Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:market share? (Score 1) 152

by dropadrop (#43774979) Attached to: Jolla Announces First Meego Phone Available By End 2013

> They aren't even bothering to go after the US market. They're focusing on smaller, less competitive markets like China, Europe, and North Africa.

The US is the smaller market compared to China.

You can even blame Nokia, for throwing away their business in Asia and Africa with Symbian, just to try to capture the smaller US market with Windows Phone. And they even hardly succeed with that.

I expect Jolla to sell quite good in China, and hopefully somewhat in Europe too.

Nokia has always been obsessed with the US market, but have still been happy with their market share in developing countries. Losing a foothold of the developing countries might not have happened due to trying to gain the US market even more, rather just due to better offering from competitors.

Working with operators is a big part of success in the US, as such the business model is very different from the rest of the world where most phones are sold directly to the consumer (possibly with a monthly fee, but still more transparently).

Comment: Re:You're using it wrong (Score 1) 211

by dropadrop (#43491167) Attached to: Oracle Fixes 42 Security Vulnerabilities In Java

Whether they are "nice" or not in and of themselves isn't the point. They fail to integrate with the desktop, they don't behave like native apps, and they don't look like native apps either.

Maybe that depends on the desktop? Could it actually be that some (read whatever you are using) desktops are seriously limiting how different kinds of applications can be integrated degrading the user experience? Bashing the apps might be the wrong way around, as the problem is on the desktop environment.

Comment: Re:You're using it wrong (Score 2) 211

by dropadrop (#43490207) Attached to: Oracle Fixes 42 Security Vulnerabilities In Java

Java makes an excellent desktop application development platform, but an absolutely lousy browser plugin.

You may like Java as a developer, but Java fails to integrate properly with any of the desktops; Java desktop apps are a nightmare.

I've seen a lot of nice Java desktop apps and a lot of bad ones.

Comment: Re:still with the java? (Score 2) 211

by dropadrop (#43490189) Attached to: Oracle Fixes 42 Security Vulnerabilities In Java

In Scandinavia we have to use a java applet called BankID for login to our bank account. This has for the past few months become REALLY frustrating for people who really don't know what Java is. Even technicians who has a basic understanding of what a computer is, has problems keeping Java up to date(they don't know where to download it, and therefore accidentally download something they shouldn't) and all the them are infected with that Oracle search toolbar malware.

I'm in Scandinavia and don't need to use any java applets...

Have you considered that there are tens of banks in Scandinavia, and only a handful require java support in browsers? I would be surprised if such banks did not exist outside Scandinavia too. Just switch to something else (at least for day to day banking if you can't move loans).

Comment: Re:Here's the difference (Score 1) 1105

by dropadrop (#43458937) Attached to: Explosions at the Boston Marathon

I'm all for understanding terrorists and root causes but you're giving terrorists a lot more credit than they deserve. Those reasons you gave lead to societies that tend to generate terrorists. But as for the actual terrorists, they're dysfunctional individuals looking for a purpose. In a healthy society they're join a fraternity, cult, gang, political party hack, or become a spree shooter. In a threatened society they play the hero by becoming a soldier in a war against a great enemy (a terrorist), but the motive is the same, forget your morals and become a part of something.

Not necessarily. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. People can be terrorists for lots of reasons, but generally of course something they feel strongly about (nationality, religion, race).

If the US army lost a lot of it's might, and China invaded your country (yeah, not going to happen, but play along) what would you do? Would you fully submit to their will, or would you do your best to get them out? Let's say you won't fight back, but others do... Upon trying to find out the "patriots" trying to kick out the invaders they kill 50 civilians for each militant. Half of your relatives are killed without taking part in some combat. Does this make you feel like you did the right thing in submitting to the Chinese invaders, or feel even more like getting rid of them?

I know the analogy does not work, but it's still not that far fetched. I live next to Russia in a country that has previously been invaded by them and regained independence. When we where under their reign any people fighting for independence where considered terrorists, and of course the same thing would happen again if they decided to invade us a second time. Looking from the Russian point of view terrorists would of course be considered the scum of the earth, they did after all invade our weak country in a day, now why can't everybody just submit and play along by their rules?

Those reasons you gave lead to societies that tend to generate terrorists.

Having your country invaded generates terrorists. Having your relatives shot and blown to pieces generates terrorists. Having a religious or nationalist nut doing your head in generates terrorists, especially when combined with low education and those previous points.

But as for the actual terrorists, they're dysfunctional individuals looking for a purpose. In a healthy society they're join a fraternity, cult, gang, political party hack, or become a spree shooter.

Some of them are for sure

Comment: Re:Here's the difference (Score 1) 1105

by dropadrop (#43458873) Attached to: Explosions at the Boston Marathon

Drones killing civilians is an accident; people thought there was a military target there. Sometimes mistakes happen, and innocent people die, but the intent is to target military forces and largely that is what happens.

Civilians being killed as in Boston - there is no possibility of it being a military target, the target is as explicitly non-military as you can get.

Can you truly not discern any kind of difference?

A few times could be considered an accident, doing it over and over again can not. If the people responsible for those accidents would have repercussions and they would be handled openly then they might be viewed as accidents, now it looks like policy to me.

Drones are killing 50 civilians for each military target, and this is over hundreds of strikes, where does the accident come to play? I really have the highest sympathy towards all victims in Boston, but the civilians in Pakistan are no less worthy humans then you or me.

Comment: Re:What kind of moronic "defense" lawyer... (Score 1) 170

by dropadrop (#43449805) Attached to: Guantanamo Hearings Delayed as Legal Files Vanish

Geneva conventions covers flagged soldiers and non-combatants. These guys were neither. The constitution covers U.S. territory, Guantanamo is in Cuba. Furthermore even within the U.S. armed combatants don't get habeas corpus or any other constitutional protections. Lincoln arrested and imprisoned thousands.

They are in a legal no mans land, uncovered by treaty or U.S. law.

These guys where not picked up in Cuba, they where apprehended all over the place. 92% of them where not armed combatants, actually 86% where turned in against bounty money which explains that there is no evidence (hey, take about as much money as a local lottery for turning in that annoying neighbour!).

If they are in no mans land it's because the US has attempted to create such a notion, don't think the rest of the world can't see through it.

Comment: Re:What kind of moronic "defense" lawyer... (Score 1) 170

by dropadrop (#43449791) Attached to: Guantanamo Hearings Delayed as Legal Files Vanish

Please. From the article you cite:

"Spies and terrorists may be subject to civilian law or military tribunal for their acts and in practice have been subjected to torture and/or execution. The laws of war neither approve nor condemn such acts, which fall outside their scope."

According to the article you cite: They need a fair and regular trial. They can be held. They can be tortured. They can be executed. They just need a fair and regular trial. What that means is never defined.

Face it, there are no established laws or norms for these situations.

There are no established norms on how to handle kidnapping civilians from a foreign country? You speak as if all the people held where actually terrorists...

Some numbers released by ACLU after guatanamo had been in use for 10 years: http://www.cairchicago.org/2012/01/11/marking-10-years-since-guantanamos-opening-the-aclu-releases-report-on-guantanamo-detainees/ - 779 detained - 92% where never Al-Qaida fighters - 5% where caught by US military - 86% where turned over to coalition forces for a bounty offer (millions payed in bounties to really poor people) - Youngest captured 13 years old - Oldest captured 98 years old - 21 children prisoned

In January 2012 171 people where still imprisoned. Out of these 41 will not be tried because there is no evidence at all against them, however they will not be released because they are too dangerous. A lot of the prisoners have already been found not guilty, but they are still held there.

The US created this situation. You say "they need a fair and regular trial" and that it was never defined, but even an idiot can see that what these people are getting is not even close to a fair and regular trial (you already have a bunch who will never get a trial because there is no evidence, can't see how that could be twisted to fair and regular). The only way to make the situation feel even remotely fair and regular is to compare against Hitler and Stalin, current dictatorships like North Korea are too close to make the US behavior seem good.

Comment: Re: Is this the point in time.. (Score 1) 712

by dropadrop (#43390499) Attached to: Set Your Watches For the End of Windows XP

They might not have installed the stuff themselves. For example my mother in law can't install anything herself, and can't even speak a word of English. Some things are localized to her native tongue, others are not. Even the localized apps use wording that she just does not understand, hence her updating the app could just as well be clicking through a phishing sites gui.

Even I won't remember everything, I'll just prefer to have a third party application which keeps track of available updates so that I can click through them when I visit her, and it takes me up to an hour on the old computer even though it's just the most common apps.

I'm sure there is a group of people somewhere between who could actually have the technical knowledge to update the applications with enough certainty that they are really following through the applications own dialogues and not some pop-up from a dodgy page, but all the elderly / teachers / construction workers I know just don't automatically reach that level. It's pretty sad, but that's my experience.

Comment: Re:What? (Score 1) 61

by dropadrop (#43389313) Attached to: Apache Terminates Struts 1

True, but many haven't because if you have a website in maintainance mode (a small number of upgrade and changes) it is hard to get approval for an upgrade if what you are using is still supported. I am actually pleased that it is now at end of life, we have been wanting to evaluate new frameworks and upgrade for ages but not given the budget.

And they will never get approval unless the product goes to EOL. Above this, the longer it takes to lose support, the less likely there will be somebody who knows the system in case and the more work an update will take.

Comment: Re: Is this the point in time.. (Score 4, Interesting) 712

by dropadrop (#43388693) Attached to: Set Your Watches For the End of Windows XP

Now imagine that non-technical user on a different OS. Probably would get the same results....it's a user problem, not an OS problem. They are the ones that click on the African prince email links.

It's not just a user problem. In Linux updates are channeled through a central repository so when a user is prompted to update he will do it to pretty much everything in one go. In Windows he will only be updating system files which have not been the target of exploits lately.

If you look at the last few years of common Windows exploits they have been deployed via bugs in 3'rd party applications, mainly Flash, Java and PDF. It's a user problem that they don't keep those applications up to date, but a system problem that keeping them up to date is too difficult for the average Joe.

OS X is closer to Windows in this regard. They don't have a problem with PDF since the native reader works well and has not contained meaningful exploit vectors, but in regards to Flash and Java the situation has been even worse then Windows. Java updates have lagged badly, and there has been no update mechanism for Sun / Oracle Java. Flash updates have been issued at the same time as Windows but it took ages to have an update mechanism and when it arrived it was flaky and looked so dodgy that I would not dare use it. App store could have offered a central repository like it does for Windows, but none of the vulnerable apps are there, so it does not help.

The user is just one part of the equation. You can of course blame him, but there are some realities you have to accept such as the fact that the user does not understand what's going on with the computer, does not have the patience to read the dialogues etc. With Linux updating is simple enough that even an average user can understand it, but there are other areas where the user will be in trouble.

Comment: Re:Seems Legit. (Score 1) 108

by dropadrop (#42869349) Attached to: EU Data Protection Proposal Taken Word For Word From US Lobbyists

If you get a bunch of expert debaters and politicians, then ask them to make decisions about a complex and sensitive matter that they have no idea about, they are going to ask someone who knows a little more than them. They are going to be more able to listen to the louder voices among those who know more. It may just be that the loudest voices on the planet belong to Americans. I mean American companies.

This is how it goes... However if they where smart, they would be able to understand what the background motives of the experts could be, and try to get opinions from several experts with differing motives (preferably also experts who's motives are not financial). This is where politicians seem to fail, at least here in Finland.

16.5 feet in the Twilight Zone = 1 Rod Serling

Working...