Re: Quick question
Agreed 100%. Same boat.
77 publicly visible posts • joined 15 Jun 2011
Yeah, agreed. Then I look at all the neighbourhoods where RFID key fobs for cars have been tampered with inside houses from a van on the street to gain access to said parked cars. This 'over digitization' for the sake of convenience and/or cool factor is pure madness. Re-direct the efforts, Apple (et al).
Pretty much agreed. Professionally designed documents, created by someone who understands typography and line-lengths for readability, is more often to be found in the 'PDF world' as opposed to the web one. I agree with your paper viewpoint too. Regrettably, the web-world has just turned into a sch!tt-show due to the persistent accommodation of the 'smartphone' at the primarily level.
While that is true, essentially national currencies are traditionally more stable, and overseen with a responsibility towards the well-being of said nation.
Crypto is private, and has no regulations or oversight whatsoever. Hence, the opening statement: Crypto 'derives value based on make believe' rings very true. I absolutely refuse to endorse it, or go near it in its current state. I see it as currency for the dark web and criminals.
Now, tell me that the G20 has come up with an 'international currency' that operates similar to crypto, but is much more stable and has iron-clad G20 oversight, there may be more of a mainstream appetite for the concept then—especially from the business world.
Just my 2¢ worth.
One odd impact crater caused by Chinese space junk. For decades humanity has been trashing up space and there are increasing amounts of junk in orbit. The moon already has a notable amount of left junk, and Mars is now being trashed up as well. And NOBODY seems to care. Just like here on Earth. Nobody really cares unless there is negative political impact, or a nasty financial one. And those who do believe we should be picking up after ourselves are just viewed as 'enviro-lefty-kooks'.
So I see one double impact crater. Does it really matter? Nobody apparently gives a toss.
Oh, gawd—yes. As one who was responsible for in-house online design (enterprise & consumer) I saw that shite all the time from outside vendors who management would contract without our knowledge (f#$k !). So many times we'd be asked by internal stakeholders to redesign/rebuild the entire disaster. Thankfully, I had a crack-on team who were able to rise to the challenge. The downside was trying to keep it under wraps from management that their 'wunderkind' vendor had caulked up. But that was the CIOs job, not mine.
I can see this as a real concern for businesses who blindly trust Zoom as they discuss confidential matters.
But for myself, who is retired, all Zoom will be getting is mindless rabble from a bunch of p!ssed up old yobs who periodically group for a virtual pub night and yak on endlessly about our favourite 80's bands (LOL!!)
They are useful.
As soon as you’re connected to the Internet, applications can potentially send whatever they want to wherever they want. Most often they do this to your benefit. But sometimes, like in case of tracking software, trojans or other malware, they don’t. But you don’t notice anything, because all of this happens invisibly under the hood.. While this may edge into the tin-foil hat crew, it's not a bad idea if one is concerned to that degree. I've been thinking myself of installing Li'l Snitch for the last 20 years. I'm still thinking about it, but I'm a cheap SOB yet I could afford it easily. And as we know, these programs like Li'l Snitch can turn off the offending programs ability to 'call home'.
Personally, I don't see them as absurd as you do. To each his own.
TV used to be so easy. Turn on via remote, channel up, and fall asleep. Now my rogue smart TV is getting into my bank card's smartchip by bridging from my iPad, MacBook and finally through my radio. I'll be wiped of funds by tomorrow morning.
I give up. I hate 21st century TV.
"You wanna see the cutting edge? Try a casino's surveillance network."
Do you know how much dough casinos put into their surveillance? FAR MORE that what the average retail chain wants to put in—and pay to administer constantly.
Hmmmmm . . . not quite. Digital stalking can garner a lot of information about a person to a much greater degree than a security camera ANYWHERE can. Security cameras only capture your face, and may capture your movements within a store. Information that is not captured and stored in a databank like digital stalking can be. Unless you interact with checkout at the brick-and-mortar location, you are still invisible. Use cash at the checkout and you may remain so.
Not really the same comparison.
This isn't a new story. The handwriting has been on the wall since the late 90's. And the news biz has done precious little except reluctantly getting online, and having their lunch eaten. Well all know that paywalls suck, especially when ALL the content is there. But maybe a selection of 4-8 stories, in an abbreviated form can be accessed? Perhaps the ones the various media outlets promote on social media. Why? It looks like a fair compromise and a 'meeting in the middle'. The rest can be paywalled if one enters from any other place other than a social media channel. Just a thought.
CORRECT. I've been saying that for eons.
Basics like how to attach a JPEG to email, adjust the size of ones browser window, enlarge or reduce type on a web page, etc, etc, etc.
And upon failing, a simple series of tutorials to remedy the issues. But I can now hear the excuses . . .
"I'm too busy—and besides my kid knows more about that interweb and computers than I do."
Mine has been discovering that people STILL (over the last 20 years) have no idea that a web browser in a laptop/desktop environment can be made narrower/smaller by just grabbing the lower right corner and pulling it in. I suspect this has accounted for a large amount of 'why' we ended up with 'responsive design'. (The other reason, of course, would be people's obsession of trying to do everything on a fondlephone)
I remember signing up for Facebook (business purposes) I gave them false info to shut them up. Fake DOB, no phone, and fake location. My name and email is near-everywhere anyhow, but one can't do anything with that. I don't know why people think they have to be so honest with these data slurpers. My Twatter account is even sparser, and fake-ier. LOL!
Ready, at anytime, to pull the plug on the lot of them, frankly.
Various forms of this has been going on in the electronics industry since I remember when getting in around 1993. In those days it was new computer gear released 6 months after you bought yours that was twice as fast and two-thirds the cost. Consumer outrage ensued!!! Lawsuits were rampant, as were the accusations.
Then it was updates of OS's that sucked machine performance that required more ultra-expensive memory that some couldn't (or couldn't afford to) install, or sucked up the puny hard drive space. Follow that with Apple's insistence of changing from '040 to PPC to Intel, and today, to M1. That can sideline perfectly good hardware in a short period of time due to dwindling updates to software for the old system.
While I have lived through it, I can't say I like it, but that's the reality of the electronics world. I applaud the Briggs & Stratton business model, and I know of a few like that in my world outside of digital 'stuff', but I can hardly expect a 1998 Apple G3 Wallstreet to be fully functional, AND serviceable, in today's world. I think this Apple battery thing is really overblown by a lot of folks who haven't yet faced the reality of the electronics world. And I might add, Apple isn't alone in this battery thing.
Would I like to be able to field-strip my MacBook Air (which is pretty easy already) and add in a new M1 chip to continue. You bet I would! Do I think for a second Apple is going to be a stand-up firm and accommodate me? Nope.
Indeed they are. Perhaps to the chagrin of some.
I used Macs through the 1990's, 2000's, etc., because I was working in the ad agency world, so postscript was standard. Today, I still use Macs, and I my MacBook Air is smooth. But every now and again, I will fire up my . . . PowerBook 3400c and it runs wonderfully as well (800 x 600). With 16mbs of RAM. Yes, they CAN last a long time.
Gawd, I've gone from '040, to PowerPC, to Intel, now this. I'm really tired of the BS that goes along with these transitions. *rolls eyes*
The GOOD NEWS is, that this M1 chip sounds like it can really deliver efficiently, but I wish I knew this was on the horizon about a year and half ago. Looks like some really solid performing new-ish Apple Intel kit of mine could get sidelined prematurely. Bugger!
I was replying to someone who looked like they were in need of an option, not someone who is satisfied with Adobe. Good for you.
But I too added up the costs to 'rent' Photoshop, Illustrator, and Indesign, and if I added up the yearly cost, the entire Affinity suit still cost less as a one-time fee. And small intermittent updates are no-charge. Although my final decision was based on a number of factors, the one-time fee was really a pleasant bonus.
I'd say we 'iRent' just about anything digital, be it Apple branded or not. But since we're talking about the fruit company, over the weekend I spent some serious time with my fully functioning PowerBook 3400 running FA-18 Hornet 2.0 and having a blast. I updated the address book on my 2007 iPod Touch and added two albums. So frankly, I'm not too concerned about the longevity of my 2017 iPad Pro and 13" Macbook Air. They'll live on, and on, and on. My fully functioning 12" G4 PowerBook from 2005 is nodding approvingly from across the room. :-)