Yes this thing is a joke and if it wasn't made by Jobs we could all safely ignore it.
But I seriously doubt it will sell.
Part of the appeal of the iphone is that you could carry a small computer with you everywhere, the thing is, you already carry a phone everywhere, and usually a media player too, a camera too is nice.
The iphone was a portable camera/phone/media player that was also a computer, a very locked down computer perhaps, but it isn't anyone's main computer anyway so it's fine.
The ipad, unlike a netbook, cannot be carried out of home. It's just not functional enough.
It is not a phone so you don't have to carry it, too bulky for a media player, it has no camera. And it can not be used as a lightweight laptop because it's so locked down.
It can only be really useful inside your very own house and only in tandem with your actual computer, a Mac of course, it will be severely useless if you use Windows, and completely useless if you choose Linux.
Every sold ipad will require a small shard of Jobs soul to sustain the RD-Field for long enough and I doubt the guy can take it.
Why yes! There are some stuff that should be extensions by default, but that doesn't mean I have to install 10 addons myself, Firefox could easily ship with "default addons", in fact I wouldn't mind *at all* if FF shipped with the Personas addon preinstsalled, that way All I had to do to remove very pixel of the Personas UI is uninstall it.
If you don't like the feature, don't use it. It's not intrusive.
For starters, Personas adds a menu to the status bar for changing the so called themes. That's one widget more than I want in my browser, you may think, "yea but it only a menu", but my point is that I don't want it, but I won't have an option for it, nor for the bloat and memory it will consume, what really bothers me is that it already works as an addon so they went to spend the effort of not giving me a choice in installing it, like I said, a step in the wrong direction.
But probably it is not going to matter, I saw the projected UI for Firefox 4 and it simply appalls me. It disregards any attempt at UI standaristation, it won't fit with Gnome anymore, besides, it's going to become a literal ripoff of both Chrome *and* IE.
FF 4 probably won't be main browser anymore.
PS: Then again integration with Gnome won't be much of a problem since Gnome Shell is also making sure that I switch to KDE even with the ridiculous "Folder Views".
That's a good argument for autoinstalling it, not for making it unremovable or hard to remove. Although I'd agree that Mozilla is also at fault for introducing the mechanism in the first place.
What? I DO work in web development, I know that if my pages depended on installing themes into users without their consent I'd like to be guaranteed they are using Personas.
What I find shit-scaring is that you think that random developers need to ensure they can install themes into my browser even if I don't want to have anything to do with it.
Wrong. Whether core or extension, FF's UI is XUL all the way down, FF's can't stop dealing with XUL, they of all people have no reason to avoid XUL.
You make a good case for jetpack and you know what? I support jetpack, I don't think it should be the *only* way to extend FF, but it's true that most extensions would work better in jetpack.
But Personas was already working as an extension and it was and still is written in XUL, the only result of this move is making it mandatory.
Personas could work AND WAS ALREADY WORKING as a lightweight theming replacement without being tied to the browser code as an addon.
REPEAT: It already works as an addon.
This is essentially an unremovable addon like that MS.NET addon that MS shoved down our throats.
Look, I have for the most time defended Firefox ever increasing features as progress. I already don't think they managed their "awesomebar" well at all, I like it but many loyal users didn't and instead of making it an option or an extension they gave it a hip name to add insult to injury.
But now they are taking an already working addon into the browser.
The thing I liked about FF was it's modularity, it's what caused the browser to split form the mozilla suit in the first place. This is a step into the wrong direction, into a more monolithic application.
Why do FF developers hate their own extension framework dammit!?
On the other hand endings are not always necessary and sometimes makes sense to make cliffhangers since the beginning, example, the first Halo ended in cliffhanger before it was obvious the franchise was a hit, but, it was such a short game, it was like the first issue of a comic book, you can't expect each comic book to be auto-conclusive, the idea is that it's ok to spread your stories in several issues because each issue is too short to tell a whole arc. Similarly short games can have cliffhanger endings and it's ok in my opinion.
Yes it would suck if a sequel isn't made but that's the same with any comic book, TV show, or series of books or any form of art that uses periodic releases instead of one big fat release.
Alternative solution, become a book buff, the kind that never watches movies, people will hate you when you say that you didn't watch the movie because the book was better, but they'll know you are right.
Which is exactly what they want to do with anime, did you look what they did to Dragon Ball? Now they want to pray on Evangelion, Cowboy BeBop and, gods, Ghost in the Shell.
I remember watching an episode batman Batman: The Animated Series about an AI developed in wet tissues. I think it was called "Heart of steel" but can't tell...
I know Mexico is desperate for cash - but really, what do they think they will get? 10 million? What's 10 million going to do for a freakign COUNTRY.
Given that the National Institute of History and Anthropology is the one asking for the money, I'd say they are going to use it to, keep protecting and restoring ancient artifacts.
First RTFA, see that picture of the naked guy? That's a real person, BTW.
Privacy campaigners claim the images created by the machines are so graphic they amount to "virtual strip-searching" and have called for safeguards to protect the privacy of passengers involved.
So the thing is that you are invading people's privacy, but it's with technology so it's right? I don't think so, that technology makes it easy for Security personal to watch me naked doesn't mean I like it now, it's an invasion of my privacy and I don't want them to do it unless they have a good reason.
The irony is that personal privacy of adult civilians is a joke in the UK to the extent that the best argument you can make against it is that it is a form of CP, and that only works because they are that paranoid of it. That's completely fucked up.
Full body scanning of children is right or wrong for the same reasons that full body scanning of adults would be right or wrong. It's like, oh you are an adult now, you no loger deserves clothes. Fucked up.
I'd dare to say that Mexico has a stronger presence of alternative parties than the US, but the public is very polarized between two main parties PRI and PAN (read them as Mexican Republican Party A and Mexican Republican Party B) and people don't so much for one or the other but *against* one or the other, making it a two party system anyway.
I'm getting the feeling a Condorcet method could be the greatest advance one could add to Mexican elections.
Giving information to law enforcement is not "bowing down." The police are working for us, they are our employees.
1) Law enforcement police works for the government works for corporations. You'd have to get rid of the whole concept of lobbing before I even consider admitting the police as "ours".
2) The very law they are supposed to protect requires them to get an order before making a subpeona for such information, which mean they must have a justifiable reason to make such request which means that, by definition they seeked information they where not allowed to get and had no justification to seek.
3) Did Blizzard comply because they believe in the police or because they were afraid of reprisals? You assume Blizzard acted in good faith and sheer belief in the infallibility of law enforcement, as if police agencies weren't know for harassing people for being uncooperative.
If a well known murderous thug asked you politely for your wallet does it count as robbery? Not for you since the thug didn't really do anything wrong. I'd suspect his historial of killing people had something to do with it.
But... I know this is a hard concept for some people to grasp, since from the time you are a kid the 'authorities,' who at that time are your parents genuinely love and try to help you.
That's funny but at face value sounds unrealistic, the parent already said government is *us* so anything the government does is a reflection of our own will. Of course that's a lie, the government don't listen to the public anymore.
I don't claim to understand the problem or to know the solution. it is vast. I'll talk about Mexican politics but I guess its roughly the same in the US. My representative said during his campaign that he wold work to lower taxes. And the very next thing he did was rise them. Now I didn't vote for him but the people that did, did so because of his campaign promises, I assume so how could he betray his word so easily? We need a mechanism to punish politicians for betraying their people but what can we do?
During our last presidential election fraud a massive pacifist protest was launched to have every vote counted because thousands of votes from the poorest regions of the country were omitted from them count for no sane reason. The protest was huge and lasted for over a month. It didn't work.
Are we supposed to start a violent revolution (again)? But carrying weapons is illegal and even if it was legal using them is not, planing on using them is not. That's the very definition of thought crime but the same is true in the States. Just planning a coup d'etat is already illegal. Only way to accomplish this is keeping it secret and small ensuring failure. Even that is impossible to carry because the government spies on the population and the population has bought on the idea that it's ok for the law to access all private information it claims to need in the name of protecting us.
Worse yet, violent uprising *is* a crime so they wouldn't be even transgressing the law which they do regularly anyway.
Do we have any realistic (effective) options to punish politicians for not keeping their promises?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes this thing is a joke and if it wasn't made by Jobs we could all safely ignore it.
But I seriously doubt it will sell.
Part of the appeal of the iphone is that you could carry a small computer with you everywhere, the thing is, you already carry a phone everywhere, and usually a media player too, a camera too is nice.
The iphone was a portable camera/phone/media player that was also a computer, a very locked down computer perhaps, but it isn't anyone's main computer anyway so it's fine.
The ipad, unlike a netbook, cannot be carried out of home. It's just not functional enough.
It is not a phone so you don't have to carry it, too bulky for a media player, it has no camera. And it can not be used as a lightweight laptop because it's so locked down.
It can only be really useful inside your very own house and only in tandem with your actual computer, a Mac of course, it will be severely useless if you use Windows, and completely useless if you choose Linux.
Every sold ipad will require a small shard of Jobs soul to sustain the RD-Field for long enough and I doubt the guy can take it.
He discovered it accidentally back when he was busy funding the Mongol Empire.
my kingdom for a mod point.
Where's the catch?
Why yes! There are some stuff that should be extensions by default, but that doesn't mean I have to install 10 addons myself, Firefox could easily ship with "default addons", in fact I wouldn't mind *at all* if FF shipped with the Personas addon preinstsalled, that way All I had to do to remove very pixel of the Personas UI is uninstall it.
For starters, Personas adds a menu to the status bar for changing the so called themes. That's one widget more than I want in my browser, you may think, "yea but it only a menu", but my point is that I don't want it, but I won't have an option for it, nor for the bloat and memory it will consume, what really bothers me is that it already works as an addon so they went to spend the effort of not giving me a choice in installing it, like I said, a step in the wrong direction.
But probably it is not going to matter, I saw the projected UI for Firefox 4 and it simply appalls me. It disregards any attempt at UI standaristation, it won't fit with Gnome anymore, besides, it's going to become a literal ripoff of both Chrome *and* IE.
FF 4 probably won't be main browser anymore.
PS: Then again integration with Gnome won't be much of a problem since Gnome Shell is also making sure that I switch to KDE even with the ridiculous "Folder Views".
That's a good argument for autoinstalling it, not for making it unremovable or hard to remove. Although I'd agree that Mozilla is also at fault for introducing the mechanism in the first place.
What? I DO work in web development, I know that if my pages depended on installing themes into users without their consent I'd like to be guaranteed they are using Personas.
What I find shit-scaring is that you think that random developers need to ensure they can install themes into my browser even if I don't want to have anything to do with it.
Wrong. Whether core or extension, FF's UI is XUL all the way down, FF's can't stop dealing with XUL, they of all people have no reason to avoid XUL.
You make a good case for jetpack and you know what? I support jetpack, I don't think it should be the *only* way to extend FF, but it's true that most extensions would work better in jetpack.
But Personas was already working as an extension and it was and still is written in XUL, the only result of this move is making it mandatory.
Personas could work AND WAS ALREADY WORKING as a lightweight theming replacement without being tied to the browser code as an addon.
REPEAT: It already works as an addon.
This is essentially an unremovable addon like that MS .NET addon that MS shoved down our throats.
Look, I have for the most time defended Firefox ever increasing features as progress. I already don't think they managed their "awesomebar" well at all, I like it but many loyal users didn't and instead of making it an option or an extension they gave it a hip name to add insult to injury.
But now they are taking an already working addon into the browser.
The thing I liked about FF was it's modularity, it's what caused the browser to split form the mozilla suit in the first place. This is a step into the wrong direction, into a more monolithic application.
Why do FF developers hate their own extension framework dammit!?
I see that animal traffickers are trimming their dozens when selling to researchers...
Nineteen eighty four was ****NOT**** SUPPOSED TO BE A FUCKING GUIDEBOOK!
What was Orwell thinking, he only gave them ideas!
On the other hand endings are not always necessary and sometimes makes sense to make cliffhangers since the beginning, example, the first Halo ended in cliffhanger before it was obvious the franchise was a hit, but, it was such a short game, it was like the first issue of a comic book, you can't expect each comic book to be auto-conclusive, the idea is that it's ok to spread your stories in several issues because each issue is too short to tell a whole arc. Similarly short games can have cliffhanger endings and it's ok in my opinion.
Yes it would suck if a sequel isn't made but that's the same with any comic book, TV show, or series of books or any form of art that uses periodic releases instead of one big fat release.
Please do so, and this time add a sensible explanation of why every animal has usb ears/hair.
What Akira? There's no respect, no respect...
Alternative solution, become a book buff, the kind that never watches movies, people will hate you when you say that you didn't watch the movie because the book was better, but they'll know you are right.
Which is exactly what they want to do with anime, did you look what they did to Dragon Ball? Now they want to pray on Evangelion, Cowboy BeBop and, gods, Ghost in the Shell.
I remember watching an episode batman Batman: The Animated Series about an AI developed in wet tissues. I think it was called "Heart of steel" but can't tell...
iPod users have bigger dicks than Android users.
IPod users have smaller breasts than Android but only the male ones.
Given that the National Institute of History and Anthropology is the one asking for the money, I'd say they are going to use it to, keep protecting and restoring ancient artifacts.
As a Mexican, I have to say that's wrong. I'm used to the government being evil but the INAH? Who's next the SEP?
First RTFA, see that picture of the naked guy? That's a real person, BTW.
So the thing is that you are invading people's privacy, but it's with technology so it's right? I don't think so, that technology makes it easy for Security personal to watch me naked doesn't mean I like it now, it's an invasion of my privacy and I don't want them to do it unless they have a good reason.
The irony is that personal privacy of adult civilians is a joke in the UK to the extent that the best argument you can make against it is that it is a form of CP, and that only works because they are that paranoid of it. That's completely fucked up.
Full body scanning of children is right or wrong for the same reasons that full body scanning of adults would be right or wrong. It's like, oh you are an adult now, you no loger deserves clothes. Fucked up.
Nit-pick, replace the first "religion" with "Christianity" as not all religions make such distinctions.
The second "religion" should also be replaced for something more specific, but its probably fine as it is.
It's okay Mexican Politics work roughly the same.
I'd dare to say that Mexico has a stronger presence of alternative parties than the US, but the public is very polarized between two main parties PRI and PAN (read them as Mexican Republican Party A and Mexican Republican Party B) and people don't so much for one or the other but *against* one or the other, making it a two party system anyway.
I'm getting the feeling a Condorcet method could be the greatest advance one could add to Mexican elections.
Giving information to law enforcement is not "bowing down." The police are working for us, they are our employees.
1) Law enforcement police works for the government works for corporations. You'd have to get rid of the whole concept of lobbing before I even consider admitting the police as "ours".
2) The very law they are supposed to protect requires them to get an order before making a subpeona for such information, which mean they must have a justifiable reason to make such request which means that, by definition they seeked information they where not allowed to get and had no justification to seek.
3) Did Blizzard comply because they believe in the police or because they were afraid of reprisals? You assume Blizzard acted in good faith and sheer belief in the infallibility of law enforcement, as if police agencies weren't know for harassing people for being uncooperative.
If a well known murderous thug asked you politely for your wallet does it count as robbery? Not for you since the thug didn't really do anything wrong. I'd suspect his historial of killing people had something to do with it.
But... I know this is a hard concept for some people to grasp, since from the time you are a kid the 'authorities,' who at that time are your parents genuinely love and try to help you.
That's funny but at face value sounds unrealistic, the parent already said government is *us* so anything the government does is a reflection of our own will. Of course that's a lie, the government don't listen to the public anymore.
I don't claim to understand the problem or to know the solution. it is vast. I'll talk about Mexican politics but I guess its roughly the same in the US. My representative said during his campaign that he wold work to lower taxes. And the very next thing he did was rise them. Now I didn't vote for him but the people that did, did so because of his campaign promises, I assume so how could he betray his word so easily? We need a mechanism to punish politicians for betraying their people but what can we do?
During our last presidential election fraud a massive pacifist protest was launched to have every vote counted because thousands of votes from the poorest regions of the country were omitted from them count for no sane reason. The protest was huge and lasted for over a month. It didn't work.
Are we supposed to start a violent revolution (again)? But carrying weapons is illegal and even if it was legal using them is not, planing on using them is not. That's the very definition of thought crime but the same is true in the States. Just planning a coup d'etat is already illegal. Only way to accomplish this is keeping it secret and small ensuring failure. Even that is impossible to carry because the government spies on the population and the population has bought on the idea that it's ok for the law to access all private information it claims to need in the name of protecting us.
Worse yet, violent uprising *is* a crime so they wouldn't be even transgressing the law which they do regularly anyway.
Do we have any realistic (effective) options to punish politicians for not keeping their promises?