Comment Re:Doesn't work, and won't tell me why (Score 1) 110
Don't worry, Google will be improving the tool soon - they plan to do it right after they've updated Google Voice!
Don't worry, Google will be improving the tool soon - they plan to do it right after they've updated Google Voice!
It's like putting too much air into a balloon!
So we have a bunch of male scientists who apparently didn't know about rufies.
The whole thing sounds like using a massive amount of expensive technology to replace a very small amount of skill.
Yeah, but we're talking about the guy who runs the patent troll firm Intellectual Ventures. I suspect he's got a whole slew of patents covering the theoretical oven he's describing.
I suspect he likes pretending he has other interests than patent litigation, though, since that isn't the sort of thing that's going to look great in an obituary.
Yes, it has warts, security issues and the original database services were anything but plug-compatible, but it's a great language for quick-and-dirty.
Yes, let's gloss over PHP's security issues. I mean, It's not like the developers ever broke crypt and then debated whether or not they were going to fix it...
I'm still watering my veggies with a sprinkler, for the most part. I check my soil's moisture with my finger, and I calculate how much water has been put down using either a couple tin cans or some cheapie rain gauges.
I guess this new equipment is now going to be added to the list of things I'm not using. On the bright side, it also means some hacker isn't going to turn my vegetable garden into a bog garden from the comfort of their parents' basement... they'll have to sneak into my yard and turn on the faucet by hand (and hope they make it past the dogs and the homeowner).
So Google+ has apparently taken off! I must have missed the memo!
Well, I suppose if the frame of reference was Orkut, then yes it has. Sure, Google+ has tens of millions of members... who aren't actually aware they are members of Google+.
Yet nobody seems to complain about this much–presumably because, when you put it this way, it seems kind of silly to suggest that a company whose business model is predicated on getting its users to use its product more would do anything other than try to manipulate its users into, you know, using its product more.
Back when I was on Facebook, it seemed like every change they made was designed to make me want to use its product less. So much so that I eventually asked them to delete my account.
I've been using Aperture since it first came out.I never liked how Lightroom worked - it certainly has powerful capabilities, but you have to do things exactly the way it wants you to do them. Aperture seemed better at getting out of my way.
If the new Photos app doesn't have all of Aperture's tools, though, I may not have a choice. And, with Aperture gone, I imagine Lightroom will quickly switch to the subscription model Adobe is trying to force down our throats with all their other titles. But I'm going to wait and see what the new app is like before committing, one way or the other. Adobe's "double down on Lightroom" statement can be seen two ways - and one of them is they may be worried about what's coming.
I'm old enough to recall when many people argued we didn't have to worry about various (then theoretical) JPEG vulnerabilities because they would be "extremely hard to exploit". But once it becomes known that something is possible, people have repeatedly proven themselves extremely clever in figuring out how to accomplish it.
If I was on the Rover team, I might not worry - but terrestrial users of LZO compression should at least start thinking about how to ameliorate this.
Wouldn't matter. The police search to produce evidence that is admissible in court. If they were to search a cell phone illegally, they could not use any of the evidence obtained from it in court, thus making the search useless in the first place.
Yes, it's not as if there's any recent evidence that US governmental entities sometimes obtain information by one method! then pretend they got it a different way.
There was a period in time where pretty much everyone in my group (including the student helpers) would order snacks, daily, from kozmo.com. The problem was they'd order them independently over a span of a few hours. So the delivery guy would have to make multiple trips to our building to deliver a candy bar, then a pint of Ben & Jerrys, then some licorice or a can of pop.
It really isn't a sustainable model when you have to send a guy out just to deliver a Snickers bar.
They state in the opinion that you can search a phone for psychical threats such as a bomb or a blade hidden in the case, but data on a phone is not an imminent threat, it is just data.
So my case with the built in rocket launcher is still fair game to them? That sucks!
At least Scalia, Thomas, and Alito got it right.
Sure, but they're unpopular politically.
If you think the system is working, ask someone who's waiting for a prompt.