Re: I patched my MacBook Air...
I keep Refreshers on mine.
1882 posts • joined 11 May 2007
I keep Refreshers on mine.
People react differently to the same thing. Apparently you all feel fine with some random bloke who's close enough to bluetooth a picture of his cock to your phone. Me, i'd be a little freaked out by that. I can imagine some people might feel violated by it.
You don't get to decide how other people feel and when you say they're wrong all you're really saying is "i don't do empathy".
Sounds so much better than "Google made an OS without thinking about security patches and they've just realised that that might be a problem."
But back in the days when some people thought drunk driving was acceptable you might have been.
...but at some point one has to move to more interesting, rewarding (or not) real-world activities.
Jesus, could you patronise that up a bit for me Grandad?
Yeah, it's not like this is a Windows issue.
That just blocks an attack vector though, doesn't it? I though Stagefright was a video system problem. If so then other methods of playing videos would still be vulnerable.
is open to answer and close to hang up!
If you don't want stupid headlines you're on the wrong site.
Google analytics is pretty much everywhere.
You mean like every browser does until you check the "don't ask me again" box?
Sounds like IE has a security hole and Edge doesn't. Why would you want your browser to be able to allow remote access to your machine?
They don't have to be the default to be used.
... must constitute a real indication of the individual's wishes.” Typical bureaucratese? Sounds like an accurate description of what consent means to me.
It's a "free upgrade" if you do it within a year.
Do you use Chrome? If so, got any tips on stopping it updating itself?
But does it install a driver update utility on unix that messes with the os' update mechanism? Otherwise it's not really relevant is it? The issue is the update mechanisms clashing, not the quality of either driver.
So just like ANDROID / CHROME now then? Except I'm PRETTY SURE that Microsoft ASK PERMISSION FIRST for anything involving PERSONAL INFO...
Is it really surprising that targeting a single device is easier than targeting all pcs made in the last 5 years and a load of tablets?
Yeah, i'd be so much safer if i didn't know about this. They can't hack my car if i don't know there's a flaw!!
Thanks for an informative and balanced post! Just what the OP required!!
Because they fuck it up and end up paying more for less?
Yeah, but that's Google stinking up the web with non-standard markup and therefore ok. Totally different to the IE specific stuff that we all loathe.
No, some of us like to be able to control when an app updates itself, something Chrome makes very awkward.
Without multiple rendering engines the html5 standards would just become "what webkit does". Multiple engines following the same standards should keep the standards clear and sensible.
I'm not too keen on Google taking over where IE6 left off....
Well they could make it so the option is always there, rather than it appearing after you've enabled it in an app. Or they could take you to the settings screen to switch it on, thereby informing you of where it is.
Both of those would make it clearer, if not easier...
Cool, link me up!
But srsly, reading the wikipedia mod discussions about this is better than any article. Where else exactly would the journos research?
The one month thing is fundamental to the discussion. It's imposed by MS ending support for 2003. If you don't understand that why are you commenting?
He's not giving you his condescending tone, get past it and move on.
Irrelevant straw man. Trevor isn't recommending you wait until your platform only has a month to go, he's saying that when someone who is already in that situation comes to you and says "What should I do" the answer isn't "Switch to a different platform".
Sweet, always room for a new fart euphemism!
Sorry, I just airgapped....
Not really the same thing though is it. Windows is platform for rich client apps, a browser is the platform for a web app. The interface between me and the platform is strictly defined and controlled and that's how I communicate with it. More to the point (about shipping code) I don't ship Windows with my rich client apps and I don't ship a browser with my web apps.
So what are you saying? Google will keep the scripts updated in line with browser updates that break compatibility with older browser versions? That would actually be useful, though not breaking compatibility would be more useful. I'm still going to have to retest and potentially reship my app. I'd just do that with the latest library scripts.
Adding in untested updates saves maintenance hassle? I disagree. If you trust Google to never make a mistake then you're naive. But more importantly, if the script actually has problems in areas you use then you'll have worked round them. A fix to the underlying problem could break your work round. If the script has problems in areas you don't use why do you need the updates? You won't use them.
So logically it's just for performance. There are much better ways of improving performance that don't involve trusting a third party with the core functionality of your app.
If I was shipping a new build of an app I wouldn't include some untested third party binaries. You can't guarantee the performance of your code if you include random untested bits.
So why do people link to Googleapis.com to get jquery or whatever instead of taking a known version and hosting it locally?
Private Eye FTW.
But he's not. Because he knows if anyone's digs they'll find out he's over firmly denied it?
Go to the wikipedia edits for his page and read the discussions. Make up your own mind.
Linux on the Desktop "just works"? For you maybe. All you've really said there is "I understand the things I use all the time and thus can easily get them working to my satisfaction."
"I've heard some rumours". That's not telling them about Jimmy Saville.
Chrome hasn't changed. Chromium has.
What's more irritating is that, despite the masculinist vibe of the OP there is a point to be made here. Apparently women do get lesser sentences for similar crimes: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002"
A single paper doesn't constitute irrefutable evidence by any standards, but it is certainly worth considering.
Then apply it to every book.
That's fighting talk where I come from!
What's wrong with it is that it's not for all books by all authors. It's also more penny pinching from an organisation that really doesn't need to, not for the relatively small amounts this will save them.
But then it's their service so it's their rules. No doubt "we can change this whenever we feel like it" was in the massive Ts&Cs doc that everyone skipped....
People trust the open source lines because they can read them. They don't trust the stealth listening blob because they can't read it. It's not tricky.
Thanks, now I understand! Your post makes much more sense than the article!
No, not everyone uses 32-bit IE for plug-in compatibility. If you reined in the hyperbole a bit you might have a point about a substantial group of users. Or you could just be bitching about something that effects you and your mates. Who knows?