My experience is completely different. I have Google Nexus 10, Samsung S4 and some other phones running Android. On each and every one they are slow as hell, just swiping between screens is really slow sometimes and the core UI is unresponsive lot of times. Of course I am a power user and have a lot of apps installed but that shouldn't affect the Android OS and the UI response unless of course the Android OS is buggy.
Anything that does not run Android. Google unfortunately is focusing on fancy look but doesn't care about all the myriads of core bugs that are present in the system. Google is also removing critical core functionality in every new release of Android. Android used to be very good in 2010 but each new version becomes slower and slower and unusable.
In the old map you could access your "My places" to your bookmarked places. Where is that in the new map? Nowhere. That's right, the one usage of a map is to have your markers on a map and Google managed to fuck that up. Thanks Google your developers sure are smart.
The best thing about Half-Life 2 was trying to find out ways/glitches to bring the buggy with you to all the levels that you weren't supposed to have the buggy at all.
Not specially in 5.1 but in all versions. What has been removed/disabled:
- Ability to control Airplane mode programmatically
- Ability to control Data mode programmatically
- Ability to control interruption/silent mode programmatically
- Ability to control system volume programmatically
- No control of how lock screen icon appear programmatically
- No write access to SD card from apps
These are just the ones from the top of my head.
For goods sake stop removing features and disabling stuff. There is no point in having an app platform when the apps can do less and less with every new release because you just removed important features from the system.
Android uses to be great when it was in version 2.1 or something, but now every new version gets worse and worse and more bugs are introduced and more stuff breaks.
Well if you didn't pay attention to the clues throughout the film then the movie isn't as good. It's only when you realize that Deckard is also a replicant that the movie takes on a different deeper meaning.
Well maybe people would upgrade if every new version wasn't slower than the previous version and Chrome wouldn't get buggier and buggier.
Google for goods sake fix all the bugs before pushing out new versions with even more bugs. Do some QA testing for heavens sake, I mean you have the resources. Don't be evil.
I don't have anything against law enforcement having the ability through the court system to wire tap. What I am against is when phone companies pretend that this doesn't exists. So this is not "end-to-end" encryption, it should be called "end-to-end except as required by law" encryption
I think it was clear in the movie that Deckard was a never model and modeled to be more human like than the other models. The motto of the company was "More human than human" so that would imply that Deckard could age.
But a submarine can actually swim. The difference is that a submarine doesn't have actual limbs but he can swim just like a human. In the same way it is possible for a computer to think if it is powerful enough.
No it is actually very likely that machines will be sentient. You see, we are made of molecules arranged in a special way. Our body and brain is completely made out of matter. So if we could arrange molecules in a similiar way that is in our brain we would actually have created a sentient being. Consciousness is just a by-product of intelligence. If you are intelligent enough you will understand your own existence. There is no difference between Intelligence and Consciousness
This professor doesn't get what artificial intelligence (AI) is. There really is no difference between AI and "real intelligence" the only difference is in size. We only call it AI because it isn't very smart yet. If we could construct a computer that would be at the size of a human brain in terms of neurological connections and had the same capacity we would actually have constructed a self aware computer.
The same way it is being done for drivers licenses. There are set of rules of what causes suspension of your driver license due to mental illnesses and there is a group of people who rule on a case by case basis. The same way is also being done for the courts. Somehow the courts can rule if you are sane or insane. This isn't a problem that hasn't been solved before.
Stringent background checks means less desirable people are given guns, which means fewer guns. It is all about limiting the amount of guns in circulation and having only responsible people own guns.
For example you could require by law that all gun owners keep their guns locked in a gun cabinet which the police will enforce by inspection of your home. That would limit the relatives of the gun owner of aquiring the weapons.
Well I would like to think that if you are classified as having severe mental problems you should not be allowed to own a gun, just like having certain mental problems can suspend your drivers license.
There are already in place regulations for mental problems for having a drivers license, so it isn't impossible to do the same for gun license.
You talk like these are some impossible problems to solve, but these are being applied every day for everything else.