Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Agree very much that it is not Google that controls your apps, but whomever hosts them. The GGP (GGGP now?) parenthetically alluded to it not being just Google, but I agree with you that they didn't give enough credence to the fact that the vast *vast* majority of apps are well outside of Google's control.
Fair enough that both traditional and "hosted app" OS's can maintain the "feature" of the author controlling the current version of the app. But the model promoted by the ChromeOS does inherently *promote* the control of the app being in the author's hands. If the author chooses to maintain multiple versions of their apps on their servers, that is still the author controlling the app. Yes, I realize that *not* requiring an installed app to check with the mother ship is also in the author's hands, but it is less work for the author to *not* check in via installed app and *more* work for the author to maintain prior release in a hosted app. In this sense, it is inherent in the hosted model, even though it is not a requirement of the OS.
The job of a model is to make whatever is being modeled attractive to those that might be a consumer. If you feel that making items appear attractive is sexist, why the hell would you get into the modelling industry. Let's look at the very first quote from one of the models for some insight into exactly why:
"But the work is pretty relaxed and you don't have to do a lot in order to get paid."
Complaining about being stared at for these women is like a call center employee complaining about having to speak to so many damn callers. Any physical contact or lewd suggestions from the consumers is completely inappropriate and should be prosecuted if it falls in the realm of illegal. And doubly so for their employers. But for a model to complain about getting stared at it is ridiculous.
I do agree with the general position of listening to the courts to determine if someone is guilty or innocent, but that is not always the best place to look. The best example, IMHO, is the MLB steroids debacle. Nobody was convicted in a court of law of steroid use, but I know damn well that a large number of MLB players are guilty of that crime. And there are multiple reports to point out which ones.
My home page is 202 bytes.
The most used link points to a page that is 45 kilobytes. All data, no images, no css. There are 12 people that use it.
I believe my site design style could be considered Minimalist.
With this, its just a matter of time before these "predicted" red light runners are ticketed for their "pre-crime".... We slide further down the slope that Huxley warned us about....
Or you could take off your tin foil hat and realize it could be used as a safety feature in cars. If you are sitting at an intersection, and the system detects a probable red light runner approaching, it could warn you to not enter the intersection too quickly.
But I don't believe that the foreseeable future holds any means of calling a balk.
It isn't the usual calls that are the problem. It is the infrequent ones. Balk. Infield-fly rule. Base runner interference. Batter interfering with the catcher's throw. Pitcher doctoring the ball. Batter using too much pine tar.
These little elements are rules just outside of what could be programmed, IMHO.