Indeed. WE'll complete ignore that this is a debt free company with a strong portfolio, significant income, and expanding user base, and go right to the doom and gloom headline.
I agree, but there's a difference of scale here; and add that there's no source code available to the reviewers for most apps. There is only so much that they can do when they have thousands of apps and updates to get through every day.
On what basis does he think that consumers are starting to care more about privacy? A few comments on some apps?
In reality... the awareness simply isn't there. The all-or-nothing approach taken by Android doesn't help much: because you have to grant every requested permission or deny the app entirely, android installer is simply another form of windows UAC: it encourages people to click 'yes' without considering the consequences. You might have some vocal minority speaking out against excessive permissions requests, but most are just going to click through so they can get to play with their dancing bunnies, flying farm animals, or whatever else catches their fancy.
Unfortunately, the piecemeal approach taken by RIM isn't much better: consumers can get prompt for almost every specific permission the application requires -- but there's really little detailed explanation of how those permissions might get used.
Ideally we'd see RIM's fine-grained permissions combined with Android's detailed explanations -- and still get the same result of automatically allowing;)
Until users get burned by privacy issues, they're not going to pay attention to them.
Great, you'll be exonerated. But only after you name appears in the newspapers in conjunction with [insert wrongdoing here], you've lost your job because you were accused of [insert wrongdoing here]; and you've lost anything vaguely computer-related in your house while they take an unknown amount of time to determine that you really were not guilty. And for some types of accusations, your life stays ruined even after you're shown to have no complicity in the activity.
... why I remember when were content to call it VSAM;)
Meanwhile, color me surprised (that would be a pale shade of mauve, for those interested) -- a review of a Packt book that isn't an 8.9, or 10 ad actually has something critical to say. Maybe this one was by a real person?
. Or maybe they're smartening up and realizing lukewarm press still gets the product name out there, while at the same time deflecting "shill" accusations.
Two sides to that - if the resident troll is driving people away, he's bad for the web site and the community.
On the other hand, trolls have a way of getting people engaged and keeping them way -- both those reading, and those participating in the conversation. It's a bit of a balancing act.
If it takes years for a professional to learn how to effectively use any piece of software, that's a sign that the software is very poorly designed indeed.
This will probably be different from what Netflix does.
And it will fail since what Netflix offers clearly seems to be what customers want since they also have more customers than even a larger cable company.
Customers don't want only one thing, last I checked. The majority of households are not Netflix customers. I'd even suspect that the majority of computer-using households are not NF customers. There's plenty of room in the market for Google to offer either a different service that meets the needs of other customers; a complementary service; or even to try a directly competing service.
, so you still get the funding that you need to keep operating, and the person learns a lesson in social responsibility...
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure someone will even if you don't) but aren't repairs, maintenance, and extensions to the Bahn system get paid for (at least in part) out of general funds of local and state governments?
It's part 2 that you lost me. You... rewarded the people who showed up late? As a result of not showing up on time, they had prizes handed to them in exchange for not spending any time or effort, and for not joining with the rest of the community in the hunt?
Altruism is often paid for by the recipient as well as the giver. Just in different ways than you might expect.
Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous
You gave yourself away there. The folks that think like this *never* admit that it may come across as paranoid or preposterous. I think it doesn't even occur to them.
While I'm firmly of the stance that we need to drastically reduce spending (almost) across the board, this is the type of project I wish money would go to if it's going to be spent.
This, of course, exemplifies the problem. Everybody wants to see costs cut. Nobody wants to see it cut from the programs they support.
Surely Microsoft have conclusively proven that most people value convenience far more than security?
The big problem is that companies add these 'convenience' features with no warning and no easy way to remove them. Having to manually strip exif data from every image is painful, to say the least.
The big problem is more that most consumers don't realize that they're giving up security when they give up privacy - as with GP's example, telling the world when their house is vacant, and even giving the world their regular out-of-house patterns.
On the other hand, the eclipse team seems to have said "Hell with anything you may be familiar with - like shortcuts that practically every IDE shares in a windowed environment - we're going to do our own thing and everyone else can figure it out or suck it. While we're at it, let's make all of our features as non-discoverable as possible by hiding them in illogical places."
Very little is known about how TDCS works. Scientists theorize that the mild current primes the neurons for action but does not trigger the voltage spikes that neurons use to communicate. "Presumably, it is polarizing neurons and making them more or less likely to respond to inputs," says Warren Grill, a neural engineer at Duke University, in Durham, NC. "But what's happening at the level of the synapse, where the business of learning really takes place, we don't know."
Of course, given the opening sentence to that paragraph, it's probably not something you'd want to play with at home...
As far as I can tell from TFA the "other things they were pulling" were workarounds to the fact that online gambling is illegal. ie, they lied to banks about the nature of their business, thus the charge of "fraud".
Given that Amazon can (and currently does) function perfectly well without these terms in other markets, it is unclear why game developers should take a leap of faith on Amazon’s behalf. Such leaps are rarely rewarded once a retailer achieves dominance."
So... uh, don't? It only succeeds if enough developers jump on board; and if they do, then clearly it's not that much of a leap of faith for them.
And if Amazon does turn around and abuse this... we can walk away from the table. If, that is, our principles are worth more than the paycheck.
Slashdot Mirror
They're not gaining new users at as fast a rate as the competition; however they *are* growing year over year.
Indeed. WE'll complete ignore that this is a debt free company with a strong portfolio, significant income, and expanding user base, and go right to the doom and gloom headline.
I agree, but there's a difference of scale here; and add that there's no source code available to the reviewers for most apps. There is only so much that they can do when they have thousands of apps and updates to get through every day.
In reality... the awareness simply isn't there. The all-or-nothing approach taken by Android doesn't help much: because you have to grant every requested permission or deny the app entirely, android installer is simply another form of windows UAC: it encourages people to click 'yes' without considering the consequences. You might have some vocal minority speaking out against excessive permissions requests, but most are just going to click through so they can get to play with their dancing bunnies, flying farm animals, or whatever else catches their fancy.
Unfortunately, the piecemeal approach taken by RIM isn't much better: consumers can get prompt for almost every specific permission the application requires -- but there's really little detailed explanation of how those permissions might get used.
Ideally we'd see RIM's fine-grained permissions combined with Android's detailed explanations -- and still get the same result of automatically allowing ;)
Until users get burned by privacy issues, they're not going to pay attention to them.
Great, you'll be exonerated. But only after you name appears in the newspapers in conjunction with [insert wrongdoing here], you've lost your job because you were accused of [insert wrongdoing here]; and you've lost anything vaguely computer-related in your house while they take an unknown amount of time to determine that you really were not guilty. And for some types of accusations, your life stays ruined even after you're shown to have no complicity in the activity.
Meanwhile, color me surprised (that would be a pale shade of mauve, for those interested) -- a review of a Packt book that isn't an 8.9, or 10 ad actually has something critical to say. Maybe this one was by a real person?
. Or maybe they're smartening up and realizing lukewarm press still gets the product name out there, while at the same time deflecting "shill" accusations.
Two sides to that - if the resident troll is driving people away, he's bad for the web site and the community.
On the other hand, trolls have a way of getting people engaged and keeping them way -- both those reading, and those participating in the conversation. It's a bit of a balancing act.
Asshole. (See what I did there?)
One of the few times in recent memory I've actually laughed aloud at a comment here.
-1 Muphry
If it takes years for a professional to learn how to effectively use any piece of software, that's a sign that the software is very poorly designed indeed.
Crap. Where's the duc[tk] tape? My brain just exploded.
My name is Wilbur, you insensitive clod.
This will probably be different from what Netflix does.
And it will fail since what Netflix offers clearly seems to be what customers want since they also have more customers than even a larger cable company.
Customers don't want only one thing, last I checked. The majority of households are not Netflix customers. I'd even suspect that the majority of computer-using households are not NF customers. There's plenty of room in the market for Google to offer either a different service that meets the needs of other customers; a complementary service; or even to try a directly competing service.
Fair enough, given the circumstance
, so you still get the funding that you need to keep operating, and the person learns a lesson in social responsibility...
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure someone will even if you don't) but aren't repairs, maintenance, and extensions to the Bahn system get paid for (at least in part) out of general funds of local and state governments?
Page 54-55: http://books.google.com/books?id=m09SySxAy2EC&lpg=PA54&ots=XN1l9TGRiJ&pg=PA55#v=onepage
It's part 2 that you lost me. You... rewarded the people who showed up late? As a result of not showing up on time, they had prizes handed to them in exchange for not spending any time or effort, and for not joining with the rest of the community in the hunt?
Altruism is often paid for by the recipient as well as the giver. Just in different ways than you might expect.
Yes, I know this probably sounds paranoid and preposterous
You gave yourself away there. The folks that think like this *never* admit that it may come across as paranoid or preposterous. I think it doesn't even occur to them.
hey who knew ridding several thousands tons of lox was dangerous
I'll say. Dumping that much lox surely presents a risk of mercury contamination.
While I'm firmly of the stance that we need to drastically reduce spending (almost) across the board, this is the type of project I wish money would go to if it's going to be spent.
This, of course, exemplifies the problem. Everybody wants to see costs cut. Nobody wants to see it cut from the programs they support.
Surely Microsoft have conclusively proven that most people value convenience far more than security?
The big problem is that companies add these 'convenience' features with no warning and no easy way to remove them. Having to manually strip exif data from every image is painful, to say the least.
The big problem is more that most consumers don't realize that they're giving up security when they give up privacy - as with GP's example, telling the world when their house is vacant, and even giving the world their regular out-of-house patterns.
People like you are how people like Hulda Clark make money. (Before dying of cancer, it seems - from the author of "the cure for cancer".)
On the other hand, the eclipse team seems to have said "Hell with anything you may be familiar with - like shortcuts that practically every IDE shares in a windowed environment - we're going to do our own thing and everyone else can figure it out or suck it. While we're at it, let's make all of our features as non-discoverable as possible by hiding them in illogical places."
Very little is known about how TDCS works. Scientists theorize that the mild current primes the neurons for action but does not trigger the voltage spikes that neurons use to communicate. "Presumably, it is polarizing neurons and making them more or less likely to respond to inputs," says Warren Grill, a neural engineer at Duke University, in Durham, NC. "But what's happening at the level of the synapse, where the business of learning really takes place, we don't know."
Of course, given the opening sentence to that paragraph, it's probably not something you'd want to play with at home...
As far as I can tell from TFA the "other things they were pulling" were workarounds to the fact that online gambling is illegal. ie, they lied to banks about the nature of their business, thus the charge of "fraud".
Given that Amazon can (and currently does) function perfectly well without these terms in other markets, it is unclear why game developers should take a leap of faith on Amazon’s behalf. Such leaps are rarely rewarded once a retailer achieves dominance."
So... uh, don't? It only succeeds if enough developers jump on board; and if they do, then clearly it's not that much of a leap of faith for them.
And if Amazon does turn around and abuse this... we can walk away from the table. If, that is, our principles are worth more than the paycheck.