Making up shit that isn't supported by evidence has a name: FUD. Do you not have enough REAL problems in your life that you have to imagine hypothetical ones?
Ah yes the proverbial "it's only a matter of time" post.
Software vendor goes way too far and wants their software to be licensed. Why would Google think have have a right to put any conditions on the use of the software they write? Don't they know they are *required* to just give it away? It's only a matter of time before they have wires into our brains causing us to eat babies and puppies.
Geez they are really doing their absolute best to piss off and alienate their core fanbase.
By "core fanbase" do you mean the 0.001% of people that flash custom firmware and want to steal Google software and run it on devices that were never licensed to do so? I'll bet they are okay with that.
The title of thread to which you responded was "Don't trust any of them". Then you said:
Apple, I just don't see.
What's your point? Apple should be trusted? Apparently because they have a smaller user base? If you are a user of Apple products and Apple is mining your user data, I don't think it's much consolation is it? Oh well, they did mine my data, but since they only sold hundreds of millions of devices it's okay?
Whether any law gets heeded simply depends on potential profit breaking it, potential fine for being caught and chance of being caught. If the product of the latter two is lower than the first, the law is toothless an will be ignored.
What law was broken? By using Facebook you agreed to the EULA which allows all of this.
Were all the pictures of your friends' dinners and new shoes worth it?
The only response available is "sure, keep investigating Trump but Hillary should have been indicted last year".
Funny isn't it. Trump controlled government. Trump controlled house. Trump appointed FBI director. And so on. Yet for some reason, they aren't able to indict this person that is apparently the biggest criminal of the last 50 years? Oh but forget Trump, they've been trying to find something on H for the last 10 years. Yet still, nothing?
Uh huh. And how much time did you spend complaining about Pence's private email from Indiana? And yes, Hillary will continue to be relevant, since:
I don't even know what that is. And if I did, I'm 100% sure the answer would no "zero".
You see, normal people with 1/2 a brain are capable of evaluating facts without constantly saying "what about...". It's a skill but I think you could learn it too.
All the crap Russiagaters accuse Trump of doing (without any evidence) Hillary was actually guilty of. Not only did she conspire with foreign intelligence agents, she paid them for dirt on her opponent.
I know comrade. Your handlers told you to just keep repeating lies over and over and eventually you'll sway the dumb people. It doesn't even matter if you don't supply any facts!
Hillary consciously choose to eschew secure federal email and instead contracted a consultant to arrange a private server for all work-related emails - care to argue her private server was more secure than the State Department's servers?
Hi, Hilary Clinton is no longer running for president. You'll have to find a new bogeyman in your attempts to distract the US populace from the actual, present dangers facing us.
Bullshit! Almost 2GB of a 7Z archive transferred at a sustained rate of nearly 23MB/s.
What you are saying is so ridiculous it's comical. I even linked the proof that any consumer can buy that for $80 / month, which you then called "bullshit" lol.
Go away and find another thread to troll where you can make sense.
What on Earth did you just say that wasn't already pointed out?
I pointed out that a lot of the posts here are hypocritical. And apparently you also. I'll say it again slowly. You can't say it's impossible to to meter a data transfer, and simple and easy
No way in hell they have an ISP with that as an UPLOAD rating, and even if locally on the LAN, that would require a gigabit connectivity.
https://www.att-services.net/a... I have it at my house. It's this little known technology known as fiber. Have you heard of it? It as symmetrical up / down. I get ~900Mb/s both ways.
Now, could a Russian operative have bandwidth as good as what I can get for $80 / month? Hmmm....
and even if locally on the LAN, that would require a gigabit connectivity
Yes and who has $50 to buy a gigabit router? Certainly not a state-sponsored operative.
It's not. Well, it's a watch insomuch as your phone is a watch and tablet is a watch. It's a mobile device similar to your phone, in the form factor and ergo of a watch. Set your expectations accordingly before you buy.
Smart watches are marketed as a type of wrist watches, but being a wrist watch is a task they don't do well at all.
Are you confused? Are you under the impression they are basically just a watch? I doubt it. I'm not. I guess we are smarter than everyone else though?
I really don't think anyone purchases say an Apple watch with the expectation that it's mainly just a timepiece. If you go to the Apple page, the first image shows an incoming call on the watch. It goes on to show it being used as a fitness tracker and displaying incoming text messages.
Putting a full computer in a phone actually resulted in a more useful device
It also resulted in lesser voice quality and ergonomics, and more connection problems. But people were somehow able to get past the fact that their smartPHONEs were more than phones and the functional benefit outweighed the suboptimal phone experience.
SmartWATCHes aren't watches. They are mobile devices that are nearly as functional as your phone, and surprise, they have battery lives similar to other mobile devices because magic isn't real. They are worn like watches, but functionally they aren't anything like them.
That's like saying your laptop fails at being a calculator. It uses way more energy, it's 100x bigger, it doesn't fit in your pocket, and doesn't have a dedicated keypad. Smartwatches are watches only in how they are generally shaped and worn on the body. In all other respects they are mobile devices, like your phone or a tablet. They are marketed as "watches" because that's a familiar concept to people but functionally they are not similar.
Touchscreen Chromebooks have been running android apps for about a year or so. ChromeOS has a full strength, desktop grade browser which is a much better experience than any mobile browser. Android apps are surprisingly good on ChromeOS now.
You know else runs Android apps surprisingly good? ANDROID.
Slashdot Mirror
The slippery slope is perfectly reasonable
No it's not reasonable.
Making up shit that isn't supported by evidence has a name: FUD. Do you not have enough REAL problems in your life that you have to imagine hypothetical ones?
Ah yes the proverbial "it's only a matter of time" post.
Software vendor goes way too far and wants their software to be licensed. Why would Google think have have a right to put any conditions on the use of the software they write? Don't they know they are *required* to just give it away? It's only a matter of time before they have wires into our brains causing us to eat babies and puppies.
Geez they are really doing their absolute best to piss off and alienate their core fanbase.
By "core fanbase" do you mean the 0.001% of people that flash custom firmware and want to steal Google software and run it on devices that were never licensed to do so? I'll bet they are okay with that.
If Facebook has vast expenses, then they need to be CHARGING for that, which is what revenue is, the cost charged to produce the good or service.
Advertiser supported businesses are as old as the universe and I don't think they are going away. You of course have a choice whether to participate.
Happened back in 2012 by the Obama campaign.
THANKS OBAMA!
The title of thread to which you responded was "Don't trust any of them". Then you said:
Apple, I just don't see.
What's your point? Apple should be trusted? Apparently because they have a smaller user base? If you are a user of Apple products and Apple is mining your user data, I don't think it's much consolation is it? Oh well, they did mine my data, but since they only sold hundreds of millions of devices it's okay?
I realize most people still weren't thinking about the fact that they were the product with this scheme
People aren't dumb. I think most people understand corporations need to make money and Facebook is a big company with vast expenses.
1. how to delete facebook
2. how to delete apps
3. how to delete twitter
4. how to delete instagram
5. how to delete a page in word
Whether any law gets heeded simply depends on potential profit breaking it, potential fine for being caught and chance of being caught. If the product of the latter two is lower than the first, the law is toothless an will be ignored.
What law was broken? By using Facebook you agreed to the EULA which allows all of this.
Were all the pictures of your friends' dinners and new shoes worth it?
Apple has all the information for say.. almost half of smartphone owners.
Got it. Apple is safe, unless you own Apple hardware or run Apple software on your non-Apple computer (e.g., iTunes).
Rear camera is maybe unnecessary, but a front camera is for video conferencing.
The only response available is "sure, keep investigating Trump but Hillary should have been indicted last year".
Funny isn't it. Trump controlled government. Trump controlled house. Trump appointed FBI director. And so on. Yet for some reason, they aren't able to indict this person that is apparently the biggest criminal of the last 50 years? Oh but forget Trump, they've been trying to find something on H for the last 10 years. Yet still, nothing?
It's so strange, and hard to explain.
Okay. whoosh.
Uh huh. And how much time did you spend complaining about Pence's private email from Indiana? And yes, Hillary will continue to be relevant, since:
I don't even know what that is. And if I did, I'm 100% sure the answer would no "zero".
You see, normal people with 1/2 a brain are capable of evaluating facts without constantly saying "what about ...". It's a skill but I think you could learn it too.
All the crap Russiagaters accuse Trump of doing (without any evidence) Hillary was actually guilty of. Not only did she conspire with foreign intelligence agents, she paid them for dirt on her opponent.
I know comrade. Your handlers told you to just keep repeating lies over and over and eventually you'll sway the dumb people. It doesn't even matter if you don't supply any facts!
Hillary consciously choose to eschew secure federal email and instead contracted a consultant to arrange a private server for all work-related emails - care to argue her private server was more secure than the State Department's servers?
Hi, Hilary Clinton is no longer running for president. You'll have to find a new bogeyman in your attempts to distract the US populace from the actual, present dangers facing us.
Bullshit! Almost 2GB of a 7Z archive transferred at a sustained rate of nearly 23MB/s.
What you are saying is so ridiculous it's comical. I even linked the proof that any consumer can buy that for $80 / month, which you then called "bullshit" lol.
Go away and find another thread to troll where you can make sense.
What on Earth did you just say that wasn't already pointed out?
I pointed out that a lot of the posts here are hypocritical. And apparently you also. I'll say it again slowly. You can't say it's impossible to to meter a data transfer, and simple and easy
No way in hell they have an ISP with that as an UPLOAD rating, and even if locally on the LAN, that would require a gigabit connectivity.
https://www.att-services.net/a...
I have it at my house. It's this little known technology known as fiber. Have you heard of it? It as symmetrical up / down. I get ~900Mb/s both ways.
Now, could a Russian operative have bandwidth as good as what I can get for $80 / month? Hmmm....
and even if locally on the LAN, that would require a gigabit connectivity
Yes and who has $50 to buy a gigabit router? Certainly not a state-sponsored operative.
Can IP addresses be spoofed? Yes, so it must not be Russia.
Can data transfers be rate limited? Certainly not, so it has to be an internal job.
Glad I could clear that up for you.
It's outrageous that these two stories (stealing the election and manufacturing the Russiagate narrative ) don't even exist in the mainstream.
Nah, it just means people aren't all that dumb after all.
So the DNC under Clinton is the source for the Russiagate narrative and for the analysis of the theft(Crowdstrike), as well as for the Steele dossier.
Sure thing comrade. Now report to your superiors about your progress undermining the capitalist pigs.
but if it is a watch
It's not. Well, it's a watch insomuch as your phone is a watch and tablet is a watch. It's a mobile device similar to your phone, in the form factor and ergo of a watch. Set your expectations accordingly before you buy.
They show the current time when you look at them. Sounds a lot like a watch to me.
Do does my phone. So does my desktop computer for that matter. So does my microwave.
Smart watches are marketed as a type of wrist watches, but being a wrist watch is a task they don't do well at all.
Are you confused? Are you under the impression they are basically just a watch? I doubt it. I'm not. I guess we are smarter than everyone else though?
I really don't think anyone purchases say an Apple watch with the expectation that it's mainly just a timepiece. If you go to the Apple page, the first image shows an incoming call on the watch. It goes on to show it being used as a fitness tracker and displaying incoming text messages.
Putting a full computer in a phone actually resulted in a more useful device
It also resulted in lesser voice quality and ergonomics, and more connection problems. But people were somehow able to get past the fact that their smartPHONEs were more than phones and the functional benefit outweighed the suboptimal phone experience.
SmartWATCHes aren't watches. They are mobile devices that are nearly as functional as your phone, and surprise, they have battery lives similar to other mobile devices because magic isn't real. They are worn like watches, but functionally they aren't anything like them.
I respect just a normal analog watch. It's simple, it does the job, and you only need to change the battery once every few years.
If all you want / need to do is tell time, then you are surely right, a smart watch isn't for you.
They generally fail at being a watch.
That's like saying your laptop fails at being a calculator. It uses way more energy, it's 100x bigger, it doesn't fit in your pocket, and doesn't have a dedicated keypad. Smartwatches are watches only in how they are generally shaped and worn on the body. In all other respects they are mobile devices, like your phone or a tablet. They are marketed as "watches" because that's a familiar concept to people but functionally they are not similar.
Touchscreen Chromebooks have been running android apps for about a year or so. ChromeOS has a full strength, desktop grade browser which is a much better experience than any mobile browser. Android apps are surprisingly good on ChromeOS now.
You know else runs Android apps surprisingly good? ANDROID.