I have owned several as well, and have to agree that they do lack in UI design. I don't understand why, since you could simply copy a Nokia or a Samsung UI and make some minor changes.
Having said that, the UI in my RAZR is much better than anything they used to have and is almost up to par. I only wish they would offer more advanced controls and customization.
I think one problem might be availability. Here in Europe, we CAN get exotic GSM phones, but you have to go to a specialty dealer. If you just walk into a mainstream electronics and home appliance shop or a cell phone booth you can't find any linux phones.
The specialty dealers take a large profit off the phones since they don't sell that many of them. So nobody has one, you never hear about one so you never know you might actually want one.
How will you stop the edit wars? How will you make it so that Wikipedia has proper sources? How will you stop dimwits writing BS? How will you make Wikipedia respect expertise?
I really wish Wikipedia worked, could you please fix it?
I live in a country with a national ID system, but I'm American and still really worried about this. I think we're talking about two different cultures here. In a European country, ID's have strongly agreed upon usage and there is a culture of checks and balances, your personal information might be known by the government, but strong rules based on tradition control the use of that information. No such thing in the States, where these systems are basically being implemented to increase control over the populace.
It is completely legit and functions according to Russian laws, this was concluded by a police investigation. So I wouldn't say it is "grey" operation.
Of course those laws are considered lenient by copyright holders and there is pressure to change them. That is of course a matter of politics in Russia.
Now, I don't know what the laws in the US (or any other country) say about purchasing music from a foreign (legal) provider, that might be a grey area in the law.
From what I understand, the money paid to copyright holders are the same as for radio play, so I don't see any "moral" problem with the operation either.
My impression on the text is, that the shuttle (and thus the ISS) is bleeding NASA dry. They should logically cut and run as far as the shuttle goes, but then they lose the ISS which they have spent alot of money on.
This could of course happen anyway, if the economy crashes and there is more war and NASA gets slashed, but even so, science and the other stuff that is really very good and cost-effective, like space probes, hubble and satellites will get less money.
I still think exploring other ways of saving the ISS should be explored, though I'm not sure its possible. The Russians do have a heavy lift rocket, it might be possible to use that and would save money, for sure.
I say NASA has painted itself into a corner with the shuttle, the reason being lack of vision and the inability to stop using the shuttle when they should have.
There is a company in Russia, called allofmp3.com, that is completely legal. They pay royalties according to Russian laws. These royalties work in the same way as when radio stations pay them, only they pay them according to data transferred. Thus you pay according to quality.
One record costs about $3-$4 so I'd say the prices are quite good. The site is mentioned in this The Register article.
It is irrelevant wether global warming is caused by CO2 or not. Oil is a finite resource, we should be swithing to other forms of energy simply for that reason and use the remaining oil sparingly.
Not only that, but since global warming IS happening, we should be preparing for lower crop yields, flooding and other horrible disasters.
None of this is economically possible right now -and that I believe is the problem.
So you see, the whole CO2-causes-global-warming-debate isn't worth even getting in to.
Don't get me wrong, I think Wikipedia is a good idea, I use it all the time to find out tidbits of information on various subjects.
Yet Wikipedia is seriously flawed! I really wish Wikipedia could be used as an academic reference. I really wish the edit wars would stop. I really wish I could truly trust the information posted there. I really wish the POV could be fixed so that various viewpoints could be accurately and fairly be included.
It could be done. The current system is just too open for the kind of abuse described in the article.
I visited a local video rental shop just recently, I haven't been there for a year probably.
I noticed ALOT of straight to DVD sequels to various successful movies. It seems the Hollywood machinery today is all about squeezing blood out of turnips.
I think laptops use way less energy than desktops. So perhaps, in the future, with energy prices going up (as they invetably will), laptops and equialent systems (Mac Mini, anyone?) will prevail.
I think the situation here is, that we have to choose, either it is heavy investment in nuclear power and uranium enrichment and excavation, or we scale back our lifestyles radically.
So, anyone cheering for the "eat-dry-fish-and-porrige-all-the-time-while-livin g-off-the-land" -alternative?
First you said the Challenger accident had a social aspect to it:
"the Challenger was destroyed, the American Century started to be destroyed with it. Our sense of infalibility, superiority, and incredible technology was irreparably damaged by what happened.
Then you said I'm trying to give it a social aspect because I didn't like the Reagan administration (I never elaborated on Reagan or how I feel about him, BTW, only on unemployment and race riots):
At the very least a "-5 Trying To Still Politicize Something That Happened Two Decades Ago Because I Didn't Like The Reagan Administration" should apply.
Bottom line:
You, my friend, are a big floppy cock.
Hardware bubble harder to make
on
The New Boom
·
· Score: 1
Atleast with hardware, you have to build something tangible, like a production line, and actually have a product to offer. This is already a fundamental difference to the dotcoms.
But seriously, take a look at the way the stockmarket works. How does it differ from a classic Ponzi scheme?
Perhaps there MAY be better returns and stocks do have more legitimacy, but that's about it.
"I didn't realize until this thread just how young most Slashdotters must be. I was already 8 years into my engineering career when Challenger failed."
I'm not saying you're old, but I wouldn't call someone who was only, say a kid of 10 years old in 1986, and 30 now exactly young! I mean, 30 isn't old, but it aint young no more either.
I did read the article. If you had thought a little instead of using a knee-jerk reaction, you would have realized, that I was pointing out, that the concept of spaceflight is inherently dangerous. Any system, no matter how well designed, that releases those kinds of energies is going to have failure of some sort.
It is VERY relevant, that people die of all sorts of things that are not even inherently dangerous, such as walking down the street. However, sitting on top of a large mass of soon-to-explode-stuff is. Those astronauts took their chances and died, too bad, but that was expected.
Were you born in the nineties? Because things were really wrong in the late 1980's in the States and Challenger, Grenada and Panama were all made into huge deals to keep people distracted.
Your comment is currently rated at +5 and is exactly the reason why some comments should be moderated to -5 Totally Uninformed.
I actually remembered watching it live, and we did have CNN on cable no less. So it should have been possible. But I asked my dad about it and he said I hadn't seen it. So all the coverage since and me being young at the time messed things up in my head.
Slashdot Mirror
I have owned several as well, and have to agree that they do lack in UI design. I don't understand why, since you could simply copy a Nokia or a Samsung UI and make some minor changes.
Having said that, the UI in my RAZR is much better than anything they used to have and is almost up to par. I only wish they would offer more advanced controls and customization.
I think one problem might be availability. Here in Europe, we CAN get exotic GSM phones, but you have to go to a specialty dealer. If you just walk into a mainstream electronics and home appliance shop or a cell phone booth you can't find any linux phones.
The specialty dealers take a large profit off the phones since they don't sell that many of them. So nobody has one, you never hear about one so you never know you might actually want one.
This, I think, is really too bad.
Related to this:
How will you stop the edit wars?
How will you make it so that Wikipedia has proper sources?
How will you stop dimwits writing BS?
How will you make Wikipedia respect expertise?
I really wish Wikipedia worked, could you please fix it?
Get a job you like, and never work a day in your life!
Umm, yes, I kind of like Opera, though I don't use it for a only a few reasons that could easily be fixed.
Slashdotters hate Opera for some reason.
Of course now that I had to explain it to you, it isn't too funny.
Opera sucks, plain and simple. However, Firefox on the other hand is simply great. This is and always will be, facts notwithstanding.
Well, at least on the Slashdot plane of existance anyway.
Parent is right. This is the first step towards a national ID system. Another is the PASS card required for travel to Mexico or Canda.
I live in a country with a national ID system, but I'm American and still really worried about this. I think we're talking about two different cultures here. In a European country, ID's have strongly agreed upon usage and there is a culture of checks and balances, your personal information might be known by the government, but strong rules based on tradition control the use of that information. No such thing in the States, where these systems are basically being implemented to increase control over the populace.
I call this one an example of "Fachism Creep".
That's "African American" you insensitive clod!
It is completely legit and functions according to Russian laws, this was concluded by a police investigation. So I wouldn't say it is "grey" operation.
Of course those laws are considered lenient by copyright holders and there is pressure to change them. That is of course a matter of politics in Russia.
Now, I don't know what the laws in the US (or any other country) say about purchasing music from a foreign (legal) provider, that might be a grey area in the law.
From what I understand, the money paid to copyright holders are the same as for radio play, so I don't see any "moral" problem with the operation either.
My impression on the text is, that the shuttle (and thus the ISS) is bleeding NASA dry. They should logically cut and run as far as the shuttle goes, but then they lose the ISS which they have spent alot of money on.
This could of course happen anyway, if the economy crashes and there is more war and NASA gets slashed, but even so, science and the other stuff that is really very good and cost-effective, like space probes, hubble and satellites will get less money.
I still think exploring other ways of saving the ISS should be explored, though I'm not sure its possible. The Russians do have a heavy lift rocket, it might be possible to use that and would save money, for sure.
I say NASA has painted itself into a corner with the shuttle, the reason being lack of vision and the inability to stop using the shuttle when they should have.
There is a company in Russia, called allofmp3.com, that is completely legal. They pay royalties according to Russian laws. These royalties work in the same way as when radio stations pay them, only they pay them according to data transferred. Thus you pay according to quality.
One record costs about $3-$4 so I'd say the prices are quite good. The site is mentioned in this The Register article.
Oh well, one out of five getting it aint bad I guess.
I was just refering to the parent claiming that Hollywood USED to only make quality enterntainment.
Which obviously isn't true, now is it?
It is irrelevant wether global warming is caused by CO2 or not. Oil is a finite resource, we should be swithing to other forms of energy simply for that reason and use the remaining oil sparingly.
Not only that, but since global warming IS happening, we should be preparing for lower crop yields, flooding and other horrible disasters.
None of this is economically possible right now -and that I believe is the problem.
So you see, the whole CO2-causes-global-warming-debate isn't worth even getting in to.
Don't get me wrong, I think Wikipedia is a good idea, I use it all the time to find out tidbits of information on various subjects.
Yet Wikipedia is seriously flawed! I really wish Wikipedia could be used as an academic reference. I really wish the edit wars would stop. I really wish I could truly trust the information posted there. I really wish the POV could be fixed so that various viewpoints could be accurately and fairly be included.
It could be done. The current system is just too open for the kind of abuse described in the article.
"Yeah, but they used to be about getting dead presidents by delivering quality entertainment."
B-movies, a liberal myth.
Contrary to popular belief, there is no mention of "B-movies" before 1998.
I visited a local video rental shop just recently, I haven't been there for a year probably.
I noticed ALOT of straight to DVD sequels to various successful movies. It seems the Hollywood machinery today is all about squeezing blood out of turnips.
I think laptops use way less energy than desktops. So perhaps, in the future, with energy prices going up (as they invetably will), laptops and equialent systems (Mac Mini, anyone?) will prevail.
n g-off-the-land" -alternative?
I think the situation here is, that we have to choose, either it is heavy investment in nuclear power and uranium enrichment and excavation, or we scale back our lifestyles radically.
So, anyone cheering for the "eat-dry-fish-and-porrige-all-the-time-while-livi
No?
Nuclear power it is!
Well, atleast I'm consistent.
First you said the Challenger accident had a social aspect to it:
"the Challenger was destroyed, the American Century started to be destroyed with it. Our sense of infalibility, superiority, and incredible technology was irreparably damaged by what happened.
Then you said I'm trying to give it a social aspect because I didn't like the Reagan administration (I never elaborated on Reagan or how I feel about him, BTW, only on unemployment and race riots):
At the very least a "-5 Trying To Still Politicize Something That Happened Two Decades Ago Because I Didn't Like The Reagan Administration" should apply.
Bottom line:
You, my friend, are a big floppy cock.
Atleast with hardware, you have to build something tangible, like a production line, and actually have a product to offer. This is already a fundamental difference to the dotcoms.
But seriously, take a look at the way the stockmarket works. How does it differ from a classic Ponzi scheme?
Perhaps there MAY be better returns and stocks do have more legitimacy, but that's about it.
"I didn't realize until this thread just how young most Slashdotters must be. I was already 8 years into my engineering career when Challenger failed."
I'm not saying you're old, but I wouldn't call someone who was only, say a kid of 10 years old in 1986, and 30 now exactly young! I mean, 30 isn't old, but it aint young no more either.
I did read the article. If you had thought a little instead of using a knee-jerk reaction, you would have realized, that I was pointing out, that the concept of spaceflight is inherently dangerous. Any system, no matter how well designed, that releases those kinds of energies is going to have failure of some sort.
It is VERY relevant, that people die of all sorts of things that are not even inherently dangerous, such as walking down the street. However, sitting on top of a large mass of soon-to-explode-stuff is. Those astronauts took their chances and died, too bad, but that was expected.
Were you born in the nineties? Because things were really wrong in the late 1980's in the States and Challenger, Grenada and Panama were all made into huge deals to keep people distracted.
Your comment is currently rated at +5 and is exactly the reason why some comments should be moderated to -5 Totally Uninformed.
I'm sure your cozy middle class life kept you away from any pesky race riots, homelesness or unemployment.
So your point is, that spaceflight is 100% safe dispite the Challenger (or any other) accident?
Umm, I don't get it.
I actually remembered watching it live, and we did have CNN on cable no less. So it should have been possible. But I asked my dad about it and he said I hadn't seen it. So all the coverage since and me being young at the time messed things up in my head.
I'd say myth is busted.