I dunno, if you're doing live digital performances that require extensive user interaction, wouldn't you just pack a road-case with dedicated equipment, rather than trying to pack second-rate gear into a vaguely laptop form-factor? Small Wacom tablets are worse than useless, they are counter-productive. Why not just take a regular laptop and a full-sized Wacom tablet (or whatever other specialized devices you may concoct)?
Ummmm... Ogg Vorbis is widely considered to be in violation of several patents, so using Ogg doesn't solve the problem of being held hostage by patent holders, trolls or otherwise.
You can't convert people that wouldn't have bought your game in the first place.
Nonsense. That's what marketing is all about. It's practically the basis of the consumer economic model. You take somebody who isn't a customer, and turn them into a customer.
If somebody is unaware of your product, or not buying because they don't know about some feature - you inform them of the benefits (or cool factor, or whatever). If that's successful, you made a customer. If this is impossible, as you say, then why does advertising exist?
You have yet to give me a good reason why I should accept Apple, or any other group, having control over what I decide to put on a phone I legally own.
I must be missing something.
When did anybody say you must use and accept Apple products? If you don't like it, use something else. Just because other people have different preferences and priorities to you, does not make them wrong. And there's nothing unethical or illegal about what Apple's doing. They are just making a product you can choose to use, or not.
But come on, seriously. You know precisely what comes up with this. Any freeware program that competes with something Apple might want to make pay software for, will instantly be on the blacklist.
Bullshit. Got any evidence for that? Apple has never shut down or strong armed competing software products. And they'd be in big legal trouble is they did.
What is the basis for your comments? It doesn't appear to be grounded in reality.
Nope. He says the phone has that capability. But it's not related to this particular blacklist, which concerns Core Location services. The application blacklist must be somewhere else, not the one Engadget is talking about. Is it too much to ask for some accuracy in reporting?
The blacklist in question does not blacklist applications from running on the phone. It's a registry of applications which are denied access to the "Core Location" service - i.e, when you don't want the phone to use GPS or triangulation data for privacy reasons. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. I don't want apps broadcasting my location without permission.
Except that it doesn't. The blacklist in question does not blacklist applications on the phone. It's a registry of applications which the user denies access to the "Core Location" service - i.e, when you don't want the phone to use GPS or triangulation data for privacy reasons. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. I don't want apps broadcasting my location without permission.
Wrong. You fail to understand/see the major flaw in your argument, that corporations are creations of the state.
Which of course, is bullshit, unless you believe in strange fairytales. Corporations would exist without governments to authorize them. How does Libertarian philosophy prevent them from existing?
That's because the two "teams" aren't different enough ideologically to make it about anything other than winning.
If the two teams were as ideologically opposite as possible, I'm pretty sure it would still be all about winning, and things would be just as vicious and dishonest.
I'm not following the logic that two vastly different political parties would change the nature of politics. Perhaps you could explain how that works?
What modern "democracies" are, are government by media manipulation of the bottom two-thirds of society.
I'm certain that there's plenty of manipulation of the "top third" of society, too. What makes you think that they are immune? Hell, who could ignore the huge corporate contributions to and from the wealthy elites?
Take Libertarians, most people thing Libertarians will allow corporations to run a muck and do whatever they want.
That's because that is exactly what would happen. Libertarian philosophy's end result is corporate domination of the individual. They can claim they believe otherwise, but "pure" Libertarian principles applied to today's society means corporate fascism.
Why must I be the one to move aside? Is it so unreasonable to want just a little bit of respect for helping others?
I never said you "must" do anything.
Who said you were helping anybody else but yourself?
You appear to demand respect. I don't see any reason why this is automatically due, just because you wrote some software.
Why should the very people who are being helped be the ones to realize that they should show at least some respect instead of flaming away blindly?
What makes you think that the people who are "flaming" are the same ones who are being helped? Did you ever stop to think that maybe you are the one being helped by the criticism? Not being criticised by anybody is a sure sign that nobody cares about what you are doing. Criticism is actually a sign that somebody cares.
I dunno how you could be getting this, unless your system is pretty messed up or you have a buggy browser or something. In the linked article, I'm counting around 10-15 words per line of text, not three or four. And that amount is near-perfect, based on scientific research into readability and line-length.
That's actually a very well-deigned web page for its purpose, and the length of the written material. 90% of pages I encounter these days are far worse. The light-gray background is icing on the cake, taking away the harshness of a white background, without inducing the text-burn of dark backgrounds.
Slashdot Mirror
I dunno, if you're doing live digital performances that require extensive user interaction, wouldn't you just pack a road-case with dedicated equipment, rather than trying to pack second-rate gear into a vaguely laptop form-factor? Small Wacom tablets are worse than useless, they are counter-productive. Why not just take a regular laptop and a full-sized Wacom tablet (or whatever other specialized devices you may concoct)?
Holy fucking shit! *sigh*
What? If I'm a band....
If you're a band? If an individual person can be a band, then I think I'd be more alarmed at the genetic mutation involved.
suggests the actions of a loan deranged scientist...
He tried to murder people with anthrax, because he was upset that his student loans hadn't been repaid??
Have you ever listened to a 78? It hisses like a motherfucker. And isn't hiss just a higher-frequency variation of "crackles and pops" anyway?
Ummmm... Ogg Vorbis is widely considered to be in violation of several patents, so using Ogg doesn't solve the problem of being held hostage by patent holders, trolls or otherwise.
You can't convert people that wouldn't have bought your game in the first place.
Nonsense. That's what marketing is all about. It's practically the basis of the consumer economic model. You take somebody who isn't a customer, and turn them into a customer.
If somebody is unaware of your product, or not buying because they don't know about some feature - you inform them of the benefits (or cool factor, or whatever). If that's successful, you made a customer. If this is impossible, as you say, then why does advertising exist?
You have yet to give me a good reason why I should accept Apple, or any other group, having control over what I decide to put on a phone I legally own.
I must be missing something.
When did anybody say you must use and accept Apple products? If you don't like it, use something else. Just because other people have different preferences and priorities to you, does not make them wrong. And there's nothing unethical or illegal about what Apple's doing. They are just making a product you can choose to use, or not.
But come on, seriously. You know precisely what comes up with this. Any freeware program that competes with something Apple might want to make pay software for, will instantly be on the blacklist.
Bullshit. Got any evidence for that? Apple has never shut down or strong armed competing software products. And they'd be in big legal trouble is they did.
What is the basis for your comments? It doesn't appear to be grounded in reality.
How is there anything wrong with offering a useless piece of overpriced tat?
Because it encourages the spread of mediocrity in society. Intelligent people should refuse to indulge in such activities. It should be beneath them.
Nope. He says the phone has that capability. But it's not related to this particular blacklist, which concerns Core Location services. The application blacklist must be somewhere else, not the one Engadget is talking about. Is it too much to ask for some accuracy in reporting?
The blacklist in question does not blacklist applications from running on the phone. It's a registry of applications which are denied access to the "Core Location" service - i.e, when you don't want the phone to use GPS or triangulation data for privacy reasons. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. I don't want apps broadcasting my location without permission.
Except that it doesn't. The blacklist in question does not blacklist applications on the phone. It's a registry of applications which the user denies access to the "Core Location" service - i.e, when you don't want the phone to use GPS or triangulation data for privacy reasons. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. I don't want apps broadcasting my location without permission.
Why is winning better than sportsmanship?
Uhhh... because you win?
But even though that is a timeworn strategy, it isn't sure fire.
He has a timeworm? I think that's pretty unbeatable.
Wrong. You fail to understand/see the major flaw in your argument, that corporations are creations of the state.
Which of course, is bullshit, unless you believe in strange fairytales. Corporations would exist without governments to authorize them. How does Libertarian philosophy prevent them from existing?
That's because the two "teams" aren't different enough ideologically to make it about anything other than winning.
If the two teams were as ideologically opposite as possible, I'm pretty sure it would still be all about winning, and things would be just as vicious and dishonest.
I'm not following the logic that two vastly different political parties would change the nature of politics. Perhaps you could explain how that works?
What modern "democracies" are, are government by media manipulation of the bottom two-thirds of society.
I'm certain that there's plenty of manipulation of the "top third" of society, too. What makes you think that they are immune? Hell, who could ignore the huge corporate contributions to and from the wealthy elites?
Take Libertarians, most people thing Libertarians will allow corporations to run a muck and do whatever they want.
That's because that is exactly what would happen. Libertarian philosophy's end result is corporate domination of the individual. They can claim they believe otherwise, but "pure" Libertarian principles applied to today's society means corporate fascism.
BTW, the term is "run amok," not "run a muck."
Why must I be the one to move aside? Is it so unreasonable to want just a little bit of respect for helping others?
You appear to demand respect. I don't see any reason why this is automatically due, just because you wrote some software.
Why should the very people who are being helped be the ones to realize that they should show at least some respect instead of flaming away blindly?
What makes you think that the people who are "flaming" are the same ones who are being helped? Did you ever stop to think that maybe you are the one being helped by the criticism? Not being criticised by anybody is a sure sign that nobody cares about what you are doing. Criticism is actually a sign that somebody cares.
Especially if people *still* criticize me even after having put so much time and effort into helping them, for free.
Maybe you should do something else with your time, then?
... columns with three or four words per line.
I dunno how you could be getting this, unless your system is pretty messed up or you have a buggy browser or something. In the linked article, I'm counting around 10-15 words per line of text, not three or four. And that amount is near-perfect, based on scientific research into readability and line-length.
That's actually a very well-deigned web page for its purpose, and the length of the written material. 90% of pages I encounter these days are far worse. The light-gray background is icing on the cake, taking away the harshness of a white background, without inducing the text-burn of dark backgrounds.
A long-time practitioner of "creative bookkeeping" and "creative business practices" advocates "creative capitalism." What a shocker.
I'm sure mob bosses would rather people call murder "creative surgery" too.
Wouldn't "copying" or "duplicating" be the technical term? "Xeroxing" is just a variant of a marketing term.
It's Apple. Shouldn't that be: