The problem why nobody does it is because even if you're completely legally in the clear... and they sue you... you're still out legal fees. And you have to wait for a court date and all that. It's really just a total mess, which is why everyone reccomends against it so strongly.
It's not illegal, although it may be libelous. (slanderous, depending.) It can be the basis for such a lawsuit. However, that doesn't alter the fact that if what you say is the truth, there's not a damn thing they'll win on against you.
Because the last time the Queen ordered the government to invade a country was when, exactly, again? Oh... humm... 1648? The Thirty Years War? 1337, the Hundred Years War?
Er, no. They're not. They're full of it, and so are you. I'm not even using the RTM- this is RC1, and it still can whip through every modern game in my arsenal with absolutely no trouble at all.
Bull. Shit. It runs just fine on my Core 2 Duo T2400 with 2GB RAM and Intel GMA 950, that's Windows Vista Ultimate with all Aero mods turned on. It flies, and it ran great when this laptop had 1 GB. Anybody who says you need 4 GB minimum is on crack.
Not to be pedantic, but there is a difference between 'unreasonable search and seizure' and 'unlawful search and seizure'. In many cases, the government is held to the higher standard of 'unreasonable', but to my knowledge, citizens are only held to 'unlawful'. For example, in Catz (I think), the government wasn't allowed to use evidence they had gained from eavsdropping- that was 'unreasonable'. It certainly, however, wasn't illegal.
thats simply not true. typical liberal entitlement mentality
Haha, flamebait now. When I saw it, it was at + insightfult.
Anyway, there's a reason we have written agreements- and the reason is so people don't walk all over them. If that's entitlement, damn right, mark me liberal!
Don't give them ideas. Air travel's bad enough as it is. If you absolutely must fly, don't fly out of international airports- fly out of local trans-border/civil aviation ones, where security is much more lax.
He also pointed out that's only 2,000 dollars a month. Not at all excessive. Anywhere up to 10,000 dollars a month is 'middle class' in the US. Still and all, however, it's not an awful salary, and they're certainly not paying them peanuts.
Why is this important to note? Does it materially alter his life in any way? Will the world come crumbing to a halt if he can't view, exactly, the pieces of code that he executes?
No. Chances are, he really doesn't give a damn one way or another. Chances are, even, that he never even noticed.
So who cares?
There are two types of people on Slashdot- those who are slavishly devoted to Open Source and Free Software and those who want to get work done. I would even go so far as to argue that in a vast majority of the cases, they're mutually exclusive classifications.
Actually, it's interesting- did you see the article posted on slashdot a little while ago about the iPhone euphoria wearing off?
Anyway, don't get me wrong- I may buy an iPhone when I can get one unlocked off E-bay, just because it looks damn cool. But I'll wait for the reviews to tell me if it's as awesome as Apple says it is.
It has NO FRACKIN' BUTTONS! It may turn out to be a goofy idea and they could fall flat on their faces but that is an important part of the reason they're Apple and not just some other screwdriver clone company. We won't know whether it was a good or great idea or just another miscue until many people own and use it. The Newton was a cool idea that is still better than the pale copycats that followed but the failure of its handwriting recognition system was fatal.
It has at least two buttons that I can see, and there's one very good reason for having buttons (If you've seen a picture of the Universal, you'll know that when folded out like an iPhone it also does not have as many buttons as your typical smartphone on the face)- that reason is that this is a phone. I want to be able to take it off my belt, hit answer, and put it to my ear without needing to worry about looking at the screen and finding the answer soft-key. (the Universal has two buttons on the hinge that are accessible no matter how the device is folded, and when using it in an in-between state, there are two keys on the keyboard.)
The fact that your undersized PC has a barrel full of features including some combination of video screen interfaces doesn't matter because it also has a full complement of physical keys as well. To put it mildly I would venture to guess that most would not characterize it as a clean or elegant interface. The ray of sunshine in this is that you like it. What is not so clear is if you understand that others might not share your enthusiasm for perfectly valid reasons. Your response seems to be that if someone doesn't agree he must be an idiot (e.g. the tens of millions of purchasers of iPods). Well, that is as much effort as I am willing to expend.
Actually, I don't think it has enough buttons. I'd prefer at least four more buttons on the primary device face around the screen, and at minimum a pair of softkey buttons when the device is folded back. The fact is, the 'full compliment of physical keys' are the keyboard, and under normal operation, they remain folded away out of sight and out of mind, leaving the edge buttons and the directional pad on the face.
What I am arguing is simply that Apple has a penchant for creating what are undoubtedly inferior devices, and through some magic trick that I don't understand (which is why Apple is a multi-billion dollar company and I'm not) making them sell tremendously well. This is just one more of those devices, and, like most Apple products, I always hope it will fall on its face- Apple is years late to the party and with an inferior product, as always.
The iPod is the perfect example. It is, plain and simple, an inferior product technologically speaking. The interface design is not massively amazing. And yet it's captured the lions share of the MP3 player market. Does this make me angry? Not really. It makes me sad that so many people are so stupid as to buy what Apple is selling.
(Actually, to put this in perspective, I have nothing against their computer business. I've used and supported OSX, and while I personally don't like it, (it looks too flashy for me, I prefer the Windows 2000 interface) it's a competently designed operating system, for the most part. It has it's quirks, but so does anything else. When it came time to buy my laptop, I found the one with the best price performance, be it Apple or PC. (It happened to be a HP Pavillion that had undergone a massive price cut and still came with 2GBs of RAM standard and 120 GB of HDD space, so I'm happy).
You spent $1,100 for a phone and you brag about the specs that come with this dinosaur. It weighs more, it's bulkier and its design sounds like it is much like every other "smart"phone. Maybe it is the right device for you but you aren't going to influence anyone who is looking for something that breaks the mold of previous phone design.
Because you apparently cannot read, the fact that I bought it unlocked was what caused the price to skyrocket. The price on contract was approximately the same as the iPhone at the time. Moreover, the entire point of my argument was that the iPhone does not break the previous mold of phone design. Aside from the size and the weight, (and the featureset, which is better on my phone), the iPhone is pretty much exactly what we've had before. Adding an Apple trademark to it does not magically make it break the mode of previous devices, nor does making it slightly (not much, admittedly) slimmer and a bit lighter. A lot of my friends and relatives have used my phone. None of them has complained about the interface. A lot of them have complained it's like holding a brick to their faces, though, but the iPhone doesn't seem in a place to much change that, given that the size of it is roughly comparable.
Right, I'm an idiot and you can't even spell a simple word like ridiculous correctly. You are also in the position of someone whose advice on music players is so inept that you've completely lost contact with reality. Maybe "standard WM5 interface" is the greatest development ever in human interface design, I haven't used it so I can't say. I do use WinXP on a daily basis and find it pathetic in comparison to OS X which is at best tolerable.
Ah, three strawmen attack in one paragraph! Nowhere did I say WM5 was the best interface ever- I said, correctly, that it's extremely simple, intuitive, and does everything that Apple's demo did just as easily. My spelling is not at issue here, and thirdly, allow me to point this out to you: Apple's music players are some of the worst, hardware-for-cost wise availible on the market at the moment. An example? I bought what amounts to a Nano-knockoff for a friend a whle back. Cost me 60 bucks, including shipping, for 8 GB of storage. Looks identical to a Nano on the outside, except that it's a hell of a lot cheaper, plays all sorts of video, and has a radio tuner in it, too. The interface had a learning curve of about thirty seconds. Comparing it hand to hand with a nano, one really couldn't tell the difference in interface use or outside appearance- the non-apple one was just a lot cheaper and had more features.
I did just do a quick lookup of HTC Universal and it is a good thing you are happy with it. We need more tech devices that have satisfied users. It does seem to be possibly even more expensive than Apple's product but I doubt your characterization of its advantages is entirely accurate. For one thing it is limited to 802.11b wifi speeds rather than 802.11g for the iPhone. That is a non-trivial disadvantage but it is an older device. Also the VGA screen looks pretty dim in some of the reviews but maybe that is not common. It also appears to be bulkier and heavier. Hard to say and I couldn't find specific numbers to compare with iPhone's 4.8 ounces and 4.5 x 2.4 x 0.46 inches.
You apparently didn't look very hard. Activating 802.11g speed is as simple as flipping a software switch, and, unlike Engadget's report of the iPhone, is absolutely uncrippled- I decide when and where to turn it off, and what it connects to, and what I can donwload with it. Moreover, sure it's bulkier and heavier- I just said it was two years old. It has an integrated keyboard, two cameras, stereo speakers and a bunch of other features that the iPhone does not. It'd expect it to be bigger, although actually it's quite similar to the iPhone in many ways (ie, the dimensions of the Universal I'm holding are... 4.9 x 3.2 x.85 inches. I can't tell you exactly the weight, because I don't have a scale handy, but I imagine it weighs more than 4.8 ounces by about that much again, if not slightly more.)
I don't plan to be spending the sort of money Apple is charging (or for an HTC Universal) unless there are some surprises that haven't been announced yet. But I can imagine why someone might rationally make that choice. Just like I haven't purchased an iPod but can understand why all three of my children have purchased one. It is too bad your blinders prevent you from appreciating some of the best technology and design available today.
Except you mis-stated the featureset of the Universal, and frankly, (although I expect no less from a marketing presentation) Jobs apparently highly overstated the features availible on the iPhone. it's no revolution, just like the iPod was no revolution. The only advantage it possesses is marketing and 'cool' factor.
p.s. the Apple Demo I refer to is not what was shown at MacWorld by Jobs but rather what is available at Apple's website. If you haven't seen it yet don't be misled by the simplified stuff they use for for onstage presentation.
Yep, no question about it. I also wish the price were lower not unlike many other devices from Apple and others. I am skeptical about your rather unsupported claim that your two year old phone stomps all over Apple's as yet unreleased phone. You fail to mention what model phone you have so that others could evaluate how accurate your claim might be.
It's an HTC Universal, released in 3Q 2005- sometime in April-June, I'm not sure when. That will make it two years old when the iPhone is released in the mainland US. Look up the spec sheet sometime- 3G/UMTS, VGA screen, etc.
I haven't held and operated Apple's phone but if the demo on Apple's website is accurate your claim about an existing phone being better as a phone is utter nonsense. Every phone I've ever used has required that I have its own cryptic and unknowable interface committed securely to my memory to operate it effectively. A call is coming in, what phone am I using, what is the magic key sequence needed to handle the call and if I guess wrong what happens to the existing call and the impending call? With a touch screen and Apple's useable interface that sort of common frustration is simply eliminated. The devices that are currently available are just plain broken and the vendors are mindless idiots to have done nothing to correct this sort of interface hell that they have been providing ever since we moved beyond circular dial phone.
So... we've both seen the same Apple Demo... and you haven't held my phone... and you claim I'm lying. That's intelligent debating right there! The interface is the standard WM5 interface- I press the green phone-answer button which always brings you straight into the phone screen (or picks up the call, obviously, if it's ringing) and then dial the number from the dialpad, or press contacts to enter the contacts screen. I press the red-end button to end a call or return to the desktop from anywhere. It's about as simple as the phone can get without a dedicated phone keyboard. Not to mention the fact that my phone ALSO has a touch screen, and the interface is as simple as I've seen- plus, it's skinable! You could turn it into Apple's interface, if you felt like it.
The things Jobs did in his demo- sending a picture via e-mail while in a call- is things I've been able to do on my phone forever, it's built straight into the OS. I expect this sort of thing from my phone. Those are basic things, not magic techniques that have never been applied before.
This looks incredibly similar to the mp3 player market where existing devices and their unimaginative vendors have settled for crappy products and left it to Apple to do the sort of things that were obviously needed but no one was providing. As a result Apple could charge high prices and still rout their competition utterly. Plenty of otherwise savvy viewers of the market were oblivious to the glaring shortcomings of existing products because they made the needed absurd accomodations. So Apple's success remains an inexplicable mystery that can only be understood by inventing a fanbois mythology. Wake up and smell the coffee!
Now I know you're just an idiot. Apple's MP3 players are rediculously horrible compared to the competition. Anyone with half a brain shouldn't use one, and I advise all my friends not to get one. Me? I just play music... from my phone! (Which, by the way, gets approximately 18 hours of battery life playing music when I I set it into music mode, with processor and radios offline, and it gets approximately 5 hours of wifi, phone, and full use.
Frankly, it's not a good phone. The phone I carry now is better in almost every respect (screen resolution, wireless systems, battery life) and, though it may be a little thicker and most certainly a little heavier, is it worth losing 3G and VGA to get something that looks prettier? Not really.
I was on the edge of my seat, too, watching Jobs unveil it at CES via Engadget. But after the euphoria of this actually being an apple product I wanted to own wore off, I took a good hard look at it- and came to the conclusion that this product is inferior to my current phone in almost every way, and that converting to it would involve a total reworking of how I now work with my phone and computer.
It's just not worth it. Maybe if the phone cost 199, 299, I'd buy it to suppliment my daily-driver as an Ipod-ish thing. But for 599+ contract, it's too expensive, and too inferior.
I hope the apple fanbois realize that my phone, two years old, stomps all over Apple's iPhone (which hasen't even been released yet) as a phone, not to mention as a portable computing appliance.
And the second that a US Navy vessel tells you to stand down and be boarded, and you refuse, and they shoot at you, and you fire back with missiles and try to sink their ship, what the fuck do you think is going to happen? They'll laugh and wander off? You'd be lucky to make off your ship alive.
Well, it's unlikely to be 'try to sink their ship'. It'd be 'send their ship straight to the bottom without delay', because the P-800 is a supersonic anti-ship cruise missile. Assuming they close to a kilometer to hail and then fire warning shots, your missile is going to go from launch to having sunk them in about one and a half seconds- far too fast for them to respond even if they wanted to. However, it's not a good idea...
And I don't know why 'pirate' would make you laugh. They kill people, you know. Navies are allowed to board anyone they suspect of piracy, and operating without a flag is a pretty strong indicator. And in international waters ships without a flag are subject to the jurisdiction of all nations, and thus any vessel operated by any country can demand they allow themselves to be boarded under suspicion of being a pirate vessel, and fire on them if they refuse.
...Except against pirates. Anyway, I think you severely overrate the capability of most navies. Sure, if you go up against the Americans, British, Chinese, or Russians and sink one of their ships, you're screwed. The first indication most navies will have that somebody's sunk one of their ships is when it doesn't report back to port.
That actually isn't just some hypothetical situation. Navies actually do board unflagged ships whenever they find them in international waters or their own waters. (And they alert the host country when they find them suspicious in other people's waters.)
Indeed. And I fly my own flag. Too bad.
If you're an innocent person in a boat that wasn't intended for international trips, but drifted, you'll usually be fine, and they'll even tow you back to shore. If you refuse to stand down and be boarded, they will attempt to board by force, period. If you attempt to stop them, they will shoot back. You might be able to hold them off, but they will send their military. And, hell, even if you can defeat their entire military, they'll just alert other navies where you are. Navies board and search suspected pirate ships on general principles, you can't just fire at them and they go 'Well, that seems a bit hard, let's just give up'.
Um, did you read the article about Sealand? That's exactly what the British Navy did.
Plus, have fun finding a port that will take a ship without a flag when you need to get repairs.
Who says I won't have a flag? I'll run it up when I need repairs. However, if I'm spending half a billion pounds, I might as well buy myself a helicopter and some mechanics too.
Anyway, the entire scenario is rediculous, because I don't have half a billion pounds, and I don't go toddling around in my container-ship cum aircraft carrier shooting russian-made supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles at errant naval warships.
Considering you'd have to fly under someone's flag or risk getting sunk immediately by every country's navy as a pirate vessel, you'd need a country to sail under where gambling was legal anyway. (Which, incidentally, includes the US. Gambling is legal in 'the US', it's just not legal in most states.)
If you're spending eight digits on your boat, you can afford to spend a couple million bucks to buy some SS-N-25 and P-800 surplus russian anti-ship missiles. Anything that's not an aircraft carrier battlegroup will be toast, and even some of those won't want to engage you without significant air support.
Slashdot Mirror
That, and a conviction of perjury.
Both options rely on security through obscurity, however. Why else would you be trying to hide your private key?
The only difference anywhere is how abstract your obscurity is.
The problem why nobody does it is because even if you're completely legally in the clear... and they sue you... you're still out legal fees. And you have to wait for a court date and all that. It's really just a total mess, which is why everyone reccomends against it so strongly.
It's not illegal, although it may be libelous. (slanderous, depending.) It can be the basis for such a lawsuit. However, that doesn't alter the fact that if what you say is the truth, there's not a damn thing they'll win on against you.
Because the last time the Queen ordered the government to invade a country was when, exactly, again? Oh... humm... 1648? The Thirty Years War? 1337, the Hundred Years War?
Er, no. They're not. They're full of it, and so are you. I'm not even using the RTM- this is RC1, and it still can whip through every modern game in my arsenal with absolutely no trouble at all.
Bull. Shit. It runs just fine on my Core 2 Duo T2400 with 2GB RAM and Intel GMA 950, that's Windows Vista Ultimate with all Aero mods turned on. It flies, and it ran great when this laptop had 1 GB. Anybody who says you need 4 GB minimum is on crack.
Not to be pedantic, but there is a difference between 'unreasonable search and seizure' and 'unlawful search and seizure'. In many cases, the government is held to the higher standard of 'unreasonable', but to my knowledge, citizens are only held to 'unlawful'. For example, in Catz (I think), the government wasn't allowed to use evidence they had gained from eavsdropping- that was 'unreasonable'. It certainly, however, wasn't illegal.
Haha, flamebait now. When I saw it, it was at + insightfult.
Anyway, there's a reason we have written agreements- and the reason is so people don't walk all over them. If that's entitlement, damn right, mark me liberal!
Don't give them ideas. Air travel's bad enough as it is. If you absolutely must fly, don't fly out of international airports- fly out of local trans-border/civil aviation ones, where security is much more lax.
He also pointed out that's only 2,000 dollars a month. Not at all excessive. Anywhere up to 10,000 dollars a month is 'middle class' in the US. Still and all, however, it's not an awful salary, and they're certainly not paying them peanuts.
I'm not an american, you insensitive clod!
Why is this important to note? Does it materially alter his life in any way? Will the world come crumbing to a halt if he can't view, exactly, the pieces of code that he executes?
No. Chances are, he really doesn't give a damn one way or another. Chances are, even, that he never even noticed.
So who cares?
There are two types of people on Slashdot- those who are slavishly devoted to Open Source and Free Software and those who want to get work done. I would even go so far as to argue that in a vast majority of the cases, they're mutually exclusive classifications.
Actually, it's interesting- did you see the article posted on slashdot a little while ago about the iPhone euphoria wearing off?
Anyway, don't get me wrong- I may buy an iPhone when I can get one unlocked off E-bay, just because it looks damn cool. But I'll wait for the reviews to tell me if it's as awesome as Apple says it is.
It has at least two buttons that I can see, and there's one very good reason for having buttons (If you've seen a picture of the Universal, you'll know that when folded out like an iPhone it also does not have as many buttons as your typical smartphone on the face)- that reason is that this is a phone. I want to be able to take it off my belt, hit answer, and put it to my ear without needing to worry about looking at the screen and finding the answer soft-key. (the Universal has two buttons on the hinge that are accessible no matter how the device is folded, and when using it in an in-between state, there are two keys on the keyboard.)
Actually, I don't think it has enough buttons. I'd prefer at least four more buttons on the primary device face around the screen, and at minimum a pair of softkey buttons when the device is folded back. The fact is, the 'full compliment of physical keys' are the keyboard, and under normal operation, they remain folded away out of sight and out of mind, leaving the edge buttons and the directional pad on the face.
What I am arguing is simply that Apple has a penchant for creating what are undoubtedly inferior devices, and through some magic trick that I don't understand (which is why Apple is a multi-billion dollar company and I'm not) making them sell tremendously well. This is just one more of those devices, and, like most Apple products, I always hope it will fall on its face- Apple is years late to the party and with an inferior product, as always.
The iPod is the perfect example. It is, plain and simple, an inferior product technologically speaking. The interface design is not massively amazing. And yet it's captured the lions share of the MP3 player market. Does this make me angry? Not really. It makes me sad that so many people are so stupid as to buy what Apple is selling.
(Actually, to put this in perspective, I have nothing against their computer business. I've used and supported OSX, and while I personally don't like it, (it looks too flashy for me, I prefer the Windows 2000 interface) it's a competently designed operating system, for the most part. It has it's quirks, but so does anything else. When it came time to buy my laptop, I found the one with the best price performance, be it Apple or PC. (It happened to be a HP Pavillion that had undergone a massive price cut and still came with 2GBs of RAM standard and 120 GB of HDD space, so I'm happy).
Because you apparently cannot read, the fact that I bought it unlocked was what caused the price to skyrocket. The price on contract was approximately the same as the iPhone at the time. Moreover, the entire point of my argument was that the iPhone does not break the previous mold of phone design. Aside from the size and the weight, (and the featureset, which is better on my phone), the iPhone is pretty much exactly what we've had before. Adding an Apple trademark to it does not magically make it break the mode of previous devices, nor does making it slightly (not much, admittedly) slimmer and a bit lighter. A lot of my friends and relatives have used my phone. None of them has complained about the interface. A lot of them have complained it's like holding a brick to their faces, though, but the iPhone doesn't seem in a place to much change that, given that the size of it is roughly comparable.
It probably fell off a truck. I picked it up from China on ebay, total no-name brand. So what?
Ah, three strawmen attack in one paragraph! Nowhere did I say WM5 was the best interface ever- I said, correctly, that it's extremely simple, intuitive, and does everything that Apple's demo did just as easily. My spelling is not at issue here, and thirdly, allow me to point this out to you: Apple's music players are some of the worst, hardware-for-cost wise availible on the market at the moment. An example? I bought what amounts to a Nano-knockoff for a friend a whle back. Cost me 60 bucks, including shipping, for 8 GB of storage. Looks identical to a Nano on the outside, except that it's a hell of a lot cheaper, plays all sorts of video, and has a radio tuner in it, too. The interface had a learning curve of about thirty seconds. Comparing it hand to hand with a nano, one really couldn't tell the difference in interface use or outside appearance- the non-apple one was just a lot cheaper and had more features.
You apparently didn't look very hard. Activating 802.11g speed is as simple as flipping a software switch, and, unlike Engadget's report of the iPhone, is absolutely uncrippled- I decide when and where to turn it off, and what it connects to, and what I can donwload with it. Moreover, sure it's bulkier and heavier- I just said it was two years old. It has an integrated keyboard, two cameras, stereo speakers and a bunch of other features that the iPhone does not. It'd expect it to be bigger, although actually it's quite similar to the iPhone in many ways (ie, the dimensions of the Universal I'm holding are... 4.9 x 3.2 x .85 inches. I can't tell you exactly the weight, because I don't have a scale handy, but I imagine it weighs more than 4.8 ounces by about that much again, if not slightly more.)
Except you mis-stated the featureset of the Universal, and frankly, (although I expect no less from a marketing presentation) Jobs apparently highly overstated the features availible on the iPhone. it's no revolution, just like the iPod was no revolution. The only advantage it possesses is marketing and 'cool' factor.
You made that clear
It's an HTC Universal, released in 3Q 2005- sometime in April-June, I'm not sure when. That will make it two years old when the iPhone is released in the mainland US. Look up the spec sheet sometime- 3G/UMTS, VGA screen, etc.
So... we've both seen the same Apple Demo... and you haven't held my phone... and you claim I'm lying. That's intelligent debating right there! The interface is the standard WM5 interface- I press the green phone-answer button which always brings you straight into the phone screen (or picks up the call, obviously, if it's ringing) and then dial the number from the dialpad, or press contacts to enter the contacts screen. I press the red-end button to end a call or return to the desktop from anywhere. It's about as simple as the phone can get without a dedicated phone keyboard. Not to mention the fact that my phone ALSO has a touch screen, and the interface is as simple as I've seen- plus, it's skinable! You could turn it into Apple's interface, if you felt like it.
The things Jobs did in his demo- sending a picture via e-mail while in a call- is things I've been able to do on my phone forever, it's built straight into the OS. I expect this sort of thing from my phone. Those are basic things, not magic techniques that have never been applied before.
Now I know you're just an idiot. Apple's MP3 players are rediculously horrible compared to the competition. Anyone with half a brain shouldn't use one, and I advise all my friends not to get one. Me? I just play music... from my phone! (Which, by the way, gets approximately 18 hours of battery life playing music when I I set it into music mode, with processor and radios offline, and it gets approximately 5 hours of wifi, phone, and full use.
Frankly, it's not a good phone. The phone I carry now is better in almost every respect (screen resolution, wireless systems, battery life) and, though it may be a little thicker and most certainly a little heavier, is it worth losing 3G and VGA to get something that looks prettier? Not really.
I was on the edge of my seat, too, watching Jobs unveil it at CES via Engadget. But after the euphoria of this actually being an apple product I wanted to own wore off, I took a good hard look at it- and came to the conclusion that this product is inferior to my current phone in almost every way, and that converting to it would involve a total reworking of how I now work with my phone and computer.
It's just not worth it. Maybe if the phone cost 199, 299, I'd buy it to suppliment my daily-driver as an Ipod-ish thing. But for 599+ contract, it's too expensive, and too inferior.
I hope the apple fanbois realize that my phone, two years old, stomps all over Apple's iPhone (which hasen't even been released yet) as a phone, not to mention as a portable computing appliance.
Well, it's unlikely to be 'try to sink their ship'. It'd be 'send their ship straight to the bottom without delay', because the P-800 is a supersonic anti-ship cruise missile. Assuming they close to a kilometer to hail and then fire warning shots, your missile is going to go from launch to having sunk them in about one and a half seconds- far too fast for them to respond even if they wanted to. However, it's not a good idea...
Indeed. And I fly my own flag. Too bad.
Um, did you read the article about Sealand? That's exactly what the British Navy did.
Who says I won't have a flag? I'll run it up when I need repairs. However, if I'm spending half a billion pounds, I might as well buy myself a helicopter and some mechanics too.
Anyway, the entire scenario is rediculous, because I don't have half a billion pounds, and I don't go toddling around in my container-ship cum aircraft carrier shooting russian-made supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles at errant naval warships.
I'm pretty sure the amount of armour you'd require on a jumbo jet to do that would ensure the thing would never take off.
All the nationals live in England anyway, so England already does.
If you're spending eight digits on your boat, you can afford to spend a couple million bucks to buy some SS-N-25 and P-800 surplus russian anti-ship missiles. Anything that's not an aircraft carrier battlegroup will be toast, and even some of those won't want to engage you without significant air support.
And pirates? Don't make me laugh.
Um... doesn't that require him to have physical access to the server anyway?
And we all know that old maxim- if you have physical access, you have it all.