Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:There's two paths... (Score 1) 233

by Xest (#47548043) Attached to: Do Apple and Google Sabotage Older Phones? What the Graphs Don't Show

Right, I love Android, but the Nexus 7 seems to be the exception. I bought a Nexus 7 and a Samsung Galaxy Nexus at the exact same time, the Nexus 7 does indeed still receive updates, but my Samsung Galaxy Nexus? They stopped supporting that after less than 18 months from it's UK launch, that's the worse service I've seen of any Android provider I've had. Even my HTC Magic got updates for longer than that.

Fact is, even Google can't be trusted to offer updates for a reasonable amount of time - it's not like they were even refusing a major version jump from Android 4 to Android 5, they simply refused to update Galaxy Nexus users from 4.3 to 4.4 after less than 18 months which is utterly pathetic.

It pains me to give Apple fanboys ammunition, because much of what they spout is just plain old FUD, but this is really one area where Google deserves all the flack it gets. The Android update problem has been one of the top complaints since day 1, and 4 - 5 years into it's life Google, rather than deal with the problem, decided to be part of it, so it's really Google's own stupid fault if Android gets flack on this front - the blame can't simply be shifted to other device manufacturers since the day Google decided to be part of the problem itself.

Comment: Re:Grab 'n dash (Score 1) 11

by damn_registrars (#47547393) Attached to: it boggles the mind

(Took a chance seeing who's post this third one was, hoping that since mine wasn't a political JE it might not be toxic.)

I ask you to make fewer assumptions in the future based on the author's name alone.

As I had been wondering that if this person was trying to get in, why not really try and get in, so thanks for posting this as a possible explanation.

You're welcome. I have heard of it happening more than once at universities; in research labs, offices, libraries, even in dorms.

Still uncomfortably brazen of this person.

I agree. Some people are quite bold.

I suppose with the blinds flapping so wildly, this person could've looked in and saw the back of someone sitting in a recliner and could've decided to take the chance that I had fallen asleep and that maybe it was potentially a grab-and-go opportunity.

I can't speak for them or their motivations. Indeed they could have been after something else entirely or it could have been someone who thought they were at a different door. I will speculate though from what I have read of grab 'n dash crimes previously that they likely didn't think real hard on it; I'd be surprised if they even looked in the window. If they had heard your TV they may have even thought there were a number of people there (party) and that it would be that much easier to walk in, grab something, and walk back out.

I would say think pickpocket, not mugger / murderer.

And I would never defend property with a firearm

If you're near the door, and they come in and you shoot before you wait to see if they are armed, I would say you were defending your property more than your life. Now granted some would say that if you wait you are foolish, and gambling with your life or whatnot. Generally the pizza guy knocks, and people seeking help say so from the door (rather than coming through it first), but it could just be someone at the wrong door with no malicious intent.

Personally I would expect that if you just yelled at the person at the door - just a loud "HEY WHO (with or without expletive inserted here) ARE YOU" - they would probably turn tail and run without even pushing the door open.

Comment: Grab 'n dash (Score 1) 11

by damn_registrars (#47546603) Attached to: it boggles the mind
This is a not-terribly-uncommon strategy for some thieves. They look for doors that they don't have to do anything special to enter through, grab the first thing of value they see, and run as fast as they can. Happens far too often at universities as well; thieve enter in broad daylight, grab a laptop, and run as quick as possible (generally to the closest pawn shop). It's the equivalent of opening someone's shed and grabbing their lawnmower to sell for a quick buck.

You could buy a firearm to defend your stuff, but it seems like your door lock did its job fairly well here, didn't it?

Comment: Re:There is a definition (Score 1) 16

by damn_registrars (#47545853) Attached to: niwdoG
I could just turn it all around at this point and ask you what your goal is here. Why do you come to slashdot and partake in discussions on topics that you are not the least bit knowledgeable - or interested in coming knowledgeable - on? Are you doing this just to waste other peoples' time?

It would be one thing if you were coming here to learn about a topic that you have no working knowledge of. However your comments show that you not only are completely lacking in knowledge but you are also completely lacking in interest in obtaining any.

Comment: Re:It's actually worse than that (Score 1) 24

Take a stand, is the administration competent or not?

They are competent at campaigning and "winning" elections.

If those are the only competencies of the current administration then you have just admitted that your conspiracy theories regarding them preparing to invoke a new world order are completely unsubstantiated. Thank you.

If you want to present that case then you need to abandon your bits about them going for socialist world domination as the two are fully incompatible since no incompetent clown could even aspire to pull that off.

The point you seem to miss is that, for an ultimately incompetent clown, the self-awareness to grasp the unattainability of the world domination isn't going to be there.

No. A clown of any stripes would not attempt world domination. A self-aware clown is aware of his role to distract attention and would not attempt anything else. An ignorant or incompetent clown would just run around pulling silly tricks for an audience.

Especially in our case, the total information control needed to ensure that a disaster like ObamaCare fails into the ultimate failure of Single Prayer (at a controlled rate) just can't be done.

So if it can't be done, then why do you insist they are trying to do it? You are making your conspiracy theory less believable, not more. That is actually quite a feat, being as you so far have presented not a single fact to support it.

Oh, and then there is the border crisis.

How exactly does that fit in to anything here? And how is the border situation any different in 2014 than it was in 2004 or 1994? You want to resist change; yet now we have a situation where nothing has changed for decades and you are screaming for change.

But that's the Manchu language for you: dying with a slow squish.

I substituted in something that you are likely equally as knowledgeable on as the topic you tried to use in this quote.

Comment: Re:What's your point? (Score 1) 15

by damn_registrars (#47545747) Attached to: Practical socialism

[snarkiness]

What a brilliant opening, it really shows plainly the strength of your argument and how well rooted it is in reality.

It is rather hard to balance a budget when a large population of the people tasked with doing that are hard-set ideologues who refuse to negotiate on what should be in the budget in any way, shape, or form. Believe it or not, democracy is supposed to involve compromise.

Less snarkily, leadership, in general, is not about finger-pointing.

Believe it or not, there is plenty of finger pointing coming from both parties in DC. Your party is not by any means above it.

The notion of the entitlements being unsustainable is entirely manufactured.

Oh, well, then, why don't they make us all millionaires, then?

I wish you actually presented an argument there, instead of just more snarkiness. I would love to actually discuss this matter with you but that statement does not indicate any interest from you to do so.

I find you and your accusations of my ignorance completely laughable.

You certainly haven't yet countered by demonstrating knowledge.

Comment: Re:Typical (Score 1) 147

by drinkypoo (#47543755) Attached to: Bose Sues New Apple Acquisition Beats Over Patent Violations

Thus sayeth the audiophile.

My PC stereo system is a couple of Yamaha monitors whose model I don't know on a 40W Kenwood whose model I don't know (squinting... KA-305) and my "home theater" system is a Sony STR-DE635. I'm still using the original double-driver powered sub from the kit (it's pretty Bose-esque in its own way, actually) but I got out from under the other kit speakers with an assortment of yard sale scores. I forget who made my cheap center, maybe JBL. I have cambridge metal case in the rears, and the fronts are something british whose name I can't remember. My Headphones may be Sennheisers, but they're refoamed and reconnectorized HD420s I got for five bucks. I am a cheap bastard whose stereo systems are cobbled together from cheap crap, not an Audiophile. I bought the Sony new at Costco some ages ago, and on purpose. Hilariously, it's never let me down.

your observations are preference observations

Bose falls on its ass when it comes to non-objective measurements every time someone performs a test at their own expense. Bose refuses to publish the same numbers everyone else publishes for their speakers, claiming that those numbers are irrelevant. Whether they are correct is, I think, a whole other argument, but why not, here we go. Subjectively, I think Bose sounds pretty good, but I've heard other stuff that I found much more impressive. Objectively, Bose is inferior to much of the competition, some of which is cheaper. Personally, I'd rather have someone else's equipment, but I won't avoid buying a car because it has a Bose sound system. I just wouldn't pay thousands for the option.

tl;dr: If you think Bose sounds good then feel free to buy, listen, insert rectally whatever, who gives a fuck? Music enjoyment is subjective anyway.

Comment: Re:Where were you when the Eagle landed? (Score 1) 210

by mcgrew (#47543305) Attached to: Apollo 11 Moon Landing Turns 45

I was working at Disney World when the first shuttle took off, and saw every shuttle launch before Challenger without a TV. One was a night launch I saw from my mom's house in Tampa. We drove to the cape to watch one, man that thing is LOUD.

The first one I not only didn't see firsthand was Challenger; I missed that launch completely. I was in Illinois looking for work (we'd just had our first kid and moved back to be close to family and besides, Florida is a shitty place to live).

Comment: Re:Unknown (Score 1) 6

by damn_registrars (#47543241) Attached to: Shot in the back, in self-defense

If he shot her before they left, it was certainly justified.

I'm not entirely sure that I agree with shooting someone in the back - when they are running away from you - under any circumstances. Granted we don't know exactly what happened, but if that were the case I think it warrants some further investigation.

If it was indeed in the alley he should certainly face murder charges. As the article says, that hasn't been determined. Personally, I'm going to withhold judgement.

Another article on the same event suggests that he may have shot them while inside the house, and then followed them outside and shot the woman twice more in the alley when she was running away:

[Greer] was able to retrieve a gun from another room in the house. He returned to confront the suspects and fired his gun at them while they were still inside his house

...

Police said Greer followed the suspects as they fled the house with what they had stolen and fatally shot Miller outside in an alley

APL hackers do it in the quad.

Working...