Thanks for illustrating the problem with a US dominated internet. The US only domains are.GOV for the US government,.MIL for the US Military,.US for American sites, and.EDU for American educational institutions.
America can control those, but you're not allowed to dictate what happens outside your domains. If, like Megaupload, I have servers in your country you're allowed to confiscate those. You can block my site in your borders. You can try to take me to court. But what the fuck gives you the right to silence me in countries where your jurisdiction is null?
Yeah, you're right. Reading the article I assumed it was a VPS, but after browsing the rest of the site I get that it's a new Anglefire or whatever. That's something I have no issue with. I read the article assuming it was OS level patching. This I don't care about.
Why are they better? Do you have an article that isn't a technocratic rant that boils down to "Fuck you, that's why" or "Because that's how I learned to use them so it makes sense!"
Whenever I'm forced to use a version of office with the menu system, I end up spending half my time trying to figure out which menu a particular function is hidden in. Searching the ribbon is orders of magnitude easier. This tab? no, next, next, Bingo. With the menu. Is it this, wait, open up a submenu, scan decipher one word descriptions many of which may have to do with what I'm doing, nope. Open next menu, scan, dig into deeper level, select item scan tabs of new dialogue box, nope, exit, forget which menu item I just looked at. Open next menu, scan, dive deeper, dig deeper, dig deeper, select item wrong item. Wait is that it?
I just think its right up there with microsoft bob and Clippy.
Because it abandons the idiotic digging through 3 levels of dropdowns into a modal dialogue which obscures the formatting I'm trying to alter, and requires me to jump into another modal dialogue because the thing I want to do has multiple settings. I hated the ribbon when it first came out, I nerd raged about it, then I used Office 2007 for 3 months to learn what my users were going through, and now I look at that menu paradigm and I shake my head at how poorly designed it is.
The ribbon also allows features that I had no idea existed, but have complained about not existing, to be brought forward without ruining the UX. With the ribbon, I can hover over a confusing icon and get a valuable tooltip rather than having to either open the help menu or click the thing and hunt around the new modal dialogue to determine if it's the right menu item I clicked on. It's also customizable in a way that the old menu system is not. If you don't want to have it taking up valuable real estate, collapse it and you'll
The old menu system makes sense, but keeping it is skeuomorphic and bad UI design. When computers were first designed and primarily navigated by keyboards the menu system made sense. There are much better ways to do things that require less clicking, less hunting, and less frustration caused by "Was that edit>file>format>paragraph>spacing, or page>printing>setup>paragraph>spacing?" Now it's "Page Layout tab> spacing" for both. The old way of doing things was annoying before there was an alternative, it's just stupid pig-headed stubbornness of the old guard to talk about how great it is.
I don;t think anyone is saying that avoiding the scanner is difficult; more that it shouldn't be there in the first place.
I've bypassed them several times, only once was I asked why. I said I didn't feel that the safety concerns the machine potentially eliminated was worth the privacy violation it definitely created. The agent smiled and nodded his head before doing a professional pat down, in which each of his actions was explained to me.
The people working there aren't always the issue, it's the policies that are the proble
No, people that are using Macs are Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and MS Office users. Gone are the days where the typical Mac user was a power user, why do you think the Pro line has been all but forgotten?
The F part comes from cross licensing deals to make things fair. Apple has no standards-essential patents that are being requested, so there's no cross licensing for those items.
Apple's patents, since not FRAND-eligible, aren't being offered at reasonable rates. If I have a deal that I can use my neighbour's pool if they can use my trampoline, that's FRAND. But if you want to use my trampoline and tell me I'm not allowed to play in your tree fort because the FRAND deal is only applicable to ground constructs, then fuck you, pay me $10 to use my trampoline.
Thanks for pointing me to mtpfs, which solves Linux at home! But not Windows at work or Windows on laptop. I didn't even think of taking that approach to it,maybe there's a Windows equivalent...
I tried using PyMTP, but I can't get it to work on Windows, so that's my real gripe.
The move to MTP is something I've been speculating has to do with moving away from the FAT patent licensing issues that Microsoft is using to bilk Android manufacturers. I find it super annoying to use, since it isn't treated like a block level device Python won't interact with it, I can't read it in anything like Baobab, so I tend to lose track of what's occupying what space.
The 90% number suggests that you're significantly more likely to die if you get into a bike accident and don't have a helmet on. I'm not suggesting that helmets would've prevented anywhere close to 900 deaths, it's possible that all of those were death by laser bear in which case a helmet would do nothing.
There's no debate about the fact that having a helmet on will reduce head injuries. You put armour on something, it's not going to be as easy to injure.
Ok, sorry for the delay here forgot about this thread. You're completely correct in your pedantry; Android (tm) is not the same as AOSP. But the marketing campaign does a pretty good job of making that clear, so most of your points are invalid. I had a big post addressing the rest of your childlike vitriol, but I'm going to give up because you're being a pedant to the point of ridiculousness and asserting that you have said something as a proof to your argument. I have no interest in arguing with you further, aside from one thing:
[quote]You sound like you're 15 years old and a real pro at visiting the xda forums and downloading ROMs. Good job! Maybe when you grow up you'll realize that the impact of open source has little to do with how you can install a half-working ROM of the latest version of AOSP.[/quote]
The cute attack aside, the impact of open source is precisely that I can download the latest version of AOSP and install it on whatever hardware I can make it work on. That's the end of the impact, in fact. Access to the source code lets me do what I want with it, rather than doing what others tell me I can. Access to the source means I can bend it to my will, there's nothing else.
All the lovey dovey, information should be free, all source is open, movement shit boils down to the fact that I can edit your code to make it do what I want, instead of what you want.
This is like saying that fewer people drown in the desert than in the ocean. The roadway system in the Netherlands is completely different than the one in the US, and that's why there are no helmet laws. If the majority of people in the US travelled by bike, it'd be safer to travel by bike in the US as well.
Roads that are crammed with unfocussed, inattentive drivers doing 40MPH in a Hummer are not the same as roads in the Netherlands where bike traffic outstretches that of cars 2:1.
Add to that the fact that the vast majority of Dutch cities have bike lanes, and you might as well be comparing the safety of Iraqi roads in areas with large insurgent populations with those of Main st Anytown USA.
In the US, where cycling is SIGNIFICANTLY less popular, you're looking at ~1,000 deaths a year, 90%+ of them with people without helmets.
Discouraging them from riding in cars is great, but they're going to ride in them, shouldn't they wear seatbelts when they do? The reason they're required to is because seatbelts improve safety and reduce injuries and fatalities. Same as bike helmets.
What is the benefit of not wearing a helmet? Increased cool factor? Feels nicer to have the wind in your hair?
You're right, head injuries did increase when helmet laws came into play, and some helmets made in the 90s (and probably still today) don't protect as well as they could. Shockingly, fatalities decreased by (up to 20% in the same time frame. So, instead of dying, people walked away with a concussion. Pretty decent trade off if you ask me.
Sorry, I should've stated There is NEVER an accident where you'll be ok without a helmet, but wouldn't be ok if you had one.
If you agree that helmets reduce the likelihood of a serious injury, why are you against wearing them? People are stupid selfish assholes, and forcing them to do things for their own good is the only reason those things get done in many cases.
About the only thing that people advocating helmet use/laws agree with the don't-tread-on-me-types about is that helmets don't prevent facial injuries.
Slashdot Mirror
In Chrome this is:
Click search box
right click> "Add as search..."
OK
Thanks for illustrating the problem with a US dominated internet. The US only domains are .GOV for the US government, .MIL for the US Military, .US for American sites, and .EDU for American educational institutions.
America can control those, but you're not allowed to dictate what happens outside your domains. If, like Megaupload, I have servers in your country you're allowed to confiscate those. You can block my site in your borders. You can try to take me to court. But what the fuck gives you the right to silence me in countries where your jurisdiction is null?
Yeah, you're right. Reading the article I assumed it was a VPS, but after browsing the rest of the site I get that it's a new Anglefire or whatever. That's something I have no issue with. I read the article assuming it was OS level patching. This I don't care about.
I'll be finding a new host now.
You're not being paid to view my site or make changes to it, let me know and shut it down if it becomes a problem; keep your fingers out of my site.
Why are they better? Do you have an article that isn't a technocratic rant that boils down to "Fuck you, that's why" or "Because that's how I learned to use them so it makes sense!"
THE MENU SYSTEM IS ABSOLUTELY USELESS.
Whenever I'm forced to use a version of office with the menu system, I end up spending half my time trying to figure out which menu a particular function is hidden in. Searching the ribbon is orders of magnitude easier. This tab? no, next, next, Bingo. With the menu. Is it this, wait, open up a submenu, scan decipher one word descriptions many of which may have to do with what I'm doing, nope. Open next menu, scan, dig into deeper level, select item scan tabs of new dialogue box, nope, exit, forget which menu item I just looked at. Open next menu, scan, dive deeper, dig deeper, dig deeper, select item wrong item. Wait is that it?
I just think its right up there with microsoft bob and Clippy.
Because it abandons the idiotic digging through 3 levels of dropdowns into a modal dialogue which obscures the formatting I'm trying to alter, and requires me to jump into another modal dialogue because the thing I want to do has multiple settings. I hated the ribbon when it first came out, I nerd raged about it, then I used Office 2007 for 3 months to learn what my users were going through, and now I look at that menu paradigm and I shake my head at how poorly designed it is.
The ribbon also allows features that I had no idea existed, but have complained about not existing, to be brought forward without ruining the UX. With the ribbon, I can hover over a confusing icon and get a valuable tooltip rather than having to either open the help menu or click the thing and hunt around the new modal dialogue to determine if it's the right menu item I clicked on. It's also customizable in a way that the old menu system is not. If you don't want to have it taking up valuable real estate, collapse it and you'll
The old menu system makes sense, but keeping it is skeuomorphic and bad UI design. When computers were first designed and primarily navigated by keyboards the menu system made sense. There are much better ways to do things that require less clicking, less hunting, and less frustration caused by "Was that edit>file>format>paragraph>spacing, or page>printing>setup>paragraph>spacing?" Now it's "Page Layout tab> spacing" for both. The old way of doing things was annoying before there was an alternative, it's just stupid pig-headed stubbornness of the old guard to talk about how great it is.
I don;t think anyone is saying that avoiding the scanner is difficult; more that it shouldn't be there in the first place.
I've bypassed them several times, only once was I asked why. I said I didn't feel that the safety concerns the machine potentially eliminated was worth the privacy violation it definitely created. The agent smiled and nodded his head before doing a professional pat down, in which each of his actions was explained to me.
The people working there aren't always the issue, it's the policies that are the proble
My point exactly. ARM is fine, most Mac users will be fine with that.
Hasn't everyone stopped using AIM/MSN and moved on to Gtalk/Facebook Messenger?
No, people that are using Macs are Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and MS Office users. Gone are the days where the typical Mac user was a power user, why do you think the Pro line has been all but forgotten?
Shelf life of this story is like a week.
The funniest part is that Apple.com alternates between two images the same size, while the UK one is only the big iPad mini page.
It's from the Time Cube website. Ancient trolling.
The F part comes from cross licensing deals to make things fair. Apple has no standards-essential patents that are being requested, so there's no cross licensing for those items.
Apple's patents, since not FRAND-eligible, aren't being offered at reasonable rates. If I have a deal that I can use my neighbour's pool if they can use my trampoline, that's FRAND. But if you want to use my trampoline and tell me I'm not allowed to play in your tree fort because the FRAND deal is only applicable to ground constructs, then fuck you, pay me $10 to use my trampoline.
Good point, we should just rush in to things like this assuming there's nothing that could go wrong. What could possibly go wrong with that plan!
My kingdom for a couple of mod points.
I've got an Asus Zenbook, the screen is 1600X900. The new models are 1080p on a 13" screen.
Thanks for pointing me to mtpfs, which solves Linux at home! But not Windows at work or Windows on laptop. I didn't even think of taking that approach to it,maybe there's a Windows equivalent...
I tried using PyMTP, but I can't get it to work on Windows, so that's my real gripe.
The move to MTP is something I've been speculating has to do with moving away from the FAT patent licensing issues that Microsoft is using to bilk Android manufacturers. I find it super annoying to use, since it isn't treated like a block level device Python won't interact with it, I can't read it in anything like Baobab, so I tend to lose track of what's occupying what space.
I thought it was for subscription freebies, but none of you people have subscriptions.
Unless you're just hiding them.
The 90% number suggests that you're significantly more likely to die if you get into a bike accident and don't have a helmet on. I'm not suggesting that helmets would've prevented anywhere close to 900 deaths, it's possible that all of those were death by laser bear in which case a helmet would do nothing.
There's no debate about the fact that having a helmet on will reduce head injuries. You put armour on something, it's not going to be as easy to injure.
Ok, sorry for the delay here forgot about this thread. You're completely correct in your pedantry; Android (tm) is not the same as AOSP. But the marketing campaign does a pretty good job of making that clear, so most of your points are invalid. I had a big post addressing the rest of your childlike vitriol, but I'm going to give up because you're being a pedant to the point of ridiculousness and asserting that you have said something as a proof to your argument. I have no interest in arguing with you further, aside from one thing:
[quote]You sound like you're 15 years old and a real pro at visiting the xda forums and downloading ROMs. Good job!
Maybe when you grow up you'll realize that the impact of open source has little to do with how you can install a half-working ROM of the latest version of AOSP.[/quote]
The cute attack aside, the impact of open source is precisely that I can download the latest version of AOSP and install it on whatever hardware I can make it work on. That's the end of the impact, in fact. Access to the source code lets me do what I want with it, rather than doing what others tell me I can. Access to the source means I can bend it to my will, there's nothing else.
All the lovey dovey, information should be free, all source is open, movement shit boils down to the fact that I can edit your code to make it do what I want, instead of what you want.
This is like saying that fewer people drown in the desert than in the ocean. The roadway system in the Netherlands is completely different than the one in the US, and that's why there are no helmet laws. If the majority of people in the US travelled by bike, it'd be safer to travel by bike in the US as well.
Roads that are crammed with unfocussed, inattentive drivers doing 40MPH in a Hummer are not the same as roads in the Netherlands where bike traffic outstretches that of cars 2:1.
Add to that the fact that the vast majority of Dutch cities have bike lanes, and you might as well be comparing the safety of Iraqi roads in areas with large insurgent populations with those of Main st Anytown USA.
In the US, where cycling is SIGNIFICANTLY less popular, you're looking at ~1,000 deaths a year, 90%+ of them with people without helmets.
Discouraging them from riding in cars is great, but they're going to ride in them, shouldn't they wear seatbelts when they do? The reason they're required to is because seatbelts improve safety and reduce injuries and fatalities. Same as bike helmets.
What is the benefit of not wearing a helmet? Increased cool factor? Feels nicer to have the wind in your hair?
You're right, head injuries did increase when helmet laws came into play, and some helmets made in the 90s (and probably still today) don't protect as well as they could. Shockingly, fatalities decreased by (up to 20% in the same time frame. So, instead of dying, people walked away with a concussion. Pretty decent trade off if you ask me.
Sorry, I should've stated There is NEVER an accident where you'll be ok without a helmet, but wouldn't be ok if you had one.
If you agree that helmets reduce the likelihood of a serious injury, why are you against wearing them? People are stupid selfish assholes, and forcing them to do things for their own good is the only reason those things get done in many cases.
About the only thing that people advocating helmet use/laws agree with the don't-tread-on-me-types about is that helmets don't prevent facial injuries.