The kingsoft app is an app for actually working with Office files.
This ain't that...
This is not an Office Application like Kingsoft....it's a tool for Office 365 users. Nothing more. So yeah, obviously it fails miserably at being something it ain't.:)
What you imply is that they released an office suite for Android, when in fact, they merely released an Android client for Office 365 users.
As much as you might care to think one is pretty much the same as the other, you would be wrong. This app is not for editing office documents on your mobile device. It is for Office 365 users to view items synced to their cloud....nothing more. It cannot even access items on your mobile device...
We're not talking about getting mugged or raped, here.
We're talking about "getting drunk at a party at the age of 14 and then not having the skills, support, or tools to cope with the consequences".
Big difference. For the former, parenting has virtually no affect (regarding the victim), whereas the latter can be all but eliminated by effective parenting.
No-one but you here ever said anything about "absolute control".
Do tell us all how "irrespective of the parents" doesn't equate to "parents have no control"
No; Really. Let's hear it.
Hey, you said it...
My first post argued parenting could have prevented this. You disagreed by arguing that this child may have had excellent parents. I believe the story itself refutes this. Excellent parents can teach their children to make healthy, responsible decisions; and how to cope with situations that have escalated far beyond their own personal control. Sure, they'll still make mistakes; but not of this magnitude and not with these results.
"And please let me know where I said that I knew anything about you."
Your first post. Something along the lines of me not having kids, I believe...
"I never said your kids were irresponsible or anything of the like"
Previous post: "Your kids could just as easily end up in an embarrassing situation that gets video taped and put on social media, quite possibly ending up in them committing suicide"
This is the kicker though...
"irrespective of the parents"
This has been the common implication throughout your entire thread here. Your sole assertion seems to be that parents have *ZERO* control over the kinds of things their children are interested in, what they do, and their reactions to pressure. You may not have said exactly that, but the implication couldn't be more clear: Parents have no responsibility in child-rearing.
It's not quite the stupidest thing I have ever heard, but it is damned close. Nothing more needs to be said. An utter lack of responsibility isn't something that can simply be argued away...it's downright sociopathic.
Please, don't ever have kids. If you already do: Give them up. For their sake alone...smh
Yeah, I should have accused you of being something I had no way of possibly knowing. Ya know, like *you* did. Kudos on you for that, by the way.
"but I have never seen a comment history like yours that has so many consecutive comments without a single up vote." Huh...
"Excellent Karma" Wonder how that happened...
"Your kids could just as easily end up in an embarrassing situation that gets video taped and put on social media, quite possibly ending up in them committing suicide "
*laughing my ass off*
Yeah. First you "know" I don't have kids...then you "know" my kids are irresponsible, cowardly, morons. Aren't you insightful, today... Care to divulge those lotto numbers yet, Swami?
Guess what? Until they are 18, parents are legally responsible for them. If they are unwilling to take that responsibility, don't have 'em or don't keep 'em. If you are of the opinion that you cannot possibly raise a child to not be an imbecile or a coward; please, don't have any; for their sake more than anything else.
I did not mean to imply that it was, and certainly, the girl has some responsibility; but while I am certain there are exceptions to the rule, most kids with good parents likely aren't going to be caught in this situation, much less deal with it by offing themselves.
Package/dependency management has been around for well over a decade now and takes care of *all* but the worst "not ready for prime time" applications/functionality still in development.
"install a new X server from source"
You're kidding, right? Who in their right minds would even attempt such a thing on a modern distribution of Linux? Are you high??
Gotta wonder why his wife skipped Christopher Eccleston. It got much darker after him (where they instated the new rule where someone had to die in every episode, it seems).
I'm actually pretty sure the middle east has been "The Place To Go" for religious war, terror, death and persecution for over 2000 years now......and I really cannot think of any other location on this or any other planet that has seen as much bloodshed and death...which considering the religious fervor of the folks in that region...says far more about religion in general than I ever could.;-)
I'm not saying we in the west are "Angels" by any stretch. I'm not even saying we're better. We just haven't gotten on that kind of a roll yet. Give us time...
It was more Peaceful, dammit! Stop throwing things like actual *facts* at me! I don't care if they were busy killing each other...they were doing it with *our* weapons...which means they were being peaceful!
Yeah...
That's it...
Right?
I really do love the extremes some people will go to in order to keep themselves from admitting they just might possibly not have been correct.
FWIW: I misread your OP. Specifically the "current" bit...so I take back my disagreement on that specific issue. But any claims you have made regarding it being "peaceful" in the middle east are well, still quite laughable.
Wow. Quite the jump you just pulled off there from words like "trust" and "faith", to "fear" and "dislike"... do that often??
Oh, and in focusing on your athletics you missed the point, though I repeated it at least twice:
There is not one person on this planet that feels the same way you do about *everything*. Therefore, not even you can support your institution 100%, as your "best interests" will not always equal the best interests of the whole...even in an institution of 2, such as marriage.
I never said "fear" or dislike". I can speak for myself and do not need you failing miserably at doing it for me.;-) I said not to trust or put faith in it. Doing so equates to "taking it for granted" and leads to the "suboptimal" conditions you have so eloquently listed.
I don't "gush" about government, and you won't see me begging it to "save us!"...but don't take that to mean that I do not believe it has it's place, as you seem to have done. It has it's place. It just needs constant reminders (and constant limitations) *keeping* it in it's place. As I said in the beginning: it is a necessary evil. One that allows for us to be able to co-exist in a civil manner.
I hear a lot of folks talk about "trusting" or having "faith" in government...and it scares the living daylights out of me. How anyone could possibly believe without a moment's thought (there's my answer) that any institution has their best interests in mind is utterly beyond me.
The institution, by definition, lives to support itself, and those that align with it. If you do not fall into 100% lock-step with said institution, it no longer serves you. Institutions do not serve individuals, they serves an agenda. That agenda may be "the betterment of society", but we're right back to there not being one single individual that is 100% in lock-step with "society"....as such, they serve no-one.
Far more people need to understand this and have the proper disregard for their "good intentions".
Gartner, eComScore, Neilsen, all put Apple and Android a lot closer than you are as of Q1, and I think you are letting the media coverage of larger devices affect your assumptions as to how many there actually are. I don't think the 3.2-3.5 market is as negligible as you seem to believe.
What makes the best selling device on the planet irrelevant? I would think it would be of utmost relevance, seeing as how what people are buying by the truckload usually seems a pretty good indicator of preference.
"The large smartphone market is larger than the 3.5" smartphone market, all phones combined."
Based on what evidence? Sure, 68% is bigger than 32%, but are you certain that that 68% is all larger than 3.5 (or at least the majority of them)? Again...based on what?
(..and you're right....it is 3.5. but..they keys are really close together...and it's a hint at my personal bias (that I tried to keep out of my OP). All of my smartphones have been Samsung devices, and they've each been larger than the one before it...but that's my *personal* preference...not what the market, sales, and share tell us, which I would think would be more accurate)
Slashdot Mirror
"one cannot travel quickly within the country without having basic rights violated."
I'm not entirely disagreeing with you, but I am going to call you out on this bit.
You can go damn near anywhere the hell you want in this country without the slightest threat to your rights.
It's called driving. :)
Truckers do it nearly every single day of their adult life...
The kingsoft app is an app for actually working with Office files.
This ain't that...
This is not an Office Application like Kingsoft....it's a tool for Office 365 users. Nothing more. So yeah, obviously it fails miserably at being something it ain't. :)
Guess what?
Microsoft didn't release Office for Android.
They released Office Mobile for Office 365.
What you imply is that they released an office suite for Android, when in fact, they merely released an Android client for Office 365 users.
As much as you might care to think one is pretty much the same as the other, you would be wrong. This app is not for editing office documents on your mobile device. It is for Office 365 users to view items synced to their cloud....nothing more. It cannot even access items on your mobile device...
I see your disconnect now...
"a bad situation"
We're not talking about getting mugged or raped, here.
We're talking about "getting drunk at a party at the age of 14 and then not having the skills, support, or tools to cope with the consequences".
Big difference. For the former, parenting has virtually no affect (regarding the victim), whereas the latter can be all but eliminated by effective parenting.
No-one but you here ever said anything about "absolute control".
Do tell us all how "irrespective of the parents" doesn't equate to "parents have no control"
No; Really. Let's hear it.
Hey, you said it...
My first post argued parenting could have prevented this. You disagreed by arguing that this child may have had excellent parents. I believe the story itself refutes this. Excellent parents can teach their children to make healthy, responsible decisions; and how to cope with situations that have escalated far beyond their own personal control. Sure, they'll still make mistakes; but not of this magnitude and not with these results.
"And please let me know where I said that I knew anything about you."
Your first post. Something along the lines of me not having kids, I believe...
"I never said your kids were irresponsible or anything of the like"
Previous post:
"Your kids could just as easily end up in an embarrassing situation that gets video taped and put on social media, quite possibly ending up in them committing suicide"
This is the kicker though...
"irrespective of the parents"
This has been the common implication throughout your entire thread here. Your sole assertion seems to be that parents have *ZERO* control over the kinds of things their children are interested in, what they do, and their reactions to pressure. You may not have said exactly that, but the implication couldn't be more clear: Parents have no responsibility in child-rearing.
It's not quite the stupidest thing I have ever heard, but it is damned close. Nothing more needs to be said. An utter lack of responsibility isn't something that can simply be argued away...it's downright sociopathic.
Please, don't ever have kids. If you already do: Give them up. For their sake alone...smh
"Well, sure, insult me for being AC"
*laughs*
Yeah, I should have accused you of being something I had no way of possibly knowing. Ya know, like *you* did. Kudos on you for that, by the way.
"but I have never seen a comment history like yours that has so many consecutive comments without a single up vote." Huh...
"Excellent Karma" Wonder how that happened...
"Your kids could just as easily end up in an embarrassing situation that gets video taped and put on social media, quite possibly ending up in them committing suicide "
*laughing my ass off*
Yeah. First you "know" I don't have kids...then you "know" my kids are irresponsible, cowardly, morons. Aren't you insightful, today... Care to divulge those lotto numbers yet, Swami?
Guess what? Until they are 18, parents are legally responsible for them. If they are unwilling to take that responsibility, don't have 'em or don't keep 'em. If you are of the opinion that you cannot possibly raise a child to not be an imbecile or a coward; please, don't have any; for their sake more than anything else.
Spoken like an anonymous coward...
Try again:
3 kids, 2 with honors, ranging from second grade to 11th. ...but hey, keep showing us how much you "know". It's amusing.
Oh, and you missed the point: Mischief is expected. Having it lead to permanent (life ending) consequences? ...not so much.
Sure, the kid may have had mental health issues. That'd be one of those exceptions I mentioned...
I did not mean to imply that it was, and certainly, the girl has some responsibility; but while I am certain there are exceptions to the rule, most kids with good parents likely aren't going to be caught in this situation, much less deal with it by offing themselves.
Parents regardless. The girl was 14 and drunk at a party...
Good parenting there, folks. Yeah...Facebook failed the girl...not you, right?
" annoyed at careless crap "
Keyword: careless.
Meaning: They don't care.
Resultant logic: Have fun tilting at those windmills, and say, "Hi!" to Sancho for me!
Seriously?
Have you used Linux since 1995?
No...really.
Package/dependency management has been around for well over a decade now and takes care of *all* but the worst "not ready for prime time" applications/functionality still in development.
"install a new X server from source"
You're kidding, right? Who in their right minds would even attempt such a thing on a modern distribution of Linux? Are you high??
Gotta wonder why his wife skipped Christopher Eccleston. It got much darker after him (where they instated the new rule where someone had to die in every episode, it seems).
I'm actually pretty sure the middle east has been "The Place To Go" for religious war, terror, death and persecution for over 2000 years now... ...and I really cannot think of any other location on this or any other planet that has seen as much bloodshed and death...which considering the religious fervor of the folks in that region...says far more about religion in general than I ever could. ;-)
I'm not saying we in the west are "Angels" by any stretch. I'm not even saying we're better. We just haven't gotten on that kind of a roll yet. Give us time...
It was more Peaceful, dammit! Stop throwing things like actual *facts* at me! I don't care if they were busy killing each other...they were doing it with *our* weapons...which means they were being peaceful!
Yeah...
That's it...
Right?
I really do love the extremes some people will go to in order to keep themselves from admitting they just might possibly not have been correct.
FWIW: I misread your OP. Specifically the "current" bit...so I take back my disagreement on that specific issue. But any claims you have made regarding it being "peaceful" in the middle east are well, still quite laughable.
33 years? of 237?
Vs. how many of 2000 years? (I bet you can count them on one hand...)
So do tell me: How many genocides have been attempted/carried out since we got involved?
Brush up on your history, Today's Middle East is nothing compared to the atrocities that have been going on there since before Christanity.
riiiiight...before the US went over there it was the most peaceful place on Earth...
Unless you actually know anything about the history of the middle east....which has, for 2000 years, been in a nearly *constant* state of war.
See, they did it wrong; They should have gone with MAD,GS, then we'd all love it. (Come on, you know what it stands for...)
Dress classy, litigate cheesy, my friend. ;-)
Wow. Quite the jump you just pulled off there from words like "trust" and "faith", to "fear" and "dislike"... do that often??
Oh, and in focusing on your athletics you missed the point, though I repeated it at least twice:
There is not one person on this planet that feels the same way you do about *everything*. Therefore, not even you can support your institution 100%, as your "best interests" will not always equal the best interests of the whole...even in an institution of 2, such as marriage.
I never said "fear" or dislike". I can speak for myself and do not need you failing miserably at doing it for me. ;-) I said not to trust or put faith in it. Doing so equates to "taking it for granted" and leads to the "suboptimal" conditions you have so eloquently listed.
I don't "gush" about government, and you won't see me begging it to "save us!"...but don't take that to mean that I do not believe it has it's place, as you seem to have done. It has it's place. It just needs constant reminders (and constant limitations) *keeping* it in it's place. As I said in the beginning: it is a necessary evil. One that allows for us to be able to co-exist in a civil manner.
Government: Necessary Evil.
I hear a lot of folks talk about "trusting" or having "faith" in government...and it scares the living daylights out of me. How anyone could possibly believe without a moment's thought (there's my answer) that any institution has their best interests in mind is utterly beyond me.
The institution, by definition, lives to support itself, and those that align with it. If you do not fall into 100% lock-step with said institution, it no longer serves you. Institutions do not serve individuals, they serves an agenda. That agenda may be "the betterment of society", but we're right back to there not being one single individual that is 100% in lock-step with "society". ...as such, they serve no-one.
Far more people need to understand this and have the proper disregard for their "good intentions".
Dang. Was hoping for option #3, the Intrusion Countermeasure Executable engine.
Ahh well.
Stupid monkeys....
Wait...
Was the the Internal Combustion Engine engine, or the engine that "RUNS ON ICE!!!"?
"Yes there are a few small (ie 3.2"-3.5") Android phones but the bulk is over 4". I think it's a pretty safe assumption."
I don't. I think you're missing the forest for the trees...and you are completely dismissing Symbian, RIM, Microsoft...
http://www.email-marketing-reports.com/wireless-mobile/smartphone-statistics.htm
Gartner, eComScore, Neilsen, all put Apple and Android a lot closer than you are as of Q1, and I think you are letting the media coverage of larger devices affect your assumptions as to how many there actually are. I don't think the 3.2-3.5 market is as negligible as you seem to believe.
"Completely irrelevant."
What makes the best selling device on the planet irrelevant? I would think it would be of utmost relevance, seeing as how what people are buying by the truckload usually seems a pretty good indicator of preference.
"The large smartphone market is larger than the 3.5" smartphone market, all phones combined."
Based on what evidence? Sure, 68% is bigger than 32%, but are you certain that that 68% is all larger than 3.5 (or at least the majority of them)? Again...based on what?
(..and you're right....it is 3.5. but..they keys are really close together...and it's a hint at my personal bias (that I tried to keep out of my OP). All of my smartphones have been Samsung devices, and they've each been larger than the one before it...but that's my *personal* preference...not what the market, sales, and share tell us, which I would think would be more accurate)