That's not nearly as true as you'd think. Besides which, there's a difference between Oracle's database (which is widely used), and Oracle's consultancy arm which while used has never put out a decent project in their history.
Isn't the very point of this player's system, that the player serves the interests of the disc's publisher over the interests of the users, where the users' needs should always yield whenever there is a conflict? That's not a mere technicality; it's the very essence. From the spec's pov, this is desirable operation. Nothing has been subverted.
I said elsewhere that this is a scam for the following reasons.
Her Tumbler account (Swiked) shows the initial photo asking what color is the dress. A day or so later she posts a second picture of someone wearing the blue/black version, stating:
this is the dress as i saw it on the day of the wedding. blue and black. It's just that one photo bUT it's so weird???!??
Here's the thing, she does not say the second photo is the same dress ON THE DAY of the wedding, only that the photo shows what she saw.
What most likely happened was she took the first picture on a different day and because it's white/gold, it took on the cast of the lighting to give a blue hue and her friends had a disagreement over the color which started the whole thing, especially if someone is red/green colorblind.
Second, if you look at the top edge of the dress in the first picture you can clearly see what would be considered "virgin" light, i.e. light which is not reflected but directly falling on to the dress. If the claim is that our eyes are fooling us because of the bright background or because we can't be sure what the lighting situation is, this light should produce a different color under it, just as light shining across a rippled surface can produce different colors.
Except it doesn't. There is no transition from the slice of light to the shaded portion. It's one continuous tone. In fact, as the picture shows, there are multiple shadows of different angles and lighting conditions which should produce different colors, but they don't. For instance, under the cape/shawl toward the upper right, the area under the shadow is darker but not a different color.
Further, if our eyes are being deceived by the bright background, covering up all but a small portion of the dress should reveal the true colors because then there would be nothing to confuse us. Except that doesn't work either, the dress stays as white/gold with a blue hue.
And finally, if you look at the edging in the middle of the picture then down to the lower left corner (our left), you can see shadows under the gold edging. If the dress in the picture was blue/black you would not see such distinct shadows as are shown in the picture.
So, the dress in the original picture IS NOT the same dress she shows a day or so later but is the same style.
One final thought. The opposite of blue on the color wheel is gold and the opposite of black is white. However, if you look at what is blue and black in the "good" picture, they are not the correct parts. The bodice is blue which means in the reversed portion the bodice of the original picture should be gold and the edging should be white. Except that is not what is shown. The bodice is white and the edging is gold.
And for the record, I am not red/green colorblind. I pass all the Ishihara color tests without issue.
Beep... Beep... Beep...
You think being responsible for the literal lives of your passengers for 8 hours a day, needing to be alert the entire time is *less* responsibility and stress? You're out of your fucking mind.
How many Android phones have you had that didn't require you to either wait for your carrier to provide an update (and they never do), or give up and root the machine to install Cyanogenmod or whatever, or you just bought a new shiny phone to replace it? My HTC Aria is so hopelessly vendor-locked I doubt it's worth putting Cyanogen on it (the OTA upgrade from 2.1 to 2.3 never succeeded.) My newer Samsung did get upgraded to 4.4.2, but my Coby tablet running 4.0.4 isn't the version the manufacturer sells today, so I doubt they'll bother with customer satisfaction.
I haven't been able to Google up a good reference to Android documentation from Google that says how a regular user can upgrade their own Android version, as opposed to "Wait until your vendor ships an upgrade!"
Yes, folks, not all PCMCIA is the same. The newer ones support Cardbus cards; the older ones don't, and this machine is absolutely an older one. I've got a Pentium-75 laptop that only takes the original-flavored cards.
Yes, you'll have to look up your old friend Kermit (or Xmodem/Ymodem/Zmodem, or maybe even UUCP), and it'll have to run for a few days unless you can get it to sync up at higher speeds like 115200, but it's not information you really need much faster than that.
At least you could get in. I had to change my resolution so I could find the edge of the login option. It was hidden under the search box.
Now that I'm in I'm still seeing overlapping options along the top edge.
With an article title like this, there's supposed to be an Earth-shattering kaboom! Fortunately, if the article's correct, it seems like we just get a really bright star for a while, but no fatal gamma-ray bursts or anything like that.
Those applications are all *drumroll* web pages. They are not video conferencing or any of the other crap Mozilla has been putting in there lately. Anyone who thinks those belong in a browser is a fucking idiot.
Define "default android browser". Each OEM ships their own- Google has one, but so does Samsung. If you have a Samsung phone you've never used the default Android browser.
In *browser*? Abso-fucking-lutely. If Mozilla Foundation wanted to write the Mozilla Videoconfrencing app, that would be fine. But there is 0 reason to put it in the browser, and it only decreases security of everyone involved by having it in there. A browser should display webpages- period.
I read several novels a month. But I wouldn't read a technical book on an ereader if you gave it to me for free and paid me to do it. And I've tried- I originally bought it thinking it would be great for tech books. But the slow speed of page switching, the inability to flip through pages rapidly, the reduced area per page all make it an unbearable experience. Ereaders are good for fiction reading, they're completely unsuitable for anything that isn't read beginning to end with no branching or backtracking.
With your bare hands?!?
