Is the harddrive running open-source firmware too? How could I possibly store my data on a device that uses proprietary software?
The firmware residing in hardware ROM is considered part of the hardware. The FSF only takes issue with the binary firmware that are distributed as part of the driver software, i.e. those binary blobs under
today's smartphone is just a compact, pocket-size general purpose computer with a radio transceiver in it.
Today's home routers are just small general purpose computers with a bunch of network ports.
Today's "smart scales" are just small general purpose computers embedded in a scale.
Today's smart TVs are just general purpose computers embedded inside a big TV.
Today's treadmills are just general purpose computers, in a treadmill.
Today's DVRs are just general purpose computers with an hdmi-in and an IR receiver.
Today's PS4s and Xbox Ones are, well they are just general purpose computers really.
I fail to see how anyone can legitimately claim that installing software on it (even changing an OS) can void the warranty
They all do. If they don't, they'll have to at least double the price on most of these products.
matroska is definitely a no go on both. mp4 is recognized at least on the ps3, but can only play a very limited number of codecs. In the end I just said to hell with it and built a small XBMC box.
Oh, yes they do support DLNA. What I meant to say was that their codecs and container format support is so poor that it makes them practically useless as a living room media player, DLNA or not. I don't expect the next-gens to be any better in this regard.
Did you notice Sony will only let you watch streamed Video and Music sold to you by them?
No DLNA support
No USB support
No using a PS4 for home media
I've been called a paid Sony Shill on these forums, and I'm now saying that the XBox is the best all-round device for the next generation.
That sucks but I don't see how the Xbox can be any better in these regards, speaking from my experience with the PS3 and the Xbox360.
If you want this kind of freedom then you need a general purpose computing device (i.e. a PC). The consoles are very locked-down, special purpose hardware, designed specifically for you to consume content in ways they intended, generating sustained revenue for MS/Sony in the process. If you're buying a console expecting anything more than that then you're bound to be disappointed. On the other hand, a general purpose computing device (i.e. a PC) of comparable processing capabilities would also cost you a fair bit more.
There's much more exploitable bullshit in Chinese traditional medicine than just big hard dicks. You just need to find the human organ that most resembles a "small, inert floppy goop-sack", and somehow link that organ to one's sexual prowess (through the theories of Chinese Medicine of course, I'm pretty sure it's in there somewhere). Do that and before you know it we're adding the jelly fish to the endangered list.
Or you can boot into a custom recovery like clockworkmod, start adb shell, mount
But there's still likely several you can't actually uninstall. On my HTC phone, I can't uninstall Facebook, but I can disable it. On my Google Nexus, I've had Google re-enable some apps I've specifically disabled because I don't want them.
If you have root access you can just remove any apks you don't like from
They all try to put their crapware on the devices, and can make it awfully difficult to remove or disable them. Because they like to pretend they still own the devices, and they figure their desire to monetize your device outweighs your desire to lock it down.
Well, to be fair, they feel that way because they sold you a $600 phone for $200. So it's not really that outrageous they woud try to recoup that difference, by doing their best to force you to use their shitware. The confusion arises from the fact that you expect to fully own a device, while paying subsidized price.
If you really want to have full control of your device, then you'll need to adjust your expectations, that a high-end phone is $600 and not $200.
I specifically went with the Google branded Nexus so I wouldn't have to worry about the crap from a 3rd party, but that doesn't mean Google has made it any easier to strip out the shit you don't want
AFAIK all Nexus devices are bootloader unlocked, which means you can do whatever you want with the device, up to ripping out the whole operating system and installing your own. Does Google make it easy for you to remove their stuff? No. But that's no different from say a laptop. Does Microsoft make it easy for you to remove IE? When I buy a Thinkpad, there's Microsoft shit and Lenovo shit, and they don't make it easy for me remove their shit, but there's nothing stopping me from installing Linux. Same goes for smart phones, which are essentially small computers.
Welcome to the exciting future, where you don't own the stuff you buy, and the company who made it has embedded everything possible to give them access to your information.
The fact is, it really isn't that bad, at least not yet. The phone manufacturers are more than happy to sell you "developer" devices at a full price, and if that's too expensive then get a Nexus. The subsidized pricing model seems to flourish especially in the US market, presumably because the carriers make back much more than loss on the initial hardware sale over the long run. But the consumers are not without blame, as they've basically voted with their wallets saying that it's OK to trade their freedom (to tinker) and their privacy for a couple hundred bucks off their new shiny device. Luckily the choice is still there, but just don't expect to pay $200 for a $600 device and still be able to do whatever you want with it.
Aha, but there is a difference: collecting user data doesn't take any "time and attention", it's basically just pure "profit". In fact, for a company like Apple, I imagine it'd take enormous will power to resist the temptation to collect data on its users. If they're true to their words, kudos to them, but the business practice of Apple really doesn't give me any reason to trust them on that.
I'd imagine any autopilot that goes on sale will already have to avoid potholes, so it will have some sort of terrain management logic built into it.
Would it even know to avoid them on the 2nd pass?
Would you accept avoiding them on the first pass?
Exactly. That was a pretty poor example to hypothesize on the limitation of computers. I'd imagine if there was _any_ way around those bumps at all, the autopilot would find it in the blink of an eye. Furthermore, its chosen trajectory would most likely be more optimal than the one chosen by the human through trial and error. What the GP has described seems like a situation where an autopilot would _excel_ at.
It's always nice to see the Apple customers so very satisfied with their
So what you're saying is that the movie producers are not allowed to have opinions at all? By your standard all movies having any ties to history and current events are propaganda, and all documentaries are automatically propaganda too.
In China, many people felt that the movie Avatar was social commentary about the occupation of Tibet.
What?? Which China are you talking about?
No Chinese would ever see themselves as colonists, only as victims of colonialism (first the British, then the Japanese).
No Chinese would ever think of Tibet as an "occupation", only as an "Autonomous Region". Tibet has never been an "issue" in the minds of most Chinese. Chinese travel freely in Tibet, seldom aware that foreigners are often denied access.
As such, if the Chinese sees any message in the movie Avatar, it can only be about the struggle of indigenous people against the colonial powers, and they would most likely see part of themselves in the navi (especially the signature pony tails) and not the colonists.
The source you link doesn't even mention Tibet anywhere. The Chinese sources referenced from that page are all mistranslated sarcastic rants against the Chinese government, not really having much to do with how the Chinese interpret the movie Avatar, and most certainly have nothing to to with Tibet.
Meanwhile as of 3.11 the kernel "radeon" driver is already fully functional, complete with power management and KMS support.
Frankly I'd wager nvidia has already lost on Linux, even though it may currently appear they are still the preferred platform with their higher quality binary driver. But binary drivers have a very limited future on Linux, especially such a critical one as the graphics driver. AMD may have a shitty binary driver, but the "radeon" driver is miles ahead of "nouveau", and once they start seeing the signs on the wall it will be a simple matter for them to put in a little effort and make "radeon" the best graphics driver for gaming on Linux. It's hard to see how nvidia can ever catch up with AMD even if they somehow miraculously changed their attitude toward open source in the near future.
Does NoScript still upgrade itself Every.Single.Day?
The hardest part of climbing the ladder of success is getting through the crowd at the bottom.
