Your tripe response appears to imply you believe I was somehow saying it would prevent such things from happening. Save everyone the time and read the entire post before replying.
Is there any actual evidence that phones are bad for kids?
They aren't trying to ban cellular telephones for kids, they are trying to ban smartphones for kids. The important difference here is that one is a telephonic communications device and one is a small computer. The reason this matters is because it's the applications that engineered to maximize user interaction using neuroscience. This can lead to very real addictions regardless of age in a similar fashion to gambling addiction. Are there adults that are addicted to their smartphones? Most definitely.
I'm not arguing in favor of the ban, I'm just answering your question.
What about Kyle Kullinski, Darvid Pakman, etc. They are Secular Humanist Political commentators and Journalists who report on current events and extremists in the news. They are Agnostic Atheists who are critical of religion, and want to hold Government accountable.
I fully support their right to post videos on their own website. Youtube is whatever youtube wants it to be and that does not include unrestricted speech.
I think maybe RedHat needed something to cement its position as lead supporter for Linux systems or maybe they needed more change for the sake of change. I don't know for sure but it sure doesn't seem like their changes are motivated by benevolence. I do agree though that Poettering seems like an instrument of their will.
Don't worry too much, though. If I've learned anything from open source, it's that long term survival is based on merit.
If (and that's a big "if") companies become liable for software failures then it will be most likely that there will be a guideline of standard programming practices. Likely it would restrict companies to using programming languages that have already been heavily analyzed and their security weaknesses identified. CMU has composed guidelines for multiple languages and platforms which could easily be identified programmatically. Such regulation would be a deathblow to companies using script kiddies to scrape together IoT devices in their favorite language du jour but I think we would be better for it. Also, it may also force companies to analyze open source software and (ultimately) submit patches which makes things better for everyone.
Just looking the size of the application is very crude because for all we know they could just be packing in a lot of additional uncompressed data. What really needs to be looked at is how much of it is executable code and how much is wasted on repetitious framework libraries.
I could be wrong but it seems like Netflix only a proponent of network neutrality when it suits them. I suspect they have recently gotten notice that they are being throttled in some locations and they don't like the proposed contract, so they are back on the net neutrality bandwagon. Once they establish long term contracts with major ISPs, they'll be back to their old anti-competitive ways.
If the NSA failed to bribe their developers, it doesn't mean they are just going to give up. A bribe is just the most cost effective solution for the long term. Have no doubt that they will seek or even maybe even create a weakness in the application.
Well no, this is the difference between developing for the console vs developing for the PC. Sure you can code purely to the DirectX abstraction and not care about the underlying architecture but the advantage of developing for a console is that you know what the underlying architecture is and can optimize for it.
Those days are long gone. They are just little computers now and that's how software is developed for them.
you don't really think developers just use DirectX and don't care about leveraging the advantage of unified memory over separate memory groups connected by a system bus do you?
You don't really think Microsoft forgot about that when they implemented the software their graphics subsystem do you?
You decry gun violence. Well the overwhelming majority of the violence is in 2 percent of the counties. Focus your attention there.
But 100% of guns related to gun violence come from people selling guns.
Commonsense is this:....
The background check bill got canned immediately. I do not believe opening the market to more military hardware is a good idea. I think you are talking about suppressors rather than silencers but I understand your point.
Why not cool it on the organized hate campaign anyway?
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye."
Maybe cut down on the groupthink while you're at it.
So you want to cut the hate while accusing me of not thinking for myself. The hypocrisy is quite poetic.
Slashdot Mirror
* Add massive amounts of time between seasons!
* Take one season and split it into two!
Well done CBS!
I hope this dystopia was everything you hoped it would be because it sure does suck for humans!
Your tripe response appears to imply you believe I was somehow saying it would prevent such things from happening. Save everyone the time and read the entire post before replying.
So, over budget, behind schedule and full of bugs? They just need to add Oracle to the mix to get the trifecta of bad businesses! ;)
Is there any actual evidence that phones are bad for kids?
They aren't trying to ban cellular telephones for kids, they are trying to ban smartphones for kids. The important difference here is that one is a telephonic communications device and one is a small computer. The reason this matters is because it's the applications that engineered to maximize user interaction using neuroscience. This can lead to very real addictions regardless of age in a similar fashion to gambling addiction. Are there adults that are addicted to their smartphones? Most definitely.
I'm not arguing in favor of the ban, I'm just answering your question.
Physics: 4 sigma error, question the model
Climate: 4 sigma error, jail those who dare to disagree
Not quite.
Everything: 4 sigma error, question the model
Everything: shame those who think a 6 sigma error is the truth
What about Kyle Kullinski, Darvid Pakman, etc. They are Secular Humanist Political commentators and Journalists who report on current events and extremists in the news. They are Agnostic Atheists who are critical of religion, and want to hold Government accountable.
I fully support their right to post videos on their own website. Youtube is whatever youtube wants it to be and that does not include unrestricted speech.
I never claimed it was a solution, I just said that it's the kind of regulation they would put in place.
I think maybe RedHat needed something to cement its position as lead supporter for Linux systems or maybe they needed more change for the sake of change. I don't know for sure but it sure doesn't seem like their changes are motivated by benevolence. I do agree though that Poettering seems like an instrument of their will.
Don't worry too much, though. If I've learned anything from open source, it's that long term survival is based on merit.
That makes two things that brings out the anon trolls in droves: Net neutrality and Systemd.
If (and that's a big "if") companies become liable for software failures then it will be most likely that there will be a guideline of standard programming practices. Likely it would restrict companies to using programming languages that have already been heavily analyzed and their security weaknesses identified. CMU has composed guidelines for multiple languages and platforms which could easily be identified programmatically. Such regulation would be a deathblow to companies using script kiddies to scrape together IoT devices in their favorite language du jour but I think we would be better for it. Also, it may also force companies to analyze open source software and (ultimately) submit patches which makes things better for everyone.
Just looking the size of the application is very crude because for all we know they could just be packing in a lot of additional uncompressed data. What really needs to be looked at is how much of it is executable code and how much is wasted on repetitious framework libraries.
Congratulations on not understanding the core concept of net neutrality!
I could be wrong but it seems like Netflix only a proponent of network neutrality when it suits them. I suspect they have recently gotten notice that they are being throttled in some locations and they don't like the proposed contract, so they are back on the net neutrality bandwagon. Once they establish long term contracts with major ISPs, they'll be back to their old anti-competitive ways.
If the NSA failed to bribe their developers, it doesn't mean they are just going to give up. A bribe is just the most cost effective solution for the long term. Have no doubt that they will seek or even maybe even create a weakness in the application.
You mad, bro? ;)
Just use the Konami code to get infinite money. ;)
By "faster" what is your measurement?
Total computational throughput.
Well no, this is the difference between developing for the console vs developing for the PC. Sure you can code purely to the DirectX abstraction and not care about the underlying architecture but the advantage of developing for a console is that you know what the underlying architecture is and can optimize for it.
Those days are long gone. They are just little computers now and that's how software is developed for them.
you don't really think developers just use DirectX and don't care about leveraging the advantage of unified memory over separate memory groups connected by a system bus do you?
You don't really think Microsoft forgot about that when they implemented the software their graphics subsystem do you?
at fucking you over. ;)
People have been calling for less hate for years but Fox News won't listen.
Sure, like The Guardian is unbiased.
Don't you just hate it when facts get in the way?
You decry gun violence. Well the overwhelming majority of the violence is in 2 percent of the counties. Focus your attention there.
But 100% of guns related to gun violence come from people selling guns.
Commonsense is this: ....
The background check bill got canned immediately.
I do not believe opening the market to more military hardware is a good idea.
I think you are talking about suppressors rather than silencers but I understand your point.
How does this in any way relate to why you oppose the commonsense gun bills?
Why not cool it on the organized hate campaign anyway?
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye."
Maybe cut down on the groupthink while you're at it.
So you want to cut the hate while accusing me of not thinking for myself. The hypocrisy is quite poetic.
You're not simply interested in making certain that felons and mentally ill people don't purchase guns.
And yet that's exactly what the bills were trying to regulate and what 85% of people think should be laws.
What you truly want is to remove guns from the society.
A) That's not what I want.
B) That would require a constitutional amendment.
Ain't gonna happen.
I realize this and many people will continue to die on a daily basis from gunshot wounds.