Ah, one of those are you. Yes, there are scientists on both sides, as well as politicians, and pro capital propaganda machines masquerading as *green* organizations.
As to scientific method, the very foundation of scientific method is skepticism. Scientists come up with a theory and then other scientists immediately try to poke holes in it. Yet, the climate change group immediately demonize anyone that points to the flaws rather than finding ways to get better data.
So...where is the warming that your scientists have been saying that we were supposed to have for the past 25 years when even their own data (the stuff they don't hide) shows at best the temperature holding steady and at worst (for them) growing a bit cooler? Yes. Yes. I know. The record blizzards and cooler temerpatures are the result of warming. Up is down. Red is blue, yada yada yada.
...since the "scientific results" change on a monthly basis, combined with the yearly releases on how the "scientists" are doctoring the data or selectively releasing on the portions that support the result that they want to show - debating is very, very easy. Add to that the other side where scientists are doing the same thing, but support the opposing view, and you get wonderful conflict.
If either side actually released the complete data, with nothing hidden and both sides actually focused on finding the truth about the climate, we *might* be able to actually determine what is going on and if there is anything we can do about it – or even if we should do anything about it. After all, who says that today's climate is the best one for the earth? There are have been very many climate changes in the earth's history. Why do we think we have the right to pick one?
However, since there are people/power/money involved, there will be very few real facts that matter. So, we are back to debate and the people that get paid to do it.
Yep, and it can be cheaper. It is not my problem if other countries choose to screw their citizens and control them with higher energy costs. That is a problem for them to solve. In the US, it is my problem. We are based on freedom (freedom that has been and continues to be seriously eroded) and using taxes to control us is unacceptable to me and to a very large and growing segment of our population.
Striving to keep the cost of fossil fuel down? You must be kidding - or living in a place where they allow for local extraction of fuel and without the taxes on all aspects of the extraction to delivery process. So...you must not be living in the US.
Some other facts are, the iPhone doesn't need a removable battery - that is a red herring and has been proven out by the millions that continue to purchase upgrades to the iPhone rather than go with a new Android phone with a removable battery and the constantly extremely high customer satisfaction rate far above the Android user satisfaction.
Android phones (all the ones that I've seen) require an SD slot because they are so anemic with internal storage.
4G is great except that nagging ability to keep a charge when you use it. And, according to the reviews, except when you are downloading large files (even with the Galaxy S 2, there is no advantage over the speed that the iPhone 4S gets on browser usage - in real life. Solittle speed advantage for very little battery life. That mean that one place where 4G would be terrific – streaming large files like movies – is made moot because you can't watch for long before you battery tanks.
In my opinion, Apple is offering the best real-world experience for the most people. The exception is for the very cash strapped where you can get very, very cheap Android phones instead of a feature phone. However, no one really wants those customers because they don't buy things. They are broke. Do anyone really think that if every adult in Ethiopia had an Android phone that Google and its advertisers would see much financial benefit? (no insult to Ethiopia intended, just a place that came to mind when I think of poor). No they wouldn't. However, you can bet that Google and the Android press would be trumpeting the additional millions of Android handsets in use!
Funny, I use Siri all the time and I have consistently great results. No, not while jogging in the traditional sense. More jogging from one appointment to the next. Advertisements or not, I love what Siri has done for my ability to get things done on the move.
Well, Google was selling it to carriers as little as 6 months ago, so users that bought their device from a carrier like Videotron or Mobilicity are finding themselves without updates a mere 6 months later.
I'm an Apple user, but even I don't see the problem with older phones, that the buyer probably got for "free" with a contract as not being able to run the latest and best OS. There is a price you pay for being on the back-side of the curve.
Even so, I know that there will be complaints. So I am expecting a large gnashing of teeth when iOS 6 is released and all those people that are purchasing the iPhone 3GS now (because it is "free") cannot get the update.
First, I don't see any iPhone/Apple deriding Google products or Androidand I see a lot. I'm sure that there are some (especially her on/.), but then Google/Android has their share of the same type of people.
As to Siri being unpolished, I completely disagree. It is very polished, but does not do everything that it can and will do. Except for the beta tag, it is what I consider to be a very typical Apple first iteration. It does a few things and does them very well. And, as typical with Apple, they will iterate it quickly and it will gain new capabilities as they feel they can release *polished* implementations. Look at their history since the return of Steve Jobs. It is proof of this approach.
I truly wish they had left the "beta" tag off, but it is there. So be it. I can bet that it will retain that tag 1/10th as long as Google Mail retained its beta tag.
BTWthe name calling ("iFans" etc.) just make points you make even when valid, childish. I almost wrote you off as a middle schooler that just doesn't know betterthen I remembered I was posting in/. and thought you might at least be a young professional that just got caught up in the meaningless religious wars.
Are you forgetting that Apple had no scale when the iPod came out? They were one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel. The iMac got them that foot out of the grave, but one mis-step and they would not even have been a footnote in corporate history.
As to functionality, that is precisely what most of the Apple competitors miss. Oh, yes, they put together very full spec sheets, but when the average uses tries to use the device, they cannot operated those functions for a variety of reasons. Apple make things usable. That sells.
Spec sheets only sell to guys on/. and wanna be/.'ers.
Dude, Apple products have had voice control since before Google itself was founded and ages before Android was even a stolen idea on Eric Schimdt's Apple Board Room minutes copy.
Actually, combining Siri with Nuance and then integrating it into the phone in a very polished and high-quality way has made the phone very much more usable to me. Examples include being able to set up appointments, reminders, alarms, send out texts/emails etc. without having to stop walking/driving to my next appointment. As a mobile professional that is very busy, not having to stop for simple items makes my phone hugely more productive for me.
As they further integrate and – more importantly – extend Siri to the iPad and the Mac and to third party developers, I think that my computing life will be changed forever.
As a side note, and not particularly at you, I never hear the Google fans deriding Goggle products that are in beta for literally years. But a first iteration of an Apple product with a beta tag gets hugely slammed. Seems a bit biased to me.
You don't seem to know your history very well. Apple has been doing voice synth and voice control, since at least the early '90's. And, yes, they probably got the idea from Star Trek - so it wasn't their idea. However, typical of Apple to make a concept actually usable. At least typical of Apple with the second coming of Jobs. The Jobs of the first coming and of NeXT, had vision, but didn't know how to only release stuff that was ready for prime time – something that he learned and applied when he returned to run Apple.
First mover and more polish. Apple cares about how smoothly things work together. It is not perfect in doing this, but it is far better than most of the competition.
You are sort of right. We do believe in Jesus as the Christ and our everlasting life. You should look up the definition of the words you use before you use them. The term you used is not what some circles would fall those that have Faith (unless they are ignorant of definitions as you seem to be). There are many other derogatory terms that might be used, but not "gullible", in that context.
Interesting you seem to think that we believers are not open to new information. You are wrong. We are, just not about Jesus - seems that you are the same, but from the opposite direction. Perhaps you will open your mind to the possibility of immortality through the Christ. Perhaps you will overcome the hubris that the search for physical knowledge can lead to in those that do the search without Jesus. Perhaps.
Actually, there is evidence. Not everyone agrees with it, but then not everyone agrees with evidence that there is or is not human generated global climate change.
There is nothing in studying the universe that God provided us with (i.e. science). Nor is faith in God an end to knowledge. As far as science goes, how much of it do you take on faith? As an example, unless you can provide me with some witnesses to the Big Bang, you have to take it on faith that the scientists' theories are correct. There is nothing wrong with faith and all things begin with it (and in my case, end with it).
Excuse me. Exactly how do we "know" anything about a Big Bang? Can you produce the witnesses? Yes, we have some evidence and some theories that seem to make sense, but we are always adjusting what we *thought* we knew based on new evidence all the time. And, for me, that one statement in your other seemingly lucid argument, completely ruined your comment.
No kidding! While LaTeX is fine, I greatly miss FrameMaker for its document processing capabilities. So sad that no one has really replaced it after Adobe bought FrameMaker and killed it – hoping to replace it with InDesign.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, one of those are you. Yes, there are scientists on both sides, as well as politicians, and pro capital propaganda machines masquerading as *green* organizations.
As to scientific method, the very foundation of scientific method is skepticism. Scientists come up with a theory and then other scientists immediately try to poke holes in it. Yet, the climate change group immediately demonize anyone that points to the flaws rather than finding ways to get better data.
So...where is the warming that your scientists have been saying that we were supposed to have for the past 25 years when even their own data (the stuff they don't hide) shows at best the temperature holding steady and at worst (for them) growing a bit cooler? Yes. Yes. I know. The record blizzards and cooler temerpatures are the result of warming. Up is down. Red is blue, yada yada yada.
...since the "scientific results" change on a monthly basis, combined with the yearly releases on how the "scientists" are doctoring the data or selectively releasing on the portions that support the result that they want to show - debating is very, very easy. Add to that the other side where scientists are doing the same thing, but support the opposing view, and you get wonderful conflict.
If either side actually released the complete data, with nothing hidden and both sides actually focused on finding the truth about the climate, we *might* be able to actually determine what is going on and if there is anything we can do about it – or even if we should do anything about it. After all, who says that today's climate is the best one for the earth? There are have been very many climate changes in the earth's history. Why do we think we have the right to pick one?
However, since there are people/power/money involved, there will be very few real facts that matter. So, we are back to debate and the people that get paid to do it.
Yep, and it can be cheaper. It is not my problem if other countries choose to screw their citizens and control them with higher energy costs. That is a problem for them to solve. In the US, it is my problem. We are based on freedom (freedom that has been and continues to be seriously eroded) and using taxes to control us is unacceptable to me and to a very large and growing segment of our population.
Striving to keep the cost of fossil fuel down? You must be kidding - or living in a place where they allow for local extraction of fuel and without the taxes on all aspects of the extraction to delivery process. So...you must not be living in the US.
Hey! Get your facts straight. The sun has nothing to do with global warming. ;-)
I didn't see much of an opinion – just facts.
Some other facts are, the iPhone doesn't need a removable battery - that is a red herring and has been proven out by the millions that continue to purchase upgrades to the iPhone rather than go with a new Android phone with a removable battery and the constantly extremely high customer satisfaction rate far above the Android user satisfaction.
Android phones (all the ones that I've seen) require an SD slot because they are so anemic with internal storage.
4G is great except that nagging ability to keep a charge when you use it. And, according to the reviews, except when you are downloading large files (even with the Galaxy S 2, there is no advantage over the speed that the iPhone 4S gets on browser usage - in real life. Solittle speed advantage for very little battery life. That mean that one place where 4G would be terrific – streaming large files like movies – is made moot because you can't watch for long before you battery tanks.
In my opinion, Apple is offering the best real-world experience for the most people. The exception is for the very cash strapped where you can get very, very cheap Android phones instead of a feature phone. However, no one really wants those customers because they don't buy things. They are broke. Do anyone really think that if every adult in Ethiopia had an Android phone that Google and its advertisers would see much financial benefit? (no insult to Ethiopia intended, just a place that came to mind when I think of poor). No they wouldn't. However, you can bet that Google and the Android press would be trumpeting the additional millions of Android handsets in use!
cue crickets
silence is the best answer when there is no other
Funny, I use Siri all the time and I have consistently great results. No, not while jogging in the traditional sense. More jogging from one appointment to the next. Advertisements or not, I love what Siri has done for my ability to get things done on the move.
the N1 is a fairly old device at this point
Well, Google was selling it to carriers as little as 6 months ago, so users that bought their device from a carrier like Videotron or Mobilicity are finding themselves without updates a mere 6 months later.
I'm an Apple user, but even I don't see the problem with older phones, that the buyer probably got for "free" with a contract as not being able to run the latest and best OS. There is a price you pay for being on the back-side of the curve.
Even so, I know that there will be complaints. So I am expecting a large gnashing of teeth when iOS 6 is released and all those people that are purchasing the iPhone 3GS now (because it is "free") cannot get the update.
Android voice control is not natural language input yet. It will get there but not yet.
First, I don't see any iPhone/Apple deriding Google products or Androidand I see a lot. I'm sure that there are some (especially her on /.), but then Google/Android has their share of the same type of people.
As to Siri being unpolished, I completely disagree. It is very polished, but does not do everything that it can and will do. Except for the beta tag, it is what I consider to be a very typical Apple first iteration. It does a few things and does them very well. And, as typical with Apple, they will iterate it quickly and it will gain new capabilities as they feel they can release *polished* implementations. Look at their history since the return of Steve Jobs. It is proof of this approach.
I truly wish they had left the "beta" tag off, but it is there. So be it. I can bet that it will retain that tag 1/10th as long as Google Mail retained its beta tag.
BTWthe name calling ("iFans" etc.) just make points you make even when valid, childish. I almost wrote you off as a middle schooler that just doesn't know betterthen I remembered I was posting in /. and thought you might at least be a young professional that just got caught up in the meaningless religious wars.
Are you forgetting that Apple had no scale when the iPod came out? They were one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel. The iMac got them that foot out of the grave, but one mis-step and they would not even have been a footnote in corporate history.
As to functionality, that is precisely what most of the Apple competitors miss. Oh, yes, they put together very full spec sheets, but when the average uses tries to use the device, they cannot operated those functions for a variety of reasons. Apple make things usable. That sells.
Spec sheets only sell to guys on /. and wanna be /.'ers.
Dude, Apple products have had voice control since before Google itself was founded and ages before Android was even a stolen idea on Eric Schimdt's Apple Board Room minutes copy.
Actually, combining Siri with Nuance and then integrating it into the phone in a very polished and high-quality way has made the phone very much more usable to me. Examples include being able to set up appointments, reminders, alarms, send out texts/emails etc. without having to stop walking/driving to my next appointment. As a mobile professional that is very busy, not having to stop for simple items makes my phone hugely more productive for me.
As they further integrate and – more importantly – extend Siri to the iPad and the Mac and to third party developers, I think that my computing life will be changed forever.
As a side note, and not particularly at you, I never hear the Google fans deriding Goggle products that are in beta for literally years. But a first iteration of an Apple product with a beta tag gets hugely slammed. Seems a bit biased to me.
I wish I had mod points for you!
You don't seem to know your history very well. Apple has been doing voice synth and voice control, since at least the early '90's. And, yes, they probably got the idea from Star Trek - so it wasn't their idea. However, typical of Apple to make a concept actually usable. At least typical of Apple with the second coming of Jobs. The Jobs of the first coming and of NeXT, had vision, but didn't know how to only release stuff that was ready for prime time – something that he learned and applied when he returned to run Apple.
First mover and more polish. Apple cares about how smoothly things work together. It is not perfect in doing this, but it is far better than most of the competition.
...unfortunately, what they show is only a tablet TV. There is not interactivity. They only watch an interview.
You are sort of right. We do believe in Jesus as the Christ and our everlasting life. You should look up the definition of the words you use before you use them. The term you used is not what some circles would fall those that have Faith (unless they are ignorant of definitions as you seem to be). There are many other derogatory terms that might be used, but not "gullible", in that context.
Interesting you seem to think that we believers are not open to new information. You are wrong. We are, just not about Jesus - seems that you are the same, but from the opposite direction. Perhaps you will open your mind to the possibility of immortality through the Christ. Perhaps you will overcome the hubris that the search for physical knowledge can lead to in those that do the search without Jesus. Perhaps.
Actually, there is evidence. Not everyone agrees with it, but then not everyone agrees with evidence that there is or is not human generated global climate change.
There is nothing in studying the universe that God provided us with (i.e. science). Nor is faith in God an end to knowledge. As far as science goes, how much of it do you take on faith? As an example, unless you can provide me with some witnesses to the Big Bang, you have to take it on faith that the scientists' theories are correct. There is nothing wrong with faith and all things begin with it (and in my case, end with it).
Excellent comment.
If I had mod points, you'd get them.
...we know that time began with the Big Bang...
Excuse me. Exactly how do we "know" anything about a Big Bang? Can you produce the witnesses? Yes, we have some evidence and some theories that seem to make sense, but we are always adjusting what we *thought* we knew based on new evidence all the time. And, for me, that one statement in your other seemingly lucid argument, completely ruined your comment.
No kidding! While LaTeX is fine, I greatly miss FrameMaker for its document processing capabilities. So sad that no one has really replaced it after Adobe bought FrameMaker and killed it – hoping to replace it with InDesign.