is a warning flag, not a recommendation.
You either completely missed the point of the parent, or you deliberately chose to ignore it.
Freedom of action is not synonymous with freedom from responsibility. There is, nevertheless, a large body of people who wish that were so, and who hope that by pretending it so they can make it so. That is not the case. Since there is no ultimate escape from the consequences of actions, the actors can only hope that someone else will bear those consequences for them. Sometimes that happens; when it does, it is unfortunate.
At one time, acceptance of responsibility was considered one of the indicators of adulthood. By those standards, the percentage of adults in this country today is probably below ten percent and falling steadily.
Slashdot Mirror
Congratulations. I'm very happy for you.
I made the choice to buy those expensive Samsung chargers, and I would have to take that in to consideration if I chose to buy an HTC. It's my choice, and my problem.
You think that government isn't behind the US system? Everything that the communications companies do is constrained by government rules and regulations. The fact that those rules and regulations are ill-advised is the fault of the government, not the companies.
I don't know. Why do we need anti-monopoly laws? Do you think that those monopolies could have been created without the government making the rules that allowed it? Government is behind all of it; government directed not by villains but by well-intentioned individuals created all of this mess.
You didn't read what I wrote. If Apple, Samsun, Sony, HTC, Motorola and Nokia all used proprietary connectors, I would buy whichever of them I preferred and not worry about it. Opinions differ. Government is always the very worst answer to any problem. Always. Most of the problems that we have are the result of government trying to solve problems. Which always creates new problems. And rather than go back and tweak their original "solution" they pass new laws and regulations to ameliorate the damage that their original actions caused. Fortunately, not everything else works that way.
I have no problem with proprietary. There are advantages as well as disadvantages. If you prefer not to use proprietary, then buy only products which don't use proprietary. If there are enough people who want to do that, there will be vendors aplenty to sell you products. If not, then you're in a minority too small to be worth anyone's business. Did you prefer BluRay or HD-DVD? Don't depend on other people to solve your problems for you, and in particular don't count on Government to force everyone to do what you think they should. If enough people like a solution, there will be no reason for government to impose it, and if they don't then it is unconscionable for government to impose it. Pretty simple, really.
The government should not "protect large companies from consumers' best interests", but it should allow the market to determine standards. If you don't like a product because it doesn't work with what your other products, don't buy it. Pretty simple, really. If people don't buy a manufacturers products the manufacturer will either adapt or go out of business. If enough people buy his products to keep him in business, it's no concern of yours or anyone else what either he or his customers do.
Perhaps we should all standardize on Windows, then. Wouldn't that make things a lot simpler?
Let's standardize all of the electrical outlets first. Which one should we choose?? http://www.kropla.com/electric2.htm
I don't remember it being so bad. Not at all. What did you think was bad about it? If you were personally affected, how did that affect anyone else?
Actually, the left in any country is the equivalent of the creationists. They believe in totally contrary-to-fact principles because they want to believe them, and they expect everyone else to act in accordance with those principles regardless of what they believe. Absolute nonsense. It's really very simple to determine what someone is worth: anyone is worth exactly what someone else is willing to give them either in exchange for their goods and services or simply because they want to give them something for reasons of their own. No one is entitled to anything more than that. Any other idea is simply wrong, and as ridiculous as creationism.
Voters aren't informed enough about anything. They can't be, and never will be. Voters will always make their choices based on irrelevant factors and misinformation. That's the way it is. No amount of education will ever change that.
Interesting. I sent in a correction to "MySQL: the definitive guide" a few months ago (about ten, actually) and got an immediate acknowledgement. Yesterday I got another email saying that the errata had been updated to include my submission. I checked, and it's there.
Could be. Never had to fight the interface or the configuration over any of it, so didn't think about it.
The long-running operations may seem to annoy you more, but they are unlikely to affect your personal productivity. You can do something else while you're waiting for them to finish.
The little things that occur while you are actively trying to get things done through the interface can distract you from what you are really doing. If you are concentrating on getting a piece of code just right, or shading that graphic just so a tiny delay in the user interface can take you right out of the zone. And that very definitely affects your productivity.
Or perhaps you believe that everything would be well and good if we could all just get along? Of course, by getting along you mean that everybody else agrees with you and all of your right-thinking associates, right? I mean, after all, how could anyone fail to understand how right your positions are once they understand what you mean.
Want to buy a bridge?
I thought this was common knowledge - I've been arguing that the effects of Sarbanes-Oxley are detrimental for some time now.
Q: What is Sarbanes-Oxley?
A: It is a bill enacted by the Congress of the United States.
Q: But isn't it absurd?
A: It is a bill enacted by the Congress of the United States; of course it's absurd. That's a tautology.
I don't really think that the issue is bugs.
Fair enough?
RSVP
My "ifs" never move past the conditional; they are very reliable; that's why I use them. :)
Actually, I didn't take a position at all on the original question so I wasn't comparing anything with anything. I'm agnostic on the issue.
I hate to point this out, but if mindshare is the criterion then Windows wins. Considering that the average person is almost always wrong, I tend to think that mindshare is a warning flag, not a recommendation.
Freedom of action is not synonymous with freedom from responsibility. There is, nevertheless, a large body of people who wish that were so, and who hope that by pretending it so they can make it so. That is not the case. Since there is no ultimate escape from the consequences of actions, the actors can only hope that someone else will bear those consequences for them. Sometimes that happens; when it does, it is unfortunate.
At one time, acceptance of responsibility was considered one of the indicators of adulthood. By those standards, the percentage of adults in this country today is probably below ten percent and falling steadily.