Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Not really seeing the point (Score 1) 120

by Cerium (#43240395) Attached to: Google Fiber Expands To Olathe, Kansas

What can you do on an ethernet connection that you can't do on a serial connection?
What can you do on a 128k DSL connection that you can't do on a 56k dial-up connection?
What can you do on a DVD that you can't do on a CD?

I can keep going, but I'm sure you get the point. It's not about what you can do _right now_, but about what you can do tomorrow. And in the meantime, you can do the same things can do today much faster.

Gotta look to the future, not muck about in the present.

Comment: Re:Cue the morons (Score 1) 120

by Cerium (#43240329) Attached to: Google Fiber Expands To Olathe, Kansas

In all fairness, that is only one of the factors. Another pretty big one is likely the artificially high prices on anything that has that "enterprise" prefix on a product description, or anything that could be used by some pesky upstart.

It could also be the plethora of red tape and lawsuits that seem to be our thing here in the US.

Honestly, I'd put the landmass at a distant 3rd, at best.

Comment: Re:More stupid victim-blaming (Score 1) 171

by Cerium (#43100695) Attached to: RSA: Phish Me If You Can (Video)

Those same VPs are the types that demand all sorts of stupid shit if they think it gets in the way of how they feel things should work.

They're the problem. They're the exact reason training never works, because even if you explain the problem to them, they demand that you work around their shortcomings, because fuck you, why should they change to solve your petty problems, asshole.

People who are receptive to any type of training like what's being blatantly advertised to us here or what the GP is talking about have probably already either learned about it through their local sysadmin/tech pal or by being burned by a scam or two.

Comment: Re:Only because you are a Mac fan (Score 1) 367

by Cerium (#43055361) Attached to: Among Servers, Apple's Mac Mini Quietly Gains Ground

No dude, you just don't get it.

These IT departments are in charge of maintaining this crap and making sure it runs. They already have an environment and systems to maintain that environment in place. It is perfectly reasonable for them to not want to have to maintain a completely different set of systems for some one-off site that some newbies are proposing because it's the current hotness and/or all they know.

These consultant-type "web developers" are going to come and go in short order. Meanwhile, those IT guys are left dealing with the crap left in their wake (translation: more work for the IT admins). If they were to allow this to happen repeatedly, you'd probably give them shit for not keeping their environment homogenous.

Comment: Re:Crazy (Score 1) 156

by Cerium (#42994267) Attached to: Open Source Emoji Project Wants Money For Icons

I didn't read the article or kickstarter very closely, so forgive me if you already addressed this.

The one thing I can't quite understand is that your goal is to make a bunch of little vectorized emoticons that are free to use. Many of these are based on things that already exist, but will be done with your own artistic styling (correct?).

That's all wonderful and whatever, but why does this project demand $50,000? What's stopping you from taking the week or two to fire these things out and just releasing them under the licensing model you claim you want them to be under?

I know for a fact many of us here have spent years of our lives on projects simply to fill gaps, make cool stuff or generally just make the internet|world|whatever a little better. So again I ask: why does this demand so much money? Why are you only releasing these things once you hit certain monetary goals? Doesn't that seem shitty to you? Because, no offense, it seems pretty shitty to me.

Comment: Re:Blog post with more background info (Score 1) 110

by Cerium (#42703199) Attached to: Voxel.js: <em>Minecraft</em>-like Browser-Based Games, But Open Source

Well, the statement itself wouldn't have been bad if you had linked to something else (as you had done quite a bit in that article).

In any event, it's still a bit silly to me that your opinion on the matter is based on (what seems to be) others misusing it. Moreover, that said opinion makes you more partial to other languages and platforms that give you more rope to hang yourself with (and, in this case, require more work to achieve any semblance of stability/consistency), is even stranger to me -- it seems like it's a self-perpetuating problem. But, to each their own, I suppose. :)

Comment: Re:Blog post with more background info (Score 1) 110

by Cerium (#42702923) Attached to: Voxel.js: <em>Minecraft</em>-like Browser-Based Games, But Open Source

"Reeks of Java"?

I stopped reading and started skimming there. Can't take you seriously when there are subtle jabs at a tool with no justification for your disposition.

I have other gripes with the article and project as well, but I can't think of a way to word them in a way that they can be perceived as constructive criticism, so I'll just leave it at that.

Comment: Re:I Love the Thought Process Here (Score 2) 250

by Cerium (#42587005) Attached to: Instagram Loses Almost Half Its Daily Users In a Month

Umm... I'm pretty sure that if I were using a service and the TOS changed, switching to another that has better terms is the most logical thing to do. How they learn about the change doesn't really matter.

That seems to make more sense than posting a passive-aggressive pseudo-rant on some nerd news site. :/

Comment: Re:Who cares (Score 3, Informative) 71

by Cerium (#42333753) Attached to: Samsung Drops European Injunction Requests Against Apple

Okay, so let's just pretend for a second that I didn't specify any other device types or reasons in my very short example. Let's also ignore the mental acrobatics you performed to disregard the remainder of that chunklet of information I posted in a seemingly feeble attempt at steering the clearly biased back toward the gray area within which the rest of us live.

Let's pretend all of that. Even still, you're saying that the iPhone was a technological evolution of devices that were not only already in existence, but established enough that there were known workarounds for the seemingly terrible user experience.

Even if that were exactly the case, to hold Apple so highly for their "accomplishments" that you feel they're justified in suing everyone else for "stealing" mind-numbingly obvious IP is sociopathic at best.

Look, If you guys enjoy living within the walled garden of Apple, great. I'm happy for you. However, to think they somehow developed everything in a vacuum and everything to come after is a mindless copy... Jesus Christ, man.

Comment: Re:Who cares (Score 3, Informative) 71

by Cerium (#42332277) Attached to: Samsung Drops European Injunction Requests Against Apple

Ugh. Enough of this backwards justification for this crap.

Do a few minutes of 5th-grader-level research and you'll find that there were more than a few phones/pdas/whatever that had touch screens with grids of icons before the iPhone existed. The tech simply wasn't cheap (or cool) enough yet. Apple was simple in the right place at the right time.

Your memory of how things got to where we are now is fuzzy at best. :/

The trouble with the rat-race is that even if you win, you're still a rat. -- Lily Tomlin

Working...