Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Pathetic (Score 1) 492

by Alunral (#39910533) Attached to: Is Google the New Microsoft?
This has to be one of the dumbest artist reasons I've ever read. Was Dropbox unique? Were they the first ones to do cloud storage? NOPE. First one I remember was box.net. Probably were many, many more prior to that. This isn't copying. This is just taking an old idea, and adding your own spin to it.

Comment: Their Choices (Score 1) 722

by Alunral (#39016539) Attached to: Reddit: No More Suggestive Content Featuring Minors
I've been reading a lot of comments on this article, and I just want to point this out. In no way am I supporting child pornography(or hell, even "child" pornography, "child" being 14/15-18). but...these laws are telling these people what they can and cannot do with their own body. Why does the law get this decision? Because they "can't decide for themselves"? Why can't they? Who is the government, or even some random person who finds out, to tell them they can't? Sure, younger than 15 is questionable, but yes, they can. A 14 year old is going to know exactly the same amount of information about what kind of impact sex will have on them as an 18 year old. There's not much to really not understand at that point. It's something pleasurable, is involved in reproduction. And can also cause you to become pregnant/impregnate someone.

The maturity levels don't really differ much either, by then. I certainly know many people younger than 18 that are more mature than most adults. And yet the government gets to decide this. Okay, fine. In most cases, I could understand this. But this is the very same government that does not give those minors the full "freedoms" an adult has(or as much "freedom" as we currently have here, what with censorship running rampant). You do not have full freedom of speech. You can't vote on your country's leader(and yet they can coerce you into fighting, and dying, for that same country). You can't vote for any leader, really. You cannot legally marry. You cannot get medical treatment without parent consent(except in extreme circumstances). You must attend public school(and your parents are forced to pay for this, too). That's quite a bit of human right that you do not have. These are all things that I can't agree with. At least not until you hit close to that age.

So why does the government get to decide what you can do with your body, the one "property" they cannot take away from you(I'm starting to wonder if I should add "yet" to this. I get the feeling if left alone, they'll find a way...)?

Comment: Re:Multiple mobile operating systems? (Score 1) 358

by Alunral (#38934731) Attached to: iOS Vs. Android: Which Has the Crashiest Apps?
If you bothered reading the article, they're calling different versions of each base version a "different OS". In the same way that Windows XP is a bit different from Windows 7. Android 2.1 compared to Android 4.0. They are both Android, and are relatively compatible...but they are not the same. What works on one will not always work on the other. Not to mention not all phones run the same version of that software. When you have to flash a different ROM to update, that's not considered just updates. It's a whole new system. So yes, both Apple and Google have multiple mobile OSes. Microsoft as well, as they do count.

Comment: That's crappy (Score 0) 173

by Alunral (#38838357) Attached to: Pentagon Drafts Kids To Build Drones and Robots
Well that certainly doesn't sound good at all. Since when do we make/coerce/trick the children into doing work? And then not pay them a single dime. And then say they can't have a single right to anything they make. Godsdamn does that sound terrible. Worst part is that it'll be in schools, so you can't really get away from it...

Comment: This is overboard and fails to get the point (Score 1) 770

by Alunral (#37861626) Attached to: Android Orphans: a Sad History of Platform Abandonment
See, you people all blame Google, when it's far from Google's fault at all. Not to mention Apple has total, complete control over the OS, the phone, and updates. Google does not have that, and I don't really think the providers would allow that to change. It let's them customize their phones for their network. Up until recently, AT&T was the only one with the iPhone.

Google has no way to push updates on it's own, and even if it did, the providers would likely block that. If they did come up with a way, you can bet your breakfast, lunch, dinner, and car that Apple would go berserker over it. Lawsuits everywhere. I mean, they're already doing that anyway. It's the Providers who are at fault, here, not Google. Plus, you do have to realize that like a computer OS, they keep getting more powerful, then computers need more power to run them. The same goes for phones. The newer the OS, the stronger the phone must be, no exceptions.

An older computer cannot run Windows 7, or 8(requires at least 1GB of memory), likewise, older phones cannot run stuff like Gingerbread, Honeycomb, ICS. The only way is to build a special version of that OS for that phone. Apple, as they have only about 7 phones, only 4 of which are currently supported, can do that. The teams for CyanogenMod do exactly what they do, make that special version. Apple has the resources, time to do that. Not to mention they handle the phones themselves. Google doesn't. HTC, Samsung, Nokia, LG...they all handle their phones themselves.

Don't blame Google for this. You cannot expect a company to manage that many different phones that need that many different ROMs for those phones. Gotta be at least 151 different Android phones out there, not even APPLE could handle that. 4 is something not bad. Pokemon-levels is not.

FORTRAN is for pipe stress freaks and crystallography weenies.

Working...