|
Authored by: soronlin on Monday, July 23 2012 @ 06:15 AM EDT |
Microsoft Removes
Embarrassing 'Big [redacted]' String From Linux Code
What a heartening
tale; it seems Microsoft now allows unprofessional schoolboys to post code in
public.
I find it a little disturbing though that the author of the article
and reportedly many other people are making the assumption that this puerility
will offend all women and no men. Personally I don't know of any woman who would
be offended by coming across such a term, which is after all of the most
infantile variety. In fact most if not all the women I know would use that term
in general conversation referring to their own or another's anatomy, think
nothing of it and not be thought crude whoever their audience. I'm sure many
people will find this particular use of it in bad taste, I am one of
them, but that reaction will not be limited to people of any one particular
gender.
I'm male myself, so I have to be circumspect, but I don't see it
helps women's cause for them to be seen as fragile and easily offended. People
who perpetuate that image do more damage than the puerile idiot at Microsoft. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Gringo_ on Monday, July 23 2012 @ 12:23 PM EDT |
The article posted at the Financial Times requires (free)
registration. I
declined, since there are other sources
available, such as
this one at
PCMag.
They say... Nokia is reportedly considering a
new
strategy to drum up excitement for its upcoming Windows-
based
smartphones.
I say good luck with that - especially when the same
magazine also has an article titled "Advance Demand for
Apple's Next iPhone
'Unprecedented'".
The article also states... In June
2011, PCMag
went
to carrier retail stores and found that there wasn't much
enthusiasm from carriers or from their sales people to push
the
platform." and "In the U.S.,
Nokia offers the Lumia
900 exclusively on AT&T. Last week,
Nokia slashed the Windows phone price
from $99 to $49.99...
, so we see how well that worked out
for AT&T.
One doesn't cut the price of their flagship phone until the
next
model is ready and will be available shortly, or as I
suspect is the case here,
to move dead stock out of the way
for other phones.
Meanwhile, Samsung
and Google products are set for record
sales. What carrier wants to get tied in
to a loser Windows
phone now? The Financial Times said the idea is for carriers
to receive financial incentives to actively promote Nokia
products, whereas
the PCMag article seems to be suggesting
they are looking for a partner willing
to invest in the
relationship.
"A source told the Financial Times
that Nokia's
new relationships would also offer service providers a
financial
stake in the phones' success, which Nokia hopes
will provide an incentive for
the carriers to push Windows
Phone device at the retail
level."
That doesn't sound like a subsidy to me, but rather, an
invitation for the carrier to invest in the venture. We
already know how that
is working out for previous win phone
partners, from Nokia to AT&T.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 23 2012 @ 12:28 PM EDT |
If you liked Tomi Ahonen's text and analysis, here is more. Digging Deeper
into Nokia Q2 Results - and exactly how many 'awesome' sales was AT&T and
China... and If Apple is running away from this strategy, and Samsung growing by
opposite strategy, why is Elop trying 'exclusive' carrier strategy for Nokia and
Microsoft. He must be mad! This time without any Military History, haha. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 23 2012 @ 02:45 PM EDT |
Quote - "We were after the C++ programmers. We managed to drag a lot of
them about halfway to Lisp."
- Guy Steele, co-author of the Java spec
Comment, so if all the languages are derived from Lisp, then what does that mean
(if you are Oracle or anyone else trying to sue)?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 23 2012 @ 04:05 PM EDT |
If you look at these languages in order,
Java, Perl, Python, you notice an interesting pattern.
*BUT* nothing surprising there ,-just like all wheel are round
because it works , and at then there wasn't patent[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 23 2012 @ 06:32 PM EDT |
I like PJ's note saying that she's asking people she knows not to put any of her
information in their Contacts if they're going to use FB to maintain it. But I
have a deadly serious question for her: how does she plan to enforce this?
The people I know who have been responsible for me receiving invitations to join
FB are the sort who simply don't understand why I will never do so. I could ask
them to delete me from their contacts, but even if they agreed, I wouldn't trust
them to actually do it properly. And even if they did, I certainly don't trust
FB to ever delete anything, so I don't believe it could possibly do any good.
I think the only reasonable assumptions to make about the visibility of your
information to FB are these:
1. If any FB user has ever seen it, they will publish it to FB; and
2. If it has ever been published to FB, FB will keep it forever.
It doesn't matter what you want FB to keep or publish. It doesn't matter what
you tell your friends to do with your information. Third parties (people who are
not you and are not FB) who have your information will willingly provide it to
FB as part of their site usage. And FB seems to think that makes it their
property to do with as they see fit.
I would really, REALLY, like to see a class action against FB that results in FB
making a meaningful and legally-binding pledge to purge their systems of all
personal information that was given to them by any third party without the
consent of the owner of the information, and to "blackhole" any such
information in the future. I do not expect to ever see this happen, because it
would make FB a real opt-in system, whereas their business model depends on it
continuing to be (as it currently is) an opt-out-if-you-can system.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|