your tone suggests one's preferences should be dictated by a corporation's interests; it's perfectly reasonable that the 1/8" jack solves problems for the user that the lightning jack does not solve. Even if they don't even include a 1/8" jack on future products, it could still have been preferable from the individual point of view.
Either you replied to the wrong person or you are majorly projecting your own displeasure. They just asked if the other person was planning on sticking with the iPhone in the future or moving to something that still includes the headphone jack. There was no negative tone to be inferred from that post.
Given what I know about the aviation industry, it's extremely unlikely that this was the first and second time he has done this task. We might be looking at the millionth time and million-and-one time. Memory is probably not a factor.
I have to say... I don't understand what about Firebase's offering is SO killer or unique. I feel like it would be very easy to roll one's own custom 'Firebase.' I'm unsure as to why anyone would ever choose to predicate their businesses continued existence on another platform, especially one that can be replicated in like, an afternoon.
Can you replicate it and open source it tomorrow afternoon please? :) I'll pay for your time.
While what they did was certainly a dick move, this type of comments trivzializes and diminishes the work the firebase engineers put it. Incidentally it also implies that google is full of stupid execs with money that pay millions of tech that can be build by one dev in an afternoon.
I can definitely do that. I only collect payments up front, so fork it over and I will have it for you tomorrow, likely even tonight.
I think what I said ("I don't understand what firebase does that is so killer or unique") is very different from what you are reading ("firebase is useless, firebase's engineers do stupid work, and google is full of student execs with money that pay millions of tech that can be build by one dev in an afternoon"). I think your characterization of my statement is more than a bit unfair.
I'm still at a loss for what firebase is beyond a key value store with web sockets. I think it would be a problem to scale a platform like this on ones own -- maybe that's why to use Firebase? I've used it in hackathon settings where I didn't want to roll my own backend, or to mock web-sockets pre Django 1.9 / Channels.
Still, if I had a business that depended on a key value store with web sockets I would definitely build it myself.
A couple more things regarding the trivialization of the engineers work:
1: Just because work is done does not mean it is important
2: It is possible to say that the product is not special or unique and yet the hard work that is done to keep that product up all of the time and scale it to many of customers is special.
Forbes is unequivocally the worst website I have the displeasure of being linked to on a regular basis. Readability is quickly approaching 0. This page kept hijacking my scroll thru the article to keep an ad at the top of my window. Horrible, horrible, horrible.
Go to Preferences ("Options" on Windows), select the "Content" section, click the "Colors..." button, and change the "Override the colors specified by the page with your selections above" dropdown to "Always".
In current nightly:
Go to Preferences/Options, select the "General" section, scroll down to the "Colors..." button in the "Fonts & Colors" part, then as above.
Is there an equivalent option in firefox prior to version 52 ?
I'm forever stuck to firefox before version 52 because 52 is the release that dropped support for having sound in the browser with no intent of going back.
The dropdown that's in 53 has been there since Firefox 37.
Before Firefox 37 it was just a "Allow pages to choose their own colors" checkbox (which you could uncheck). _That_ UI goes back to at least Firefox 3.5. Likely earlier (I'm pretty sure it was in 1.0 as well), but I don't have anything older than that on hand at the moment.
On a separate note, I assume your "having sound" thing refers specifically to Linux and even more specifically to Linux systems without PulseAudio, right? Characterizing that as a blanket "dropped support for having sound" is at bit disingenuous.
I couldn't tell as trying to access the article is hijacked and redirected to https://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome/?toURL= and stay stuck there until I start disabling privacy measures and allow scripting.
I won't even try clicking another forbes link from now on.
It kind of blows my mind that even real, serious journalism outlets cheapen their product like this (nearing the mid-2000s music lyrics website threshold).
Got a NYT digital subscription to see if it was worth it, and I like it. Would be more likely to keep going if it extended to other publishers, and I could consistently access an ad-free, ad-blocker gate free experience.
This is a great illustration of how we grapple with the abstraction of scales and key over time.
First, you have tabs, which describe the physical position of the notes on the instrument.
Then, we have root / chord type notation, in which we describe the starting position and shape of the notes on the instrument, and the musician must translate that information to the physical position of the notes, on the fly.
What is important about this second stage is that the musician has a pretty good grasp on how to play, and can usually sight read a piece and get a pretty decent version of it just by tracking chords, or in the case of the piano, just chords and the melody on the other hand, or a small pattern.
Finally, we come to roman numeral notation, which describes the chords based on their relative position to the root note of key, not the chord. This is a powerful abstraction. It provides incredible insight into the relationships between music, notes, chords, and progressions of chords at a level divorced from the 'root' of that key. A 9th played over a minor 7th chord is going to give you a very similar sound in any key. This is a great skill for songwriters and composers, who need to have a strong working intuition about things like what chord will sound good in this progression, or what notes we want to appear in our melody (which is related to the chords beneath it).
> The reason why I bought a bluetooth toothbrush was for a ranking system
We are truly living in a modern fall of rome. We will choke on our bluetooth enabled toothbrushes, 700 dollar juicer machines, our fucking fitbits. We've ravaged the earth to adorn ourselves with decadent shackles and we will reap the consequences with fake tans and ultra clean teeth.
In the past year I've gone from being an environmentalist to a big fan of the end times. We're going to eat ourselves out of a home, and a few billion years later, the Earth will still be here, not missing us at all. Fuck it, get three bluetooth toothbrushes next time.
An age where "idiots are getting promoted for baseless ideas" is closer to the truth. This is why people who were traditionally more humble now have the obligation to speak out - but I often see them silenced at the tech companies they work for... These companies are often selectively listening to exactly the wrong people, who are usually in the minority in the company anyway!
And I would love if my 2001 Honda Accord was compatible with Tesla's autopilot, but I understand it is not a realistic expectation.
I'm not sure why you'd expect the web to be a. Mostly text and b. able to render easily on obsolete devices.
The web is becoming a robust application delivery platform. That is so, so awesome. Most people do not want to be stuck with shitty looking, text only websites. Moving the platform forwards necessitates that it will use more resources. Increased resources availability and consumption over time is fairly consistent across most aspects consumer computing.
The point isn't that the web should be mostly text, but that it shouldn't comprise of layers and layers of unnecessary fiddle-faddle that doesn't add anything useful to the end-user's experience.
If you can convey what your trying to convey with a JS-less (or even just JS-lite) 2-page website, then don't build a monolithic, scroll-hijacking, background-parallaxing fireworks show of a website, tied together with the most tenuous of Javascript libraries.
I'm all for the web as an application delivery platform, but not every website, or application, needs so much bulk.
They may be robust but the user experience still sucks. JS heavy web sites are unresponsive and turn my 3 year old MBP into a vacuum cleaner. Facebook is the best example. I can barely load the web site without the fans spinning. Firefox can't handle it at all. It is unusable for me.
That is crazy. I use Facebook on a 5 year old MBP with no problems. I have Ad Block Pro and U-Block, but even without them, my computer can handle Facebook just fine.
ublock origin is the only adblocker you need. Adblock Plus does the same thing but is less efficient and lets some ads through by default, and ublock is abandoned.
Don't run two ad blockers, they will just use more resources for no benefit.
Might be more Firefox than your macbook or the web. I've noticed (while developing an extension) that Firefox feels noticeably more sluggish than Chrome. Safari somehow feels even faster than Chrome, but I'm too tied to the extension ecosystem of Chrome to switch.
I'm using Chrome but I tend to agree. A particularly painful area of Facebook is Buy/Sell pages. It slows to a crawl if you scroll through too many listings. Even on my 6 core X99 system.
> Increased resources availability and consumption over time is fairly consistent across most aspects consumer computing.
Worth remembering this is the case for people interested in tech. The local library still runs Vista on a 10yo system. My parents will use Android 2.x until the phone does not turn on anymore. Bandwidth updates don't apply to many people living outside of towns. Etc. It's been a long time since we've reached a point where an average person shouldn't need more bandwidth and power to look for information online.
And BTW, you can have beautiful text-only websites. These 2 properties are not related.
So what is the move if you are caught with your pants down, and a LEO is requesting access to your actual phone? Does a factory restore wipe all data, or is in necessary to wipe, fill up with bunk data, wipe again?
I don't know about everyone else but my phone is has data including me talking about controversial opinions, intimate photos, and various other data that I would not want anyone else to have.
In the US, use passwords to protect your phone. Passwords have been held by courts to be testimony and thus protected by the 5th Amendment. Patterns, swipes, facial recognition and fingerprints have been held by courts to be the equivalent of "keys" and you can be required to turn them over upon being ordered by a lawful authority (such as a police officer demanding them). Passwords require a court order and if you have a competent attorney, they can argue that revealing the password would result in self-incrimination (and this can spend a lot of time in court before anything happens).
First, it would vary by phone -- but if LEO is requesting your phone and do not have a warrant (yet), they could still seize the phone citing exigent circumstances. The exigent circumstances being that if they left the phone in the custody of the subject, then they will likely delete the contents or at least could delete the contents. Once the phone is in LEO possession then they can take the time to apply for a warrant to search the device.
So -- if you get to the point of LEO requesting your phone and you have data on your phone, then it is too late.
In the US, unless we are talking about a border search, LEO will still need a warrant to search your phone. I'm unsure if this is what you meant by "pants down" tho :)
Just... so much wrong here. First and foremost, you are still characterizing an entire movement by it's worst actors, so the point of the poster above you stands.
Second -- 'Ferguson' was a community reacting to a state sponsored murder -- not a 'BLM protest'. They weren't out there for BLM, they were out there because Ferguson cops enacted violence on their community.
Finally, calling 'in defense of looting' required reading is not endorsing or defending looting. You aren't a Nazi because you read Mein Kampf. It's an interesting take and I'm sure Deray has a nuanced opinion on the issue -- but nah you're just going to keep mischaracterizing people and movements to fit your world view.
First, while I don't want to argue the case of the shooting of Michael Brown here (nor do I have any special knowledge to add to the publicly available facts), you've jumped to conclusions regarding the case ("a state sponsored murder").
The grand jury did not find enough evidence to charge the officer and even CNN said "Some [witnesses] admitted lying. Others changed their stories under questioning."
You've clearly decided the facts of the case based not on evidence but on your own world view so kindly spare me spurious accusations of doing so.
Second, I'm not characterizing an entire movement, I'm merely referencing the events.
I'm not merely referring to Ferguson, that's simply one example of many, so I used a general term. You may prefer other terms but I suspect that you know what I'm referring to when I use the term "BLM protests".
Third, while Mein Kampf may be required reading for its historical importance, do tell, why would In Defense of Looting be required reading if not for the position it advocates?
...
So this is being downvoted without response - why?
Hi. I just went off and read In Defense of Looting[1], which I'd never seen before, following its mention in your earlier post. It's fascinating. I think you should read it. It presents a very interesting perspective that many might not be familiar with and, despite the title, is not primarily a defense of looting.
Isn't this an interesting idea worth thinking about?
"Looting is extremely dangerous to the rich (and most white people) because it reveals, with an immediacy that has to be moralized away, that the idea of private property is just that: an idea, a tenuous and contingent structure of consent, backed up by the lethal force of the state."
I don't think looting is a good idea, but I do think reading that essay is. Possibly Deeray McKesson felt the same way.
"It is in solidarity with these latter protesters–along with those who loot–and against politicians and de-escalators everywhere that I offer this critique"
As someone who would like to see de-escalation before this all ends in civil war, the author has declared (correctly, I think) themselves against me.
It is, more than a mere defense of looting, an attack on capitalism and "white supremacy" (by which the author means American society in general, not extremist Neo-Nazis).
I'm as aware as anyone of the failures and injustices of capitalism, but merely taking what one wants isn't a sustainable solution.
> It is, more than a mere defense of looting, an attack on capitalism and "white supremacy" (by which the author means American society in general, not extremist Neo-Nazis).
Right. Those are some of the reasons it's plausible that someone would recommend it with a more complex intention than "yay, looting."
I'm sure countless sources could be found that present those arguments without also defending looting.
Perhaps one could even find sources that present a fair criticism of the flaws of other economic systems and the injustices perpetrated by other societies alongside the critique of capitalism and American history.
When a prominent activist like DeRay Mckesson recommends an article like In Defense of Looting, it's likely to encourage looting by some of his followers.
