Remember when news organizations didn't so blatantly try to push agendas?
I can't remember that far back. It must've been well before the sinking of the USS Maine.
It must have been before recorded history. We have documented examples of such behavior for as long as we have documents.
Precisely. The study asked a question that results in an expected answer 80% of the time. So why would such a study be conducted in the first place?
Well, duh, they did it to verify that the people did give the "expected" answer most of the time. There are lots of scientific studies showing that something the "everyone knows" isn't actually true, so such beliefs are often worth actually testing. In this case, a number for what fraction of the people haven't a clue about DNA is interesting and potentially useful. It does put a lot of other such surveys in an "interesting" light.
Clearly I was voicing _opinions_! You know, things people think may be right but do not claim as truth. Apparently you have problems with the concept. Attributes like "bullshit" or "nonsense" clearly mark opinions, not statements of fact.
You seem to have some rather serious problem interpreting what people say. I mean that not in the sense that I am trying to insult you, but in the sense that I detect an actual perception problem on your side. Maybe get that looked at, it could help you avoid serious misinterpretations of what people say on the future.
Indeed. Safe individual transportation would be a great boon. And it could revolutionize parts of public transportation in general. Example: Need to transport something heavier? Order a self-driving car of any size desired. Of course, the Taxi-industry will likely be a casualty of this, but no historical job-setting lasts forever.
Same here. From the article, I cannot even be sure they can remotely do what the headline implies.
That is not a PC. That is an embedded ARM system. And really, there is no problem with the PC industry. The days of growth are over, but that is _not_ a problem and everybody sane did expect it. A far smaller PC industry 20 years back managed to have several manufacturers for each component and several models for each and prices where comparably lower than today.
The security problem is mostly solved. Or at least it is possibly and economically feasible to make breaking in prohibitively hard. The "cheapest bidder" and "Microsoft"/"Adobe"/etc. and "cheapest possible programmer" problems are not. For software to improve to acceptable levels of security, my guess would be that you would need to sack 95% of programmers and 95% of their bosses.
While a possibility, I think you are giving them too much credit. I think these people are indeed opponents of individual freedoms and hence are destructive authoritarians of the worst kind.
Actually what I'm mainly trying to do is provide a little counterpoint to your somewhat arrogant insistence that you are definitely 100% correct.
Oh? And where did I claim that? Apparently you cannot even read. Pathetic.
I realize that they dare not explicitly say that is what they are going to do, but once they are caught doing it, it will amount to exactly the same consequence as if they had.
I cannot determine whether you are trying to be funny or whether you are utterly demented...
Bullshit. Any halfway competent engineer would have though of all that and made sure it does not happen. Really, you have no clue how professionals work.
A "less than halfway competent" attempt is no danger.
As for finding the drone being the intended effect, that makes only sense for a false-flag operation. It is a possibility, but there _still_ is no danger.
Really, stop being stupid. Stop spreading fear.
Making a _deliverable_ chemical weapon requires far far more. Chlorine gas is not something that is effective in small quantities. And for nerve agents, there is not only the delivery problem, but also the slight issue that you do not want to kill yourself making/storing/handling it and it still requires a significant quantity.
Really, you have lost your rationality. Stop spreading fear!
If they had developed a small patch for the problem, I'm pretty sure OEMs wouldn't have a problem pushing it to the users.
Hahahahahahahahaha, seriously? This is fixed in 4.4 [...]
It's not really a fix, if the H/W requirements have been changed/increased.
Android 4.3 vs. 4.4.
Or more to the point: how do you know that your device is compatible with official golden blessed Android 4.4? CyanogenMod guys can do whatever the hell they want - except calling it "Android".
The WebView code was originally tied directly to the android version and HW manufactures aren't willing to deploy 4.4 since it would take effort on their part.
4.4 changed WebView and that broke a number of apps.
And not simply broke. Google has removed sizable chunk of WebView functionality because it is not really WebView anymore, it is small Chrome browser window and the features everybody was relying upon where never part of Chrome and as such... tough luck.
To the company with the resources of Google, lame excuses like that are just unacceptable.
If all else fails, lower your standards.
