Re: Left handed version?
The S6 Edge has 2 edges.
1289 posts • joined 23 Mar 2010
The S6 Edge has 2 edges.
"Big corporate governance..."
Corporations don't govern you, the government does.
"Capitalism has nothing to do with the form of government it runs under."
It's not capitalism when it's running under a government. When you let corporations buy governments you have fascism. Capitalism is closer to "1 person 1 vote" but is distorted slightly by the wealth of each person. What you have currently is "if there is a well organised, well funded lobby then nobody gets a vote".
"Police, Firefighters, Schools and Pensions are not public utilities. I.e. it's a comparison between apples and oranges."
It wasn't a comparison at all! When your internet is funded from the same budget as those other things, they all have to fight for the same money, which was the point. Whereas if you are allowed to buy stuff yourself then there is no risk of it being diminished for political reasons (they don't nationalise the restaurants, for good reason). There are cities which have chosen to cut back on police, road maintenance and even street lighting. If they could choose not to upgrade your internet connection the same way they could choose not to pay into firefighters' pension schemes, you'd still be on dial-up.
"Shareholder value" works when creating that value means you have to provide things people want. Politically run systems don't give people what they want.
5 people don't know that almost every American's healthcare is subsidised, or thinks that government intervention and free markets can coexist.
You might want to have a look at the regulations covering those industries before deciding the markets operate freely.
The city has 11,009 households (2013), so it was $10.60/household/month to set up. Then you need to add interest payments, maintenance and running costs, upgrades and the cost to connect it to the rest of the world. And it will be run by an elected official for political purposes rather then someone who knows what they're doing.
"worthwhile to provide it, even if they make a loss"
Alternatively, you could spend that loss on something else worthwhile, and let the citizens themselves decide whether internet is worthwhile, and how much it is worth to them. Capitalism is direct democracy.
"What is so fundamentally wrong or unbearable with the concept of state or local governments providing a public utility service?"
If you lived in Detroit, would you be happy for your internet service to be on a list of priorities which included police, firefighters' pensions and schools, all funded from a dwindling tax base and represented by powerful, organised groups? On the plus side you can have the government force poor people to subsidise your Netflix habit whilst they use only email and jobserve, but on the downside you might be cut off and left with no option.
"There is NO reason why it couldn't be a civil issue, the authorities simply choose to make it a criminal issue."
For it to be a civil issue the BBC would have to prove they have contracted with the TV set owner, even if the owner never watched BBC.
"It's a little bigger, with a 4.5-inch rather than 4.3-inch display."
Loo Pay! Spend your money a penny at a time.
My Chromebook is a C720, which is available from Amazon.de for EUR185, or £137, and still has nearly 4 years' support.
Waiting a minute to get online seems like an eternity these days! I just booted up my other Windows laptop (mid 2011, Win7) and it took 2 minutes 30 to get to firefox. I bought the 11" one a year later because the first is bulky (15") and the fan is loud so it's not great for carrying round the house, using in bed etc. But the smaller one is not powerful enough so I moved to tablets - initially, one with a keyboard. But the workflow on a tablet is not suited to the things which benefit from having a keyboard so I got a smaller tablet instead, which was my go-to device for a while but the workflow is still annoying at times. Eventually I got a Chromebook and the tablet is reduced to playing music, games and a little bit of browsing. If an app has a website (IMDb, Google Maps, Twitter, etc), I reach for my Chromebook rather than the tablet.
At least you can't say I've not experimented! Perfection for me is a small tablet and Chromebook for the lounge, and a desktop PC for the study (currently Ubuntu). I like what MS is doing with dockable tablets etc, especially with Windows 10 improvements, but ideal tablet/laptop screen sizes are different for each device type, and I'm not sure I can rely on Windows. If I can get a great setup for less than the price of a Surface there's no need to risk Windows anyway!
It will work but would you want to use it online? 4-5 years seems quite a good life span for a computer these days though, and the Power Wash functionality means it's really easy to sell fresh 2nd hand models, which means you can pick something up with 3-4 years of support for a bargain.
"Just stick the Chrome browser on the Windows PC and save 50% over the Chromebook"
Chrome OS is far superior to Chrome on Windows. You only have to reboot Chrome OS when there is an update available, rebooting takes about 7 seconds (including installing the update), sleep/resume is infinitely trustworthy and is very fast, the computer doesn't slow down over time. And Chrome is Chrome, but it is ready to use as soon as you click the icon. Mine cost me about £150 2nd hand (the replacement model can be bought new for £180), so you'll not save 50% by buying a Windows machine.
My 11" Windows laptop was quick when I got it, but now it's practically unusable for 5 minutes after I turn it on because it's just so slow at starting things up and checking for updates. I reinstalled Windows last summer and it took a day to complete all the updates, after which it was as slow as before the reinstall. I've learned not to trust it to resume from sleep, or at least to reboot daily if I want to have any expectation of Resume working. I only use it for Word and Excel. Buying a new fast Windows laptop just because I need those programs would be far more expensive than getting a Chromebook of similar speed and reliability, and I would expect it to slow down in a matter of months. So I use a Chromebook for almost everything but when I do my quarterly .xls spreadsheet I boot Windows and make a cup of tea.
I wouldn't consider Chrome OS a replacement for a PC, but when a PC gets too old and slow I recommend keeping it for specific tasks and getting a Chromebook for daily use. Unless you need those specific things daily, why bother with Windows?
Yo don't need a google account to use a chromebook. You don't need a google account to install apps, even on the chrome web store. You don't have to use any google services on your chromebook, including bookmark syncing and web search. They have a new API so you can (when providers catch up) use something like Dropbox or One Drive instead of Google Drive as the default offline storage. You can use a chromebook relying solely on local functionality.
Google guarantees to support Chromebooks with updates for at least 5 years.
...a "stripped to the bone" machine for £250 is going to be a heck of a lot faster than a "with frills" machine for £200 and anything the Chromebook can't do, you wouldn't want to do on a £200 Windows machine. And you can get a Chromebook for <£200 in the UK anyway.
There are few if any Chromebooks over 14" and the market share there is tiny (even by Chromebook standards), so MS scrapping licenses for WWB on machines over 14" shows they are using WWB to attack the Chromebook market, not that they are killing WWB.
I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole though.
Sent from my Chromebook.
p.s. has anyone seen the HP Steam Mini - a Chromebox competitor? Like a NUC but preconfigured. It comes with WWB.
"New versions of Windows and sales of new PCs go hand in hand"
...because people can't buy a new PC and put their old OS on it, and (almost) never buy a new version of Windows for an old PC.
On the other hand, I bought an OS-free PC last year but might get Windows 10 for it this year.
With reputable journalists stating "Windows 10 will be free – for one year" it's easy to be mistaken. They should write something like "upgrading to Windows 10 will free for one year".
That's because upgrades were expensive.
Touch UI is fine, they just need to change the cursor to a circle to mimic the positioning/shadow of a finger. The Asus Transformer tablets do that and it works.
Head East, young (white) man.
"I don't like your art" is different from the actual criticism, which was more like "Your art should not be allowed." Charlie Hebdo, anyone?
"Fine, go away and create your own games, and stop using discredited claims about connections between gaming and violence etc" was the response, not "We hate women." If the intention was to target women and get them out of gaming, there would have been a LOT more "victims" (it's really not hard to find women in the videogames industry!), and the victims would not be so worthy of the attention they received.
When ZQ got The Fine Young Capitalist's campaign for more women in game design stopped it was ignored, because she's a woman. When Gamergate stepped in and funded the project they were ignored because it didn't fit the narrative of misogyny. Harassment, doxing and sexist attacks on gamers are allowed, because gamers can be dismissed as male. Criticism of women is not allowed because women are the supreme gender. Truth is, nobody wants women out of game playing or design, but the narrative that the industry/subculture is anti-women HAS lead to women pulling out (and in 2 cases, being pulled from school by their frightened parents!).
Literally Wu lied, the world's media ran with it because they like the misandrist narrative and "war on women" theme, and now women think they'll be unsafe in gaming as a result. But Wu's Patreon is over $15k/month now (privilege much?), she has an excuse for her Kickstarter being so late, and the gender-baiting media got a lot of clicks, so it was all worth it.
Meanwhile, Intel has teamed up with an organisation which promoted a blacklist of "harassers" which included KFC and one of their own senior staff members, and another organisation run people who promote the sexist idea of "toxic masculinity" and that “San Francisco is full of repugnant white dudes who believe capitalism and their personal technology idea will the save the poor brown people.”
I oppose sexism, racism and hate groups so I won't buy Intel products.
@h4rm0ny you are unaware of the enormous efforts to encourage women and girls into STEM subjects, so you NEED to read this article:
It lists some of the industry, school, government and NGO programmes and encouragement for getting women into physics, where just over 40% of graduates are female, and also engineering. 40% of biology grads are male, so you should research for yourself the programmes for them, but I doubt you'll find any because nobody cares about men. The article goes on to assess the efforts made to get more men into teaching and finds there is close to nothing, but there are efforts to discourage those who would seek equality in that industry. You come across as being totally ignorant of the levels of gynocentrism and misandry in western society, so you really should read the article. It will help you.
I didn't mention statistics! Boys and girls definitely are different, but that doesn't mean you should dismiss cultural effects, it just means you shouldn't ignore the fact that boys and girls are different. Can you do that? The list of countries where the gender split in STEM is most even are not in the free world. When people have more choices they are more likely to be influenced along gender lines. If that's not the sort of culture you want, then go to Iran (it's top of the list).
Even if girls and boys are equally good at maths you'd expect more men to be mathematicians if women are better communicators and more able to use their mathematical skills in better paid professions. And that's what happens.
Teaching and psychology are well paid professions where men are underrepresented. Medicine and Dentistry students are 58% female, Law students are 62% female, student vets are 80% female (The Guardian, degrees awarded in 2012). Nobody cares because it favours women. Refuse collectors are poorly paid and men are overrepresented there. Nobody cares because it favours women.
"we need to keep the pressure on to truly change this."
And the grants and encouragement which girls get and boys don't? It would be good to change that and treat people equally.
Are you sure there is anything telling girls they "don't do STEM"? If you spend any time looking into it you'll find there is far more encouragement (and grants) for girls than for boys as far as STEM and related fields go. But that doesn't mean girls think they "don't do social work" or "don't do paediatrics", or that they should prefer STEM to any of the myriad options they are told are definitely "for them". When it comes to the crunch, you can't make them do what you want them to.
And why does nobody care about fields where men are underrepresented? Perhaps if boys were not told that teaching is "not for them" there would be fewer men in STEM. They're not told that though, are they? It's a myth just like "the idea that girls don't *do* STEM". What we need to accept is that boys and girls are different.
Do you want it to be equal (80% white because 80% of people are white) or diverse (20% white because there are 5 main races)?
IIRC Google's survey was of its US staff, so their 61% white figure means they have a lot to do in order to achieve a proper racial representation (close to 80% of the population is white) and therefore avoid accusations of racism. If someone were to count the representation by religion they might find some uncomfortable biases there too. Microsoft's data seems to be global, but with their history as a North American company it's to be expected that a more than representative number of staff would be white.
As for the number of women, it's likely this is caused by (primarily female) kindergarden teachers and pink toys (or perhaps because Lego doesn't come in pink boxes?): the number of women working in tech, relative to men, is actually higher than the number interested in tech at age 12. So there are obviously sexist forces keeping men out of the industry after that age, but something forcing girls before that age to adopt gender roles. Something must be done. We need another study. And more funding. And someone should address the issue of institutionalised sexism forcing men out of the teaching profession, as this might be the cause of girls choosing the wrong careers and thereby harming the cause of global equality (the matriarchy hurts girls too!).
Have those congresswomen also raised the important issue of sexism forcing men out of the psychology profession and racism keeping whites from playing certain professional sports? I'm sure they would have, because they wouldn't want to appear either bigoted or just incredibly ignorant.
"she could strip down, repair, even improve anything mechanical"
Sounds like the perfect woman, but why did she have to be naked?
Girls who play with dolls, and their parents, are the impervious ones. The pressure I see to make girls play as boys is quite aggressive.
There was a similar storyline in an episode of Lost: The Hot Blonde One was asked to gather sticks for a fire but turned on the charm and got The Fat Guy to fetch them instead. Her brother complained that she'd not fetched the sticks but she pointed out that she actually had. She and Barbie are equally empowered but feminists won't see it that way because they want equal representation only in safe, well-respected, high-paying jobs like Programmer and will never demand equality in lumber yards.
If you want to know the future of energy, look at the Solar Roadways project. It's been soundly debunked by various sources on grounds such as the energy it could provide would be produced far more cheaply by other methods and without the maintenance headache (tilted solar panels by the side of the road, for example). But because it's "cool" (it's solar! - free energy!) people who see the debunkings retain their faith in it, and have given the kickstarter project ridiculous amounts of money. The US taxpayer has chipped in too.
@fibbles this is what feminism is about nowadays, and it's never been about equality. When they fought for voting rights men could only vote if they made themselves available to be conscripted (in many US states this is still the case), but women wanted to be a class above, and get the benefits of citizenship without any of the responsibilities. When women were 40% of university students it was an "equality" problem that feminists wanted to fix, but now men are 40% they have no desire to make men equal, and instead campaign against men's groups and men's centres on campus, whilst removing due process from men accused of sexual assault and banning the culture of straight white males (dubbed "lad culture"). They don't want equality of representation among people working in sewers, but they have got it into EU law that 40% of board members must be women, even though women's choices regarding work-life balance, and what they study at university, suggest a non-discriminatory outcome would be far lower than 40%.
Leading, recognised feminists should take some time out from attacking men and make it absolutely clear that they oppose the people who harassed Mr Taylor over his shirt. Otherwise we will call those people feminists, and so will they themselves.
And Hollister, for their misandrist, sexualizing bags. Again, no takers.
Some harassers have claimed that's what he was wearing. The Daily Telegraph even claimed the women were wearing "bondage gear" and didn't mention any of the huge amount of support he was getting, only the opposition voices.
The good news is that Twitter has something in place to resolve all the gender-based harassment he's been getting, and the women doing it from the UK will have their IPs tracked and each get 2-year prison sentences. This will prove WAM is committed to ending harassment and is not just another feminist group censoring egalitarian viewpoints and anti-feminists statistics.
Bowie predicted all this, you know:
You really made the grade
And the papers want to know whose shirts you wear
I could spend all day reporting feminists for gender-based harassment, abuse and misandry but I doubt Twiter would do anything about it, and putting a feminist group in between victims of feminist abuse and the people who do the banning will just make it less likely that anything will be done. #endfathersday
When Facebook let feminists judge what freedom of speech should be allowed they banned a poster for a Men's Human Rights event and facts on sexual assault on university campuses (the facts belie the message they want to project).
Graham, the people doxxing, harassing and making death threats against the diverse range of activists trying to reform videogame journalism seem to have got away with it, and WAM wants to minimize the harassment men face on a daily basis, which is actually more prevalent than that faced by women. The only solution available for men and ethical journalism fans is to ignore the trolls. If it's good enough for us, why not expect women to act like adults too?
They put Material Design in Ios to make your upgrade to Android even smoother.
What about Plex and Chromecast?
As a Unity (is the best thing about Ubuntu) user I understand how ignorant your comment is. As a Xubuntu user you will never know.
They can provide their own web view because it's open source and there is no lock in. They have their own browser, don't they?
Taxes on income don't seem to be a human rights issue. Do you own yourself and everything you create, or do "they" own your output? Freedom to work is a human right, I assume.
Three words: that's four words
A Land Value Tax is the only economically efficient tax because it encourages more efficient use of land and can prevent speculators buying up land in the hope someone will build infrastructure near it. It's hard to evade because land is easy to track, and the tax take is closely related to the GDP so government "investment" and benefits should rise along with the nation's wealth. That's fine in a mostly agrarian economy where economic value is derived from the land (Adam Smith was a fan) but when value is created in cyberspace it would put a disproportionate burden on farmers relative to Amazon and the like. Taxing each gigabyte is a bit like taxing each acre, so this is something of a Land Tax for the modern age.
You forgot treason.