Now that's crazy talk, in the modern day society hackers and criminal geniouses will get past anything, companies being liable for their own flaws is a foreign concept. The best response is to reactively find and imprison the hackers. It's not sony's fault that they were using an out of date unpatched version of apache, it's the small group of script kiddies that realized it. The sad thing is right now security is so universally terrible, people actually are starting to believe that these breaches are caused by super hackers that can break into anything, rather then by amuatures taking advantage of huge gaping holes. The idea of computers somehow changes peoples minds to believe in supergeniouses. If a group of high schoolers snuck into a bank, and plastered grafiti on the walls and xeroxed customer data, 10% of the anger would go to the kids, 90% to the banks terrible security. If a group of high schoolers defaced the banks webpage "OMG they are super genious criminals, ship them to guantanemo bay!!!"
I don't look for anyone else, but anyone else can find me with just my first and last name and a picture. Maybe the john smiths will need to provide their city or something, but the bottom line is it dosn't take people long to flip through a list of people with the Firstname Lastname, they are looking for and spot the picture. They don't need my birthday, exact city, street adress or phone number work history or where I went to school. If their search narrows it down to 30 people then they can skim those 30 profile pictures. If they are just looking to add everyone who graduated from my highschool that year, I probably don't care about them.
While I can't disagree with you. There are faults on both accounts. The biggest flaw in determining information related to this, is the absolute lack of media coverage, however that lack of media coverage does make me favor the protestors a bit more then the police. In all forms of media (both done by the news and by civilians, people tend to cut to only the 5 seconds that they are trying to point out before they tell you what you are supposed to think. The main thing I think however is the media's typical response, more often then not the media favors police. Just watch any of the standard cop shows these days. The heroic police spend the first half of the show tricking manipulating, stepping around the laws that get in the way of their investigation, and then of course the handful of times when the person the police brought in and accused get's out, it's an evil person who got out on technicalities. It seems to be a very rare thing for the detectives on those shows, to bring someone in, and then realize it was a mistake.
Couldn't a simple blood test/tox screen tell scientists quickly if it is alcohol or some other source? Basically scientists are saying "they act drunk, we don't know for certain why". They could be eating piles of rotted fruit, or a naturally occoring berry, or poisonous insects or fumes from machinery. They could be doing it intentionally or accidentally. Bottom line is, if you are going to go to the trouble of posting a study... shouldn't some research and diagnostics be done if it is worth caring about?
First off we never did it, secondly we've stopped doing it. If I am ever taken to court for theft that's what I'll try, "Your honor first of all I never stole anything, secondly I just gave it all back and won't do it again".
While smartphones tablets etc... are poking at the PC, it ain't going anywhere for a long time. Want a high end gaming machine, prepare to spend double the money if you want it as a laptop, and then in a year, if you still want it to be high end, you can buy another laptop rather then upgrade the video card. Secondly with windows 8 and OEMs posing the potential of locked bootloaders that prevent other OS's etc... the homebrew desktops demand may rise higher then ever, for anyone who even wants to think about dabbling with macos/linux. Newegg never was targetted at your average computer illiterate person who has no intention to dabble outside of simple things (those people went to best buy). Hardcore gamers, tweakers/hobbiests etc... will make you rip their PCs out of their cold dead hands.
Well, having friends, is one thing but you still can completely limit the information you give to facebook. I used to have a facebook account just in case anyone wanted to look me up, details I gave it were, my name, and a single picture of myself. Everything else can be BSed, including birthday location etc... people who know you will know it's you by your picture and otherwise you have given no information out that will reach public view.
I have to agree with you, food dosn't make people fat, people make themselves fat, parents deserve the full blame for childhood obiesity, not McDonnalds, not Doritos or Count Chocula. Stupid genX parent "OMG that darn cartoon mascott is making my kid want unhealthy food, my kids are asking for unhealthy food and getting fat on it because of these evil marketers". No it isn't the marketers, it's your dumb ass who buys your kid everything they ask for, they are kids you are a parent, it's your flipping job to teach them moderation. Back to cave man times parents had to teach their kids not to eat poisonous berries frogs etc.. we have to teach our kids when they've had enough.
I believe VLC was on IOS, I think it is probably is still possible to get on jailbroken devices. Basically Apple decided that GPL and apples terms and conditions are incompatible. http://appadvice.com/appnn/2011/01/vlc-ios-removed-app-store
The problem is the CEO is more or less the head of making decisions. So the first CEO ages back made the decision that CEOs should get a ton of money when they leave, regardless of the reason, the only way such a boneheaded policy can be removed is if the next CEO pushes for it. The problem is... where on earth do you find a CEO that will fight against giving himself money.
Factoring in the cost of making the movie is a rather pointless statistic. Popular movies have made back the entire cost long before they left the big screen, and it isn't as if the DVD sales etc are going to stop as a result of this, I'd be supprised if the DVD sales even were noticably reduced.
I am actually very currious how netflix intends to recoup 30 million per movie. For this deal to pay off, every dreamworks movie they add to their streaming, needs to convince 4 million people to subscribe. Considering recent changes have lost almost half of their customers, that is going to be a huge leap foward to hope for.
While I agree on the better for the consumer part. It may or may not work on the better for amazon portion. Amazon may be intending to sell these for below manufacturing cost, expecting to make the money back via app/book/etc.. sales. If they say they were to sell a tablet for 150, that costs them 200 to make, over the life of the product they would likely recoup all of their losses. But if it is easily rootable and placed on google's market or even allows googles market to be added unrooted, and 3/4ths of the customers buying are intending to do so. They may very well be making a product that does nothing more then give google money, at the cost of $50 to them. Losses cannot be compensated for by volume, popularity and smiles, as much as we like to pretend they can.
Diaspora is a wonderful concept, unfortunately it will never have any chance to take off. Development is far too slow, I think it had a small chance back at the timeframe they released the pre-alpha demo. At that timeframe they were newsworthy enough and actually getting positive media focus. Then we found out they fscked everything up, their security bugs were so ubundant, the code seemed so poorly cobbled together that most developers coders, possible investors who were interested in the product with a promise of security and control, pretty much freaked out and ran away. Next they basically haven't made any real announcements or anything for about a year. Bottom line is, they need to get a shit ton of users converted at once. That is not something that has ever been possible with the only real advantage toted is "it's open source" "it's not run by a big evil company". Especially when they can't even guarantee security.
Indeed, open source is a tool, making your entire business model open source, will not generate any income. Giving away open source tools to enhance your primary business model, is the key. Google's business model involves the internet growing at a rapid pace, as a result they did many changes and improvements to boost the pace the internet grows at. Open source is good soil for certain types of growth adn development, it isn't the fruit, but it gives the plant what it needs, and some plants need a mixture of good soil, and some need a good amount of bullshit on top of that good soil to grow.
Honestly I partly agree, but largely disagree, not due to the companies themselves having the problem but because of the stupidity of the content holders. Content holders see streaming as a huge piracy liability (flat out retarted if you ask me... the DVDs and CDs will be ripped and uploaded to pirate sites the second they are released or sooner). But to minimize this danger, the content providers will only cut a deal with 1 or 2 streaming services. Turning the situation into a "for CBS subscribe to amazon prime for $10 a month, if your show is on fox, subscribe to hulu for $10 a month, if your show is on viacom, subscribe to dish. The same reason that TV networks go head to head by putting shows to target the same audience within the same block, they will put shows targetting similar audience on each streaming service. Forcing users to either subscribe to 5 different services to watch 5 shows, or to chose and take 1 good show and 2 medeocre ones. None of these services are competing on features etc... They are compeating on which show/movie producers chose them.
Comparitively google seems far more interested in keeping your data to themselves for their advertising cash cow. Historically google has flat out refused law enforcement access to peoples accounts without a court order (vs similar situations in which police pretty much just ask and get instant access to peoples facebook). This dosn't Make them angels by any stretch, they still horde all your data like crazy, but in terms of corporations of massive size, google seems to be one that gives the least amount of fucks as to what branches of any government want, and do the least they possibly can get away with to still opperate in their countries.
it is the raw concept of G+ though that it actually does keep things to the circles that you have. My mom and my boss both have G+ accounts. The fact that google doesn't have a history of changing the rules and shifting what I am going to post from private to public, and the ease of seeing the circles and knowing who it is shared with is why I don't worry when I do post something that could offend one of them. Facebook now that they have done the lists a bit better, mostly I could post it, but their history of changing things because of random mood swings, I would be too worried of posting something monday, and the rules changing tuesday making it public, or possibly posting something monday and a change I was unaware of that went in effect yesterday may put me at risk.
Well you think about it, the people who are making the calls, more or less do that anyway. Not like obama went out to pakistan himself and shot bin laden in the head, at most he signed a document saying, OK go send someone out there and kill them. The idea of our leaders having a harder time sacrificing a few lower class military grunt then they would a $200,000 missile, or putting a multi million dollar drone in harms way, is a cute sentiment, but probably woefully optimistic of a view.
I liked D2 and D1, D3 however too many policies I don't like, 1. attempt to stop goldfarming/selling of 3rd parties by..... integrating it into the game as a feature. AKA in game real world cash auction house. Kinda reminds me of when perfect world entertainment eliminated bot problems in ethersaga by, adding an in game botting mechanism as a standard gameplay mechanic.
DRM, nuff said
Anti moding, anti offline or lan playing... WTF seriously, The moding community is what made d2 so great. it isn't that hard to allow both to be implimented but seperate. I really am baffled by bliz's new policies against allowing the players to add more value to their games at no cost to themselves. Starcraft 2 had the same stupidity (If you create maps, you can only make a couple, before YOU HAVE TO PAY BLIZZARD, to make more maps.... uh.... what? When a user makes content for a game, the gaming companies should be praising them, and noting the possibility that that fan who did the work, may have earned them a few more sales. Not punishing them by either forbidding it outright, or charging them for the honor of helping them add value to the game.
They posted more interesting things yes. Perhaps as a result of less fear of facebooks settings changing and showing the wrong thing to the wrong person. Say a post either making jokes about or pointing out flaws in religion etc... reaching family members that would be offended and result in drama etc... Maybe it's the closed knit group I run with, but people seem to feel more secure in what they share on G+ then they did on facebook. Facebook has improved the controls by a large margain, but they also have a history of changing things without warning. The people haven't changed but what they share has.
You seem to be underestimating the time bing has been around, it was launched on June 3, 2009, it's already been bleeding money for 2 years straight (and that's of course pretending it didn't exist as livesearch for years before that), and profitability is still not in visible reach yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Now that's crazy talk, in the modern day society hackers and criminal geniouses will get past anything, companies being liable for their own flaws is a foreign concept. The best response is to reactively find and imprison the hackers. It's not sony's fault that they were using an out of date unpatched version of apache, it's the small group of script kiddies that realized it. The sad thing is right now security is so universally terrible, people actually are starting to believe that these breaches are caused by super hackers that can break into anything, rather then by amuatures taking advantage of huge gaping holes. The idea of computers somehow changes peoples minds to believe in supergeniouses. If a group of high schoolers snuck into a bank, and plastered grafiti on the walls and xeroxed customer data, 10% of the anger would go to the kids, 90% to the banks terrible security. If a group of high schoolers defaced the banks webpage "OMG they are super genious criminals, ship them to guantanemo bay!!!"
I don't look for anyone else, but anyone else can find me with just my first and last name and a picture. Maybe the john smiths will need to provide their city or something, but the bottom line is it dosn't take people long to flip through a list of people with the Firstname Lastname, they are looking for and spot the picture. They don't need my birthday, exact city, street adress or phone number work history or where I went to school. If their search narrows it down to 30 people then they can skim those 30 profile pictures. If they are just looking to add everyone who graduated from my highschool that year, I probably don't care about them.
While I can't disagree with you. There are faults on both accounts. The biggest flaw in determining information related to this, is the absolute lack of media coverage, however that lack of media coverage does make me favor the protestors a bit more then the police. In all forms of media (both done by the news and by civilians, people tend to cut to only the 5 seconds that they are trying to point out before they tell you what you are supposed to think. The main thing I think however is the media's typical response, more often then not the media favors police. Just watch any of the standard cop shows these days. The heroic police spend the first half of the show tricking manipulating, stepping around the laws that get in the way of their investigation, and then of course the handful of times when the person the police brought in and accused get's out, it's an evil person who got out on technicalities. It seems to be a very rare thing for the detectives on those shows, to bring someone in, and then realize it was a mistake.
Couldn't a simple blood test/tox screen tell scientists quickly if it is alcohol or some other source? Basically scientists are saying "they act drunk, we don't know for certain why". They could be eating piles of rotted fruit, or a naturally occoring berry, or poisonous insects or fumes from machinery. They could be doing it intentionally or accidentally. Bottom line is, if you are going to go to the trouble of posting a study... shouldn't some research and diagnostics be done if it is worth caring about?
First off we never did it, secondly we've stopped doing it. If I am ever taken to court for theft that's what I'll try, "Your honor first of all I never stole anything, secondly I just gave it all back and won't do it again".
Pretty sure it is fully possible to setup a hackentosh on a PC you built yourself. http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-to-install-mac-os-x-on-a-pc-without-using-a-mac/
While smartphones tablets etc... are poking at the PC, it ain't going anywhere for a long time. Want a high end gaming machine, prepare to spend double the money if you want it as a laptop, and then in a year, if you still want it to be high end, you can buy another laptop rather then upgrade the video card. Secondly with windows 8 and OEMs posing the potential of locked bootloaders that prevent other OS's etc... the homebrew desktops demand may rise higher then ever, for anyone who even wants to think about dabbling with macos/linux. Newegg never was targetted at your average computer illiterate person who has no intention to dabble outside of simple things (those people went to best buy). Hardcore gamers, tweakers/hobbiests etc... will make you rip their PCs out of their cold dead hands.
Well, having friends, is one thing but you still can completely limit the information you give to facebook. I used to have a facebook account just in case anyone wanted to look me up, details I gave it were, my name, and a single picture of myself. Everything else can be BSed, including birthday location etc... people who know you will know it's you by your picture and otherwise you have given no information out that will reach public view.
I have to agree with you, food dosn't make people fat, people make themselves fat, parents deserve the full blame for childhood obiesity, not McDonnalds, not Doritos or Count Chocula. Stupid genX parent "OMG that darn cartoon mascott is making my kid want unhealthy food, my kids are asking for unhealthy food and getting fat on it because of these evil marketers". No it isn't the marketers, it's your dumb ass who buys your kid everything they ask for, they are kids you are a parent, it's your flipping job to teach them moderation. Back to cave man times parents had to teach their kids not to eat poisonous berries frogs etc.. we have to teach our kids when they've had enough.
I believe VLC was on IOS, I think it is probably is still possible to get on jailbroken devices. Basically Apple decided that GPL and apples terms and conditions are incompatible. http://appadvice.com/appnn/2011/01/vlc-ios-removed-app-store
The problem is the CEO is more or less the head of making decisions. So the first CEO ages back made the decision that CEOs should get a ton of money when they leave, regardless of the reason, the only way such a boneheaded policy can be removed is if the next CEO pushes for it. The problem is... where on earth do you find a CEO that will fight against giving himself money.
Factoring in the cost of making the movie is a rather pointless statistic. Popular movies have made back the entire cost long before they left the big screen, and it isn't as if the DVD sales etc are going to stop as a result of this, I'd be supprised if the DVD sales even were noticably reduced.
I am actually very currious how netflix intends to recoup 30 million per movie. For this deal to pay off, every dreamworks movie they add to their streaming, needs to convince 4 million people to subscribe. Considering recent changes have lost almost half of their customers, that is going to be a huge leap foward to hope for.
While I agree on the better for the consumer part. It may or may not work on the better for amazon portion. Amazon may be intending to sell these for below manufacturing cost, expecting to make the money back via app/book/etc.. sales. If they say they were to sell a tablet for 150, that costs them 200 to make, over the life of the product they would likely recoup all of their losses. But if it is easily rootable and placed on google's market or even allows googles market to be added unrooted, and 3/4ths of the customers buying are intending to do so. They may very well be making a product that does nothing more then give google money, at the cost of $50 to them. Losses cannot be compensated for by volume, popularity and smiles, as much as we like to pretend they can.
Diaspora is a wonderful concept, unfortunately it will never have any chance to take off. Development is far too slow, I think it had a small chance back at the timeframe they released the pre-alpha demo. At that timeframe they were newsworthy enough and actually getting positive media focus. Then we found out they fscked everything up, their security bugs were so ubundant, the code seemed so poorly cobbled together that most developers coders, possible investors who were interested in the product with a promise of security and control, pretty much freaked out and ran away. Next they basically haven't made any real announcements or anything for about a year. Bottom line is, they need to get a shit ton of users converted at once. That is not something that has ever been possible with the only real advantage toted is "it's open source" "it's not run by a big evil company". Especially when they can't even guarantee security.
Which works great, as long as you have no intention of ever releasing your website or program on a international level.
Indeed, open source is a tool, making your entire business model open source, will not generate any income. Giving away open source tools to enhance your primary business model, is the key. Google's business model involves the internet growing at a rapid pace, as a result they did many changes and improvements to boost the pace the internet grows at. Open source is good soil for certain types of growth adn development, it isn't the fruit, but it gives the plant what it needs, and some plants need a mixture of good soil, and some need a good amount of bullshit on top of that good soil to grow.
Honestly I partly agree, but largely disagree, not due to the companies themselves having the problem but because of the stupidity of the content holders. Content holders see streaming as a huge piracy liability (flat out retarted if you ask me... the DVDs and CDs will be ripped and uploaded to pirate sites the second they are released or sooner). But to minimize this danger, the content providers will only cut a deal with 1 or 2 streaming services. Turning the situation into a "for CBS subscribe to amazon prime for $10 a month, if your show is on fox, subscribe to hulu for $10 a month, if your show is on viacom, subscribe to dish. The same reason that TV networks go head to head by putting shows to target the same audience within the same block, they will put shows targetting similar audience on each streaming service. Forcing users to either subscribe to 5 different services to watch 5 shows, or to chose and take 1 good show and 2 medeocre ones. None of these services are competing on features etc... They are compeating on which show/movie producers chose them.
Comparitively google seems far more interested in keeping your data to themselves for their advertising cash cow. Historically google has flat out refused law enforcement access to peoples accounts without a court order (vs similar situations in which police pretty much just ask and get instant access to peoples facebook). This dosn't Make them angels by any stretch, they still horde all your data like crazy, but in terms of corporations of massive size, google seems to be one that gives the least amount of fucks as to what branches of any government want, and do the least they possibly can get away with to still opperate in their countries.
it is the raw concept of G+ though that it actually does keep things to the circles that you have. My mom and my boss both have G+ accounts. The fact that google doesn't have a history of changing the rules and shifting what I am going to post from private to public, and the ease of seeing the circles and knowing who it is shared with is why I don't worry when I do post something that could offend one of them. Facebook now that they have done the lists a bit better, mostly I could post it, but their history of changing things because of random mood swings, I would be too worried of posting something monday, and the rules changing tuesday making it public, or possibly posting something monday and a change I was unaware of that went in effect yesterday may put me at risk.
Well you think about it, the people who are making the calls, more or less do that anyway. Not like obama went out to pakistan himself and shot bin laden in the head, at most he signed a document saying, OK go send someone out there and kill them. The idea of our leaders having a harder time sacrificing a few lower class military grunt then they would a $200,000 missile, or putting a multi million dollar drone in harms way, is a cute sentiment, but probably woefully optimistic of a view.
DRM, nuff said
Anti moding, anti offline or lan playing... WTF seriously, The moding community is what made d2 so great. it isn't that hard to allow both to be implimented but seperate. I really am baffled by bliz's new policies against allowing the players to add more value to their games at no cost to themselves. Starcraft 2 had the same stupidity (If you create maps, you can only make a couple, before YOU HAVE TO PAY BLIZZARD, to make more maps.... uh.... what? When a user makes content for a game, the gaming companies should be praising them, and noting the possibility that that fan who did the work, may have earned them a few more sales. Not punishing them by either forbidding it outright, or charging them for the honor of helping them add value to the game.
What if we drew a little heart on it?
They posted more interesting things yes. Perhaps as a result of less fear of facebooks settings changing and showing the wrong thing to the wrong person. Say a post either making jokes about or pointing out flaws in religion etc... reaching family members that would be offended and result in drama etc... Maybe it's the closed knit group I run with, but people seem to feel more secure in what they share on G+ then they did on facebook. Facebook has improved the controls by a large margain, but they also have a history of changing things without warning. The people haven't changed but what they share has.
You seem to be underestimating the time bing has been around, it was launched on June 3, 2009, it's already been bleeding money for 2 years straight (and that's of course pretending it didn't exist as livesearch for years before that), and profitability is still not in visible reach yet.