With the latest version of Safari, Apple removed from the right mouse click* contextual menu the ability to create a new tab.
"Open link in new tab" is still there? Are you thinking of opening a blank new tab? In which case, not having that as a context option makes sense to me - it's not an operation on the link.
Emacs Macht Alle Computer Schön. I guess noone cares about the old "Eight Megabytes And Constantly Swapping" anymore, at eight megabytes it'd be less than one percent of a web browser.
E.g. in Norway, to change the constitution you'd need 2/3rds majority after the next election to pass a change you proposed before the election.
It sounds like you need supermajority of representatives not the majority of residents. Big difference.
True, it's a supermajority of representatives. That said, the difference isn't as big in Norway as it could be in e.g. the UK or other countries with "first past the post". In Norway, there are many elected from each area - in addition to some that are handed out in order to make sure that the number of electives matches the election result even closer. The main problem with the Norwegian voting system is that non-central areas have too many representatives, but along the party lines it's pretty close.
A majority isn't sufficient; it takes a lot more than that. In fact, in the US and Europe, some rights likely couldn't be taken away even by constitutional amendment because the various supreme courts would block it.
If a large enough part of the population wants it for enough time, it would pass. They'd change laws, change constitutions and leave the treaties which prevent what they want - and also replace judges in due time.
E.g. in Norway, to change the constitution you'd need 2/3rds majority after the next election to pass a change you proposed before the election.
It would be interesting to see what Amazon customer support would say here, because I have no doubt Amazon customer support isn't trying to actually solve the problem. Either this is automated, or they want a call to make him buy something else.
You also need a valid case. The fact that your local Ford dealership doesn't sell Chevys isn't a basis for a lawsuit.
Indeed. However, if you were the dominant reseller of cars in the country of all brands, e.g. with a 60% market share - and then started selling your own brand cars and stopping sales of some of your competition, you'd be in trouble.
Amazon would be in big trouble if they were a dominant player in the market (and I'm sure lawyers would have a long fight to determine which market...). They aren't, thus no case. Just remember that Amazon sells their own stuff rather than better alternatives, so don't go to Amazon if you don't know exactly what you're getting. Never do market research there, they'd prefer to sell their own junk rather than superior alternatives.
There really isn't an excuse for Chromecast, but not supporting or selling Apple TV makes perfect sense.
Only a complete Apple Fanboy could complain about a streaming service not supporting Apple TV as an ANTITRUST issue, since the main reason streaming services don't support Apple TV is that Apple wants to take 30% of their GROSS on every transaction if they do "support" it.
That's only if you buy the service through the apple store. Just use it for existing customers signed up elsewhere, or increase the prices if you sign up there. Problem solved. And they're already doing some variation of this on iPad/iPhone, as there is an app there.
(I don't have one, I have a Roku, but I can't help but wonder if that's next. Yeah, Amazon has actually bothered to write an app for it, but given the ease they could have done so for at least one - perhaps both - of the devices here, I'm not believing that's the reason. If they drop Roku, bye-bye Prime membership.)
Of course they could. It's probably simple for the Chromecast, but for the AppleTV it's trivial . They've already got the app for iOS, so submitting it for TtvOS is not a lot of work - if they actually wanted to support it.
I'd strongly suggest that there's a large iff of anti-trust about this move. Leveraging a strong market position in one sector to gain in another?
It's an anti-competetive mode, sure - but Amazon is not even close to being dominant for that to matter in this market segment. So just buy it somewhere else, and keep in mind that Amazon is no longer a store where they sell everything. Start to look elsewhere for most purchases.
No one has managed to make it work reliably on Windows either. I don't think I've ever encountered a laptop on which Suspend wasn't either a game of Russian Roulette, or a guaranteed way to require a restart.
It works very well on Mac. It works OK on some Windows laptops as well, but many have some sort of problem - and I would guess this comes of poor vendor drivers on the laptop.
Uber can break whatever laws it wants, and it must take the legal responsibility whatever that turns out to be as determined by a court.
This is true, and if they end up in a court of law and in front of a jury of 12 people, those 12 people can decide whatever they want, such as "not guilty".
That is the 4th pillar of our legal system. No matter what the government says, at the end of the day, we're judged by a jury of our peers, not the government.
So Uber should be judged by a jury of other taxi companies?
They have pretty much the same catalogue, 25 million plus in Tidal's case.
Pretty much, but not as extensive. Tidal does not have as large a catalog as Spotify.
But even Spotify has holes in its catalog. Songs by artist (some long dead) that are just not available. Fortunately, Spotify allows me to add my own tracks from my own collection and they integrate seamlessly into playlists.
That's one of the things Apple Music is probably going to be good at. It already has Apple Match, so not integrating with your own library would be stupid. That would fill out the holes, and hopefully it also allows Apple not to pay artists whose music you already own - thus leaving more for the artists providing music you haven't already paid for. The shouldn't be a need to pay twice.
Second, they do have a tier with the same quality as Spotify for the same price.
Tidal is Spotify without the back catalog. I'm not interested in enriching a bunch of fading pop stars from the '90s who I never really cared for to begin with.
They have pretty much the same catalogue, 25 million plus in Tidal's case.
In my opionion, Tidal has better playlists (nice, curated ones with descriptions etc) and better sound quality (lossless). Spotify has better hardware support (Spotify connect), better autogenerators (E.g. make a radio based on a playlist) and is widely integrated (shazam, PS4, runkeeper etc).
This time it's Tidal, the streaming service built by Jay Z, Madonna, and other artists who want a "fair share" of the streaming music pie.
Their business model is incredible: offer the same crap music they've been donig for ages, in supposedly hifi quality (polished turd analogy goes here) for twice the price of Spotify.
Second, they do have a tier with the same quality as Spotify for the same price. They also offer lossless quality tier, which I've subscribed to since it launched with wimp here in Norway. I love the service and the quality, and I just hope the new owners won't ruin it. Exclusive music isn't exactly what I want as a new trend...
Without knowing: All money goes into the same pot and gets divided per what's listened to totally. There's no point in doing it per user.
Many artists in Norway is asking for this to happen. The reason? If you look at the listening patterns, they would get a much bigger share of the pie. Those who listen to music and often want to listen to Norwegian artists with which they have a long relationship, tend to listen to fewer songs per month than those who play it more as background noise, using generated playlists etc. Thus, with a per user scheme their slice of the pie wouldn't be marginalized by teens using spotify 10 hours a day.
The main reason why raising the minimum wage increases productivity: When the labor cost increases, it becomes more important to use it efficiently - optimizing routines, buying tools and equipment and automating. This has worked very well in Northern Europe - if your business plan demands a salary too low to live on, go think up something else. Also, all your competitors have to pay the same wage - a crucial factor.
If you want to see the other side of the coin, look at third world countries - available capital and know-how is low. You will have large groups of people manually digging, carrying materials to the top of buildings etc.
Having unprotected sex with no birth control does not imply there was a relationship to begin with. It is the culture or something that person just wants to do and decided to do
Education is also a heavy factor here. Having early and effective education with a focus on birth control - and making these available - is a lot more effective than sweeping this under the rug and teaching abstinence.
I'm not at all a web "programmer", so excuse my ignorance.
How exactly would you reliably keep "such a bit of state" without cookies?
I only see that happening by essentially putting the cookie, i.e. the session id, as a GET parameter. I hope that's not what you're thinking about because that's even more horrible than using a cookie.
You could add a parameter to the URL, specifying no cookies.
Are you too young to understand why Microsoft earned the nickname : The Evil Empire? Or are you just completely uninformed and willing to sound like a fool? If this seems rude to you, it is because you know you have no idea what you're talking about.
Microsoft acquired that nickname because of nefarious business practices, not gathering and selling customers' private data.
It's funny when Google, Apple or Microsoft complain about privacy issues.
Google, sure. But not Apple or Microsoft. For companies like Google and Facebook, you are the product and privacy is a roadblock they work around. Microsoft and Apple represents a different kind of company that wants you to buy actual products from them, and behave far better in this area. When customers desire privacy, these will try to sell you products that delivers this.
Palm Pre beat them all years ago. I dont understand why it has taken so long for everyone else to offer it.
Because until wireless charging actually is widely available, you can't just use a cable to charge your phone - you need an expensive cable with extra electronics to do so. Rather pointless, unless you want to go completely sealed for a water proof device. Until this happens, support for it in phones is a pointless gimmick. Ikea's move is one of the best things I've heard for the future of wireless charging.
Slashdot Mirror
With the latest version of Safari, Apple removed from the right mouse click* contextual menu the ability to create a new tab.
"Open link in new tab" is still there? Are you thinking of opening a blank new tab? In which case, not having that as a context option makes sense to me - it's not an operation on the link.
emacs
Emacs Macht Alle Computer Schön. I guess noone cares about the old "Eight Megabytes And Constantly Swapping" anymore, at eight megabytes it'd be less than one percent of a web browser.
It sounds like you need supermajority of representatives not the majority of residents. Big difference.
True, it's a supermajority of representatives. That said, the difference isn't as big in Norway as it could be in e.g. the UK or other countries with "first past the post". In Norway, there are many elected from each area - in addition to some that are handed out in order to make sure that the number of electives matches the election result even closer. The main problem with the Norwegian voting system is that non-central areas have too many representatives, but along the party lines it's pretty close.
A majority isn't sufficient; it takes a lot more than that. In fact, in the US and Europe, some rights likely couldn't be taken away even by constitutional amendment because the various supreme courts would block it.
If a large enough part of the population wants it for enough time, it would pass. They'd change laws, change constitutions and leave the treaties which prevent what they want - and also replace judges in due time.
E.g. in Norway, to change the constitution you'd need 2/3rds majority after the next election to pass a change you proposed before the election.
If you don't want to pay taxes then go somewhere with no taxes (Somalia?)
You misspelled Greece . . .
Greece has taxes. They were just not very good at collecting them...
What is interesting?
That actually sounds pretty dam good. A lot of companies, eg Apple, could learn a lot about customer service from Amazon.
Apple is usually a top rated company in customer support, Amazon isn't - so while they should learn, it's probably not from amazon.
It would be interesting to see what Amazon customer support would say here, because I have no doubt Amazon customer support isn't trying to actually solve the problem. Either this is automated, or they want a call to make him buy something else.
You also need a valid case. The fact that your local Ford dealership doesn't sell Chevys isn't a basis for a lawsuit.
Indeed. However, if you were the dominant reseller of cars in the country of all brands, e.g. with a 60% market share - and then started selling your own brand cars and stopping sales of some of your competition, you'd be in trouble.
Amazon would be in big trouble if they were a dominant player in the market (and I'm sure lawyers would have a long fight to determine which market...). They aren't, thus no case. Just remember that Amazon sells their own stuff rather than better alternatives, so don't go to Amazon if you don't know exactly what you're getting. Never do market research there, they'd prefer to sell their own junk rather than superior alternatives.
There really isn't an excuse for Chromecast, but not supporting or selling Apple TV makes perfect sense.
Only a complete Apple Fanboy could complain about a streaming service not supporting Apple TV as an ANTITRUST issue, since the main reason streaming services don't support Apple TV is that Apple wants to take 30% of their GROSS on every transaction if they do "support" it.
That's only if you buy the service through the apple store. Just use it for existing customers signed up elsewhere, or increase the prices if you sign up there. Problem solved. And they're already doing some variation of this on iPad/iPhone, as there is an app there.
(I don't have one, I have a Roku, but I can't help but wonder if that's next. Yeah, Amazon has actually bothered to write an app for it, but given the ease they could have done so for at least one - perhaps both - of the devices here, I'm not believing that's the reason. If they drop Roku, bye-bye Prime membership.)
Of course they could. It's probably simple for the Chromecast, but for the AppleTV it's trivial . They've already got the app for iOS, so submitting it for TtvOS is not a lot of work - if they actually wanted to support it.
I'd strongly suggest that there's a large iff of anti-trust about this move. Leveraging a strong market position in one sector to gain in another?
It's an anti-competetive mode, sure - but Amazon is not even close to being dominant for that to matter in this market segment. So just buy it somewhere else, and keep in mind that Amazon is no longer a store where they sell everything. Start to look elsewhere for most purchases.
Microsoft bought Nokia for their patents. Any other money is just chump change.
The patents were not included in the deal. Microsoft didn't actually buy Nokia, they bought Nokia's handset business. The patents remained with Nokia.
Just how many of his businesses has he bankrupted, again?
Not that many. But could you trust him not give his own businesses advantages? Is he going to be an American Berlusconi?
No one has managed to make it work reliably on Windows either. I don't think I've ever encountered a laptop on which Suspend wasn't either a game of Russian Roulette, or a guaranteed way to require a restart.
It works very well on Mac. It works OK on some Windows laptops as well, but many have some sort of problem - and I would guess this comes of poor vendor drivers on the laptop.
Uber can break whatever laws it wants, and it must take the legal responsibility whatever that turns out to be as determined by a court.
This is true, and if they end up in a court of law and in front of a jury of 12 people, those 12 people can decide whatever they want, such as "not guilty".
That is the 4th pillar of our legal system. No matter what the government says, at the end of the day, we're judged by a jury of our peers, not the government.
So Uber should be judged by a jury of other taxi companies?
Pretty much, but not as extensive. Tidal does not have as large a catalog as Spotify.
But even Spotify has holes in its catalog. Songs by artist (some long dead) that are just not available. Fortunately, Spotify allows me to add my own tracks from my own collection and they integrate seamlessly into playlists.
That's one of the things Apple Music is probably going to be good at. It already has Apple Match, so not integrating with your own library would be stupid. That would fill out the holes, and hopefully it also allows Apple not to pay artists whose music you already own - thus leaving more for the artists providing music you haven't already paid for. The shouldn't be a need to pay twice.
Tidal is Spotify without the back catalog. I'm not interested in enriching a bunch of fading pop stars from the '90s who I never really cared for to begin with.
They have pretty much the same catalogue, 25 million plus in Tidal's case.
In my opionion, Tidal has better playlists (nice, curated ones with descriptions etc) and better sound quality (lossless). Spotify has better hardware support (Spotify connect), better autogenerators (E.g. make a radio based on a playlist) and is widely integrated (shazam, PS4, runkeeper etc).
This time it's Tidal, the streaming service built by Jay Z, Madonna, and other artists who want a "fair share" of the streaming music pie. Their business model is incredible: offer the same crap music they've been donig for ages, in supposedly hifi quality (polished turd analogy goes here) for twice the price of Spotify.
First, Tidal wasn't built by Jay Z, Madonna etc. . It started out as a Norwegian company WIMP, and was bought by Jay Z.
Second, they do have a tier with the same quality as Spotify for the same price. They also offer lossless quality tier, which I've subscribed to since it launched with wimp here in Norway. I love the service and the quality, and I just hope the new owners won't ruin it. Exclusive music isn't exactly what I want as a new trend...
They 'only' make millions of dollars, but are basically enslaved? I don't think the word slave means what you think it does...
They could join forces with poor Cristiano Ronaldo, who was a 120 000 GBP/week slave in Manchester United.
Without knowing: All money goes into the same pot and gets divided per what's listened to totally. There's no point in doing it per user.
Many artists in Norway is asking for this to happen. The reason? If you look at the listening patterns, they would get a much bigger share of the pie. Those who listen to music and often want to listen to Norwegian artists with which they have a long relationship, tend to listen to fewer songs per month than those who play it more as background noise, using generated playlists etc. Thus, with a per user scheme their slice of the pie wouldn't be marginalized by teens using spotify 10 hours a day.
Raising wages increases productivity, demonstrably so: http://www.raisetheminimumwage...
The main reason why raising the minimum wage increases productivity: When the labor cost increases, it becomes more important to use it efficiently - optimizing routines, buying tools and equipment and automating. This has worked very well in Northern Europe - if your business plan demands a salary too low to live on, go think up something else. Also, all your competitors have to pay the same wage - a crucial factor.
If you want to see the other side of the coin, look at third world countries - available capital and know-how is low. You will have large groups of people manually digging, carrying materials to the top of buildings etc.
Having unprotected sex with no birth control does not imply there was a relationship to begin with. It is the culture or something that person just wants to do and decided to do
Education is also a heavy factor here. Having early and effective education with a focus on birth control - and making these available - is a lot more effective than sweeping this under the rug and teaching abstinence.
I'm not at all a web "programmer", so excuse my ignorance. How exactly would you reliably keep "such a bit of state" without cookies? I only see that happening by essentially putting the cookie, i.e. the session id, as a GET parameter. I hope that's not what you're thinking about because that's even more horrible than using a cookie.
You could add a parameter to the URL, specifying no cookies.
Are you too young to understand why Microsoft earned the nickname : The Evil Empire? Or are you just completely uninformed and willing to sound like a fool? If this seems rude to you, it is because you know you have no idea what you're talking about.
Microsoft acquired that nickname because of nefarious business practices, not gathering and selling customers' private data.
It's funny when Google, Apple or Microsoft complain about privacy issues.
Google, sure. But not Apple or Microsoft. For companies like Google and Facebook, you are the product and privacy is a roadblock they work around. Microsoft and Apple represents a different kind of company that wants you to buy actual products from them, and behave far better in this area. When customers desire privacy, these will try to sell you products that delivers this.
Palm Pre beat them all years ago. I dont understand why it has taken so long for everyone else to offer it.
Because until wireless charging actually is widely available, you can't just use a cable to charge your phone - you need an expensive cable with extra electronics to do so. Rather pointless, unless you want to go completely sealed for a water proof device. Until this happens, support for it in phones is a pointless gimmick. Ikea's move is one of the best things I've heard for the future of wireless charging.