No, it didn't. We have the email. We have a Russian operative asking Jr. if he was interested in dirt about the Clintons. We have Jr. responding to the email "I love it".
Also, it's not actually collusion or illegal to receive information from foreign nationals about political opponents. What's illegal is paying for it.
Yes, we'll see. We have very smart, determined people that will decide that. Or maybe you have more evidence and research than these people and you're ready to call it? Check your scientific method bub.
What I know is that Trump's campaign at least conspired with an unfriendly foreign power to affect election results. Even if it's not illegal, America will decide if it was all in good fun, or not.
If anything, we're discovering that any and all collusion in the election goes through Fusion GPS. And it all ties back to the DNC.
No, we're not. Only nutjobs are going down that path. Seriously can you people do anything greater than regurgitate Fox news? It's just sad at this point.
First they started with do no evil and then the corporates took over and it was do evil all the fucking time.
What? A corporation seeking profits? Say it isn't so!
the real suckers spending billions on google ads that lead no where.
Yes, indeed. The people that spend hundreds of billions of dollars on advertising really don't know anything. They probably don't do any sort of studies or research to understand if they are throwing hundreds of billions of dollars down the toilet, because you know, they really hate money and don't care if they lose it. They should hire brainiacs like you to run they corporations. It'd save them hundreds of billions of dollars a year.
But you probably think your superior brain makes you immune, right? I think there's a lot of folks like you. The truth is that these people are the most severe victims. The first step to dealing with advertising is knowing that it effects you. If you can't even take the first step of acknowledgment, you're lost.
I think the gun pointing to their head is the need to eat and have somewhere to live.
At $1 / hr (their words, not mine) they'd be better of doing anything other than this job. If you work for $1 / hr, you're a fool and your inability to eat is natural selection at work.
The reason we have such little competition at the local level is *because* local government limited it.
That's part of it. In some cases.
It's also because there are industries that have an enormous barrier to entry (like broadband). Investors aren't interested in spending years and billions to setup shop only to get into a price war with an established competitor.
And there isn't a damn thing I can do, but if you listen to the government I'm 'Served'.
Yes, you are. You have enough bandwidth for access to information. I don't want my government worrying if you can stream 4k movies. If you want more, pay for it.
Perhaps I'd find this sudden concern about security a bit more believable if Google hadn't allowed every app that's come down the pipe since the Stone Age basically to rape whatever device it's installed on.
Because you granted it that access when you were shown the permissions at pre-install time and chose to install the app anyway?
Why does just about every game in the app store "need" access to my contacts, or permission to read my browser history?
Browser history is not a permission. It's private data to the browser app and no app can read another app's private data without being signed with the same cert.
I have only one Android device, a tablet. The first thing I did after getting it home was to root it and install CyanogenMod.
Great job. By rooting it you just opened the doors wide open for an app to literally do anything it wants including reading the memory space of other apps.
I'm unimpressed at Google trying to weed out "casual" users of their accessibility in order to minimize a security issue that's their problem. Even if an app has marginal support for accessibility, it's still a good thing as opposed to not having accessibility altogether.
Um, what? They are weeding out uses of accessibility APIs for non-accessibility purposes. If your app has a legitimate use for accessibility all that's required is a description of that sent to Google.
So this is a serious question, since people can side load android apps more easily than jailbreaking an iPhone, could not some of these apps realistically just offer apps outside the Play store? I know it would cut down a great deal on people willing to bother but at least it's still a path.
Yes, and you can even sideload a different app store such as F-Droid, same as how the Amazon app store works. https://f-droid.org/
Or would Google frown on this and start shutting down developer accounts?
There are thousands of developers that work outside of the Play store. I think we would have heard about it.
"We're going to give you 30 days notice that apps purchased by millions of people will stop working until they're rewritten
Did you read this?
Action required: If you aren't already doing so, you must explain to users how your app is using the 'android.permission.BIND_ACCESSIBILITY_SERVICE' to help users with disabilities use Android devices and apps. Apps that fail to meet this requirement within 30 days may be removed from Google Play. Alternatively, you can remove any requests for accessibility services within your app. You can also choose to unpublish your app.
They aren't going to stop working. You just won't get updates from the Play store anymore.
Google really isn't very friendly to users having control over their own device.
1. You can turn on "allow non-market apps" on any Android device and load whatever app you want. 2. If that's not enough, you can root any Android device, including Google's Pixel phones, and really do whatever you want.
Let's be honest, it's the left who has to find a winning strategy here.
Not really. The right can continue to shrug, and then be blocked out of the global community, and eventually reduced to a non-player and forced to abide by the rules set out by others. Of course, there's a good chance we'll end up nuking the world into ashes in our downfall. Either way, it's not going to be good for profits.
They have no current interest in Android and no products to sell to Android users.
Did you know, Android users are also allowed to own Apple hardware? I use an Android phone but my spouse has a iPhone and we own an Apple laptop. I get that it's more likely for a user on Safari to be interested in iOS / Mac software, but when you factor in the ~5x dominance of users on Chrome that balances out.
Uh, that changes the font to the end user, so it's thus bad.
Not if the new font is better.
If your website depends on a particular font to render correctly, you ought to be harcoding the use of that font, not just using "sans serif" or whatever you were doing.
The joke of it all is that by ending globalisation and immigration and emigration the biggest casualty is capitalism as it will lead to a global economic decline. Serves you cretins right.
Yes, I'm sure you'll be fine.
The US (and Russia for that matter) are going to be relatively well off in a global economic decline. We have natural resources and land to sustain ourselves. And the might to stop others from taking it.
Slashdot Mirror
That story got debunked hard.
No, it didn't. We have the email. We have a Russian operative asking Jr. if he was interested in dirt about the Clintons. We have Jr. responding to the email "I love it".
Also, it's not actually collusion or illegal to receive information from foreign nationals about political opponents. What's illegal is paying for it.
Yes, we'll see. We have very smart, determined people that will decide that. Or maybe you have more evidence and research than these people and you're ready to call it? Check your scientific method bub.
What I know is that Trump's campaign at least conspired with an unfriendly foreign power to affect election results. Even if it's not illegal, America will decide if it was all in good fun, or not.
If anything, we're discovering that any and all collusion in the election goes through Fusion GPS. And it all ties back to the DNC.
No, we're not. Only nutjobs are going down that path. Seriously can you people do anything greater than regurgitate Fox news? It's just sad at this point.
Another genious quoting "do no evil" from 1998.
First they started with do no evil and then the corporates took over and it was do evil all the fucking time.
What? A corporation seeking profits? Say it isn't so!
the real suckers spending billions on google ads that lead no where.
Yes, indeed. The people that spend hundreds of billions of dollars on advertising really don't know anything. They probably don't do any sort of studies or research to understand if they are throwing hundreds of billions of dollars down the toilet, because you know, they really hate money and don't care if they lose it. They should hire brainiacs like you to run they corporations. It'd save them hundreds of billions of dollars a year.
But you probably think your superior brain makes you immune, right? I think there's a lot of folks like you. The truth is that these people are the most severe victims. The first step to dealing with advertising is knowing that it effects you. If you can't even take the first step of acknowledgment, you're lost.
Exactly what do you think hiding search results is then?
It's de-ranking fake news stories. I'm good with that.
Don't worry Trump will still link this crap in his tweets.
[citation needed]
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...
You're right though, really no provable connection between Trump and his campaign-manager son.
I think the gun pointing to their head is the need to eat and have somewhere to live.
At $1 / hr (their words, not mine) they'd be better of doing anything other than this job. If you work for $1 / hr, you're a fool and your inability to eat is natural selection at work.
I am not a target.
If you are participating in advertiser-supported activities, like watching broadcast TV, or using internet search, you definitely a target.
... there are *NO* unsolicited advertisements that I actually might want to see - I am not a target.
By watching broadcast television, you are soliciting ads. In case you didn't know that's their entire business model.
The reason we have such little competition at the local level is *because* local government limited it.
That's part of it. In some cases.
It's also because there are industries that have an enormous barrier to entry (like broadband). Investors aren't interested in spending years and billions to setup shop only to get into a price war with an established competitor.
If cable companies will not serve portions of an area why allow them to be in the area to begin with?
Because it's them or nothing? Ask Google how easy it is to come in and make a profit selling broadband.
And there isn't a damn thing I can do, but if you listen to the government I'm 'Served'.
Yes, you are. You have enough bandwidth for access to information. I don't want my government worrying if you can stream 4k movies. If you want more, pay for it.
The Firefox devs go out of their way to intentionally break Firefox's extension system for no good reason
There of course was a reason, but don't let that get in the way of your AC rant. I'll let you google it.
Perhaps I'd find this sudden concern about security a bit more believable if Google hadn't allowed every app that's come down the pipe since the Stone Age basically to rape whatever device it's installed on.
Because you granted it that access when you were shown the permissions at pre-install time and chose to install the app anyway?
Why does just about every game in the app store "need" access to my contacts, or permission to read my browser history?
Browser history is not a permission. It's private data to the browser app and no app can read another app's private data without being signed with the same cert.
I have only one Android device, a tablet. The first thing I did after getting it home was to root it and install CyanogenMod.
Great job. By rooting it you just opened the doors wide open for an app to literally do anything it wants including reading the memory space of other apps.
I'm unimpressed at Google trying to weed out "casual" users of their accessibility in order to minimize a security issue that's their problem. Even if an app has marginal support for accessibility, it's still a good thing as opposed to not having accessibility altogether.
Um, what? They are weeding out uses of accessibility APIs for non-accessibility purposes. If your app has a legitimate use for accessibility all that's required is a description of that sent to Google.
So this is a serious question, since people can side load android apps more easily than jailbreaking an iPhone, could not some of these apps realistically just offer apps outside the Play store? I know it would cut down a great deal on people willing to bother but at least it's still a path.
Yes, and you can even sideload a different app store such as F-Droid, same as how the Amazon app store works.
https://f-droid.org/
Or would Google frown on this and start shutting down developer accounts?
There are thousands of developers that work outside of the Play store. I think we would have heard about it.
Can't do that any more unless you have permission from the higher-ups, I guess. So much for my computer, my rules.
You can do anything you want with your device. Side load apps. Root it. Put it in a blender. Whatever you want.
"We're going to give you 30 days notice that apps purchased by millions of people will stop working until they're rewritten
Did you read this?
Action required: If you aren't already doing so, you must explain to users how your app is using the 'android.permission.BIND_ACCESSIBILITY_SERVICE' to help users with disabilities use Android devices and apps. Apps that fail to meet this requirement within 30 days may be removed from Google Play. Alternatively, you can remove any requests for accessibility services within your app. You can also choose to unpublish your app.
They aren't going to stop working. You just won't get updates from the Play store anymore.
Google really isn't very friendly to users having control over their own device.
1. You can turn on "allow non-market apps" on any Android device and load whatever app you want.
2. If that's not enough, you can root any Android device, including Google's Pixel phones, and really do whatever you want.
Did you know there have been precisely 5 visits to their site by an Android Chrome user in the past 3 years? All of them from me.
So, you think zero visits from an Android browser over 3 years is "doing your job"?
huh.
Let's be honest, it's the left who has to find a winning strategy here.
Not really. The right can continue to shrug, and then be blocked out of the global community, and eventually reduced to a non-player and forced to abide by the rules set out by others. Of course, there's a good chance we'll end up nuking the world into ashes in our downfall. Either way, it's not going to be good for profits.
Glad you can be so blase about it.
They have no current interest in Android and no products to sell to Android users.
Did you know, Android users are also allowed to own Apple hardware? I use an Android phone but my spouse has a iPhone and we own an Apple laptop. I get that it's more likely for a user on Safari to be interested in iOS / Mac software, but when you factor in the ~5x dominance of users on Chrome that balances out.
I advise them quite well, thank you.
Duly noted.
And they don't target Android. You must have missed that.
Yes, and I called them idiots for that. Maybe you should advise them.
Chrome Android is the most widely used by 2.5x.
Chrome desktop is by ~4x.
they don't care enough to even approve testing in Chrome on Android, let alone any fixes.
Well, they aren't very smart. Or maybe it's your decision?
http://gs.statcounter.com/brow...
Chrome has ~50% share, and the next highest is Safari w/ ~18%.
Uh, that changes the font to the end user, so it's thus bad.
Not if the new font is better.
If your website depends on a particular font to render correctly, you ought to be harcoding the use of that font, not just using "sans serif" or whatever you were doing.
Because they can change...
Sure, in the same way any aspect of an interface can be broken by non-backwards compatible changes. I think what you meant to say was:
Never rely on any code you didn't write.
The joke of it all is that by ending globalisation and immigration and emigration the biggest casualty is capitalism as it will lead to a global economic decline. Serves you cretins right.
Yes, I'm sure you'll be fine.
The US (and Russia for that matter) are going to be relatively well off in a global economic decline. We have natural resources and land to sustain ourselves. And the might to stop others from taking it.