Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:So ... (Score 1) 85

He said he predicted failure for their SECOND tablet. Which was the iPad.

Yes, this is what I meant, and I was far from the only one saying so. Those who weren't Apple fanbois mostly predicted the iPad to be nothing more than an oversized iPod Touch filling a small niche that could only cannibalize from Apple's existing portfolio.

10" touchscreen tablets were totally unheard of, the Newton was a flop, and everyone hated laptops with touchscreens. A tablet, keyboardless computer had, in the history of mankind, never been successful. Plus the iPad was _expensive_. People would buy the cheaper Kindle or netbooks (remember those?) instead. The concept of carrying around a tablet instead of a laptop was ludicrous, because the apps that would enable you to do that did not yet exist. Four years later it's easy to look back and say "well, duh", but in 2010 it was seen as a risky move for Apple.

My point is that it's easy to be wrong about what people will buy, and it's too early to know what will happen with wearable computing. The right product at the right time could change everything.

Comment: Re:So ... (Score 4, Insightful) 85

Anything that makes "wearables" die out faster is good in my book. Keep releasing different models all running different OSes and all doing different versions of nothing useful. Manufactured product pushes are like diarrhea. The sooner all the products exit the pipeline, the sooner corporate sees that marketing was blowing smoke up their ass when they told them "wearables" were going to be hot, the sooner I don't have to hear about them and, hopefully, the sooner that marketing dipshit is fired.

The same goes for the asshole who decided that Wendy's, Carl's Jr/Hardees, and Sonic all had to jump on the non-existent pretzel bun bandwagon. Oh wait, nobody actually wanted those? Better jump on the ciabatta bandwagon! That failed too?! Well what about brioche? Still no boost in sales? Revert back to our "classic" buns to save money and leverage our brand!

Sometimes the product vision is right but the timing or state of technology is wrong. I think wearables might fall into that category but it's too soon to tell. Groundwork and thought leadership today could reap rewards later. Apple's first tablet was such a colossal failure that many, including me, predicted the same for their second attempt. I was definitely wrong.

Comment: Re:Bicycle! And motorcycle. (Score 2) 163

Because when I have to go somewhere that parking is tricky, I'm always on two wheels. And there's always somewhere to park it.
Plus it's often quicker in busy cities, cheaper, gets you fit(If you don't have an engine) and above all, is fun!

"And here's why it matters to you even if you ride a granola-powered bike to work: I think this is a confirming instance of what I've been arguing for years, that the marketplace for ideas, inventions, and intellectual property is far less efficient than most people think it is."

This isn't about parking, except as an example of the problem.

Comment: Re:Slashvertisement (Score 1) 163

Stop this.


Just stop.

I don't think you bothered to do more than skim the summary, if that. Although to be fair, the summary could have simply said that good apps are getting drowned out in white noise of not-so-good apps because the review/curation system in the app stores is completely ineffective.

Comment: Re:Bu the wasn't fired (Score 2) 1112

by Anonymous Psychopath (#46700657) Attached to: Mozilla CEO Firestorm Likely Violated California Law

A contract signed under duress and harassment is not necessarily legally binding...

It's not duress. It isn't "if you don't sign this you're fired", but instead "if you go away quietly and promise not to sue us we will give you a bunch of money, plus we'll let everyone think it's your idea so you can tell your next employer whatever you like".

Obviously you're free not to accept the deal, and often that's a tactic during negotiation of the package, and they won't fire you unless they can legally do so. At that point the writing is on the wall anyway, and sooner or later you are going to part ways. At least with a package you get money, the company avoids litigation, everyone wins.

Comment: Re:Bu the wasn't fired (Score 4, Informative) 1112

by Anonymous Psychopath (#46697991) Attached to: Mozilla CEO Firestorm Likely Violated California Law

Did you even read the summery: "'It's clear that Brendan cannot lead Mozilla in this setting,' Baker was quoted as saying."

So basically, the only reason he was not fired, was because he was given the option to resign, before they fired him. This is a quote taken directly from the mouth of the Mozilla Executive Chairman.

Generally speaking when you want someone to resign but lack the legal means to fire them, you offer them a severance package to so that they'll decide to leave on their own. The terms usually call for non-disclosure of the deal elements (or possibly that there was a deal at all), and also some kind of legal protection for the company. Nothing illegal about that.

Comment: Re:Chinese getting uncomfortable... (Score 1) 100

Or you know, a well known totalitarian government stamping out a black market currency, you know, to control their citizens, like they've been doing forever.

This move has nothing to do with controlling their citizens and has everything to do with their continued manipulation of their currency. RMB is very tightly controlled by their government and they have a model that's working for them.

Comment: Summary correction needed (Score 3, Informative) 1482

by Anonymous Psychopath (#46632399) Attached to: OKCupid Warns Off Mozilla Firefox Users Over Gay Rights

If he opposed Prop 8 he would have been in support of gay marriage, not opposed to it. Prop 8 was a California constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. I assume he was in support of Prop 8 and not opposed to it as indicated in the summary.

Comment: Re:My Car Already Does That... (Score 1) 178

The method is new. Most (all?) current systems use the lane departure warning system and steering wheel input to determine if the driver is drowsy, but they do not put a camera on the driver themselves. The current system on my Ford doesn't seem to work very well.

Comment: Re:We need to stop big tax dodgers useing loop hol (Score 1) 300

Because building for my family's future is one of my primary motivators. I'm not just in it for myself. If I die I want my kids to receive the same education they would if I were still alive. The government already takes half of what I earn, and I will do everything legally possible to give them nothing more when I die.

Maybe the real issue is that your goverment isn't actually providing education for your own children. Your dependency on being able to leave capital to you descendants is merely a symptom of that actual problem.

I used education as an example, but there are many others. Helping with a down-payment for a starter home is another. Or perhaps they need some seed capital for a purpose I can't predict.

Comment: Re:We need to stop big tax dodgers useing loop hol (Score 1) 300

Yes, I did. You care about others, just not as much as you do about your own. Of course you're right, this is human nature. Much like fucking anything that moves, taking that juicy steak from the cripple, or killing anything that seems like it might one day pose a threat to you. Personally, I think that appeals to human nature are a bit played out, as the kids say.

You made a conscious decision to have kids knowing full well that you'd be raising them at the expense of the rest of the human race. That you'd be helping your daughter pay for college, but not helping some other little girl get a hot meal. Of course, you could've decided to do the truly selfless thing and not have kids, so that you could be a better human, so that your little girl wouldn't distract you from the rest of the world. But no, human nature stopped you from being selfless, and you were powerless to resist. Woe is you.

Your daughter is not special. She is one of billions of people suffering through this world. I'll pay for her college just as soon as I can pay for everyone's college, because I don't believe that preferential treatment is fair, by definition. Your entire argument stems from emotion (and appeals to "human nature") and lacks any substance of logic. Don't be offended by the allegations of greed. After all, it's just human nature.

Let me make sure I understand your argument:

1) Caring about and providing for your family is the same thing as rape, theft, and murder.
2) Every child is nothing but a burden to society. Or was it just mine in particular?
3) No one should go to college unless everyone can go to college. When I die everything should be taken from my family to further that goal.

Did I get that right? You're an idiot. Bye.

Comment: Re:We need to stop big tax dodgers useing loop hol (Score 1) 300

Because building for my family's future is one of my primary motivators. I'm not just in it for myself. If I die I want my kids to receive the same education they would if I were still alive. The government already takes half of what I earn, and I will do everything legally possible to give them nothing more when I die.

That's a sadly greedy way to go through life. I understand that "fuck you, I got mine" is a popular motto today, but seriously, have you no shame?

You seriously read it that way? Of course I care about others. That is my responsibility as a human being. I care about my family more than strangers. That is my responsibility as a husband and father. It's also human nature.

Tell you what, you sign up to put my kid through the college of her choice, help her with her first home purchase, generally make sure he has a better life than I do, and make sure my wife doesn't lose her home without my income, and in return I'll happily let the government take whatever they want from what I've managed to scrape up. No? Then fuck off, you sanctimonious prick.

Comment: Re:You'd be surprised how low the 50% bracket reac (Score 1) 300

If you make $50K a year, you are in the 25% Federal bracket,and if you are in California another 9.3%, then don't forget social security and medicare - 7.65%, and if you go thru the trouble of being self employed, you get to pay that twice, or 15.3%... OK you're right. It is ONLY 49.6% tax, for a self employed person in California. But, with what you have left you still have sales tax, gas tax, taxes on phone bills, cable bills, car tax (annual vehicle license fee), real-estate taxes... you get the idea.

I was going to respond but you did a much better job than I would have.

Thus mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true. -- Bertrand Russell