Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: OS less significant (Score 2) 245

by HangingChad (#47897651) Attached to: City of Turin To Switch From Windows To Linux and Save 6M Euros

I remember when the Redmond faithful used to go on about needing Windows to get "real work" done. My work must not be real because I can do it on Windows, Linux, Mac, Android and iOS. I find myself using my Android tablet more and more for work and all my social media promotions.

The operating system is becoming less relevant every day. People are choosing devices, not operating systems.

Comment: Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too (Score 1) 352

by danheskett (#47892325) Attached to: Microsoft Killing Off Windows Phone Brand Name In Favor of Just Windows

There are 3 criteria that will eliminate a huge subset of apps that devalue all app stores:

1. An app that simply wraps a mobile website is not an app, it's a short-cut. If the app has no function offline, it's really not an app.

2. Games that are free but have in-game purchases. All garbage.

3. Apps with similar names to highly rated apps, walk-through, and otherwise knockoff apps.

Another way to go about it is to require new apps to have a beta period, to open it up to users who opt-in to beta, and to only release to the public after a 30 or 60 day beta period or when enough users in the beta approve it for general release.

Anything, actually, is better than the screening which happens now, which is essentially none.

Comment: Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too (Score 1) 352

by danheskett (#47892251) Attached to: Microsoft Killing Off Windows Phone Brand Name In Favor of Just Windows

So what if it's labor intensive? Make a person at Microsoft beta-test every app for a week. Once word gets out that the last flappy bird knock off isn't going to fly, developers will stop wasting thier time. Or make the first submission of an app by a developer happen by mail. Or whatever.

Not only would I happily use an app-store with no in-app crap purchases, no adverts, and no security problems with knock off apps, I would be happy to deploy that to the whole company.

If it means you only have 500 apps, that's fine. If it means you only have 250 apps, that's fine. As long as they are good.

Comment: Re:correction: 1 OS to FAIL them all (Score 1) 352

by danheskett (#47886835) Attached to: Microsoft Killing Off Windows Phone Brand Name In Favor of Just Windows

I also don't get it. It's fine to unify Windows (please unify Windows desktop SKUs please, Microsoft. We don't need 5 versions of Windows for the desktop. If you want a cut-price one, offer Windows and Windows Pro. Thanks), but that doesn't mean you have to take away what people like. Offer Metro as an alternate to classic windows, and be done with it.

Comment: Re:KIlling off the Microsoft Store Name Too (Score 5, Insightful) 352

by danheskett (#47886817) Attached to: Microsoft Killing Off Windows Phone Brand Name In Favor of Just Windows

Disagree. Microsoft just needs to focus on high-quality apps, or better yet, just paying top app makers to port to Windows phone. There is a strong market for a trusted, high-quality only, app store. You know, apps that don't have in app purchase, no ads, etc.

Microsoft users are used to paying for things. That's the selling point. Just build really good apps, get rid of the BS, the crap, and only accept solid, really solid, working apps.

The problem MS has with it's Windows app store is that it's the worst of all worlds - low-quality, knock-off apps with security problems, ads, phoning home, etc AND missing too many good high-quality apps that users come to expect.

Microsoft, if you are listening, don't work on getting Android to run, focus on having an app-store with only 100% quality apps. Even if it means only have 500 apps in your strore, just have only good stuff.

Comment: Re:It is Well Past Time (Score 2) 223

by danheskett (#47886665) Attached to: U.S. Threatened Massive Fine To Force Yahoo To Release Data

No, Yahoo did not really try. They did more than anyone else, but it's an existential threat. These companies won't exist if people keep feeling their data is insecure. It's already happening internationally, US-based companies are getting pummeled.

Yahoo is a public company, and did not want to have a $91 million loss in addition to their already failed everything else.
Yeah, if they' re going to end up out of business anyways, what's a little bit sooner. And, amazingly, standing up for your customers will probably lead to more customers, not fewer. But even if it really pissed of the customers they did have, so what. The Yahoo precedent was set, and everyone else fell into line. That's why they should have picked up the phone, paid the fine for disclosing the legal battle, and enlisted other parties to help.

And no one uses Yahoo, at least intentionally. How the shit do they fight back with a barely captive audience?
This is a stretch. I've heard of people who use Yahoo. Back a few years it seemed more common.

So Yahoo takes the burden, what happens to the rest of the companies? The competition? They learn not to oppose the government. Yahoo, from the article, was the first to comply. If they did not, and died as a company, would anything be different other than fewer @yahoo.com email addresses?
Yes, absolutely. We would have known contemporaneously that this was happening. Years later, what can be done? Very little. And, instead of being a joke, Yahoo would be a company with principles. It may have even worked out better for shareholders.

The worst that could happen is that the board opposes the CEO, and fires and replaces management. Which happened anyways.

Comment: Re:Whenever I read stuff like this (Score 4, Insightful) 223

by danheskett (#47886303) Attached to: U.S. Threatened Massive Fine To Force Yahoo To Release Data

I may not agree with you on everything, but I do agree with you that the same idiots who funded the earlier version of the 9/11 terrorists want to fund Syrian rebels, and Iraqi's, and all manner of rebels today. ISIS, our now mortal enemy in Iraq, are fighting with equipment that we just left behind, in part.

It's a never ending parade of idiocy.

Comment: Re:Too Bad They Didn't Pull a Lavabit (Score 1) 223

by danheskett (#47886287) Attached to: U.S. Threatened Massive Fine To Force Yahoo To Release Data

My thoughts exactly. You think the phone traffic from the slowday was big? Shut down Google for a day, replace with page for everyone to call a Senator's office or the WH, and see what happens. Ever seen a phone system try to handle 100 million phone calls at once?

It's either get things 100% end-to-end encypted, and done up so that even the service provider can't get to the clear text, or they need to get the right legal framework in place to avoid large-scale data releases to the government. Otherwise all of these companies end up overseas sooner or later.

Comment: It is Well Past Time (Score 3, Insightful) 223

by danheskett (#47886271) Attached to: U.S. Threatened Massive Fine To Force Yahoo To Release Data

For one of these large companies to actually fight back. Tell the Government to stick it. Really, honestly, it's time. Well past time.

Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo, Google - just put the government in it's place. If they feel strongly about it, Yahoo, shut down Yahoo. Redirect every page to an explanation that they are currently in the process of shredding the all data, and if the users want Yahoo back, to call a Congress person or the directory of the FBI.

Fighting back has to be asymetric. $250k a day in fines is only $91 million a year. Fight. Back. There was no one at Yahoo with the pockets to with stand that type of fine? No one they could have picked up the phone and asked for?

It's not okay to lay down with the government. Just from a business perspective, American companies are loosing 10x that amount daily in lost business from international clients - business that will probably never come back - thanks to the overreaching operations and activities of the US government.

If Lars at Lavabit can do it - a one man operation - Yahoo can do it.

Comment: This is getting out of hand (Score 4, Interesting) 462

by HangingChad (#47884045) Attached to: CBC Warns Canadians of "US Law Enforcement Money Extortion Program"

First the militarization of small town police departments, SWAT teams for serving routine warrants, rising incidents of shocking brutality and now law enforcement has devolved to the point of being little better than a band of petty thieves. This is getting pathetic and scary. Foreign countries are issuing warnings about the conduct of U.S. law enforcement personnel. Am I the only person who has a problem with that?

Comment: Re:Wrong Title (Score 3, Insightful) 499

It just depends on your perspective. Ask a pro-life radical and they see us doing the exact same thing as the communists to our "best of a population" - the children. Ask a pro-prison reformer and they see us doing far worse, putting an entire population through the judicial-prison complex every year. It's not as clear as it seems on the surface.

Comment: Re:We'll never know (Score 1) 142

by danheskett (#47852297) Attached to: Feds Say NSA "Bogeyman" Did Not Find Silk Road's Servers

Yes, you got it. All branches government should hope that i am never again on a jury, because any government evidence of any sort is going to be treated extremely skeptically.

We know that the DEA, NSA, and the FBI plus state agencies will use parallel construction and outright lies to all involved to circumvent revealing sources they don't feel like they should reveal. This is blatantly against the spirit of the Constitution which recognizes a God-given right to a fair and open trial, the right confront your accuser (not the false once constructed by the government), and to hear and see evidence presented against you.

It would be nice to form a union of potential jurors and to inform potential jurors that the government feels like it can lie about evidence and it's provenance and get away with it. But if we did, the government would simply use that basis to strike you from the jury pool.

Comment: We suffer the 1st amendment for this (Score 4, Insightful) 188

There are some non-trivial downsides to the 1st amendment press protections. We have to deal with substantial abuses but the spirit of it is that it's for the common good, and that a free press is a God-given, Constitutional recognized right.

The least the press could do is deserve the hassle we get from it.

It is not best to swap horses while crossing the river. -- Abraham Lincoln

Working...