GP is correct. It is not protectionism that keeps confidential data from here in the UK heading your way. It is clearly and specifically the fact that you have less regard for privacy than is generally expected of a developed democratic country.
I have been told here on/. that this is because companies are obliged to squeeze every last penny penny out of their assets ore its officers will find themselves on the end of some sort of legal action. Is it true that if a company does not reserve the right to sell my details to every advertiser it can, they will be in trouble?
You are aware that the earths spin is not centred on the magnetic poles. Our biggest heat source (the sun) is most effective above equatorial regions. These are defined by the earths rotation which has not moved that much in the entirety of human existence.
If some places have got hotter and others cooler because of climate change, that is in keeping with what has been expected. I just don't recall being told which areas will get hotter and which cooler - except by Hollywood...
People in the US often have a different attitude to CCTV then many people on this side of the pond.
You may see CCTV as an invasion of privacy. It actually varies here.
I work in a hospital. There are a lot of cameras around here. I have never come across anyone who works here who does not want them. Most people actually want more. They are there for our protection. You don't get them in the wards, operating theatres, toilets. You get them in public areas like corridors, A&E, waiting areas car parks and so on. They can be used to send people to areas where trouble might occur. They can be used to record events that need police or legal action and so on.
This has to be similar to CCTV in taxis. It could be used to deter (There are signs about it) and it can be used to prosecute. It might prosecute a taxi driver for attacking a passenger but is more likely to be used for the misdeeds of passengers.. I know taxi drivers like having CCTV. They would probably like it more if it was free but that's human. We just need councils keeping their noses out where they are not needed.
Google+ and FB are aiming at very different groups of users. In the same way Twitter is not competing with FB either.
Twitter is not even really social media. It is more of an RSS alternative.
FB is pretty much the definitive social media. People keep track of their friends families etc. There is meaningful content there but it is not really what it is there for.
G+ is primarily aimed at finding information and discussing it with people. It is much more geared to linking people with complete strangers. That is why the linking is asymetric. X may wish to find out about someone but that someone does not need to know about X.
Someone could do a survey. "What % of your contacts have you actually physically met?"
I suspect that Twitter will be very low, FB will be higher - much higher for people over 20. G+ will be lower.
Last year, I went from an HTC Hero to a Galaxy SII. Just about everything was a great improvement. The only physical problem I had was that it is Too thin. It was not quite enough of a handful. I tried out a protective case but it was a bit of a nuisance and I am not sure how much protection this kind of glass needs anyway.
The cure also solved a standard smartphone problem - battery life. I bought a higher capacity battery - 3500 instead of 1650MAH. Because the battery was thicker, I was supplied with a new back.. It is now about the same thickness as an iPhone and better to hold than it was at its previous thinness. I can now GPS and use apps all day and don't need to charge it until bed time.
I disliked phones getting smaller and smaller. I had phones that if I put them to my ear, they didn't reach my cheekbone. The screens were too small and they looked stupid. I now have something that replaces a jacketful of gadgets and they look more like something a grown up would have.
The why have they not sued a company that sold many smartphones, they had the same form format as the iPhone and also various competitors that Apple is either suing or has sued.
Why did they not sue a tablet manufacturer whose product I have under the table here?
The reason is that PalmPilot was using this form factor in the 1990s and Fujitsus product was not long after. Apples attitude is "we invented it, even if people were using it years before that."
They are a bunch of crooks who play the system. They feel that they have enough money to scare off a lot of potential competition. Their problem is that the competition is not being scared off and this is not the first time that a judge has not found in their favour, despite the amount of lawyer money they have. Hopefully, it won't be the last either...
Apple makes a lot more money on its offering than most of the rest put together. It does not hold a candle to Android in terms of volume or existing user base. Apple may still have the edge on non-free apps downloaded but their lead stops there.
A quick Google shows that there have been 200 million new activations so far this year. How does that compare to IOS?
Is that the only PC you use? I have a work laptop. I use it when on call to VPN into work and fix things. It is probably the oldest laptop on our network. I declined a newer prestige device and have a nice desktop that should be less likely to make me unwell.
My employers do not have to waste money on something that is not needed and I get a decent desktop for much less.
According to popular culture, my Galaxy GS2 has more computing power that the entirety of NASA when Apollo 11 landed on the moon. It certainly has more storage and memory than a decent PC I used only a few years ago. I use it for all sorts of things. Yesterday, I even made a phone call on it!:)
I am sitting at my computer typing this comment. I read/. and other interesting stuff all the time on my phone. I read my email on my phone and listen to all sorts of podcasts audio and video. There is no way I am going to use my phone as a PC replacement.
We all know the reasons. I have a bigger phone screen than any iShinyShinyPhone. I have better apps than Apple would let me have and I don't need to Jailbreak it to make it useful. So Why?
Even a screen this big is tiny in comparison to a 15" monitor. A touch screen keyboard, even Swype (or whatever you prefer) is nowhere as good as a $10 keyboard from the supermarket and although pinch-to-zoom is nice even a 10 year old Microsoft mechanical mouse is more accurate and comfortable. Anyone who has a PC probably has better than any of those devices.
Smartphones are like tablets. Very good for media consumption and lightweight gaming but if you actually want to do something a decent PC is required. If you want to blog, code, photo edit, write a book, run FB G+ Twitter and LinkedIn, doing it on a phone screen is hard work. Phones are brilliant for moving about, travelling and for when your ISP decides to go t##sup but the PC has not met its equal - yet...
.... or at the very least a really powerful laptop.
If you get such a laptop and actually want to do any work on it without doing yourself harm (eyestrain, RSI, carpal tunnel etc) you will need the following
Large monitor
Mouse or preferred pointing device
Keyboard
To keep it anywhere reliable and backed up you will need an ethernet connection. This is going to plug a lot of wires into your laptop. You may want a printer connected as well. You would benefit from a port replicator and docking station.
Of course, you could spend a lot less money and get a desktop PC. This will also make it less stealable as well. It is easier for a burglar to steal a laptop. PCs get stolen too but it takes longer.
Suppression of information is pointless.
If people want it to get out, it will.
I don't believe that "information wants to be free" prattle. Information does not want anything. People want information to be free.
The US government can't keep its behaviour secret. Hugely rich football players in the UK can't do it either. Various criminal regimes around the world are trying to keep secrets to stay in power. In the long run, they will fail too and end up in the dustbin of history where they belong. It just takes time.
If they suppress one blog because of some stupid judge, others will pop up somewhere else. If they invent some automated system to look for references, someone will invent an automated system to flood the internet with such references and their system will bog down. It will get out there if people care...
Not an atheist - maybe. I never heard that he claimed to be one. In socially backwards countries that would prevent your being elected. He was elected you know,
I'm not sure what religion he was though. The area he was born in had a lot of Catholics and he was baptised. That doesn't prove what his religion was as an adult though. He certainly used the RC church politically but he also allowed his followers to do some pretty weird things that the Catholics are supposed to be against.
As a non-historian, I would say he was nothing in particular.
Consider the possibility that "then" she actually liked/loved/lusted after/whatever the guy and the Co$ bit was something she weighed against that and it was not as important. Her feelings towards him seem to have changed and so she re-weighs the factors and comes to a different decision.
In other words, she may NEVER have considered scientology ok but that was not important then.
And in fact, there's little reason for even your grandma to be on gmail. An inhouse Linux router/mail server combo would be perfect for intra-family messaging.
For my grandma!?
Unless your granny lives with you, that is something most people really would be well advised to run from. Webmail is the most suitable thing for all non-IT people nowadays. It requires no configuration, no special software, nothing to remember other than a name and password which you can probably persuade grandmas browser to remember for her.
American corporations are a terrible place to store your data, unless "you have nothing to hide".
I have nothing to hide and I still consider them unsuitable for anything important. I use Gmail only for what I consider trivia and I remember that it could still be accessed by US spooks and my own. The fact that an algorithm will put a few adverts on the screen is irrelevant.
> Google Apps is free
> does a better job of protecting my data
Are you astroturfing, or really that naive? Just because you don't pay in a currency you recognize, does not mean that any of the web-mail services (or other "cloud services") are for free.
It depends on what you mean by free. I think the GP is using the normal meaning of the word "free". This is "I don't have to pay money for it". You might use the same meaning as I do but we are in a minority.
I am surprised it took so long. I still see one man businesses using AOL or Hotmail as their email addresses on the side if their very battered vans but can only think of one person who still has a Hotmail address apart from people compelled to by MS requiring it for some dealings.
Judging by my own defunct hotmail account, I wouldn't want to do that. So much spam.
But it'd all get run through Gmail's spam filters, so you wouldn't actually see it.
I have been doing this for this very reason. As an IT worker who regularly gets asked for my Hotmail address (Passport/.net account/etc) and password, I can't get rid of it. Happily Gmail gets rid of all the rubbish for me and labels/filters it nicely.
After an ice sheet is removed, the land rises. For example, it is happening in Scandanavia and the UK at present.
In the UK, Scotland is rising and southern England is sinking. Scotland was under the ice sheet but that only extended as far as the outer edge of greater London so that area was never pressed down and it is sinking.
Having been under an ice sheet won't make you sink so don't blame rising sea levels on something that happened millennia ago. Just look at the more recent past for the culprit.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought they only released the iPhone that day?
No, you are not the only one. You are one of the best though.
GP is correct. It is not protectionism that keeps confidential data from here in the UK heading your way. It is clearly and specifically the fact that you have less regard for privacy than is generally expected of a developed democratic country. /. that this is because companies are obliged to squeeze every last penny penny out of their assets ore its officers will find themselves on the end of some sort of legal action. Is it true that if a company does not reserve the right to sell my details to every advertiser it can, they will be in trouble?
I have been told here on
This means people on LinkedIn are likely to be either career criminals or career businesspeople.
Or they may even have chosen an industry that satisfies both criteria - banking, politics, music production and so on...
You are aware that the earths spin is not centred on the magnetic poles. Our biggest heat source (the sun) is most effective above equatorial regions. These are defined by the earths rotation which has not moved that much in the entirety of human existence.
If some places have got hotter and others cooler because of climate change, that is in keeping with what has been expected. I just don't recall being told which areas will get hotter and which cooler - except by Hollywood...
People in the US often have a different attitude to CCTV then many people on this side of the pond.
You may see CCTV as an invasion of privacy. It actually varies here.
I work in a hospital. There are a lot of cameras around here. I have never come across anyone who works here who does not want them. Most people actually want more. They are there for our protection. You don't get them in the wards, operating theatres, toilets. You get them in public areas like corridors, A&E, waiting areas car parks and so on. They can be used to send people to areas where trouble might occur. They can be used to record events that need police or legal action and so on.
This has to be similar to CCTV in taxis. It could be used to deter (There are signs about it) and it can be used to prosecute. It might prosecute a taxi driver for attacking a passenger but is more likely to be used for the misdeeds of passengers.. I know taxi drivers like having CCTV. They would probably like it more if it was free but that's human. We just need councils keeping their noses out where they are not needed.
Google+ and FB are aiming at very different groups of users. In the same way Twitter is not competing with FB either.
Twitter is not even really social media. It is more of an RSS alternative.
FB is pretty much the definitive social media. People keep track of their friends families etc. There is meaningful content there but it is not really what it is there for.
G+ is primarily aimed at finding information and discussing it with people. It is much more geared to linking people with complete strangers. That is why the linking is asymetric. X may wish to find out about someone but that someone does not need to know about X. Someone could do a survey. "What % of your contacts have you actually physically met?"
I suspect that Twitter will be very low, FB will be higher - much higher for people over 20. G+ will be lower.
Last year, I went from an HTC Hero to a Galaxy SII. Just about everything was a great improvement. The only physical problem I had was that it is Too thin. It was not quite enough of a handful. I tried out a protective case but it was a bit of a nuisance and I am not sure how much protection this kind of glass needs anyway.
The cure also solved a standard smartphone problem - battery life. I bought a higher capacity battery - 3500 instead of 1650MAH. Because the battery was thicker, I was supplied with a new back.. It is now about the same thickness as an iPhone and better to hold than it was at its previous thinness. I can now GPS and use apps all day and don't need to charge it until bed time.
I disliked phones getting smaller and smaller. I had phones that if I put them to my ear, they didn't reach my cheekbone. The screens were too small and they looked stupid. I now have something that replaces a jacketful of gadgets and they look more like something a grown up would have.
Yes it was. It was called a Palm Pilot.
The why have they not sued a company that sold many smartphones, they had the same form format as the iPhone and also various competitors that Apple is either suing or has sued.
Why did they not sue a tablet manufacturer whose product I have under the table here?
The reason is that PalmPilot was using this form factor in the 1990s and Fujitsus product was not long after. Apples attitude is "we invented it, even if people were using it years before that."
They are a bunch of crooks who play the system. They feel that they have enough money to scare off a lot of potential competition. Their problem is that the competition is not being scared off and this is not the first time that a judge has not found in their favour, despite the amount of lawyer money they have. Hopefully, it won't be the last either...
Where on earth did you get that 'statistic'?
Apple makes a lot more money on its offering than most of the rest put together. It does not hold a candle to Android in terms of volume or existing user base. Apple may still have the edge on non-free apps downloaded but their lead stops there.
A quick Google shows that there have been 200 million new activations so far this year. How does that compare to IOS?
Is that the only PC you use? I have a work laptop. I use it when on call to VPN into work and fix things. It is probably the oldest laptop on our network. I declined a newer prestige device and have a nice desktop that should be less likely to make me unwell.
My employers do not have to waste money on something that is not needed and I get a decent desktop for much less.
According to popular culture, my Galaxy GS2 has more computing power that the entirety of NASA when Apollo 11 landed on the moon. It certainly has more storage and memory than a decent PC I used only a few years ago. I use it for all sorts of things. Yesterday, I even made a phone call on it! :)
I am sitting at my computer typing this comment. I read /. and other interesting stuff all the time on my phone. I read my email on my phone and listen to all sorts of podcasts audio and video. There is no way I am going to use my phone as a PC replacement.
We all know the reasons. I have a bigger phone screen than any iShinyShinyPhone. I have better apps than Apple would let me have and I don't need to Jailbreak it to make it useful. So Why?
Even a screen this big is tiny in comparison to a 15" monitor. A touch screen keyboard, even Swype (or whatever you prefer) is nowhere as good as a $10 keyboard from the supermarket and although pinch-to-zoom is nice even a 10 year old Microsoft mechanical mouse is more accurate and comfortable. Anyone who has a PC probably has better than any of those devices.
Smartphones are like tablets. Very good for media consumption and lightweight gaming but if you actually want to do something a decent PC is required. If you want to blog, code, photo edit, write a book, run FB G+ Twitter and LinkedIn, doing it on a phone screen is hard work. Phones are brilliant for moving about, travelling and for when your ISP decides to go t##sup but the PC has not met its equal - yet...
If you get such a laptop and actually want to do any work on it without doing yourself harm (eyestrain, RSI, carpal tunnel etc) you will need the following
Large monitor
Mouse or preferred pointing device
Keyboard
To keep it anywhere reliable and backed up you will need an ethernet connection. This is going to plug a lot of wires into your laptop. You may want a printer connected as well. You would benefit from a port replicator and docking station.
Of course, you could spend a lot less money and get a desktop PC. This will also make it less stealable as well. It is easier for a burglar to steal a laptop. PCs get stolen too but it takes longer.
Suppression of information is pointless.
If people want it to get out, it will.
I don't believe that "information wants to be free" prattle. Information does not want anything. People want information to be free.
The US government can't keep its behaviour secret. Hugely rich football players in the UK can't do it either. Various criminal regimes around the world are trying to keep secrets to stay in power. In the long run, they will fail too and end up in the dustbin of history where they belong. It just takes time.
If they suppress one blog because of some stupid judge, others will pop up somewhere else. If they invent some automated system to look for references, someone will invent an automated system to flood the internet with such references and their system will bog down. It will get out there if people care...
Not an atheist - maybe. I never heard that he claimed to be one. In socially backwards countries that would prevent your being elected. He was elected you know,
I'm not sure what religion he was though. The area he was born in had a lot of Catholics and he was baptised. That doesn't prove what his religion was as an adult though. He certainly used the RC church politically but he also allowed his followers to do some pretty weird things that the Catholics are supposed to be against.
As a non-historian, I would say he was nothing in particular.
Consider the possibility that "then" she actually liked/loved/lusted after/whatever the guy and the Co$ bit was something she weighed against that and it was not as important. Her feelings towards him seem to have changed and so she re-weighs the factors and comes to a different decision.
In other words, she may NEVER have considered scientology ok but that was not important then.
Nobody wants a union.
You are either from the USA or bizarrely uninformed - possibly both.
I think he used a medical term I think it means to sue someone for damaging your Achilles tendon
And in fact, there's little reason for even your grandma to be on gmail. An inhouse Linux router/mail server combo would be perfect for intra-family messaging.
For my grandma!?
Unless your granny lives with you, that is something most people really would be well advised to run from. Webmail is the most suitable thing for all non-IT people nowadays. It requires no configuration, no special software, nothing to remember other than a name and password which you can probably persuade grandmas browser to remember for her.
American corporations are a terrible place to store your data, unless "you have nothing to hide".
I have nothing to hide and I still consider them unsuitable for anything important. I use Gmail only for what I consider trivia and I remember that it could still be accessed by US spooks and my own. The fact that an algorithm will put a few adverts on the screen is irrelevant.
> Google Apps is free
> does a better job of protecting my data
Are you astroturfing, or really that naive? Just because you don't pay in a currency you recognize, does not mean that any of the web-mail services (or other "cloud services") are for free.
It depends on what you mean by free. I think the GP is using the normal meaning of the word "free". This is "I don't have to pay money for it". You might use the same meaning as I do but we are in a minority.
I am surprised it took so long. I still see one man businesses using AOL or Hotmail as their email addresses on the side if their very battered vans but can only think of one person who still has a Hotmail address apart from people compelled to by MS requiring it for some dealings.
Judging by my own defunct hotmail account, I wouldn't want to do that. So much spam.
But it'd all get run through Gmail's spam filters, so you wouldn't actually see it.
I have been doing this for this very reason. As an IT worker who regularly gets asked for my Hotmail address (Passport/.net account/etc) and password, I can't get rid of it. Happily Gmail gets rid of all the rubbish for me and labels/filters it nicely.
After an ice sheet is removed, the land rises. For example, it is happening in Scandanavia and the UK at present.
In the UK, Scotland is rising and southern England is sinking. Scotland was under the ice sheet but that only extended as far as the outer edge of greater London so that area was never pressed down and it is sinking.
Having been under an ice sheet won't make you sink so don't blame rising sea levels on something that happened millennia ago. Just look at the more recent past for the culprit.