Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Why would Amazon ditch Android? (Score 2) 38

by sarysa (#46734863) Attached to: Amazon Reportedly Launching Smartphone This Year
Regarding this last statement:

they're likely to have difficulty luring developers away from established platforms.

Kindle is already built on top of Android, and Amazon has partnerships with Android developers already. It's also a time-proven platform that's becoming ever more insurmountable for anyone trying to get their own platform off the ground. (take Windows Phone 8, and Microsoft had a decade head start) With all that stated, why is TFA assuming that this new smartphone would have anything but Android as their backbone?

Comment: Re:Why stop there? (Score 2) 496

by sarysa (#46645313) Attached to: Will Cameras Replace Sideview Mirrors On Cars In 2018?
If a window breaks, you can still see through it. If a monitor in your tank breaks?

I'm totally with Tesla that it should be a legal option, but it shouldn't be a requirement to go digital with side view. On one hand, you have the drag...on the other hand, the classic mirrors are less prone to ceasing to function effectively. (smudging/moisture/frost is also a concern, which often renders my rear camera useless -- easily fixed with classic mirrors, and driver's side can wiped off while driving)

Comment: Re:Customers may benefit... maybe (Score 1) 455

by sarysa (#46602605) Attached to: Wal-Mart Sues Visa For $5 Billion For Rigging Card Swipe Fees
It's worth mentioning that Safeway and Lucky's runs a different business model than Wal-Mart. The first two can be cheaper on a small list of items because they put deep cuts on maybe 10-20% of their inventory every week. So at least with slow perishables (and if you're less picky in general), over time if you're careful you could do better with Safeway easily. But if you have no desire to get such a rotation going, then yeah, go with Wal-Mart. Also good for things like meats and dairy that you'd prefer not to store a month's worth at a time.

Comment: Re:Does it mean, (Score 1) 110

by sarysa (#45607911) Attached to: China Bans Financial Companies From Bitcoin Transactions
Oh, and just to fully recap my many posts ranting about Bitcoin, aside from what I've said already in this thread...I'm waiting for something to come along that provides the benefits of Bitcoin but without the price instability. Its stock-like nature is going to doom it because consumers (and more importantly, merchants) need more "familiar" price stability to become comfortable with and actually use a currency for currency purposes. The vast majority of current Bitcoin users are still speculators and unwitting individuals, along with some merchants who would probably prefer something more stable but need the anonymity to conduct business...and a few outliers here and there.

Anyone who's been burned once by previous crashes won't ever want to get back on board the Bitcoin train...

Comment: Re:Does it mean, (Score 2) 110

by sarysa (#45607835) Attached to: China Bans Financial Companies From Bitcoin Transactions
Like I said, "similar", not "exact". Bitcoin is the poster child of the inflatable, independent currency experiment, but it shares traits similar to the stock market and limited quantity physical goods. It's not impossible for something which shares the traits that guided the valuation of Bitcoin to emerge. It'll likely be a long way off and possibly too difficult to identify in time to profit from it.

Comment: Re:Does it mean, (Score 1, Interesting) 110

by sarysa (#45607387) Attached to: China Bans Financial Companies From Bitcoin Transactions

that current Bitcoin rally is over?

I for one wonder if this'll be the last big rally.

I've been absolutely terrible at predicting when this train will end. An unstable currency that is not suitable for the vast majority of merchants and individuals is doomed to fail eventually, but since I've been beating this horse Bitcoin has risen by 5000%. Rally #1 was the American public, rally #2 was from Greeks and other troubled European nations and now this rally is from the Chinese.

I wonder if anything significant is left? Regardless, it's way too high for me to even consider playing this game. I do hope something similar comes along in the future, perhaps it'll follow a similar pattern and I'll get on board early...

Comment: Re:Taxing is not going to fix the problem (Score 1) 470

by sarysa (#45544829) Attached to: EU Plastic Bag Debate Highlights a Wider Global Problem
This isn't really something that one can gauge properly with their own anecdotes. In my case I practically never buy anything but well-packaged slow perishables so I have nothing to worry about. A small quantity of meat juices leaking into the bottom of someone's bag (rare enough that it doesn't ever happen to most people, but it is a concern on a broader scale) will feed a significant quantity of bacteria for a long time and create a real problem, versus the tiny bits that get onto your keyboard and create an infestation that only a germophobe can appreciate...

Again, personal responsibility, wash your damn bags, yadda yadda...as someone who'll eat fallen food while on a hiking trip and follow it up with a "meh", even I can admit that the concern here is reasonable.

Comment: Re:Taxing is not going to fix the problem (Score 1) 470

by sarysa (#45538963) Attached to: EU Plastic Bag Debate Highlights a Wider Global Problem
heh, I'm not going to defend the intentions of general media sources, but I believe the concerns were that the bottom of peoples' bags were essentially petri dishes, and over time the infestation got to the point where all but the most thorough of washing of potentially contaminated food items (and even then...) would be ineffective.Of course one's own negligence is to blame in this case but what people forget about social engineering is engineering works with what you have, not some ideal.

Comment: Re:Taxing is not going to fix the problem (Score 1) 470

by sarysa (#45537797) Attached to: EU Plastic Bag Debate Highlights a Wider Global Problem

1) You don't have to wash them after ever visit, unless you're buying, like, unwrapped raw chicken in which case you've got bigger problems

If you want to take your chances with bacteria, salmonella, etc.--go for it.

This actually made headlines some time ago as an unintended, but very real consequence of San Francisco's bag tax...

Comment: Re:"Crashes in"? (Score 1) 506

by sarysa (#44207139) Attached to: Boeing 777 Crashes At San Francisco Airport

For anyone confused by this comment, the original title of this article (before an editor stepped in and fixed it) read "Boeing 777 Crashes In San Francisco". The current title (at the time I'm posting this comment), "Boeing 777 Crashes At San Francisco Airport", is a much better description of the event without taking the mind in some horrific directions before giving the important details.

This. My original post looks pretty ridiculous now, but I'm glad someone changed it. (I don't see that often)

Comment: Re:"Crashes in"? (Score 4, Informative) 506

by sarysa (#44205143) Attached to: Boeing 777 Crashes At San Francisco Airport
Just to elaborate even more (edit function please), anyone who lives around SF and flies knows that the airport is 10 miles south of the city. So an airplane crashing within city limits would be extremely bizarre. Very little air traffic is actually routed through the city...in fact I think most planes that fly overhead are ads for car insurance companies and tires during baseball games.

The only thing cheaper than hardware is talk.

Working...