Now, since Google can't do much more there, hopefully it will mean that they can come here.
My 20x1 internet is painful to say the least... Unfortunately, to get better speed I have to go back to Comcast... which I admit is worse than pouring salt into an open wound.
from the President that has the courage to admit to fault, and grant him a pardon for bringing such an egregious overstep of personal freedom to light...
When you need to use a "Trick" to avoid legal harassment by the system, the system has failed.
There are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Our system was designed so that stupidity, ignorance, or naivety would not be a crime. Unfortunately, that day has passed.
It now seems to be about loop-holes, tricks, and double-standards. Not really life-affirming.
It's funny, when the Blackberry Curve came out, I remember thinking of how much the keyboard and layout reminded me of my Treo 600...
And now, ~10 years later, Blackberry is suing someone for something they didn't even create... I don't see Handspring/Palm/PalmOne having a tiff about it (but then again, maybe if they sued everyone who came out with something more desirable than their product, they might still be around soaking up others' profits...)
Don't get me wrong. I believe that someone who creates something has a right to profit off of it, without some second-rate hack coming in and stealing the idea out from under them.
But, seriously, the keyboard design? It wasn't original when it was on the Blackberry, and it still isn't original now that Blackberry is going the way of the dodo.
Does anyone actually believe any of this drivel?
If they are not using the data, then why are they collecting it? It's probably the simplest question that brings the whole altruistic big brother theory to its knees (and proceeds to shoot an arrow into it).
I can not, and will not believe that an agency that is designed around exploiting secrets has my best interests in mind. Which is why they are *NOT* supposed to operate on our soil. They can not have the best interests of those they collect information on, since the whole purpose of the information is for their interests.
I have worked on projects that have taken upwards of 8 hours for a full compile. There is a lot of validity behind the business impact of different compilers.
The current mentality of throw more horse power at a problem is not always the practical, or the logical conclusion. If you can improve your overall compile time, it can improve your productive time.
From a Build Engineering perspective, analyzing why it takes time for a project to compile is one of the most important metrics.
Not only do I monitor how long a project takes to compile, but I also keep an active average, and try to maintain highs and lows to identify compile spikes.
We monitor processor(s), disk access speeds, memory loads, build warnings, change size, concurred builds, etc.
We look at all possible solutions. With the current build tools we have, we can either provision another build system for the queue, or if necessary increase memory, or disk space, or faster drives, more processors, or even upgraded software. We have gone as far as home-grown fixes to get around issues until better solutions become available.
All of this needs to be accounted for, so, not only is compile time relevant, but what is CAUSING compile times is relevant.
It's not shocking, considering the current disregard for personal privacy currently administered by the government. It may be shocking if you take out the fact that many people are already aware of the fact that we have lost the war on privacy, and now are just going through the dance pretending that it's something we can win.
The US government has had a taste of knowing everything, and now thinks that it is our best interest to suspend/revoke/rewrite privacy laws because they just hinder investigations. Nevermind the fact that the rights of citizens should come first by our own principals.
Either way, shocking or not, this has been going on for over 10 years now, and will only get more invasive as new ways are revealed, and we become more complacent to the methods already used.
Even though there are those of us that disagree with this, and fight it as much as we can, it will not change the fact that the general population already has the mentality of "If you have nothing to hide...", and the government continues to keep it's mis-fires localized and on the "fringe", people will continue to give up their rights until we reach that ever lovable point of no return (which I honestly believe we have already passed).
After reading through all three pages (the first page being a real push not to read further), I was able to almost find out more about the new OS.
Being fairly anti-mac (I am also anti-windows, but use it every day anyways...), I was wondering what the new offerings were, and what it might actually have to compete.
And I have to say, I was completely unsuprised. By both the reviewer and the review. The direction appears to be divergent of functional use, and more in line with "synergistic management solutions". Bringing more shared functionality between devices (and I do see this as a boon for the Apple "Brand").
On the same note from what I read, the concerns I have (about the review and the reviewer) are as follows:
Audio HAL... Unless Apple redefined HAL, a hardware abstraction layer in direct access devices is nothing new. Linux has had it since day one, with
OS bound password storage... Yeah, NO. The last thing (and I am not just being my normal paranoid self) I would ever want is my operating system to upload my authentication information up to a third party (them) storage container. Not only do I as an individual have to worry about their security, their intentions, and well the honesty of every one of their employees, it seems to be a lazy, sloppy, and self-defeating method of security. If you are going to give your passwords to someone else to keep them safe, why are you using passwords (Yes, I am aware, we have no choice)?
Wireless external monitor support... Love the idea, I wish that the wireless HDMI support actually went somewhere. I keep a half a dozen pcs within kissing distance of my T.V. It would be nice to be able to use my T.V. as an alternate display. With that being said, it's another tribute to the catch all AirPlay concept. Great for Apple, but highly limiting to the level of supported devices and environments. I would rather have my choice of devices, but, then again, that's why I appreciate their business model, and don't buy their products.
The last thing I would like to mention is the fact that the article holds to a standard format of first give a positive impression. Then outline some real world issues, then leave on a positive note. This leaves the impression that it is a highly biased review. The OS is obviously struggling, and there are some areas that are fairly niche where it is struggling, but when one of the core benefits you outline is directly (or indirectly) related to the the most significant issue they are struggling with, it is not a positive thing. It is something to watch for, and unless it is a must have technology, or you are a developer looking to get in at the ground floor, this is actually something you want to avoid until it is resolved.
Many Linux and Windows people have suffered through early adoption. And while the concept of early adoption is fairly foreign to Apple (I won't go into the semantics of it, but open-source, and open development have caused both Windows and Linux to display research and development opportunities that very few Apple users have had a chance to really experience), there are growing pains that comes with it. Now, this doesn't mean that I think that the new OS will fail, or that it will be anything less than a raving success.
I won't even go as far as to say that the only people who will buy into this are Mac Fanboys. I don't think that will be the case. Apple has proven time and again that "Synergistic Management Solutions" work. And this is a step towards a more integrated solution. That means more adopters, and ideally a more "Dedicated Ecosystem". As a result, they should see a growth in their market. But, this needs to be taken with a grain of salt. When companies make steps like this, they always falter. And a blind review does not directly help the cause. Bashing it doesn't help either. Apple has their work cut out for them, and this is one of the biggest risks I have seen them take in quite a few years.
As a Minnesotan, I have always been a sucker for Gopher-Tech. Kinda sad that the last remnants of it has gone the way of the dodo. But, I still remember the glory-days.
Actually, that is still the title of the homepage. It just seems that firefox overwrites the tag with the RSS object count.
<title>Slashdot: News for nerds, stuff that matters</title>
If you watch when the front page loads, the title appears briefly, and then is replaced by Slashdot (##).
IE still shows the title, and I don't have Chrome or Safari installed, so I have no idea (nor do I actually care) how either of those react.
I could care less about how IE reacts, but that POS is still installed, so I figured I would check...
I don't have access to lynx or links right now, otherwise I would have checked them (the only other browsers I would actually use).
I am not sure if that makes me a geek or a nerd for checking that, but either way... I know I am not a hipster, because I still have my soul.
I think the most ironic part about this post (and it was really hard to pick one thing as the most ironic...) was that every single item mentioned is a conservative propaganda talking point.
While there were those who have been citing for years now that:
The IRS has had powers to influence companies without proper oversight. While all the way back to the 80s (and before) there were cases of the IRS performing targeted auditing that had driven companies out of business with nothing more than false information or a clerical error on the IRS's side.
The warrentless FBI issue has been brought up several times with people who have been nothing more that remotely related to those who the government is interested in, or by people who have simply posted something on facebook. There are hundreds of complaints out about this, but, it happens to the media once (after they do the same thing to a government only a couple years before), and all of a sudden people bring up the issue.
There is a reason the "Fast & Furious" gun fiasco disappeared out of the news almost as quickly as it came in. It wasn't an attempt at gun control, lack of gun control made the case fall apart. Because they couldn't arrest anyone distributing guns to those who would do us harm, they had to "watch" (and they still do on a daily basis) guns sold in the US go to people who would do us harm. But as the laws stand, until the gun is used in a crime, there does not need to be a trail of the gun ownership, which means any private citizen can sell a gun to someone who can not legally own one. There was only one gun that "walked" in the F&F ordeal. All the rest were monitored sales.
I won't even comment on a single person commenting on wanting to take our guns. That just seems silly.
Meanwhile,
We have groups of people who are targeted and arrested because they are hide their faces and participate in public gatherings without warrents.
We have police infiltrating religious groups in order to bait and catch potential "threats".
We have laws being put in place that restrict people from respecting their religious views (Christian, Muslim, Hindi, or otherwise) because it might offend atheists.
We have regulations put in place so that citizens must answer to businesses, while regulations (or the agencies responsible for the regulations) depleted so that businesses do not have to answer to citizens.
We have raving geniuses (sarcasm alert) publicly posting information that can only do harm. And while I am all for the free exchange of information. Only a complete idiot would think that releasing schematics for a printed gun will not be used to kill innocent people. It is only a matter of time. And by proving something people already knew, all they did was make it easier for people who would normally be too dumb to figure it out to do harm. Knowledge is a responsibility, and should be handled as such.
We have people leaking government information endangering lives, policy, and stability because they feel people should know, or for their own personal gain. Again, knowledge is power, taking that from those who protect us does nothing but prevent them from being able to protect us. Now, if the government, or someone in the government is obviously doing something counter to the nations security or stability, it should be raised up. But not in this crazy partisan banter that seems to snowball.
There are news stories of police shooting children trying to protect the same people they are killing.
We live in a world where Governments have lost control of their own borders. And as a result, they (in the case of the US, and many other countries at the behest of their own citizens and elected officials) are targeting it's own citizens to create a feeling of safety.
And if you think the little things you mentioned are anything near the nightmare that already exists, you are so lost.
With the escalated fear of those who are not us, you have citizens attacking innocent people because they think the police are not acting. You have people wondering why the government is not helping them 10 minutes before a disaster strikes. There are laws that allow people to kill otherwise innocent people simply because they feel threatened. You have laws that prevent people from defending themselves when they are actively being threatened.
There are laws that are seriously being considered that would prevent people from even growing their own food.
Considering all the issues we have created for ourselves (and we really can't blame our governments, after all, we made them do it), the US government trying to confiscate firearms really seems childish to me.
I would rather:
Be able grow my own food.
Practice my own religion.
Speak my mind.
Capture and report a crime without becoming a criminal.
Plan my own retirement.
Be able to go to a doctor who can help me.
Be able to buy the medication I need to survive.
Not get killed because someone *thinks* I am dangerous.
Not get sued into oblivion.
Be able to say whatever I want (with the understanding that what I say should do no harm).
be able to give my kids a proper education.
be able to get a proper education.
be able to pay for my basic needs.
Marry who I want.
Receive the benefits from my spouse if they pass.
Create something new and inventive without (again) being sued into oblivion.
This list is nearly endless of things that have been infringed since I have entered this world (some even before).
But I have to say, the right to own and use a firearm only becomes an issue when all of these completely collapse... So, while you are busy polishing your guns, and screaming that someone wants to take them...
PLEASE STOP AGREEING TO TAKE THE RIGHTS THE GUNS ARE MEANT TO PROTECT!!! If you fight your rights with the politicians you elect, you don't need to fight for your rights with guns.
Stop electing people who use fear and negativity to promote their ideas.
Stop electing people sponsored by large corporations.
Start electing the people you know and respect.
Care less about their values, and more about their respect for your values.
Stop bring political parties into the discussion. They are meaningless banter at best.
And remember, the right thing is always easy to identify, it's just not always the easiest way to go.
Thank you, with how many people seem to think that it is the responsibility of the victim to make sure that they are properly protected against idiots, it is nice to hear some sanity.
I personally think 30 months is too short. And the man should have been charged with attempted murder once for every person in each aircraft.
People need to become more conscious of their actions. If you know something "fun" that can kill people, you should still be charged with attempted murder, even if you were too stupid to realize your actions could have resulted in death.
But, you do end up in a grey area of what is a stupid attempt, and what is an honest mistake. However, in this case, it was obviously not a mistake, it was just stupid "fun".
As for his statement that he didn't know it was dangerous only leads to the fact that people are continuously using things without understanding what it is that they use. All laser pointers come with warnings. Even if his friend removed the label before letting his friend use it, the friend should also be responsible for notifying his friend of the dangers.
There is also the fact that this kid was not aware of the fact that it was illegal.
Now I know I am getting old, but the repeated use of the "I didn't know" defense sickens me every time I hear it in the news. What level of stupidity is required for people to do something they have no idea what they are doing?
I have been slowly getting my niece into astronomy, and now I have to deal with keeping up with these idiots causing new laws getting created, so I then have to research them, so that I can continue to teach her how to look at the stars responsibly, and while, it is obvious to keep pointers out of flight paths, now, before going to a new place I need to make sure I am more than 10 miles away from any registered airport.
After reading the article (and at times, it seems that the article is biased one way or the other. A rather interesting read from a technical stand-point). It is in no way commenting on the quality of the Android System or is it truly comparing Android vs Blackberry vs iOS vs Windows 7 (yeah, they list Windows 7 in the research, but it didn't make it to the writers page... Interesting).
The point and reason for the research was to analyze and report on Android as a platform and a supportable system. It identifies key characteristics in the serviceability of the Android (using other systems as a point of reference), and while they believe that the fragmentation (which they believe is the reason for the fact that 14% of all Android calls are hardware vs 7% and 6% of iOS and Blackberry), that factor does not outweigh the positive that such a model brings (pretty much the first paragraph in the report's summary).
Needless to say, with WDS posting it with such a poorly worded title, and the ability for other reviewers to lazily recap the title, and lead-in to the report (ok, they have 1 paragraph to represent a 17 page document, of which they selected to partially represent the hardware fault outline... Partially).
There are also several mis-quotes in the article that are rather telling.
e.g.:
WDS noted in its report. “Deployment by more than 25 OEMs and lower-cost product coming to market is leading to higher than average rates of hardware failures and, in turn, return and repair costs.”
Actual report text (page 4): "Its use exploded and today the OS is deployed by more than 35 OEMs2 , offering an
accessible and customizable platform that has resonated with manufacturers and mobile operators alike."
-- These stats are not even in the report. There is a graph that represents amounts per type of issue, but they do not give hard numbers in the report and w/o the graph, you do not see that the stats are fairly balanced between device with each device having a specific high fault area, except android.
12.6% of all technical support calls related to Android in the study were for hardware failures related to the touchscreen, buttons, speakers, microphones and battery performance. Just 9.3% of Windows Phone, 8% of iOS calls and 5.5% of BlackBerry calls were related to hardware failures.
--
Actual report text (): "While Android deployments may show a higher propensity to hardware failures than rival OS platforms,
analysis of these hardware faults shows no principle defects on the platform; ie: the platform is not
predisposed to one particular hardware defect. Instead, the distribution of hardware faults against
weighted averages deviates by less than 1% in all categories. In this instance, Android actually benefits
from deployment across multiple reference designs and component variants. This means that the brand is
unlikely to be associated with a specific hardware shortcoming."
===
The rest of the article goes on to only quote the press release.
At least that's the way it looks to me...
"Just think of a computer as hardware you can program." -- Nigel de la Tierre
