Err, why are my needs likely to differ greatly with the goals of the company? If I buy a product from a company, I'd say the chances are good that my needs jive with their goals....
Sit back and let me tell you a little story.
A few years ago, I bought a laptop, the first one I'd ever owned that had a 64-bit CPU. I set it up as a dual-boot system, with 64-bit versions of Windows XP Pro and whatever OpenSUSE that was current at the time (10.2 or 10.3, I'm guessing).
There were no 64-bit Windows drivers for the wifi card. None.
There were no binaries of 64-bit Linux drivers. But, there was source. While I took C++ in school way back when, and have worked with other people's code quite a lot in the last few years, I am in no way an expert coder. Nonetheless, it took me only about 20 minutes to figure out that I needed to change 1 line in one header file, and then I was only a configure; make && make install away from having a working wifi card.
That model card is still being used in new laptops today, and there are still no 64-bit Windows drivers for it. Every one of those laptops is sold with 32-bit Windows, even if it has a 64-bt CPU.
Meanwhile, the particular card discussed above is being used at this very moment to transmit this post from that very same laptop (running a 64-bit OS) to you.
A reasonable person who's not just looking for cheap laughs might actually read what the GP said, and infer that they (a) already had an iPad, which can be used to control multiple XMBC instances, and (b) bought the Raspberry Pi instead of a more expensive device to act as the kids' XMBC server.
But you go right on ahead and keep amusing yourself. I'm sure that's much more satisfying than actually bothering to understand what you read.
I don't know that i've ever tried it over wifi, but i've used Skype over 3G to the UK (from Australia) and it was clearer than a regular mobile call.
I'll have to try that next time I'm there. When I try to use 3G for Skype here in Stockholm, the quality's terrible and the calls invariably get disconnected after 2-3 minutes. (I suspect skulduggery by Telenor, but have no way to prove this.)
Now they don't need either a plan or software/VoIP knowhow - just a wifi connection.
But this is not a new thing at all--my 9-y-o daughter proved perfectly capable of installing and using Skype all by herself on her PC.. (And while I like to think she's remarkable, I realise that she's not THAT remarkable.)
I use my Android phone+wifi+SkypeOut to ring my folks' landline phones in the States all the time (I live in Sweden), and it works great. Skype video is not as good as when using my laptop with a wired connection, but it does work.
The tech is not the problem. The problems are twofold:
1. That space is already well populated (e.g. Skype).
2. US users in particular are going to get gouged deeply if they try to use mobile data to save on POTS/LDD charges.
Also, I understand that some major US providers block Skype, which means they'll probably block this as well.
Since Skype is already available on Android and iOS, and brought with it a sizable existing customer base and mindshare built up over some years,... Yep, it's gonna be uphill all the way.
No, but I apparently have to remind people that they are a huge minority and their opinion is more or less irrelevant to what the real world thinks; and the real world does not give a flying fuck, nor does it know about, "unlocked bootloaders".
We get that a lot of people don't care.
What you don't seem to get is that many of us don't give a rat's ass whether they do or not.
What the fuck is wrong with you people? You act like the teen intentionally tried to kill her parents.
What's wrong is that you are not thinking like a DA.
All the DA's office has to do is to say, with a straight face, "We believe that she intended to kill her parents." (Trust me, they're quite good at saying things like this, they get lots of practise.)
Presto! You've got a murder charge. And then she gets to try to prove that this was not her intention, and GLWT.
I suspect those convicted drivers *knew* that they'd taken Ambien, and that the law might see things differently in a case where it could be shown that the driver did not know he'd been dosed, e.g.
1. Parent drinks some of milkshake.
2. Parent gets in car, starts driving.
3. While behind the wheel in heavy traffic, parent is hit by effect of milkshake's secret mystery ingredient.
4. Parent loses it, has accident before there's even time to get off the road safely.
(For the sake of this discussion, we assume that the parent had taken nothing else that might have impaired his driving.)
If I were the DA in such a case, I'd say that the parent would have had absolutely no reason to believe they'd taken anything that might impair driving until it was too late, and I'd proceed to stick it to the kids--in proportion to the severity of the accident, of course.
I'm sorry things went badly for you and that you feel this way, BUT maybe it's time you moved out of your parents' place, because it sounds like you still live there.
Your issues are not necessarily other people's issues.
Not every family problem is of the same sort as yours.
Not every family problem has the same causes or circumstances as yours.
Without facts to back up your assertions, you're speculating at best.
I'd really like to know how you can possibly know this. Unless you're telepathic and/or the kid's psychiatrist, I'd say that you're projecting in a major way and maybe you should get some counselling yourself.
I think it's more likely that someone who's not quite yet an adult acted in a childish, "if this were the movies, I'd just..." fashion and did not think clearly about the ethics or possible consequences of her actions. This would not be the first time in history that a teenager acted rashly without thinking things through, and it would not be the last;
Furthermore, patricidal hatred is neither a requirement for nor a certain by-product of being 16 and being pissed off at the Mum and Dad because they won't extend my curfew or because they grounded me after I got caught smoking at school.
... I probably would turn my child over to the authorities. Not because I think I need the state to get involved with my parenting, but because chances are pretty damn good that the friend put my child (in the story the friend provided the sleeping pills) up to this and I need the state to force the friend's parent to seek help. Besides the DA would probably take the plea deal in exchange for testimony against the child that provided the prescription drugs.
Let's not discount the possibility that the daughter had the idea herself and talked the friend into supplying the meds.
Even so, making certain that *both* kids get professional help is absolutely the right thing to do.
I remember a kid in NYC with bad hair and a worse attitude who tried to claim he had no idea his packet sniffer was being used for packet sniffing, or why, when it was obvious that he did.
But this has exactly what to do with the story we're currently discussing...?
Slashdot Mirror
In the future, please don't assume you are even *remotely* representative of Slashdot's target reader. You don't matter, period.
Err, why are my needs likely to differ greatly with the goals of the company? If I buy a product from a company, I'd say the chances are good that my needs jive with their goals. ...
Sit back and let me tell you a little story.
A few years ago, I bought a laptop, the first one I'd ever owned that had a 64-bit CPU. I set it up as a dual-boot system, with 64-bit versions of Windows XP Pro and whatever OpenSUSE that was current at the time (10.2 or 10.3, I'm guessing).
There were no 64-bit Windows drivers for the wifi card. None.
There were no binaries of 64-bit Linux drivers. But, there was source. While I took C++ in school way back when, and have worked with other people's code quite a lot in the last few years, I am in no way an expert coder. Nonetheless, it took me only about 20 minutes to figure out that I needed to change 1 line in one header file, and then I was only a configure; make && make install away from having a working wifi card.
That model card is still being used in new laptops today, and there are still no 64-bit Windows drivers for it. Every one of those laptops is sold with 32-bit Windows, even if it has a 64-bt CPU.
Meanwhile, the particular card discussed above is being used at this very moment to transmit this post from that very same laptop (running a 64-bit OS) to you.
*fin*
... but how many people make international calls on their cell phone?
Come to Europe, and you'll find lots of people who do. Many of them don't even have landlines.
(Yes, I am one of these.)
There might be room for some bit players, sure. But I think Skype (and FaceTime, which I should have mentioned earlier) are already 800-lb. gorillas.
You do realise this story is posted under tech.slashdot.org, yes?
Are you sure about that?
A reasonable person who's not just looking for cheap laughs might actually read what the GP said, and infer that they (a) already had an iPad, which can be used to control multiple XMBC instances, and (b) bought the Raspberry Pi instead of a more expensive device to act as the kids' XMBC server.
But you go right on ahead and keep amusing yourself. I'm sure that's much more satisfying than actually bothering to understand what you read.
Amongst people posting to this thread using dialup, yes.
I don't know that i've ever tried it over wifi, but i've used Skype over 3G to the UK (from Australia) and it was clearer than a regular mobile call.
I'll have to try that next time I'm there. When I try to use 3G for Skype here in Stockholm, the quality's terrible and the calls invariably get disconnected after 2-3 minutes. (I suspect skulduggery by Telenor, but have no way to prove this.)
I've been told this by some friends in the Denver area. I've no idea who their ISP is.
Now they don't need either a plan or software/VoIP knowhow - just a wifi connection.
But this is not a new thing at all--my 9-y-o daughter proved perfectly capable of installing and using Skype all by herself on her PC.. (And while I like to think she's remarkable, I realise that she's not THAT remarkable.)
I use my Android phone+wifi+SkypeOut to ring my folks' landline phones in the States all the time (I live in Sweden), and it works great. Skype video is not as good as when using my laptop with a wired connection, but it does work.
The tech is not the problem. The problems are twofold:
1. That space is already well populated (e.g. Skype).
2. US users in particular are going to get gouged deeply if they try to use mobile data to save on POTS/LDD charges.
Also, I understand that some major US providers block Skype, which means they'll probably block this as well.
Since Skype is already available on Android and iOS, and brought with it a sizable existing customer base and mindshare built up over some years,... Yep, it's gonna be uphill all the way.
That's very flattering, cute stuff, but I'm good as married.
Wow, someone requires the presence of an emoticon to recognise humour.
Your serve, Maestro.
No, but I apparently have to remind people that they are a huge minority and their opinion is more or less irrelevant to what the real world thinks; and the real world does not give a flying fuck, nor does it know about, "unlocked bootloaders".
We get that a lot of people don't care.
What you don't seem to get is that many of us don't give a rat's ass whether they do or not.
I'm sorry, we've already determined that your opinions on this story are hardly likely to be objective.
What the fuck is wrong with you people? You act like the teen intentionally tried to kill her parents.
What's wrong is that you are not thinking like a DA.
All the DA's office has to do is to say, with a straight face, "We believe that she intended to kill her parents." (Trust me, they're quite good at saying things like this, they get lots of practise.)
Presto! You've got a murder charge. And then she gets to try to prove that this was not her intention, and GLWT.
The phrase you're looking for is "Film at 11". Unless you're in the UK, in which case it's "Pictures at 11".
I suspect those convicted drivers *knew* that they'd taken Ambien, and that the law might see things differently in a case where it could be shown that the driver did not know he'd been dosed, e.g.
1. Parent drinks some of milkshake.
2. Parent gets in car, starts driving.
3. While behind the wheel in heavy traffic, parent is hit by effect of milkshake's secret mystery ingredient.
4. Parent loses it, has accident before there's even time to get off the road safely.
(For the sake of this discussion, we assume that the parent had taken nothing else that might have impaired his driving.)
If I were the DA in such a case, I'd say that the parent would have had absolutely no reason to believe they'd taken anything that might impair driving until it was too late, and I'd proceed to stick it to the kids--in proportion to the severity of the accident, of course.
I'm sorry things went badly for you and that you feel this way, BUT maybe it's time you moved out of your parents' place, because it sounds like you still live there.
Your issues are not necessarily other people's issues.
Not every family problem is of the same sort as yours.
Not every family problem has the same causes or circumstances as yours.
Without facts to back up your assertions, you're speculating at best.
I'd really like to know how you can possibly know this. Unless you're telepathic and/or the kid's psychiatrist, I'd say that you're projecting in a major way and maybe you should get some counselling yourself.
I think it's more likely that someone who's not quite yet an adult acted in a childish, "if this were the movies, I'd just ..." fashion and did not think clearly about the ethics or possible consequences of her actions. This would not be the first time in history that a teenager acted rashly without thinking things through, and it would not be the last;
Furthermore, patricidal hatred is neither a requirement for nor a certain by-product of being 16 and being pissed off at the Mum and Dad because they won't extend my curfew or because they grounded me after I got caught smoking at school.
... I probably would turn my child over to the authorities. Not because I think I need the state to get involved with my parenting, but because chances are pretty damn good that the friend put my child (in the story the friend provided the sleeping pills) up to this and I need the state to force the friend's parent to seek help. Besides the DA would probably take the plea deal in exchange for testimony against the child that provided the prescription drugs.
Let's not discount the possibility that the daughter had the idea herself and talked the friend into supplying the meds.
Even so, making certain that *both* kids get professional help is absolutely the right thing to do.
Next time I grow a hair, you're welcome to split it.
Next on Slashdot... AC informs us that water is wet... Right after these important messages...
I remember a kid in NYC with bad hair and a worse attitude who tried to claim he had no idea his packet sniffer was being used for packet sniffing, or why, when it was obvious that he did.
But this has exactly what to do with the story we're currently discussing...?