Xlythe

A phenomena is the summation of several causes. Even if gravity is a phenomena, there are still the causes for it to look for. And if it's not, well then we still have to find the single cause. We don't even have that.

What strikes me as odd is that entropy dictates things eventually break away from each other while gravity pulls things closer. The two are at odds with each other. And that entropy is a phenomena itself.

The way I'm most comfortable programming is a sort of head-first approach. You have a feature you need and an idea of how to design it and then you just start writing. It should compile at any time (within reason), and you'll see the bits and pieces of your feature come to life. You'll catch bugs quickly because you won't have written much at any one time.

It's usually messier, though. An hour of just cleaning the code really helps as I always end up with a method that should have been broken up into 2 or more.

The lines between a name and the meaning behind that name are blurred too often. Often in school, when studying or help was needed, I'd hear students proudly proclaiming that "that's the x principle" and then go on and write down a condensed formula for it. They wouldn't know how the formula was derived, but knew that there was a very specific formula for the "x principle" and that that was it.

I have trouble, because I'm not arguing that names are unimportant. They are necessary, they condense complicated subjects into simple words and give a common ground for discussion. But I once had a probabilities teacher who wrote down seven names for what were essentially 2 formulas (Just written in different ways). There was a quick 5 minute lecture on how to get a specific formula (usually, though sometimes none was given), but the the emphasis was on what the formula was called and when exactly to use it. Maybe I missed the point of the course, it was just a first year probabilities course, and the goal was to ingrain those 7 terms into our brains for the more complicated subjects. But there was so much more behind those equations and how they were derived. By the end of the class, I felt cheated. It was a foreign language class, not a math class.

In exchange for less regulations, the FCC had private companies build out fiber networks in the 1990's. Most of it was never used, though, as companies instead focused on increasing bandwidth in copper wiring.

This would put a large amount of money in the hands of a small group of people. Money that isn't theirs, yet they get to decide where it goes. If the payout justifies it, corporations will hire lobbyists or set up backroom deals. There will be a huge influx in demand for essentially free money, meaning the paperwork to go through will be enormous. Shell Corporations that meet the requirements will sign up in addition to their actual corporation. And by setting minimum requirements (Especially 10yrs, 100workers), you end up targeting corporations who already have money in the bank. It's the uprising corporations that spend their revenue on expansion, that take out loans to rent a bigger office.

Job creation for the sake of jobs is wasteful. And these are crummy jobs being replaced by robots; just look at the suicide rates. Regardless, robots still need to be maintained, they increase energy consumption, and they lower costs. Workers will be needed. Just elsewhere.

The wealth goes to the people creating the robots and the people maintaining the robots.

Automation is a great thing. I'm still waiting for an economic model to be put into place where (decent) food, shelter, and health insurance are provided free of cost because of automation. The necessity of having a job is so ingrained into our culture, I want to see what it'd be like when it's entirely optional.

It has more to do with the atmosphere than ad targeting. Pseudo names, screen names, random characters that can't always be pronounced scare away people who don't spend much time online. In most social settings, it's common for people to share names, for it to be pronounceable, and for it to be familiar. Like the "Trash" icon being where you dump your unwanted files, or the "Magnifying Glass" being where you search, you want users to feel familiar with your product. Google+ is pruning away a bit of the geek subculture so it doesn't become a huge majority and scare away a much larger crowd.

If Google+ ever becomes a household name, there'll be much less emphasis on real names. The risk of a super majority on Google+ by a minority in the real world will be gone.

By that logic, when China comes to claim its debt, whoever we borrow from then to pay off China is who owns the US. Since ultimately we're going to pay it off (maybe in decades, but eventually), we're always the last in line and thus the "owner". No, we have to look at who we owe money to now and assume we won't be able to pay it off. The game is too circular otherwise.

The OS constantly nags you if you're without a SIM card. You're either reminded you have no signal or you're reminded you're in airplane mode (The signal icon on the notification bar becomes useless. There are messages in the notification dropdown and on the lockscreen.)

If WiFi calling were native, support would be built in to turn off these reminders. Connectivity could be displayed where signal is, instead of adding another icon to the notification bar. The app could be moved to the system partition (Coming from a Nexus One, app space was hard to come by. GrooVe IP hates being a system app and you can't move it to the SD card w/o it not starting at startup).

I've bought GrooVe IP, I just feel like a native approach could work better.

Still waiting for them to officially roll internet calling out to Android. There's built in SIP support, but nothing that easily ties in to Google Voice. And there's GrooVe IP, which definitely works well, but it's not native.

They added tethering and apps2sd despite the opposition.

Perhaps not, but after working for an advertising company the two overlap greatly.

As a student, I have no complaints about weekly quizzes. I attend university because it gives a structured environment to learn new material and quizzes help keep me focused on what I know and what I only think I know. But extending the time it takes to finish graded homework assignments? It's a waste of my time. I'd rather relax, work at a part-time job, learn a new programming language, or work on some project. Busywork is not why I decided to go to university; the internet provides a free avenue to learn everything I would in university (undergraduate). I pay for the classes, the structure.

(Clarifications. To stay enrolled, I have to maintain high grades, which means homework is an obligation. And yes, I have other motives for attending uni beyond someone telling me what I should learn next. There's the value of a degree outshining being self-taught and how close to 99% of students from my highschool take higher education. University is part of the culture here.)

No, but even sites that do sell generic ad space have ads they don't want shown (Porn, competitors, things that would reduce the brand name).

The article was advocating for something more back and forth, like a chatroom or forum, rather than a newsfeed.

With Google+ just starting out (even at 10m users), there's already a feeling of exclusivity and community. Groups would definitely help keep that feeling going as Google+ goes public, though, as long as it's implemented right. With public circles, groups, tags, etc being advocated, I hope the simplicity of Google+ isn't lost.

At least manufacturers are starting to open up their hardware. Samsung has open sourced its drivers (SG2), Motorola is unlocking its bootloaders (Atrix), and HTC has promised to open their bootloaders for future devices (Sensation in August, future phones to be announced). Google has also recommended manufacturers support their phones up to 18 months after release, though I'm not sure how much weight that message will carry. Even if you'd rather stay away from community updates, it's nice to be given the option.