What the fuck are these so-called "benefits" of a "15 minute open purchase window" that are so obvious and intuitive?
Forget about "the children". Who is so badly damaged as a person that they feel that it's currently just too hard to buy stuff online?
Let's see... I want to spend £10 on some music. So I go to the iTunes Store. Find a song that I like, click on buy, and I'm asked to enter the password for my AppleId. The song downloads. I go on looking for other stuff to buy. Find another song, click on "Buy", and I have to type in my password again. Bugger. I go on looking for more songs. Click on "Buy", and again I have to type in my password. Fuck that.
Maybe it's hard to understand, but the same feature that allows _your_ bloody kids to spend _your_ hard earned money allows _me_ to happily spend _my_ hard earned money on things I like.
... labeling all games with IAPs as rentals and displaying the average cost of being able to keep playing... per hour or something like that?
But most are not rentals. For example, "Candy Crush" with levels 1 to 35 is free. Candy Crush with levels 1 to 50 costs £0.69. Candy Crush with levels 1 to 64 costs £1.38. And so on. There's no rental. Once you paid it's yours. For £1.38 you get a game with 65 levels, which you can download on all your devices and play as long as you like.
The owner will need insurance, but it will be much lower for self driving cars without any manual controls. Even self driving cars with a manual mode will be cheaper, on the assumption that people will drive on auto much of the time.
In the UK, you'd have to consider what a driver with a normal car would be. If you just got your driving license, the cost of insurance is incredibly high. On the other hand, a self driving car with the most inexperienced and reckless driver as a passenger will be just as safe as a self driving car with an experienced and careful driver as passenger. So for young people, the insurance savings will be enormous.
It will be fun figuring out how to game the automatic vehicles. I'm sure they're programmed in some situations to pull aside. All you have to do is figure out what the trigger is. It's like playing with the blind spot sensors on the vehicle in front of yours.
This cars will be driverless, but not passengerless. And they will have lots of cameras taking evidence. So when you collected enough points to lose your license, you'll have to buy a self-driving car yourself.
And a lot of android is open source. And it's used by many parties.
As soon as you put open source code into your product, it's part of your product, and the quality is your responsibility. If you are a small time developer, you can use "Google used it as well, and they didn't find the problem" as an excuse. If you are Google, that excuse doesn't work.
Unless they have some special powers, I suppose the police will have to pay for those ads, just like the regular advertisers do. This would result in the police actively sponsoring these allegedly illegal sites. Can have interesting political repercussions.
You used the word "unless" correctly. So the police isn't going to pay. And who would be suing them?
"Those who can't create, litigate" --- who does this remind you of over last 2-3 years? Funny to see Apple whine about plays outta their OWN playbook
A stupid post replying to an equally stupid post.
I thought Google was the patent troll, trying to get four billion dollars from Microsoft for h.264 related software patents and ending up having to pay Microsoft's bills. And there is Samsung threatened with a 13 billion Euro fine if they don't stop patent trolling in Europe.
In this case, Apple just has bought Beats, and has surely not done anything to infringe on Bose's patents. And from the description of these patents, they seem to be rather concrete and it should be not too difficult to find out if someone is infringing or not.
Trusted by whom? I don't think there's any requirement that the purchaser of the device trust the "trusted" data extractor. IIUC it could become trusted before the customer ever received the device, or anytime it's in for service.
Step 1: Plug iOS device into a Mac.
Step 2: Unlock iOS device.
Step 3: Click on YES when the iOS device asks if it should trust the computer.
The critical part is Step 2, which you can only perform if you know how to unlock the device. In other words, if you know the passcode. But if you know the passcode, then you can do _anything_ with the phone. That's what the passcode is there for.
So basically, this security "expert" found a way for a thief to enter my home through the backdoor, as long as the thief has the keys for my front door.
However, one curie is an awful lot of radiation. You wouldn't go near that. On the other hand, becquerel and curie are measures of "radiation per hour", so "1 trillion becquerel released" doesn't make sense.
I can't get how such an idiotic drivel would be considered "insightful" by anyone.
Did it ever occur to you that the East German government (which was always under considerable pressure from the USSR, and remembering Russian tanks rolling through East Germany), and the East German people didn't quite agree about politics and economy? How does your statement "private property was outlawed" match the fact that in any decent family, as soon as a child was born the parents would order a car for him and her (which, due to long waiting lists, would just be ready for the child's 18th birthday).
The article just claims "cheating". However, cheating happens in different situations. There is cheating on your friends or family or neighbours, and there is cheating on authorities.
In East Germany, the authorities were out to get you. Spying on you. Trying to catch you out. Your neighbours on the other hand were the people that you had to rely on and that had to rely on you. A person coming to you and asking questions was highly suspicious and probably up to no good. Everyone would lie to them. But not to your friends and neighbours.
That's probably still there, so if some scientists will come and ask questions, whatever the questions, nobody raised in East Germany will have any problem lying to them. Will they cheat to take advantage of their neighbours? I doubt it.
I mean, if they were laid off, then that tends to mean that they *can't* be hired back on... at least not immediately. My understanding is that "laid off" means that the person is being let go because there isn't enough work to justify paying them, so how could they even *think* of hiring back anyone?
Of course a company can hire back fired employees. It could be seen as an admission that the firing shouldn't have happened and was wrong, but there is nothing wrong with the hiring. Especially since it would at least partially fix the wrong that happened with the firing.
A tiny step further: If the employer has no money, make their customers pay the fine. Suddenly the customer has much less reason to buy from someone who is cheap because they employ cheap labour.
I bet jobs growth has increased because the delta between minimum wage in those regions and unemployment is great enough to motivate folks to get jobs. This will stabilize in a short time and I think jobs growth will stall and stagnate.
That may be true, but there is a difference between jobs and job growth. Job growth in one year means there are more jobs. Forever.
One feature of the 68k to PowerPC transition was that they had software emulation for the 68k. The PowerPC was able to emulate the 68k sufficiently that most software would still run on the new hardware. This emulation was good enough that most applications performed on par with the older native platforms.
The 110 MHz PowerPC was at the time the fastest machine for running 68K code. At the time there were actually Atari users who bought a PowerPC Mac + Atari emulator because it was the fastest Atari computer that you could buy for any money.
Errr, yeah, but they could have just used Intel chips like everyone else. Ultimately it would have given better performance, saved themselves a lot of pain in switch over, and put themselves ahead of the curve selling to people who wanted to dual boot. So did IBM save them or cripple them?
As a result, Apple had the more POWERful chips for many years. They avoided the Pentium debacle completely. Pentium M was the first sane chip that Intel produced, and Apple got in with the Core Duo - just when the whole world was screaming how for ahead AMD was, and just before Intel turned things around.
Not an expert in OS design details, but I'm quite surprised there exists an OS which newly hands out the same PID a very recent process had. Do not PIDs monotonically increase until they wrap around?
The suicide candidate (he is not an attacker, the damage is entirely self-inflicted) intentionally created 65,534 other processes in between.
This is not a problem where an outside attacker can successfully attack the software. It is a problem where a malicious developer can attack his or her own software. So the vulnerability is not that an attacker can shoot at me with a gun, the vulnerability is that I can use my own gun to shoot myself in the foot. But only if I construct a clever framework that causes the anti-shoot-in-the-own-foot measures provided by the gun to be blocked.
Most EULAs have been found to be non-binding in court...
Please give an example.
What's true is that if the EULA says "you may do X only if you do Y", then nobody can force you to do Y, but then you also don't have the right to do X. If you have done X already, you have the choice of deciding whether you do Y, or whether you did X without permission. Whatever is better for you.
Well they were doing that when I was a kid in the UK 40 years ago.
However, it is only in the last ten years that they changed from German grapes that need less sun to French ones that need a lot more sun and that wouldn't have produced any wine when you were a kid.
It is a wonderful thing to tell everyone else how to behave, shame them when they deviate from your plan, and then do the opposite privately. It is what humans have aspired to for thousands of years.
Fact is that whatever I personally do has not measurable effect on the climate. Every person individually is better off not worrying about the climate and to go on consuming. Most people also know that there would be an improvement if _everybody_ changed their behaviour.
The logical consequence is that behaviour change must be forced through legislation, taxes etc. And every rational person should agree to that.
"we haven't worked with govt agencies, and no govt agency created code or hardware exists in our devices or servers. the govt has never had, or will ever have, access to our servers."
Which would all be obviously false. For example, Apple will regularly work together with the FTC. The open source code that Apple uses comes from all kinds of places, you can bet there is some created by a government agency. And every government employee can get an Apple Id and get access to the App Store or iCloud servers.
Slashdot Mirror
What the fuck are these so-called "benefits" of a "15 minute open purchase window" that are so obvious and intuitive?
Forget about "the children". Who is so badly damaged as a person that they feel that it's currently just too hard to buy stuff online?
Let's see... I want to spend £10 on some music. So I go to the iTunes Store. Find a song that I like, click on buy, and I'm asked to enter the password for my AppleId. The song downloads. I go on looking for other stuff to buy. Find another song, click on "Buy", and I have to type in my password again. Bugger. I go on looking for more songs. Click on "Buy", and again I have to type in my password. Fuck that.
Maybe it's hard to understand, but the same feature that allows _your_ bloody kids to spend _your_ hard earned money allows _me_ to happily spend _my_ hard earned money on things I like.
... labeling all games with IAPs as rentals and displaying the average cost of being able to keep playing... per hour or something like that?
But most are not rentals. For example, "Candy Crush" with levels 1 to 35 is free. Candy Crush with levels 1 to 50 costs £0.69. Candy Crush with levels 1 to 64 costs £1.38. And so on. There's no rental. Once you paid it's yours. For £1.38 you get a game with 65 levels, which you can download on all your devices and play as long as you like.
The owner will need insurance, but it will be much lower for self driving cars without any manual controls. Even self driving cars with a manual mode will be cheaper, on the assumption that people will drive on auto much of the time.
In the UK, you'd have to consider what a driver with a normal car would be. If you just got your driving license, the cost of insurance is incredibly high. On the other hand, a self driving car with the most inexperienced and reckless driver as a passenger will be just as safe as a self driving car with an experienced and careful driver as passenger. So for young people, the insurance savings will be enormous.
It will be fun figuring out how to game the automatic vehicles. I'm sure they're programmed in some situations to pull aside. All you have to do is figure out what the trigger is. It's like playing with the blind spot sensors on the vehicle in front of yours.
This cars will be driverless, but not passengerless. And they will have lots of cameras taking evidence. So when you collected enough points to lose your license, you'll have to buy a self-driving car yourself.
And a lot of android is open source. And it's used by many parties.
As soon as you put open source code into your product, it's part of your product, and the quality is your responsibility. If you are a small time developer, you can use "Google used it as well, and they didn't find the problem" as an excuse. If you are Google, that excuse doesn't work.
Unless they have some special powers, I suppose the police will have to pay for those ads, just like the regular advertisers do. This would result in the police actively sponsoring these allegedly illegal sites. Can have interesting political repercussions.
You used the word "unless" correctly. So the police isn't going to pay. And who would be suing them?
He's not excluded, there's the paralympics for people like that.
You are using very inclusionary words here. Not.
"Those who can't create, litigate" --- who does this remind you of over last 2-3 years? Funny to see Apple whine about plays outta their OWN playbook
A stupid post replying to an equally stupid post.
I thought Google was the patent troll, trying to get four billion dollars from Microsoft for h.264 related software patents and ending up having to pay Microsoft's bills. And there is Samsung threatened with a 13 billion Euro fine if they don't stop patent trolling in Europe.
In this case, Apple just has bought Beats, and has surely not done anything to infringe on Bose's patents. And from the description of these patents, they seem to be rather concrete and it should be not too difficult to find out if someone is infringing or not.
Trusted by whom? I don't think there's any requirement that the purchaser of the device trust the "trusted" data extractor. IIUC it could become trusted before the customer ever received the device, or anytime it's in for service.
Step 1: Plug iOS device into a Mac.
Step 2: Unlock iOS device.
Step 3: Click on YES when the iOS device asks if it should trust the computer.
The critical part is Step 2, which you can only perform if you know how to unlock the device. In other words, if you know the passcode. But if you know the passcode, then you can do _anything_ with the phone. That's what the passcode is there for.
So basically, this security "expert" found a way for a thief to enter my home through the backdoor, as long as the thief has the keys for my front door.
So....is that bad?
One becquerel = 27 pico curie.
One trillion becquerel = 27 curie.
Sounds a lot less frightening now.
However, one curie is an awful lot of radiation. You wouldn't go near that. On the other hand, becquerel and curie are measures of "radiation per hour", so "1 trillion becquerel released" doesn't make sense.
I can't get how such an idiotic drivel would be considered "insightful" by anyone.
Did it ever occur to you that the East German government (which was always under considerable pressure from the USSR, and remembering Russian tanks rolling through East Germany), and the East German people didn't quite agree about politics and economy? How does your statement "private property was outlawed" match the fact that in any decent family, as soon as a child was born the parents would order a car for him and her (which, due to long waiting lists, would just be ready for the child's 18th birthday).
The article just claims "cheating". However, cheating happens in different situations. There is cheating on your friends or family or neighbours, and there is cheating on authorities.
In East Germany, the authorities were out to get you. Spying on you. Trying to catch you out. Your neighbours on the other hand were the people that you had to rely on and that had to rely on you. A person coming to you and asking questions was highly suspicious and probably up to no good. Everyone would lie to them. But not to your friends and neighbours.
That's probably still there, so if some scientists will come and ask questions, whatever the questions, nobody raised in East Germany will have any problem lying to them. Will they cheat to take advantage of their neighbours? I doubt it.
I mean, if they were laid off, then that tends to mean that they *can't* be hired back on... at least not immediately. My understanding is that "laid off" means that the person is being let go because there isn't enough work to justify paying them, so how could they even *think* of hiring back anyone?
Of course a company can hire back fired employees. It could be seen as an admission that the firing shouldn't have happened and was wrong, but there is nothing wrong with the hiring. Especially since it would at least partially fix the wrong that happened with the firing.
A tiny step further: If the employer has no money, make their customers pay the fine. Suddenly the customer has much less reason to buy from someone who is cheap because they employ cheap labour.
I bet jobs growth has increased because the delta between minimum wage in those regions and unemployment is great enough to motivate folks to get jobs. This will stabilize in a short time and I think jobs growth will stall and stagnate.
That may be true, but there is a difference between jobs and job growth. Job growth in one year means there are more jobs. Forever.
One feature of the 68k to PowerPC transition was that they had software emulation for the 68k. The PowerPC was able to emulate the 68k sufficiently that most software would still run on the new hardware. This emulation was good enough that most applications performed on par with the older native platforms.
The 110 MHz PowerPC was at the time the fastest machine for running 68K code. At the time there were actually Atari users who bought a PowerPC Mac + Atari emulator because it was the fastest Atari computer that you could buy for any money.
Errr, yeah, but they could have just used Intel chips like everyone else. Ultimately it would have given better performance, saved themselves a lot of pain in switch over, and put themselves ahead of the curve selling to people who wanted to dual boot. So did IBM save them or cripple them?
As a result, Apple had the more POWERful chips for many years. They avoided the Pentium debacle completely. Pentium M was the first sane chip that Intel produced, and Apple got in with the Core Duo - just when the whole world was screaming how for ahead AMD was, and just before Intel turned things around.
Not an expert in OS design details, but I'm quite surprised there exists an OS which newly hands out the same PID a very recent process had. Do not PIDs monotonically increase until they wrap around?
The suicide candidate (he is not an attacker, the damage is entirely self-inflicted) intentionally created 65,534 other processes in between.
Old people drive far fewer miles then most.
They are as dangerous as teenagers on a per mile driven basis.
And your evidence for that is what?
This is not a problem where an outside attacker can successfully attack the software. It is a problem where a malicious developer can attack his or her own software. So the vulnerability is not that an attacker can shoot at me with a gun, the vulnerability is that I can use my own gun to shoot myself in the foot. But only if I construct a clever framework that causes the anti-shoot-in-the-own-foot measures provided by the gun to be blocked.
Most EULAs have been found to be non-binding in court...
Please give an example.
What's true is that if the EULA says "you may do X only if you do Y", then nobody can force you to do Y, but then you also don't have the right to do X. If you have done X already, you have the choice of deciding whether you do Y, or whether you did X without permission. Whatever is better for you.
He was paid 25,000 euros.
What an idiot. Destroying your career and going to jail for 25,000 euros for someone in a western country is pure idiocy.
Well they were doing that when I was a kid in the UK 40 years ago.
However, it is only in the last ten years that they changed from German grapes that need less sun to French ones that need a lot more sun and that wouldn't have produced any wine when you were a kid.
It is a wonderful thing to tell everyone else how to behave, shame them when they deviate from your plan, and then do the opposite privately. It is what humans have aspired to for thousands of years.
Fact is that whatever I personally do has not measurable effect on the climate. Every person individually is better off not worrying about the climate and to go on consuming. Most people also know that there would be an improvement if _everybody_ changed their behaviour.
The logical consequence is that behaviour change must be forced through legislation, taxes etc. And every rational person should agree to that.
"we haven't worked with govt agencies, and no govt agency created code or hardware exists in our devices or servers. the govt has never had, or will ever have, access to our servers."
Which would all be obviously false. For example, Apple will regularly work together with the FTC. The open source code that Apple uses comes from all kinds of places, you can bet there is some created by a government agency. And every government employee can get an Apple Id and get access to the App Store or iCloud servers.