|
127
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Great Talk on the Social Media Economy
|
on: December 07, 2012, 11:54:11 AM
|
Yep. That about sums it up.  Similar to something Noam Chomsky said in an interview a while back. He noted that the "new" way of doing science seems to be to catalog and get better "priors" - and then apply analytic techniques to the data collection in order to better predict future outcomes. Which is fine for predictive modeling. But it gets away from the more classic approach which tried to discover the underlying mechanism(s) behind the phenomena. Today, the emphasis seems to be more on trying to accurately predict future results. In a way it's almost like saying we've abandoned the "search for truth" and settled instead for building frameworks in order to make very highly educated guesses about things. Scary. Yes! I've been trying to explain this, but couldn't figure out how to say it. Thanks, you got it right on.
|
|
|
|
|
132
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Anything wrong with formatting a USB stick in NTFS?
|
on: December 03, 2012, 05:54:54 PM
|
 Pardon my screwup! The correct answer is format the drive in exFAT, then you can use 8 x 32Gb flash drives for ReadyBoost (the max allowed), or have the drive ready for very large files (the limit is 256Tb in size)! For drives 7Mb to 256Mb cluster size is 4K, for drives 256Mb to 32Gb its 32Kb and for drives 32 Gb to 256Tb its 128Kb. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
135
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Is the age of unlocked cell phones upon us? Pretty please??
|
on: December 03, 2012, 12:54:09 AM
|
Truthfully, I've never gotten the hate. If they subsidize so that you get a $600 phone for $200, $100, or free... well, you have to pay for it some way. I do think that they should offer unsubsidized phones along side that offer- sort of like the Kindle/Nook. But I for one would continue to get the subsidized version. I'm staying with my provider, so why should I not benefit from it.
Well, in my mind, it's many things in addition to what you are pointing out. For one, it's an awareness thing...most non-tech people are not aware that you can get unlocked phones and to figure it all out is quite a headache compared to walking into the phone store and just getting the traditional thing, which is cell phone subsidized plus contract. If they offered a no contract phone right there alongside the contract phone, it would be a different story simply due to the awareness. Then, I think more people would be inclined to get non contract phones which would affect the pricing eventually. It would mean more competition and the price of unlocked phones would go down. it would take a little control away from the big cellular companies and put more decision making opportunities into the hands of the customers. Package deals int he long run seem to benefit big companies and take opportunities away from smaller companies and customers. Normally, i'd avoid either extreme philosophically, but currently I feel like it's far too extreme in the favor of the big companies. i don't find it as nice and beneficial as, say, a package deal involving a flight and rental car.
|
|
|
|
|
138
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: clever google: httpS <--ok ad blockers, you have your hands full now
|
on: December 03, 2012, 12:19:20 AM
|
Still hoping that one day Ad muncher will some how figure out how to filter https ...
I hope not. If it does, it would totally invalidate any advantage https provides. It would totally break the security, and allow any [malevolent] access that https is supposed to provide.  Sorry. I understand your point, but I find it a little ridiculous. I'm not an "impossible" person...I totally think it's possible for https to provide the encryption advantages it has while being able to somehow intercept ads. But I've been called an idealist on more than one occasion...
|
|
|
|
|
140
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: clever google: httpS <--ok ad blockers, you have your hands full now
|
on: December 02, 2012, 02:02:28 AM
|
If Adblock+ can block it, why is the Ad Muncher developer saying he can't?
I think it's because the blockers that run as a plug-in deal with the content from inside the browser so it deals with the page from the DOM - after it's been decrypted. Ad Muncher is a proxy - it doesn't run inside the browser, so it deal with the raw HTTP stream between the browser and the server. however, that means that it can't see inside an encrypted stream. So I think for Ad Muncher to deal with HTTPS would require a fundamental change in the design of the software. Sounds to me like all they'd have to do is develop browser plugins and continue to use the same engine they currently have. I don't know how easy or hard that is to do, but a lot of other companies are able to develop browser plugins for their platforms...java, flash. I do have a problem with developers saying something "can't" be done, when really what they're saying is that they "won't" do it. Especially when there's already an example of it being done with ABP. Now, some interesting things have been happening. Firstly, ABP had some issues recently with some weird thing about not blocking certain ads that got people suspicious about their latest "updates". Also, Ad Muncher recently had trouble being honest about their pricing schemes and lifetime license issues, etc. When companies start being unclear, vague, and evasive about their latest changes and updates, that's usually a sign that things aren't going to go well for the customer in the future, and it's on us at that point to demand for alternatives or let them know we are aware of what they're trying to do. So what I'm saying is that for ABP and Ad Muncher, I don't give them the benefit of the doubt any longer. Sounds like ABP is doing ok now, Ad Muncher has been great so far, but this latest development, if it turns out to be a "can't" or "won't" situation, is going to disappoint me.
|
|
|
|
|
143
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: clever google: httpS <--ok ad blockers, you have your hands full now
|
on: December 01, 2012, 11:53:14 PM
|
Well this is not good news...straight from the developer of Ad Muncher's mouth: I guess I wasn't being clear.
It's encrypted to prevent it from being read or modified.
That includes modifying it to remove the ads.
Ad Muncher will more than likely never filter https pages. Either another company will be able to figure out how to block it, or I'll probably say goodbye to youtube for the most part. Already, i don't use it much anymore because it is quite an unpleasant experience and is only getting worse. Good job google. See ya. I hope google remembers that it took off when it offered a much more pleasant search engine than yahoo and whatever else was around at the time. Now, they are the ones making their own search and products unpleasant. And the masses may be fine with it for now...until the new google alternative arrives.
|
|
|
|
|
144
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / clever google: httpS <--ok ad blockers, you have your hands full now
|
on: December 01, 2012, 11:49:12 PM
|
|
So if you guys have noticed, google is sticking the https on all their stuff lately. First, it started with their google searches, they are now default https whether you are logged in or not. That's why you may have noticed the yellow ads at the top of your searches now, where your ad blocker would have blocked it before. Also, for the first time in however many years, I am now seeing ads on youtube. I have never seen Ad Muncher miss an add previously on youtube. And i look up, and lo and behold, the https is there.
So google is now implementing this clever little trick. So Ad Muncher, I hope you soon figure out how to block https.
|
|
|
|
|
145
|
Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Pirate Software Dilemma
|
on: December 01, 2012, 11:31:20 PM
|
|
If you were satisfied with the service that you paid for and have the trust that the company is meeting your needs, why not pay them more for the newer version? If not, don't bother getting a new version. it's not the company's fault that things move on in the world and the company has to change accordingly. Now, in your case (like, if I were you) I'd be pissed that they removed a convenient feature like portability. So i would not want to pay for it again because it tells me that they are ignoring useful features that are desired by the customer base, and instead implementing non-desired features and hyping them up to make it seem more "advanced".
This is, it seems, the proper way to prevent these companies from bullying the customer base. Over the years it seems as though it has become very easy for a company to be successful by ignoring what the users want, and that is really the opposite of what leads to a healthy economy. They use very intentional bullying tactics. When Acrobat X is hyping 3D features in the latest version, that is marketing bullying. Why? Because they remove things that users want, and they act like this 3D thing (that NOBODY uses) is a big deal and worth all these hundreds of dollars extra. They don't go out of their way to mention the things they remove. And they remove them because of copyright issues. I'm convinced now that copyright issues and usefulness of a program are practically incompatible. If a developer is trying to implement a feature and thinks about a balance between copyright stuff and usefull stuff...it won't be useful. You have to ignore copyright to make it useful. This is the catch 22 of today's marketplace. Companies want as much money as possible with as little interaction with their userbase as possible. And they are winning because users normally don't speak up, and you need a lot to speak up intentionally for the noise to be heard over the $$$$.
Why do I like a company like RightNote? They listen to the users at (supposedly) their own copyright expense. They make the users feel good. Hey, can there be a portable version? Sure, here's one a month later. Hey, is there a way for it to link to Evernote, but still use Evernote and have it sync up properly (quite a request!!)? Sure, here it is a month later. This is a company that will get repeat customers, and gladly at that.
Now let's take Evernote. Once had a snappy, portable version and everything. Not anymore. Think that pleased the hardcore users? However, it sure benefits them to move to the cloud. Not that the product is bad or anything, but the history of events made me lose my trust a little with them. They also made it harder to get the data out of evernote and into other things. So would I pay for it again? probably not, unless my back was up against the wall. And they should pay that price. But they won't because I'm in the severe minority.
Companies that remove useful features from now on get the F-U from me. because that is what they are saying to us.
|
|
|
|
|