C++ templates, which enable generic programming, are complicated enough to be their own sub-language, and errors that are output by the compiler about any of the templated container classes can be nigh-incomprehensible on their own, and take up a few dozen lines to describe an error like "You need a random-access iterator here, not just a forward iterator".
There are other examples, but essays can be (and have been) written about unnecessary complexity in C++.
Quit going to church and you will finish the task of disassociating yourself from idiots and their idiotic behavior.
If one lived alone in a cabin in the woods, one would still not succeed at escaping irrationality, since there's still one human nearby. People like to pretend that they're rational, but they're fooling themselves. You'll find the only example of non-idiotic humanity riding a unicorn, taking tea with the Flying Spaghetti Monster, in orbit about 1.3 AU out from a teapot inscribed "Bertrand" on the bottom.
So you're willing to sell off your privacy for a few bucks?
Not under those terms, which is why I don't use store-specific cards (since it's already bad enough that credit processors want to track me). If there were a pay service that could replace FB in all aspects, minus ads and data-gathering, I'd be more than interested to look at it.
How does it feel knowing that there are complete strangers out there that think they know you because of the data they collect on you about purchasing habits?
Honestly? It doesn't bother me. Similar to "How does it feel [...] that think they know you because of your pseudonynmous posts on Slashdot?" I don't do anything important on Facebook, similar to how I don't do anything important on Slashdot. Sometimes, I make posts that don't reflect my feelings, just for a change in pace. Facebook wants to see my false information? Meh.
How will you feel about it when someone gets it wrong?
Amused, so far. FB has been trying to guess where I live for years. I don't think that it's ever guessed the right city, and it guesses the right county only occasionally. More commonly, it picks a state across the country where it knows I have a lot of friends, or in another country. I commonly look up products that friends are interested in, but that I don't care about. I mark random ads as offensive. If they can actually filter the signal from the noise, I actually think that's pretty cool, and I hope some papers eventually get written and released, based on the methods. They've done the work, and all based on information that I wouldn't have a problem yelling to random people on a street corner.
- The Line app doesn't do emote pop-ups like it does on my Android phone. If you want to use emotes, you have to look them up manually
- Her phone lacks turn-by-turn navigation, and won't narrate directions. It's useless as a car navigation device for those reasons.
- As far as I'm aware, Tubecast is the only Windows app that'll stream to Chromecast, and I think it's Youtube-only
- Daily reminders to reboot the phone, with the statement that they don't recommend continuing to operate the phone without restarts
- All the games advertised on TV: No Windows Phone version.
- No emulators
- No on-device scripting environments
- No on-device command-line
- I like having my ssh +ftp clients+servers available on my phone, because they're easier than connecting a cable
- No Dropbox app
I am overjoyed that you don't care about any of the things I've listed...but I do. Most of the items aren't critical requirements on their own, but the combination of all of them together means that using a Windows Phone would be a serious reduction in what my phone could do, for me.
My certainty is that the Windows app store lacks most of the software that I want.
I see some potential fun to be had with setting up some home automation, and I see value in pre-built hardware that's designed to work together with other hardware, but it ought to be a system where I have as complete control as possible.
Your analogy is wrong. My analogy is saying, "Just because a policy's implementation is flawed does not mean the policy is inherently flawed."
I disagree. My analogy is saying that things don't happen just because you say so. Law should follow the will of the people, scientific or not, because anything else is going to cause conflict within society. I think that your entire way of thinking is wrong, because people won't magically conform to laws just because of consequences. If the world was that direct, we could just set the sentence for every crime as death. One of society's obligations is to help and support other members of that society. Otherwise, it's counterproductive for the individual to participate.
Don't break the law if you don't wish to have your license revoked, it's basically that simple.
If they revoke my license, I still need to get to work, because my family and I like eating and living in a nice home. I'll just be driving without a license and praying not to get caught. The world isn't as simple as you're making it out to be. Imagine if we applied that same logic to programming, after all. "To write perfect software, don't introduce bugs, it's basically that simple."
The answer to "WTF would I want a laptop for?" is, in your case, that you don't. In my case, the answer is that my desktop isn't portable enough and neither my phone nor my tablet have a large enough screen or run the right software for some of the things that I like doing. For a lot of people, a desktop computer is an anachronism, and a laptop makes sense as a replacement.
Want to make a real change? Build up a social network where all income comes through subscription fees rather than advertising and selling information. Don't be a citizen of a country that will require you to put backdoors into the network, and don't host any part of it in such a country. Build it so that it provides every functional benefit that Facebook has, without any of the drawbacks. Until you've got a workable alternative, people will continue using what works for them. You don't find the price acceptable, and neither does Stallman (no surprise there), but the herd won't follow until it's made clear to every one of them exactly what they're paying, and to whom...*and* you get a critical mass of users to move to something else.
You can rail against something that you don't like as much as you want, but it's not going to do any practical good.
I don't consider sacrificing privacy for convenience to such a degree and enabling Facebook's behavior by using it to be a very principles move.
To which degree? Providing a fake name, birthdate, and other information, blocking image tags, and posting untagged text information? I suppose that they can extract a fair amount of info about me from information that my friends post, but if I didn't have an account, Facebook has algorithms that would infer most of those connections anyhow.
Facebook is a tool that encourages incorrect use. Kind of like a bank, or a credit card. Still, I enjoy the conveniences of direct-deposited paychecks, not carrying around the amounts of cash that would encourage the police to seize it, and paying for things that are difficult to get by cash. Facebook has less utility than a credit card, of course. Therefore, they have less information about me. Although they've done things that I consider annoying, I haven't actually been harmed in a way that I can measure. Part of that is because I haven't given them sufficient leverage to do so.