Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Deprecating the telephone system (Score 1) 162

by onix (#47876301) Attached to: Google Hangouts Gets Google Voice Integration And Free VoIP Calls

People puzzle me indeed. They guys is not an idiot; he is ignorant just like the rest of the masses. Platform-independent Skype with multi-user video conferencing has been around forever but FaceTime locked to a single OS is much more popular. Go figure. And for a modest fee you can used Skype for POTS communications with reasonable great international rates.

And for that matter VoIP (Viber, Burner, etc) has existed for a long time, the main issue/hassle has been integrating it with a direct dial number (POTS). At one point I used SipGate.de with a Sip application on iOS successfully having a local area code and it had free incoming and modest cost for outgoing. SipGate is no longer available to US subscibers.

I guess blame European companies for poor marketing.

Comment: Re:Hangouts is, in turn, part of plus, right? (Score 1) 162

by onix (#47876249) Attached to: Google Hangouts Gets Google Voice Integration And Free VoIP Calls

"Just to clarify - the iOS hangouts app had VoIP => POTS capabilities before this. I think the Android app is catching up."

Thank you for this. I was wondering what exactly was new for iPhone users. I installed Voice on my iPhone 5 before it was deprecated. And fortunately, it was needed to show incoming. Hangouts on the iOS has never shown me incoming, except as of this change only two days before when I for the first time I received a call on Hangouts.

UPDATE:

Also I just checked (within the last 5 mins and after my last check about 1 day before) and both Google Voice and Google Hangouts have updates. Google Voice on iOS is at version 1.6.0 (the last version 1.5.0 came out in Sept 2013) and Hangouts is at version 2.2.0

I'm wondering exactly what's happening here... I guess I still remained perplexed.

+ - Noam Chomsky on the end of civilization->

Submitted by onix
onix (990980) writes "The universe will carry on but will human civilization? Are we reaching the point where things have irreversibly unraveled and spiraled beyond control in a positive feedback loop that will not end until our species is extinct? Chomsky writes, "One index of human impact is the extinction of species, now estimated to be at about the same rate as it was 65 million years ago when an asteroid hit the Earth.""
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:wut? (Score 1) 533

by onix (#47858553) Attached to: AT&T Says 10Mbps Is Too Fast For "Broadband," 4Mbps Is Enough

My justification, was not an excuse for "their" behavior. It was merely pointing out how important marketing is to their efforts and how they'd like to get by calling it "broadband"... clearly my point was missed. FWIW, I hate cable internet more than another other ISP, and refuse to use them.

Comment: Re:wut? (Score 1) 533

by onix (#47856957) Attached to: AT&T Says 10Mbps Is Too Fast For "Broadband," 4Mbps Is Enough

"They" are not Comcast/cable who can provide 10Mbps or higher universally. AT&T and Verizon are stuck with copper line DSL in certain geographies. Even with ADSL2+, the best "they" can "reliably" advertise is 6Mbps.

I say let them have "broadband". The marketing types only have to invent another term, e.g. wideband, ultraband, fastband... speaking of which perhaps I should get out a trademark :)

Comment: Re:Whatever happened to scientific discussions the (Score 2) 770

by onix (#47855037) Attached to: How Scientific Consensus Has Gotten a Bad Reputation

People believe what they want to believe. Humans are fallible and will act in their self-interest. The question are:

(1) Is science and are scientists responsible for "explaining" themselves and their discoveries?
(2) Is the scientific community responsible for calling out charlatans that pose to use the scientific method, but don't?
(3) Are scientific discoveries constantly open for debate? And does it make sense to have proper channels for inquiry and discussion, or can anyone jump in?

Comment: Re:The trouble with billionaires (Score 1) 363

by onix (#47850349) Attached to: Bill Gates Wants To Remake the Way History Is Taught. Should We Let Him?
Funny, this is exactly the point I'm making. That mentality. Monetary success does not equate to being omniscient. Some would argue the Koch brothers are common thugs, Michael Jordan with his inordinate wealth knows little about anything else aside from basketball, a "successful" gangster does makes him an expert on a certain type of sociopathic behavior, but not much else.

Comment: Re:That depends... (Score 1) 363

by onix (#47842129) Attached to: Bill Gates Wants To Remake the Way History Is Taught. Should We Let Him?
Degree or otherwise, as so many men are self-taught with a better connected-ness to society and reality, I agree of Gates' complete and abject deficit in critical reasoning that at a core lacks a guiding moral compass. It's hard to take anything seriously from a man who "needs" a 66,000 sq. ft house. Contrast this childishness to persuasions of Warren Buffett or, even the Koch brothers. Morality aside, they are far more shrewd and centered in their purpose and beliefs.

Comment: Re:The trouble with billionaires (Score 1) 363

by onix (#47842035) Attached to: Bill Gates Wants To Remake the Way History Is Taught. Should We Let Him?
Or put yet another way, put a bunch of billionaires in the same room and see if they come to any consensus on policy. They always act individually. Put Buffett, the Koch brothers, the Walton's, and Gates in the same room. Eventually one of them will pull out a dagger and kill the others. Just an experiment in hubris. Blame also society for giving them a pedestal to speak on.

Many people are unenthusiastic about their work.

Working...