I don't think dual-booting, running a VM or anything like that is necessary. It will just make me sit and wait on my phone. Simply having segregated address books is enough. When I receive a text message, if the sender is in my personal address book, then it is kept seperate.
Though I agree with the OP that even with smartphones, basic things are being overlooked.
I'd argue the address book has been a basic feature since early cell phones. And yet even on the iPhone 4 (arguably one of the most advanced phones on the planet) I can't manage groups of contacts. I need a third party app to do that for me.
To clarify though, it isn't like they'd be selling your info to random spammers. Currently I have a newspaper subscription to Wired magazine. I pay Wired with a credit card. They have some basic information on me as a subscriber. They use that information to tell advertisers what demographics their readers fall under.
In this scenario I'd have a subscription of Wired on my iPad, Apple would take a large chunk of the revenue, and Wired wouldn't be able to provide demographics to advertisers, hurting them financially.
Apple wanted lock-in and total control with the music industry and got it. Now they're an industry leader and have all the leverage while the magazine industry is going in the toilet.
My personal phone is an iPhone 4, and I use a Blackberry for work. I long assumed I'd hate the virtual keyboard, but I actually prefer it to the Blackberry physical keyboard.
Every cell phone company heavily advertises watching video on their network, but it was video that caused AT&T to yank their unlimited bandwidth and kill it. The second the iPad came out and people wanted to stream video (like AT&T sold them on) they freaked out.
Then again, these are the same companies that asked the government for a hand out in building infrastructure while bragging about profits, pocketed the money, and then still didn't build infrastructure. That is why you can get faster internet and cell phone data plans around the rest of the world.
I keep waiting for the free market to fix this. Shouldn't a competitor come out and win our business by responding to consumer demands and giving us fast access with unlimited data at a good price?
AT&T's network has been exposed. Sprint has a 4G network. Stand apart and keep your unlimited data while AT&T and Verizon remain in the stone age.
WANTING to prosecute, and prosecuting are different things.
And again, the American government can't pressure Sweden to do anything. Sweden is exceedingly neutral and doesn't cave into foreign pressure. Again, see Polanski.
Two seconds ago you insisted that Greenpeace and Amnesty International don't disclose their records. When I demonstrate that your statement is a complete lie you simply said my argument is invalid.
You argue like a five year old. Thankfully I can just hide your posts.
Microsoft is a massive fucking company. The developers who work on IE have absolutely nothing to do with the developers who work on Word or SQL Server.
Honestly, I think that speaks even better of the product that the people who often love to bash Microsoft still support Security Essentials despite that. It really is a good product.
You may have a point that it takes a person with a strong personality to gain people's trust, raise funds, run such an organization, etc.
Steve Jobs is a complete asshole, and it enables him to be wildly successful. (Mod me down for that one as well I suppose, but it really is the damned truth).
I separate the two. I respect the concept of Wikileaks and endorse it. However, I'm still entitled to view Assange as a hypocrite and a douche as an individual.
My church discloses the money they take in and where every penny gets spent. It is a large reason of why I attend that particular church. I value transparency.
Many non-profits are transparent with their funds. Since you asked:
Wikileaks as an organization is not being prosecuted. Assange (who I criticized, not Wikileaks) is being prosecuted for a reason, in Sweden of all places. Sweden is pretty damned famous for being neutral in diplomatic affairs. Sweden is the same country that refuses to extradite Polanski to the US. So please continue your crazy conspiracy notion that the rape charges are due to agents of foreign governments.
Someone has suggested killing Assange as a means to protect national interests. I didn't defend that notion, in fact I argued against it.
The difference between Amnesty International is that they are fairly transparent, and well respected. And Amnesty International (who does also criticize governments and try to expose corruption) has blasted Assange and Wikileaks. Did you know that?
I called Assange a hypocrite because he claims his life's work is about transparency, yet he operates under the guise of total secrecy. Do you want to argue that doesn't make him a hypocrite?
And you're telling me to get a fucking clue? Take two seconds and read up on the shit you want to pretend you know something about.
This is the same Sweden that refused to extradite Polanski, and certainly has no qualms disagreeing with the US government.
Please don't suggest that his arrest warrant in Sweden is proof the government in Sweden is controlled by some master all-powerful US government that can make anyone in the world do what they want. If that fictional reality was at all true, Wikileaks wouldn't have the power to humiliate it.
I took the time to research him and formulate my own opinions, including reading the mailing list above. I was asked for examples, and I provided them. However, I'm not wasting the time to dig through the archives again to provide specific examples here. Arguing with a stranger over whether or not this guy is a douche simply isn't worth it.
Aside from the accusations in Sweden, and the fact that endanger the lives of civlians by refuse to redact names, and his behavior on crypto-mailing lists.
His refusal to wear a condom despite his sexual partners begging that he do precisely that, as he sleeps with multiple strangers in a short period of time is one reason I think he is a douche.
And while he wants to keep informants secret, as that location of his servers (to protect the information) he won't disclose how much money has been donated, how he spends the money, why he doesn't disclose all leaks given to him, etc.
And I've never watched a minute of Fox News. Please stop with the ad hominem attacks. I really get tired of the moment someone disagrees with another on Slashdot, they must be part of some Republican conspiracy of ignorant assholes.
He calls for attention to himself specifically. He has snapped at people who have questioned him. He refuses to disclose details on his finances, where donations go, or how his operation works. For a foundation based on transparency, no one knows why certain leaks are disclosed, and why he refuses to disclose other leaks.
The reports out of Sweden suggest he was angry, confrontational, and intimidated his sexual partners who pleaded with him to wear a condom. When you're sleeping with multiple strangers in a short period and you refuse someone's pleas to ues a condom, you're being willfully irresponsible when it comes to STDs. That alone makes you a douche in my book.
I support transparency, but I get the impression that Assange is a hypocrite and egotistical douche. Assassinate him and you turn him into a hero/martyr. Given that his organization is still fairly secret, it could continue to run without him.
I used to recommend AVG as the free anti-virus solution to people, but Microsoft Security Essentials has a much smaller footprint, it doesn't harass you to upgrade to a paid version, and it has a better detection rate.
AVG isn't particularly great when comparing free or paid products these days.
Now that's out of the way, do we understand the implications yet? Is this suggesting the bacteria might have piggybacked on an meteor? Could it have developed naturally on Earth? How might the arsenic-based DNA affect life forms based on it?
...shifting to brand new, undeveloped technology will produce a product that isn't entirely stable on the first release, but it should get more stable with time?
What would I do without such genius insight? Instead of generalizations, how about you dig into the meat of how it will affect users day to day in the normal workflow of them using their computers?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think dual-booting, running a VM or anything like that is necessary. It will just make me sit and wait on my phone. Simply having segregated address books is enough. When I receive a text message, if the sender is in my personal address book, then it is kept seperate.
Though I agree with the OP that even with smartphones, basic things are being overlooked.
I'd argue the address book has been a basic feature since early cell phones. And yet even on the iPhone 4 (arguably one of the most advanced phones on the planet) I can't manage groups of contacts. I need a third party app to do that for me.
To clarify though, it isn't like they'd be selling your info to random spammers. Currently I have a newspaper subscription to Wired magazine. I pay Wired with a credit card. They have some basic information on me as a subscriber. They use that information to tell advertisers what demographics their readers fall under.
In this scenario I'd have a subscription of Wired on my iPad, Apple would take a large chunk of the revenue, and Wired wouldn't be able to provide demographics to advertisers, hurting them financially.
I'm assuming they intentionally leaked the bugged game to torrent sites, etc.
Don't presume to put words in my mouth.
Thanks.
I didn't suggest Apple was in the right, or a good company. I suggested they have leverage.
Apple wanted lock-in and total control with the music industry and got it. Now they're an industry leader and have all the leverage while the magazine industry is going in the toilet.
My personal phone is an iPhone 4, and I use a Blackberry for work. I long assumed I'd hate the virtual keyboard, but I actually prefer it to the Blackberry physical keyboard.
http://www.geekosystem.com/verizon-unlimited-data-ending/
Verizon is killing off their unlimited data plans and actively working to switch over all their existing customers.
Every cell phone company heavily advertises watching video on their network, but it was video that caused AT&T to yank their unlimited bandwidth and kill it. The second the iPad came out and people wanted to stream video (like AT&T sold them on) they freaked out.
Then again, these are the same companies that asked the government for a hand out in building infrastructure while bragging about profits, pocketed the money, and then still didn't build infrastructure. That is why you can get faster internet and cell phone data plans around the rest of the world.
I keep waiting for the free market to fix this. Shouldn't a competitor come out and win our business by responding to consumer demands and giving us fast access with unlimited data at a good price?
AT&T's network has been exposed. Sprint has a 4G network. Stand apart and keep your unlimited data while AT&T and Verizon remain in the stone age.
Really?
Wikileaks =/= Assange
Just like Microsoft =/= Bill Gates. In fact, Microsoft continued chugging on along after Gates left.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/prosecute
WANTING to prosecute, and prosecuting are different things.
And again, the American government can't pressure Sweden to do anything. Sweden is exceedingly neutral and doesn't cave into foreign pressure. Again, see Polanski.
Two seconds ago you insisted that Greenpeace and Amnesty International don't disclose their records. When I demonstrate that your statement is a complete lie you simply said my argument is invalid.
You argue like a five year old. Thankfully I can just hide your posts.
Problem solved.
Microsoft is a massive fucking company. The developers who work on IE have absolutely nothing to do with the developers who work on Word or SQL Server.
Honestly, I think that speaks even better of the product that the people who often love to bash Microsoft still support Security Essentials despite that. It really is a good product.
You may have a point that it takes a person with a strong personality to gain people's trust, raise funds, run such an organization, etc.
Steve Jobs is a complete asshole, and it enables him to be wildly successful. (Mod me down for that one as well I suppose, but it really is the damned truth).
I separate the two. I respect the concept of Wikileaks and endorse it. However, I'm still entitled to view Assange as a hypocrite and a douche as an individual.
My church discloses the money they take in and where every penny gets spent. It is a large reason of why I attend that particular church. I value transparency.
Many non-profits are transparent with their funds. Since you asked:
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/about/reports/
http://www.amnesty.org/en/who-we-are/accountability/financial-reports
Wikileaks as an organization is not being prosecuted. Assange (who I criticized, not Wikileaks) is being prosecuted for a reason, in Sweden of all places. Sweden is pretty damned famous for being neutral in diplomatic affairs. Sweden is the same country that refuses to extradite Polanski to the US. So please continue your crazy conspiracy notion that the rape charges are due to agents of foreign governments.
Someone has suggested killing Assange as a means to protect national interests. I didn't defend that notion, in fact I argued against it.
The difference between Amnesty International is that they are fairly transparent, and well respected. And Amnesty International (who does also criticize governments and try to expose corruption) has blasted Assange and Wikileaks. Did you know that?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/10/amnesty-international-hum_n_677048.html
I called Assange a hypocrite because he claims his life's work is about transparency, yet he operates under the guise of total secrecy. Do you want to argue that doesn't make him a hypocrite?
And you're telling me to get a fucking clue? Take two seconds and read up on the shit you want to pretend you know something about.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/10/amnesty-international-hum_n_677048.html
This is the same Sweden that refused to extradite Polanski, and certainly has no qualms disagreeing with the US government.
Please don't suggest that his arrest warrant in Sweden is proof the government in Sweden is controlled by some master all-powerful US government that can make anyone in the world do what they want. If that fictional reality was at all true, Wikileaks wouldn't have the power to humiliate it.
I took the time to research him and formulate my own opinions, including reading the mailing list above. I was asked for examples, and I provided them. However, I'm not wasting the time to dig through the archives again to provide specific examples here. Arguing with a stranger over whether or not this guy is a douche simply isn't worth it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/10/amnesty-international-hum_n_677048.html
http://cryptome.org/0001/assange-cpunks.htm
And there are the rape charges.
The hypocrisy is immediately evident in how every facet of Wikileaks is secret, as an organization dedicated to transparency.
Aside from the accusations in Sweden, and the fact that endanger the lives of civlians by refuse to redact names, and his behavior on crypto-mailing lists.
http://cryptome.org/0001/assange-cpunks.htm
His refusal to wear a condom despite his sexual partners begging that he do precisely that, as he sleeps with multiple strangers in a short period of time is one reason I think he is a douche.
And while he wants to keep informants secret, as that location of his servers (to protect the information) he won't disclose how much money has been donated, how he spends the money, why he doesn't disclose all leaks given to him, etc.
And I've never watched a minute of Fox News. Please stop with the ad hominem attacks. I really get tired of the moment someone disagrees with another on Slashdot, they must be part of some Republican conspiracy of ignorant assholes.
He calls for attention to himself specifically. He has snapped at people who have questioned him. He refuses to disclose details on his finances, where donations go, or how his operation works. For a foundation based on transparency, no one knows why certain leaks are disclosed, and why he refuses to disclose other leaks.
The reports out of Sweden suggest he was angry, confrontational, and intimidated his sexual partners who pleaded with him to wear a condom. When you're sleeping with multiple strangers in a short period and you refuse someone's pleas to ues a condom, you're being willfully irresponsible when it comes to STDs. That alone makes you a douche in my book.
I support transparency, but I get the impression that Assange is a hypocrite and egotistical douche. Assassinate him and you turn him into a hero/martyr. Given that his organization is still fairly secret, it could continue to run without him.
I used to recommend AVG as the free anti-virus solution to people, but Microsoft Security Essentials has a much smaller footprint, it doesn't harass you to upgrade to a paid version, and it has a better detection rate.
AVG isn't particularly great when comparing free or paid products these days.
I for one welcome our new arsenic overlords.
Now that's out of the way, do we understand the implications yet? Is this suggesting the bacteria might have piggybacked on an meteor? Could it have developed naturally on Earth? How might the arsenic-based DNA affect life forms based on it?
Isn't a Wayland a funded Red Hat project? It would look bad if Ubuntu got all the fame and glory for it while Fedora wasn't even using it.
...shifting to brand new, undeveloped technology will produce a product that isn't entirely stable on the first release, but it should get more stable with time?
What would I do without such genius insight? Instead of generalizations, how about you dig into the meat of how it will affect users day to day in the normal workflow of them using their computers?