It works for Fox News. Make outrageous statements, and let people get all riled up about it. The next say explain that it was wrong, but you have already won with that emotional tie. Same for Apple haters. Rationality never enters into it.
iPhones have had the ability to be remote wiped for a long time. Yet I have not heard of a pandemic of hacker-led mass bricking of iPhones. Dirty hipsters and their iPhones have been at the center of a lot of protests yet we haven't heard of mass iPhone shutdowns by the police in response to demonstrations.
I think government/law enforcement already have the powers they physically need to fuck with cell phones. Between Stingray devices and the ability to present national security letters to carriers or service providers, if they wanted to they could get IMEIs blacklisted or get someone like Apple to brick a specific phone.
It is much more useful to have the phone active and record all conversations. Why would you cut off your "bug?" Also, hacking a phone to brick it is pretty boring. The person is inconvenienced so much that they waste an hour getting a new phone. Also also, anyone with any common sense in a protest is going to use a burner phone, which is much harder to back track to the buyer.
How to Win Friends and Influence People
So you wish you were a sociopath? BTW, I gave A LOT of thought to the "career" aspect of programming when I started out, which is why I moved into systems and network administration.
Levels, classes, spell slots, armor class, superhero hit points, check, check, check. Everything that SHOULD be changed is still there. They've basically gone back to the original rules because that is what people are used to, instead of even TRYING to make a better system. Sigh.
Any word on the proposed Blake's 7 movie? That one show that deserves a resurrection.
People with functioning brains will remember CRT monitors measured in inches, hard drives measured in 1000 instead of 1024 kbytes, 4G phones that weren't. Nothing happened to them, and nothing will happen in this instance. The judge will rule: It's common advertising, all vendors do it, and people understand what it means, so worrying about it is being pedantic.
No, cheaper hotels have slower WiFi if they have any WiFi at all.
Ubiquitous, how did Gygax steal D&D from Dave Arneson by putting an A in the name? Calling Gygax the creator of D&D is like calling Stalin the creator of communism.
"But I Want the Market to Accommodate My Exact Preference!" Otherwise you'd be happy with any of a dozen clip on keyboards for iPhone or Android. A little bulkier, sure. But there are solutions, so quit bitching.
is that now that rich white people have drug problems (ie, "real" people), maybe we can muster up some sympathy for other addicted people now?
Nah, I'm dreaming.
You obviously didn't live through the late seventies, early eighties. Cocaine was everywhere in the affluent white community, and quite out in the open. Then we had a decade of drug abuse clinic stories for the rich and famous. No sympathy for non-rich non-white people was had.
"Oh that promise to not sell the information? Well, we screwed up and sold it all for $10 Billion. Pay a fine of $10 Million? Sure, that's fair."
Microsoft switch IE to use components written by someone else?
I place the likelihood of that as pretty small.
Microsoft have always had a huge case of "Not Invented Here", and I don't see that changing.
Considering that IE is based on Mosaic, SQLServer is based on Sybase, etc. etc., I don't think Microsoft has ever really "invented anything here."
And how, way I ask, does packet radio not accomplish the same thing, across considerably larger distances than a peer-to-peer mesh network? The mesh isn't useless, but at some point it still needs to connect to some place with proper connectivity. This may not be within the range of the Internet of Things.
Because it only works if every device has a pingable IP. Or some such nonsense.
Newton is a good example. We know for a fact that his 'laws' (or more accurately, models) of motion are wrong. We've known that for a very long time (that is why relativity was needed, Newton's model, for example, failed to predict the orbits of the planets accurately).
That statement is one of the problems. Scientific laws are never right or wrong. That implies an absolute truth. Physics is just looking for math to accurately describe repeatable physical phenomena. Measurement is never absolute, so there is always an implied N decimal points of accuracy. And Newtons laws work 100% in the realm in which the experiments are performed. That's why we call them laws. If you want to set up experiments in other realms, e.g. high speed atomic particles, of course you might need different math to describe it.
It wasn't on the Shuttle's, either. But killing the crew less than one time in sixty can't really be that hard, can it?
Actually it's quite hard. That's why only 3 countries have managed to do it.
E = MC ** 2 +- 3db
