I would rather restore my mother PC from a backup than have to deal with Win10 on her machine. They turned it off for now, but it takes one under-perform quarter for them to get back at it.
In other news, Microsoft and Apple team up to add more walls to their gardens. The combined effort will be called Mapple On Line. CDs are already in the mail.
In US, credit cards dominate. In the rest of the world - not so much. Actually, credit card companies are the key reason why US lags behind in adoption of CHIP + PIN and TAP to PAY.
Why isn't AOL on the list? I'm still rocking my dialup account on AOL, and I think it's all I'll ever ne(SAD&~~~~
CARRIER LOST
Dear Sir,
I hereby notifying you in writing that your post is defacing and infringing on my "no carrier joke on computer" patent. You will be shortly hearing from my la`+#$%NO CARRIER
Sure, but you could equally argue that if, for example, Google went under, Microsoft and Bing would take over. The idea behind "do without" is unlikely scenario that somehow it disappeared and no direct replacement is possible.
For example, without Facebook would mean that it disappeared and somehow people forgot how to create social networks and entice people into narcissistic navel gazing online.
This is just not true. Without credit card companies we would still have bank exchanges, wire transactions, debit cards and so on. Actually, without CC companies retail economy would grow 3% overnight, or about how much these companies suck up in transaction charges.
To me, companies like General Mills, Tyson and so on are by far more important than software companies. You got to eat first.
If we look strictly into tech - CISCO and the likes, they make networking gear keeping Internet running. Followed by chip designers - that will be AMD, Intel, Qualcomm, ARM. Followed by crypto and PKI companies, like OpenSSL Foundation, RSA, and Entrsut. Crypto is really difficult to get right, starting fresh there would be a huge setback. OS is not that important in grand scheme of things, if necessary we could have most things running again within a year if we had to start fresh. I know people who could probably cobble boot loader and a compiler in a week working directly in assembly. So Microsoft, Apple and other software-only companies are highly replaceable. The only reason they exist is because a whole bunch "on computers" patents.
Smartphones for most people are fashion accessories that could also be used to watch cat videos and check facebook. This is why actual usability is a very distant consideration.
There is absolutely a tradeoff, we could have 60mpg internal combustion cars if safety and emissions requirements did not exist. However, we don't even need to go that far - modern cars are both safe, clean, and deliver decent mileage. This is already solved problem. However, EPA's goals created new issue - manufacturers now have to choose between reliability and meeting mileage goals. They can't make cars more expensive, consumer buying power isn't there. That is, new cars today won't last as long as cars made just 10 years ago due to marginal increases in mileage. To me, this added expense of reduced usable life is absolutely not worth another marginal increase in fuel economy. It doesn't make sense economically, it also doesn't make sense environmentally when you factor in pollution produced by more frequent manufacturing and recycling of cars.
Well, now, you can pay for your own lung cancer from car exhaust with your own money!
While you might be still living the wild 60s, the rest of the world moved on. We invented something called catalytic converter that at least since mid 80s made this a non-issue.
While I like my environment clean, I really don't like the excesses EPA went into with passenger cars. I can extrapolate that this might be happening in other industries as well. We are well into diminishing returns territory on both emissions and mileage - modern cars are good enough. Yet I have to suffer increased upfront and ownership costs and reduced reliability because of unreasonable EPA requirements. If you want better cars - fund research into alternatives to internal combustion. If you want better mileage - remove gasoline subsidies. Forcing manufacturers to produce cars (compacts and hybrids) that consumers are not interested in is just wasteful and inefficient.
Ballmer wasn't wrong, he just didn't realize that consumers would put up with that. However, Microsoft learned these lessons and applying them with Win10 desktop.
From the technical point of view, this DRM effort is doomed. The client is in the hands of the enemy, so DRM effort is dead on arrival. Therefore, this is about legality - not about what can be done, but about what is legal to do.
If there is a case for supporting DRM, then clearly there is even better case for embedding support for violence. For example, someone moderated your post on./ at -1? Use
You are engaging in what is tax equivalent to dine and dash. Pay your goddamn bills, because it is YOUR responsibility that you are offloading on ME. This isn't my tab, I wasn't even in the restaurant when you ordered all the champagne, why do you expect me to pay for it?
Slashdot Mirror
I would rather restore my mother PC from a backup than have to deal with Win10 on her machine. They turned it off for now, but it takes one under-perform quarter for them to get back at it.
But the new guards have rounded corners and anodized aluminium guns.
Personally, I prefer black latex but I am not going to kink-shame anyone here.
To push the metaphor further - the prison yard got slightly bigger but there are now twice as many guards making your escape harder.
In other news, Microsoft and Apple team up to add more walls to their gardens. The combined effort will be called Mapple On Line. CDs are already in the mail.
If Facebook can kill off Snap by copying features, then it follows that Facebook can also be killed off by coping its features.
In US, credit cards dominate. In the rest of the world - not so much. Actually, credit card companies are the key reason why US lags behind in adoption of CHIP + PIN and TAP to PAY.
Why isn't AOL on the list? I'm still rocking my dialup account on AOL, and I think it's all I'll ever ne(SAD&~~~~
CARRIER LOST
Dear Sir,
I hereby notifying you in writing that your post is defacing and infringing on my "no carrier joke on computer" patent. You will be shortly hearing from my la`+#$%NO CARRIER
Sure, but you could equally argue that if, for example, Google went under, Microsoft and Bing would take over. The idea behind "do without" is unlikely scenario that somehow it disappeared and no direct replacement is possible.
For example, without Facebook would mean that it disappeared and somehow people forgot how to create social networks and entice people into narcissistic navel gazing online.
This is just not true. Without credit card companies we would still have bank exchanges, wire transactions, debit cards and so on. Actually, without CC companies retail economy would grow 3% overnight, or about how much these companies suck up in transaction charges.
To me, companies like General Mills, Tyson and so on are by far more important than software companies. You got to eat first.
If we look strictly into tech - CISCO and the likes, they make networking gear keeping Internet running. Followed by chip designers - that will be AMD, Intel, Qualcomm, ARM. Followed by crypto and PKI companies, like OpenSSL Foundation, RSA, and Entrsut. Crypto is really difficult to get right, starting fresh there would be a huge setback. OS is not that important in grand scheme of things, if necessary we could have most things running again within a year if we had to start fresh. I know people who could probably cobble boot loader and a compiler in a week working directly in assembly. So Microsoft, Apple and other software-only companies are highly replaceable. The only reason they exist is because a whole bunch "on computers" patents.
Smartphones for most people are fashion accessories that could also be used to watch cat videos and check facebook. This is why actual usability is a very distant consideration.
Austrian court can pass any law they want, however how do they expect to enforce this outside of their jurisdiction? Under what legal authority?
There is absolutely a tradeoff, we could have 60mpg internal combustion cars if safety and emissions requirements did not exist. However, we don't even need to go that far - modern cars are both safe, clean, and deliver decent mileage. This is already solved problem. However, EPA's goals created new issue - manufacturers now have to choose between reliability and meeting mileage goals. They can't make cars more expensive, consumer buying power isn't there. That is, new cars today won't last as long as cars made just 10 years ago due to marginal increases in mileage. To me, this added expense of reduced usable life is absolutely not worth another marginal increase in fuel economy. It doesn't make sense economically, it also doesn't make sense environmentally when you factor in pollution produced by more frequent manufacturing and recycling of cars.
Well, now, you can pay for your own lung cancer from car exhaust with your own money!
While you might be still living the wild 60s, the rest of the world moved on. We invented something called catalytic converter that at least since mid 80s made this a non-issue.
Sure, and I configure network gear using CLI. However, it won't be adequate UI for a smartphone.
I say we fork Pepe (or at least his legs).
I will show myself out.
I propose netsavior lema: Infinitely fast computers would result in infinitely shitty code run on it all the time.
Story cards? Reading this article I get impression this new product will end up as a case study in how run-away 'UI usability design' would look like.
I am not looking forward to this backwards slide in UI design. Android borrowed Win 3.1 UI. Whats next? Norton Commander UI? CLI? Punch cards?
While I like my environment clean, I really don't like the excesses EPA went into with passenger cars. I can extrapolate that this might be happening in other industries as well. We are well into diminishing returns territory on both emissions and mileage - modern cars are good enough. Yet I have to suffer increased upfront and ownership costs and reduced reliability because of unreasonable EPA requirements. If you want better cars - fund research into alternatives to internal combustion. If you want better mileage - remove gasoline subsidies. Forcing manufacturers to produce cars (compacts and hybrids) that consumers are not interested in is just wasteful and inefficient.
Ballmer wasn't wrong, he just didn't realize that consumers would put up with that. However, Microsoft learned these lessons and applying them with Win10 desktop.
From the technical point of view, this DRM effort is doomed. The client is in the hands of the enemy, so DRM effort is dead on arrival. Therefore, this is about legality - not about what can be done, but about what is legal to do.
It is possible to move away from Chrome, it is harder to do so from W3C.
If there is a case for supporting DRM, then clearly there is even better case for embedding support for violence. For example, someone moderated your post on ./ at -1? Use
in your post.
You are engaging in what is tax equivalent to dine and dash. Pay your goddamn bills, because it is YOUR responsibility that you are offloading on ME. This isn't my tab, I wasn't even in the restaurant when you ordered all the champagne, why do you expect me to pay for it?
Their claim largely hinges on a “landmark” 2015 review and meta-analysis of observational studies.
Translation - claim relies on cherry picking bad data sets to push narrative. Sure, I wish it was true. However, this study is not trustworthy.