I was actually in a theater where there was a fire. You could see one of the speakers behind the screen caught fire and it was burning in an awesome looking circle behind the scene... I thought it was a cool looking fireball effect until I realized it was real and it wasn't moving with the scene.
Now, according to the "yelling fire in a theater" crowd, we should have all gone off and stampeded each other to get out of the building. You know what happened? We all peacefully stood up, proceeded to the exits and went outside. We then received a free movie ticket out in the parking lot.
The whole illusion that screaming fire is going to be any different is pure bullshit if you ask me.
Two sides of a coin. I prefer glossy screens when glare isn't an issue. Not sure what I'd do with a laptop though. I have a matte screen on my ThinkPad and I've used my father's VAIO with glossy screen. I do like how bright his looks compared to mine, but I don't think I can really compare the two since they are a few years apart (the ThinkPad being older/darker.)
As far as my home PC, I have a glossy Viewsonic 19" 4:3 that I like looking at more than the newer matte 24" 16:10. Glare isn't an issue because I don't have my back to the window, but on a bright day I can see the glossy screen much easier than the matte.
That just feels expensive. I have an electric RC helicopter that cost me less than $2k for the heli, radio and all the tools needed to get it to fly. I could easily attach a camera to it (even video) and stream 10+ minutes (battery life) of photo/video for a nominal added cost.
I'm assuming that cost is quite a bit on the software/R&D side of things.
Maybe not with the Google maps we have access to, but I'm sure Google has more than one image of the same buildings. (which I assume they are using for Google Earth 3D)
Will these true believers (in Camping's revelation) be able to cope, knowing that they aren't among "god's favourites", and they are left behind to suffer with the rest of us. Will there be suicides?
5. Read the reviews of an application. See what people complain about. 6. Don't install applications which ask for rights that make little sense in context (a calculator which asks for access to the network and contacts for example). 7. If unsure about some permissions, check the developer's website to see if there is a good explanation. If not, contact the developer directly and ask. 8. If you suddenly find an app for free which you thought it was pay-only, check to see if it is cloned. If so, don't install it as it might be tampered. 9. Check if the developer of an application matches who you know it should be. If not don't install it as it might be tampered.
I can see 5, and 6... that makes sense for most people. But the rest of these make having an app store pointless. If you need to go outside the phone environment to find out why someone asked for a particular permission.
I think firewall is a bit overkill. My advice would be to just use normally. I do. I DON'T install apps from shady sources, I just use the official Market. I have a few dozen apps installed, and I clicked through the permission screen mindlessly, yes. Why? Almost every app needs network access, after some time I got bored reading through the list of permission they require. BUT - the apps I install are well established apps with overwhelmingly positive reviews (based on a large number of reviewers). That's basically it - just use common sense.
The problem is, 99% (woo, fictional stats) of the people that voted that app a 5 star app did the same thing. Nobody pays attention to what they are giving access to. They only care what the app tells them it's doing. (I'm a background switcher and I need access to your contacts so I can display them on the background and full internet access for ads!). They do not care that it's sending their contact information to a central server of spammers.
SD Card access springs to mind. Google considers all data on the SD card public... I, however, do not think my SD card is free range and wish there was a way to limit apps to just their folder. (Well, I know there is a way [symlinks in app path on local memory to directories on sdcard], but Android does not do it.)
Some apps (I have a friend who did this) will check the built in functionality to determine if you have a firewall app and refuse to run unless you buy his pay for version.
Also, Internet Access. I cannot say, "No, you will only have access to google.com/*" without a firewall.
But if you put in your postal address into the PSN then the person will know where to steal your activation code!
Any system can be explained away. Snail mail theft is a bit extreme, but so is sending everyone a snail mail code to re-activate. An email validation code should be good enough and if you're dumb enough to use the same password for PSN as your email and you haven't changed it yet, you deserve the long boring hold time while trying to get your password reset over the phone.
Eh... if you try to log in, they can send the email at that time. Anyone trying to hack all the accounts would be hard pressed to log in to that many accounts to activate and reset the passwords for any moment in the day. Now, if they sent out the activation codes in batches and let the users log in at any time, sure... I can see where that may be a bad idea, but having the activation code sent at the time of initial attempt would not be as exploitable.
Now, a smart user would not use the same password for email as the PSN account and an even smarter user would change their passwords after that fiasco if they were similar (ie: I can see someone using passwords like myemailpass and mypsnpass.) So a truly ignorant person may get re-hacked if they didn't change their passwords and the activation codes were sent out.
I remember reading a while back someone said (not sure who) that they don't care what standard is used as long as it's their standard. I think it was.NET vs. Java.
I'm sure the same mentality is behind this. They don't care who's machine you are running on as long as they have their fingers in it. Of course, they want to be the one in control and closest to the bare metal.
You know your credit really isn't at risk unless you do it, right? If someone steals your card and charges up $15k in charges that are not yours, you call the credit card company, tell them you did not buy those (they are likely to call you first actually.... I've had it happen) and you get the charges reversed and a new card issued.
I happen to like being able to look over at a glance and see where the scroll bar is without having to find that tiny thread. I also hate themes that make the scroller "hide" on the bar by making the colors match. Horizontal screen resolution is not a concern. Not sure who thought it was. There's plenty of room for a slider bar.
I'm also not a fan of the menu items up top. It breaks the flow of an app. When you have multiple windows open and you have to go to the top of the screen every time to operate the applications, it feels like there's something broken there. Not sure what it is. I want my menus on the window that they are associated with.
It wasn't required, per say, but highly encouraged. You weren't going to get fired, but there was enough of an abstraction from pay raises that it could not be tied directly, but it was a factor. Whoever worked that one out was criminal in their own right. The practice has since stopped.
Actually it's been changed from [Donate > 0 || Donate == 0] -to- [Donate N || Not]. There's a minor distinction there, but the management is no longer penalized as long as everyone at least fills out the card saying "I choose to (or not to) donate." Previously, choosing to donate 0 was considered not responding and since they wanted 100% response they changed it to Donate or Not.) Come to think of it, I haven't seen one of those slips in over a year. Hopefully they stopped the guilt trip of saying "No" to some fabricated emotional picture of a starving kid sitting next to the "No" box.
Obviously, the code he posted would be part of a method that accepted a date value so you could test it with any date. It was just an example to explain the point. I myself am having a hard time trying to find a case where you couldn't test 100% of your code, but I understood the explanation.
And perhaps the ability for senior developers to veto management decisions on features and functionality.
Did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?
I can maybe see Senior Developers being able to veto process changes... but features/functionality? Maybe my workplace is different, but usually when someone from management asks for a list of features, they expect it to be complete. It usually happens at the expense of the timeline, but they want all the features no matter how long it takes.
I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but I find if there's a "defined process" the only "creativity" I have is in creating a tool to automatically fill in that process.
You want me to enter my time card on that webpage every day with the same numbers? Fine! Automated. You want me to generate comments for every function I write even though the function name explicitly states in it's name what it does? Fine! Automated. You want me to get at least 6 hours worth of work on my Scrum each day and you berate me in front of the other developers if I don't? (yes... that happens) Fine! Automated.
All that most of these "busy work" processes that get in the way of me making a product have only made me want to remove the hindrance of the processes. And you know what? Management doesn't care because the numbers work. It's like a few years back when they were required by their management to have 100% participation in United Way donations (yep, that happened too) and my manager would basically punish me for not donating to charity until I started donating a penny to make it more expensive to process than it was worth... but it got their numbers on par.
Slashdot Mirror
I was actually in a theater where there was a fire. You could see one of the speakers behind the screen caught fire and it was burning in an awesome looking circle behind the scene... I thought it was a cool looking fireball effect until I realized it was real and it wasn't moving with the scene.
Now, according to the "yelling fire in a theater" crowd, we should have all gone off and stampeded each other to get out of the building. You know what happened? We all peacefully stood up, proceeded to the exits and went outside. We then received a free movie ticket out in the parking lot.
The whole illusion that screaming fire is going to be any different is pure bullshit if you ask me.
Two sides of a coin. I prefer glossy screens when glare isn't an issue. Not sure what I'd do with a laptop though. I have a matte screen on my ThinkPad and I've used my father's VAIO with glossy screen. I do like how bright his looks compared to mine, but I don't think I can really compare the two since they are a few years apart (the ThinkPad being older/darker.)
As far as my home PC, I have a glossy Viewsonic 19" 4:3 that I like looking at more than the newer matte 24" 16:10. Glare isn't an issue because I don't have my back to the window, but on a bright day I can see the glossy screen much easier than the matte.
That just feels expensive. I have an electric RC helicopter that cost me less than $2k for the heli, radio and all the tools needed to get it to fly. I could easily attach a camera to it (even video) and stream 10+ minutes (battery life) of photo/video for a nominal added cost.
I'm assuming that cost is quite a bit on the software/R&D side of things.
Maybe not with the Google maps we have access to, but I'm sure Google has more than one image of the same buildings. (which I assume they are using for Google Earth 3D)
Although OP didn't mention making money...
I'm sure there are restrictions for selling the photos, but maybe not derivative works?
Just don't buy any XBox games. That's simple. Heck, you could even torch the 360 just to prove that you are a rat bastard.
Will these true believers (in Camping's revelation) be able to cope, knowing that they aren't among "god's favourites", and they are left behind to suffer with the rest of us. Will there be suicides?
Darwin works in mysterious ways.
Now must be a great time to start looking for foreclosure homes!
Even if it does make sense... it was by design. Obviously, nothing important happens at random.
Use common sense:
5. Read the reviews of an application. See what people complain about.
6. Don't install applications which ask for rights that make little sense in context (a calculator which asks for access to the network and contacts for example).
7. If unsure about some permissions, check the developer's website to see if there is a good explanation. If not, contact the developer directly and ask.
8. If you suddenly find an app for free which you thought it was pay-only, check to see if it is cloned. If so, don't install it as it might be tampered.
9. Check if the developer of an application matches who you know it should be. If not don't install it as it might be tampered.
I can see 5, and 6... that makes sense for most people. But the rest of these make having an app store pointless. If you need to go outside the phone environment to find out why someone asked for a particular permission.
Well, the notepad app could say it needed the Internet access for ads and the contact information for the quick contact paste feature.
Also, a majority of the phone users are not geeks with finely tuned BS meters or the ability to tell what the access even means.
I think firewall is a bit overkill. My advice would be to just use normally. I do. I DON'T install apps from shady sources, I just use the official Market. I have a few dozen apps installed, and I clicked through the permission screen mindlessly, yes. Why? Almost every app needs network access, after some time I got bored reading through the list of permission they require. BUT - the apps I install are well established apps with overwhelmingly positive reviews (based on a large number of reviewers). That's basically it - just use common sense.
The problem is, 99% (woo, fictional stats) of the people that voted that app a 5 star app did the same thing. Nobody pays attention to what they are giving access to. They only care what the app tells them it's doing. (I'm a background switcher and I need access to your contacts so I can display them on the background and full internet access for ads!). They do not care that it's sending their contact information to a central server of spammers.
Some of them are non-obvious or too lenient.
SD Card access springs to mind. Google considers all data on the SD card public... I, however, do not think my SD card is free range and wish there was a way to limit apps to just their folder. (Well, I know there is a way [symlinks in app path on local memory to directories on sdcard], but Android does not do it.)
Some apps (I have a friend who did this) will check the built in functionality to determine if you have a firewall app and refuse to run unless you buy his pay for version.
Also, Internet Access. I cannot say, "No, you will only have access to google.com/*" without a firewall.
Not affiliated with this site, but I find it handy at times:
http://alternativeto.net/software/skype/?profile=linux&platform=linux&exactmatch=true
But if you put in your postal address into the PSN then the person will know where to steal your activation code!
Any system can be explained away. Snail mail theft is a bit extreme, but so is sending everyone a snail mail code to re-activate. An email validation code should be good enough and if you're dumb enough to use the same password for PSN as your email and you haven't changed it yet, you deserve the long boring hold time while trying to get your password reset over the phone.
Eh... if you try to log in, they can send the email at that time. Anyone trying to hack all the accounts would be hard pressed to log in to that many accounts to activate and reset the passwords for any moment in the day. Now, if they sent out the activation codes in batches and let the users log in at any time, sure... I can see where that may be a bad idea, but having the activation code sent at the time of initial attempt would not be as exploitable.
Now, a smart user would not use the same password for email as the PSN account and an even smarter user would change their passwords after that fiasco if they were similar (ie: I can see someone using passwords like myemailpass and mypsnpass.) So a truly ignorant person may get re-hacked if they didn't change their passwords and the activation codes were sent out.
I remember reading a while back someone said (not sure who) that they don't care what standard is used as long as it's their standard. I think it was .NET vs. Java.
I'm sure the same mentality is behind this. They don't care who's machine you are running on as long as they have their fingers in it. Of course, they want to be the one in control and closest to the bare metal.
You know your credit really isn't at risk unless you do it, right? If someone steals your card and charges up $15k in charges that are not yours, you call the credit card company, tell them you did not buy those (they are likely to call you first actually.... I've had it happen) and you get the charges reversed and a new card issued.
It's dead simple and not a real concern, IMHO.
Uh... Ubuntu is a Debian derivative, not vice versa...
I happen to like being able to look over at a glance and see where the scroll bar is without having to find that tiny thread. I also hate themes that make the scroller "hide" on the bar by making the colors match. Horizontal screen resolution is not a concern. Not sure who thought it was. There's plenty of room for a slider bar.
I'm also not a fan of the menu items up top. It breaks the flow of an app. When you have multiple windows open and you have to go to the top of the screen every time to operate the applications, it feels like there's something broken there. Not sure what it is. I want my menus on the window that they are associated with.
It wasn't required, per say, but highly encouraged. You weren't going to get fired, but there was enough of an abstraction from pay raises that it could not be tied directly, but it was a factor. Whoever worked that one out was criminal in their own right. The practice has since stopped.
Actually it's been changed from [Donate > 0 || Donate == 0] -to- [Donate N || Not]. There's a minor distinction there, but the management is no longer penalized as long as everyone at least fills out the card saying "I choose to (or not to) donate." Previously, choosing to donate 0 was considered not responding and since they wanted 100% response they changed it to Donate or Not.) Come to think of it, I haven't seen one of those slips in over a year. Hopefully they stopped the guilt trip of saying "No" to some fabricated emotional picture of a starving kid sitting next to the "No" box.
Obviously, the code he posted would be part of a method that accepted a date value so you could test it with any date. It was just an example to explain the point. I myself am having a hard time trying to find a case where you couldn't test 100% of your code, but I understood the explanation.
And perhaps the ability for senior developers to veto management decisions on features and functionality.
Did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?
I can maybe see Senior Developers being able to veto process changes... but features/functionality? Maybe my workplace is different, but usually when someone from management asks for a list of features, they expect it to be complete. It usually happens at the expense of the timeline, but they want all the features no matter how long it takes.
I'm sure I'm not alone in this, but I find if there's a "defined process" the only "creativity" I have is in creating a tool to automatically fill in that process.
You want me to enter my time card on that webpage every day with the same numbers? Fine! Automated.
You want me to generate comments for every function I write even though the function name explicitly states in it's name what it does? Fine! Automated.
You want me to get at least 6 hours worth of work on my Scrum each day and you berate me in front of the other developers if I don't? (yes... that happens) Fine! Automated.
All that most of these "busy work" processes that get in the way of me making a product have only made me want to remove the hindrance of the processes. And you know what? Management doesn't care because the numbers work. It's like a few years back when they were required by their management to have 100% participation in United Way donations (yep, that happened too) and my manager would basically punish me for not donating to charity until I started donating a penny to make it more expensive to process than it was worth... but it got their numbers on par.