Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Slashdot Deals: Prep for the CompTIA A+ certification exam. Save 95% on the CompTIA IT Certification Bundle ×

Comment Re:Jail broken devices? (Score 1) 194

I can give you plenty of reasons for jailbreaking:..

Thank you, AC. Finally, someone who actually knows something about the issue takes the time to respond.

As for most of the rest of you...

I've been jailbreaking my iPhones for years. Why? Simple aesthetic reasons, for the most part, and a few minor enhancements for keyboard layout, select/copy/paste routines, and minor, but very useful tweaks of the Control Center, App Switcher, OneTouch ID, Notifications, etc. Not to mention "hiding" some of the bullshit cruft "apps" that clutter up my situation.

Apple, as usual, decides how the device will look and feel, and allows almost no "real" customization of the iPhone desktop, navigation, power switching (On/Off/Restart/Springboard relaunch), etc.

I want... check that, demand... a transparent Dock, unlimited nested folders without that hideous gray background blur, no resource-killing "animations," no auto-redirect to "App Store," and a number of other personalized processes and "look and feel" adjustments that are ONLY available on the iOS to jailbroken hardware. Period.

If kids, or old farts, for that matter, want to jailbreak so they can avoid paying... what(?) 99 cents or two bucks for some apps, and they get burned using some obscure Chinese software repository, who gives a fuck? I don't.

I don't like my homescreen being cluttered up with icons. If Jonny Ive thinks that's cool, and Apple agrees to the point of not allowing the simplest, safe mods, well fuck him and them too. Once I buy the phone (outright, no subsidy), that bitch is mine.

Pardon my french, you know, but it's bad enough we have to wade through all the fucking horseshit that does, indeed, exist in the JB "community," without having to listen to misinformed luddites, and chickenshits posturing about how bad it all is or how these "kids" you all speak of, get what you think they "deserve." If you're getting ready to chime in on moralistic bullshit, about a simple issue of choice, well then, fuck you, too, in advance.

I feel better. Oh, and by the way, almost all of the serious root-level exploits that Apple has "patched," now, for years, have come courtesy of the JB underground. You're welcome... assholes.

Comment Re:They _ARE_ strangling (Score 1) 258

I'm sorry, what?

I could be wrong, but I believe the poster was referring to the idea that "class" (whether in terms of disparity, privilege, warfare, etc) is what's killing people. You know, allowing them to have malnourished kids, filling up prisons with people who can't afford proper representation, jails with people who can't afford bail on minor charges, poor health care... etc., etc.

Race, gender, "rights," (or, as they're sometimes characterized, "wedge issues") DO distract people from underlying issues.

Comment Re:Passed data with a ton of noise? (Score 1) 391

Same with instrument cables. No, a brand new expensive guitar cable does not sound better than a cheap one.

Although I generally agree, the fact is there are degrees of what constitutes "expensive" and of course, the nature of the guitar pickups, local environmental factors, and, last but not least, little things like anti-RFI on the guitars own guts, and the integrity of the amplification unit... all bear a huge responsibility as far as the presence, or lack of, "interference."

Having played electrics, more on than off, since about 1965, I've seen my fair share of musical instrument hype. And at times I've tried all sorts of devices, wiring schemes, ground lifters, and yup, expensive cables. And it usually boiled down to: physically moving around to find a sweet spot.

But, I am currently doing my limited "plugged-in" practice in a room with funky old electrical wiring, playing on a number of single-coil Fenders, through an old Ampeg that dates back to somewhere between '68 and '72... and the situation, powered up, whether the guitars volume pots are full open, or closed, is... whisper quiet. No 60-cycle hum, no RFI. Nada.

After all these years, frankly, it's a bit startling. The only actual circuit change? Klotz cables (their higher-end model). Silly pricey. No phony "gold" connectors.No ultra-thick wrapped copper (as in bogus "Monster" stuff). As a matter of fact, they don't even tangle like normal cables. And I'm using one to run into a small (5 or 6 unit) pedalboard, that has nothing but 9-volt batteries, and no ground lifting whatsoever, and another Klotz running out of that to the front-end of the VT-22, with precious little attenuation, and no "noise suppression" or "gates," at all.

Different strokes...

Comment Re:Slashdot is guilty too (Score 1) 394

Thanks for the insights regarding traffic on roads. But, as a driver, here in California, I have to say that any great ideas that are dependent upon "educated drivers who obey the rules of the roads" is doomed. For instance, turn "signals," here, means "as you begin the actual turn, flip on your signal."

They "obey" the rule, they just lack a fundamental understanding of what the rule is supposedly for. It seems minor,but it contributes to lack of safety, and is murder in terms of "anticipatory" traffic flow decision-making on the part of other drivers.

Graft, in the mass transit area of the transportation world, is a major factor in everything from where subway/metro/light rail stops will be, or even "might" be, located, to which business areas will, or not be, inconvenienced by construction.

Thanks again...

Comment Re:Slashdot is guilty too (Score 1) 394

I feel a novella coming on. You have been warned. Skip or read it, it is up to you. I think you may be surprised.

...surprised.

Surprised? More like, enlightened.

Sure, I knew a few of these things (not many) and always sensed there was some "organization" going on in terms of grocery store layouts. But this was a seriously interesting/fun piece!

A novella, of course, as you must have considered, isn't a bad idea, at all.

Curious about the rationales (etc.) behind traffic routing on roads and highways. Wait for the book? Heheh, anyway, good one!

Comment Don't Get Excited... (Score 1) 70

Marvin Ammori is considered a "sensible" net neutrality advocate by the lobbyists and regulatory attorneys who represent the Cable & Telecom biz, as a whole, both on the CA state, and Federal levels. An anonymous-remaining legal person at NCTA told me, "he's not a wingnut like most of the rest."

Comment Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one (Score 1) 389

Oh, don't worry. They'll tell *you*.

I have a MacBook Pro.

Oh... that runs OS 10.10.3, Ubuntu 14.10, FreeBSD 10.1, and Win 7 Ult. But, honestly? Rarely more than three of those simultaneously.

Three OS's ought to be enough for anyone, though, right?

Submission + - CPUC Decision on Comcast/TimeWarner Merger

Lord Flipper writes: The California Public Utilities Commission decision on the Comcast/Time-Warner proposed merger has just been released. It's not an exciting read, BUT, the 25-bullet-point Appendix to the decision is a shocker. Example:

"19. Comcast shall for a period of five years following the effective date of the parent company merger neither oppose, directly or indirectly, nor fund opposition to, any municipal broadband development plan in California, nor any CASF or CTF application within its service territory that otherwise meets the requirements of CASF or CTF."

- Whoa! Trust me, Comcast was NOT expecting this at all. Here's one more, as an example:

"8. Comcast shall offer Time Warner’s Carrier Ethernet Last Mile Access product to interested CLECs throughout the combined service territories of the merging companies for a period of five years from the effective date of the parent company at the same prices, terms and conditions as offered by Time Warner prior to the merger."

What #8 means, was confusing to me, at first, as it appears they are saying Comcast has to let current TW customers continue to use, or take advantage of, something they already have. But that's not the case, at all. "CLECs" is CPUC shorthand for Competitive Local Exchange Carrier. And the ruling by the CPUC covers all customers, now, or in the future of the combined entity, here in California. What they're talking about here, simply, is opening up Last Mile Access.

Personally, I see this as a much larger "step, but step only, in the right direction, but the ruling today is definitely a total shocker. It could nix the merger, in California, only, or... it could light a fire under the asses of the FCC, or, the "codified" long-shot: it could bring real competition to Internet access, here in California, pronto.

The CPUC is basing their entire decision on Common Carrier law (Setion 706, as opposed to Title II), and, unlike the projected FCC decision (coming around the 26th of the month) the CPUC's decision has all kinds of "teeth" as opposed to the FCC's "Title II, with forbearance" approach. It could very interesting, very soon.

Here's the link to the PDF of the Decision: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Publis...

Submission + - CPUC Decision on Comcast/TimeWarner Merger->

Lord Flipper writes: Edited version [Due to accidental exposure of a third-party attorney who cannot risk exposure, period]:

"The California Public Utilities Commission decision on the Comcast/Time-Warner proposed merger has just been released. It's not an exciting read, BUT, the 25-bullet-point Appendix to the decision is a shocker. Example:

"19. Comcast shall for a period of five years following the effective date of the parent company merger neither oppose, directly or indirectly, nor fund opposition to, any municipal broadband development plan in California, nor any CASF or CTF application within its service territory that otherwise meets the requirements of CASF or CTF."

- Whoa! Trust me, Comcast was NOT expecting this at all. Here's one more, as an example:
"8. Comcast shall offer Time Warner’s Carrier Ethernet Last Mile Access product to interested CLECs throughout the combined service territories of the merging companies for a period of five years from the effective date of the parent company at the same prices, terms and conditions as offered by Time Warner prior to the merger."

What #8 means, was confusing to me, at first, as it appears they are saying Comcast has to let current TW customers continue to use, or take advantage of, something they already have. But that's not the case, at all. "CLECs" is CPUC shorthand for Competitive Local Exchange Carrier. And the ruling by the CPUC covers all customers, now, or in the future of the combined entity, here in California. What they're talking about here, simply, is opening up Last Mile Access.

Personally, I see this as a much larger "step," only in the right direction, but the ruling today is a total shocker. It could nix the merger, in California, only, or... it could light a fire under the asses of the FCC, or, the "codified" long-shot: it could bring real competition to Internet access, here in California, pronto.

The link goes to the list of Public Utilities Commission documents, and the two at the top of the page are referencing "Proceeding: A1404013; A1406012"... the second of the 2 docs is the one that has the whole decidsion, including Appendix A, where all the real news is at regarding this whole deal."

Here's the link to the full CPUC document: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/Search...

Link to Original Source

Submission + - CPUC Decision on Comcast/TimeWarner Merger->

Lord Flipper writes: The California Public Utilities Commission decision on the Comcast/Time-Warner proposed merger has just been released. It's not an exciting read, BUT, the 25-bullet-point Appendix to the decision is a shocker. Example:

"19. Comcast shall for a period of five years following the effective date of the parent company merger neither oppose, directly or indirectly, nor fund opposition to, any municipal broadband development plan in California, nor any CASF or CTF application within its service territory that otherwise meets the requirements of CASF or CTF."

- Whoa! Trust me, Comcast was NOT expecting this at all. Here's one more, as an example:
"8. Comcast shall offer Time Warner’s Carrier Ethernet Last Mile Access product to interested CLECs throughout the combined service territories of the merging companies for a period of five years from the effective date of the parent company at the same prices, terms and conditions as offered by Time Warner prior to the merger."

What #8 means, was confusing to me, at first, as it appears they are saying Comcast has to let current TW customers continue to use, or take advantage of, something they already have. But that's not the case, at all. "CLECs" is CPUC shorthand for Competitive Local Exchange Carrier. And the ruling by the CPUC covers all customers, now, or in the future of the combined entity, here in California. What they're talking about here, simply, is opening up Last Mile Access.

Personally, I see this as a much larger "step," only in the right direction, but my wife, an attorney for, shall we say, interested parties, says the ruling today is a total shocker. It could nix the merger, in California, only, or... it could light a fire under the asses of the FCC, or, the "codified" long-shot: it could bring real competition to Internet access, here in California, pronto.

The link goes to the list of Public Utilities Commission documents, and the two at the top of the page are referencing "Proceeding: A1404013; A1406012"... the second of the 2 docs is the one that has the whole decidsion, including Appendix A, where all the real news is at regarding this whole deal.

Link to Original Source

Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success. -- Christopher Lascl

Working...