In London there are signs all over the place telling you to watch your valuables. A friend who lived there said thieves would hang out near those signs and watch the people as they checked their valuables.
If you were a thief, which bag would you try to steal, the one someone is constantly holding on to, or just a random bag sitting with the other random bags?
A non story, really?
Officer: I noticed you were doing the speed limit. So I thought I'd pull you over and make sure everything was ok.
Officer: You aren't doing anything illegal, and have done nothing to make us suspect you. But we suspect you are a terrorist....
And THAT is the story.
Sure there are things that fall out of use, and many times we still retain their word usage (full steam ahead?)
But seriously, this list?
I am planning to buy a brand new car radio. It still has buttons the has one selection at a time
A lot of people still use clipboards
People still use bookmarks. Even school children.
People still have address "books" They may not be physical books, but they are still a collection of address
I think a lot of people have physical calenders, but everyone has digital calendars... Or did we stop needed to take into account the date?
Every phone I know of sitll uses voicemail.
Fewer people use folders, but they are still in use
Handset? Hmmm ok yeah that one is dieing off
Magnifying glass and Binocluars are still used, or did everyone suddenly get bionic vision? Watch a detective show like CSI they still use magnifying glasses. Go to a sports game people int he stands use binoculars
Envelopes. USPS is still in business, but people use envelopes for more than just mail.
I understand that maybe fewer people work on their own car, but people still use wrenches, and gears are still used to move things
The microphone doesn't normally have that iconic 50's shiny metal look. And fewer people are holding them. But I think most kids can still recognize a microphone. They are still used at concerts... a lot of young people go to concerts
Photography???? Huh, wasn't instagram, essentially a photo site, sold for like a quintillion dollars?
Televisions??? Sure they are flat panel displays, and most people probably play xbox on them... but people still watch tv
Carbon Copies... yeah not many people use carbon copies... what icon is a carbon copy?
Blue prints? I'm pretty sure the same people who used blue prints yesterday use them today.
Yes some things come and go... and some things are cultural (like the mailbox icon for mail) and over years some will change. But like some words that still retain their meaning 100 years after their technology stopped being used, I suspect that some icons will still be used for a long time.
Almost all of their real world examples were poor. Sitting on the couch turns the tv on, so if I stand up to go to the kitchen, it'll shut off? It knows I fell asleep because my arm rolled onto the couch? Or "lock the door" by closing it with your whole hand, but use just a single finger to "shut the door and not lock it"
tap on the wrist to change the channel, act like you are praying to turn the iPod on.
These were the best ideas they could come up with?
The TSA's whole job is to keep radical idiots from blowing me and my family up in mid air.
Why is there such a fear that the bogey man will blow you up in mid air? Do you fear being blown up at the mall? At church? At school? At your office? Anywhere else people congregate? Yet you are so worried about the sky? You do know that they spent quit a bit more than $200M.
It's not as simple as taking the current number of hijackings and bombings, dividing by the current number of flights, ignoring the fact that screening is currently in place (and has been since the 1970's), and thus "proving" that we don't need screening of any kind.
Actually it is. And you can look at other areas that don't have screening to do your "proving."
If it were as easy to kill thousands or tens of thousands of infidels as walking on to a plane, do you doubt that there would be many more than there are currently?
No there will be 0 more than there are currently. Because it is as easy to kill thousands or tens of thousands of infidels as walking on a plane. (since when does walking on a plan kill 10s of thousands?) There are many places were you can target several hundred individuals. Shoot the TSA security line is one such place. A busy shopping mall, a school, any sporting event, an office building. These are all easy targets, they aren't commonly targeted. You can apply the same logic, a plane is an easy target, why would it suddenly be targeted when none of the other easy targets are targeted?
So I'm spending $1000/year on Google and other companies to thrust unwanted ads in my face (maybe closer to $2000/year if you discount young+old). I don't even pay Apple that much. Calling Google's stuff "free" is a misdirection.
Well if Google wasn't doing what it was doing, you'd still be spending about $1000 a year on advertising. You know advertising comes in many forms and not just Google ads... There's the name of the local football stadium, radio ads, tv ads, billboards, signs on the sides of buses, newspapers, magazines, etc, etc, etc.
I'd feel no safer using Hotmail than I would using Gmail.
While you may feel no safer Google's terms are much more permissive than Microsoft's.
Microsoft says:
you hereby grant Microsoft the right, to use, modify, adapt, reproduce, distribute, and display content posted on the service solely to the extent necessary to provide the service.
While Google says:
you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps).
Microsoft says "you give us the right to use your content to make the service you are using work." Google says "thanks for your content and giving us permission to use it however we want to use it, forever"
I would buy this argument if the Dems (or the GOP) were trying to even attempt to balance the budget. That way we could look to the future with hope for stopping fund cuts like these.
Instead, both sides - and 99% of Americans, for that matter - aren't willing to make the sacrifices necessary.
Last week there was someone collecting signatures at the local grocery store "Make it harder for them to raise taxes." Uhmmm WHY????
Than solution to bad airport security is good airport security, not no airport security.
That would be true if the problem is something that security can fix. But The "security" we have today is as good as no security, except it costs time and money. So no security is better. Good security? Well because we don't really need security, good security would be worse than no security.
So No Security is the best solution.
(Even bicycles are occasionally faster than flying.)
They had to travel 38 miles. TFA:
The plane had just taken off when the cyclists arrived.
Bikes were faster because they had to go through security. Not because the plane was slow. Get rid of security, and you wouldn't have to get to the airport so early.
I doubt anyone wants 'no' security. More like bring back the old security (metal detectors, dog sniffing, etc).
I do.
What are we afraid of? there is no security when I get on a bus, or a train, or subway. Why do I need it when I get on a plane?
Don't bring back anything. Just let us show our tickets (without id) and get on the plane.
It is much easier to arrest a citizen that works for a private company.
It is MUCH easier to sue a private company than sue the government.
There is a huge difference between a private company and the government
Skydrive, iCloud, and Google drive...
I'm afraid dropdox will have trouble existing. But it is the only one that works on all three major platforms (as well as iOS)
Jesus fucking christ you people are fucking braindead.
Apple gets a fucking cut if you purchase from in-app. In fact, IF you offer in-app purchases, you have to use the app store, and Apple gets their cut.
There is not one fucking thing preventing Dropbox from pulling in-app upgrades, and doing it only on their website.
Dude, are you fucking braindead?
Perhaps we should reread TFS:
"Dropbox's latest SDK has incurred the wrath of Apple, because users who don't have the Dropbox app installed on their iPhone/iPad are instead pushed to Dropbox's website via the Safari browser. Here, they can click a link to the desktop version of the service, which allows them to buy extra Dropbox storage without Apple taking its usual 30% cut."
Notice how it says "instead pushed to Dropbox's website"?
Did you see that? Did you see how they are "doing it only on their website?"
Did you notice how TFS doesn't mention in app purchasing?
Did you notice how the user has to "click a link to the desktop version" to purchase something.
So what does this have to do with INAPP?
Where is your fucking reading comprehension?
Slashdot Mirror
But the TSA is there for your safety!
In London there are signs all over the place telling you to watch your valuables. A friend who lived there said thieves would hang out near those signs and watch the people as they checked their valuables.
If you were a thief, which bag would you try to steal, the one someone is constantly holding on to, or just a random bag sitting with the other random bags?
Seems like a non-story to me.
A non story, really?
Officer: I noticed you were doing the speed limit. So I thought I'd pull you over and make sure everything was ok. Officer: You aren't doing anything illegal, and have done nothing to make us suspect you. But we suspect you are a terrorist....
And THAT is the story.
But seriously, this list?
Yes some things come and go... and some things are cultural (like the mailbox icon for mail) and over years some will change. But like some words that still retain their meaning 100 years after their technology stopped being used, I suspect that some icons will still be used for a long time.
Seems like a Clbuttic mistake
Paypal is not a verb. Contrary to popular beliefs not every noun can be verbed. Not without looking like a tool.
Calvin would seriously disagree with you.
Almost all of their real world examples were poor. Sitting on the couch turns the tv on, so if I stand up to go to the kitchen, it'll shut off? It knows I fell asleep because my arm rolled onto the couch? Or "lock the door" by closing it with your whole hand, but use just a single finger to "shut the door and not lock it"
tap on the wrist to change the channel, act like you are praying to turn the iPod on.
These were the best ideas they could come up with?
Yes, but the iPod can't detect when you are touching your body, and react.
Is that the RedHat (or rather OpenSource) method?
The TSA's whole job is to keep radical idiots from blowing me and my family up in mid air.
Why is there such a fear that the bogey man will blow you up in mid air? Do you fear being blown up at the mall? At church? At school? At your office? Anywhere else people congregate? Yet you are so worried about the sky? You do know that they spent quit a bit more than $200M.
It's not as simple as taking the current number of hijackings and bombings, dividing by the current number of flights, ignoring the fact that screening is currently in place (and has been since the 1970's), and thus "proving" that we don't need screening of any kind.
Actually it is. And you can look at other areas that don't have screening to do your "proving."
If it were as easy to kill thousands or tens of thousands of infidels as walking on to a plane, do you doubt that there would be many more than there are currently?
No there will be 0 more than there are currently. Because it is as easy to kill thousands or tens of thousands of infidels as walking on a plane. (since when does walking on a plan kill 10s of thousands?) There are many places were you can target several hundred individuals. Shoot the TSA security line is one such place. A busy shopping mall, a school, any sporting event, an office building. These are all easy targets, they aren't commonly targeted. You can apply the same logic, a plane is an easy target, why would it suddenly be targeted when none of the other easy targets are targeted?
So I'm spending $1000/year on Google and other companies to thrust unwanted ads in my face (maybe closer to $2000/year if you discount young+old). I don't even pay Apple that much. Calling Google's stuff "free" is a misdirection.
Well if Google wasn't doing what it was doing, you'd still be spending about $1000 a year on advertising. You know advertising comes in many forms and not just Google ads... There's the name of the local football stadium, radio ads, tv ads, billboards, signs on the sides of buses, newspapers, magazines, etc, etc, etc.
So you think Microsoft would ignore another source of revenue?
Why would they? Why not take your money and still use the documents like google would?
Well because you didn't give them permission to do so... But really because they don't have access to your documents.
I'd feel no safer using Hotmail than I would using Gmail.
While you may feel no safer Google's terms are much more permissive than Microsoft's. Microsoft says:
you hereby grant Microsoft the right, to use, modify, adapt, reproduce, distribute, and display content posted on the service solely to the extent necessary to provide the service.
While Google says:
you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a business listing you have added to Google Maps).
Microsoft says "you give us the right to use your content to make the service you are using work." Google says "thanks for your content and giving us permission to use it however we want to use it, forever"
I would buy this argument if the Dems (or the GOP) were trying to even attempt to balance the budget. That way we could look to the future with hope for stopping fund cuts like these.
Instead, both sides - and 99% of Americans, for that matter - aren't willing to make the sacrifices necessary.
Last week there was someone collecting signatures at the local grocery store "Make it harder for them to raise taxes." Uhmmm WHY????
Than solution to bad airport security is good airport security, not no airport security.
That would be true if the problem is something that security can fix. But The "security" we have today is as good as no security, except it costs time and money. So no security is better. Good security? Well because we don't really need security, good security would be worse than no security.
So No Security is the best solution.
(Even bicycles are occasionally faster than flying.)
They had to travel 38 miles. TFA:
The plane had just taken off when the cyclists arrived.
Bikes were faster because they had to go through security. Not because the plane was slow. Get rid of security, and you wouldn't have to get to the airport so early.
No one is saying we don't need airport security, so just simply eliminating the TSA is not a rational solution.
I am saying it. We don't need airport security. Abolish the TSA. We already have a half dozen other police forces, we don't need the TSA.
I am sure there are plenty of politicians who think the TSA is a bad idea, and has the power to do something about it.
But the won't unfortunately.
I doubt anyone wants 'no' security. More like bring back the old security (metal detectors, dog sniffing, etc).
I do.
What are we afraid of? there is no security when I get on a bus, or a train, or subway. Why do I need it when I get on a plane?
Don't bring back anything. Just let us show our tickets (without id) and get on the plane.
It is much easier to arrest a citizen that works for a private company.
It is MUCH easier to sue a private company than sue the government.
There is a huge difference between a private company and the government
Every time it comes up, lots of people (myself included) always say that you just need a degree
And so the question is... do you really need a degree?
THe point of my comment was that any large internet company can do what Dropbox does
Except that NO ONE DOES.
Skydrive, iCloud, and Google drive...
I'm afraid dropdox will have trouble existing. But it is the only one that works on all three major platforms (as well as iOS)
Jesus fucking christ you people are fucking braindead.
Apple gets a fucking cut if you purchase from in-app. In fact, IF you offer in-app purchases, you have to use the app store, and Apple gets their cut.
There is not one fucking thing preventing Dropbox from pulling in-app upgrades, and doing it only on their website.
Dude, are you fucking braindead?
Perhaps we should reread TFS:
"Dropbox's latest SDK has incurred the wrath of Apple, because users who don't have the Dropbox app installed on their iPhone/iPad are instead pushed to Dropbox's website via the Safari browser. Here, they can click a link to the desktop version of the service, which allows them to buy extra Dropbox storage without Apple taking its usual 30% cut."
Notice how it says "instead pushed to Dropbox's website"?
Did you see that? Did you see how they are "doing it only on their website?"
Did you notice how TFS doesn't mention in app purchasing?
Did you notice how the user has to "click a link to the desktop version" to purchase something.
So what does this have to do with INAPP?
Where is your fucking reading comprehension?