Comment

Where did you get icons? I like the look of those.

17 days ago on Post your homescreen! 1 reply 1 recommend

Comment

Without questioning your math (b/c I can’t be arsed to double check) wouldn’t the proper conclusion be just that Android users spend less on apps? Not that they may be spending less on apps OR only 1 out of 10 of them are buying apps and the other 9 do not – what reason do you have to believe that latter option is really a possibility?

The distinction is important b/c in the context of this thread of comments I don’t think I’ve seen anyone argue yet that it’s BS to say iOS users spend more on apps. Only that it’s BS to say that Android users generally don’t spend money on apps at all. They are two different claims.

20 days ago on A civil war seems to be going on within android.

Comment

Yes, Android as a whole has higher market share than any other OS, but what good is that doing Android OEM’s not named Samsung?

They have access to the same platform, and without it their options are windows phone or developing their own platform and trying to compete with that. Assuming the latter is impractical, if the other Android OEMs are making more money from selling their Android phones than their Windows phones (which I’m assuming is the case) is that not good being done for them?

You talk in the context of bullying but these are all businesses. I don’t think it’s about enabling or blaming a company for finding success. These other OEMs have to look at where they went wrong, and fix those mistakes/do better going forward so they can properly compete and hopefully spur on better competition from Samsung as well. Like Ti02 alluded to, this was probably the main premise behind Android.

22 days ago on A civil war seems to be going on within android.

Comment

The only lights I’ve seen effected by IR have been lights hooked up to a touch sensitive switch that had a remote as well. I used to be able to aim the tv remote near one of these and turn the lights on and off but I’m not sure that should be a problem in this application. For 1) doing that did require aiming the remote at the switch, and 2) all buttons on the TV remote involve use of the IR blaster – presumably these are set up so that certain apps would interface with the blaster. It’s not like texting should result in TV and lights randomly turning off and on.

I’ve seen an adapter like that you’e described from Redeye (their mini) but I’m not sure how that could be considered a better option. It’s one more thing to keep track of / lose and is ultimately a plug you’re paying I think like $40 bucks for sticking out of your phone tablet, vs. something built in for a negligible cost.

24 days ago on Back from the dead: why do 2013's best smartphones have IR blasters?

Comment

How much did the iTach IR blaster cost? Looking at Roomie’s page it seems most of the gear they sell costs nearly $100 a pop. Considering that the blaster in the phone really should not add much to the cost (consider the cost of replacement remotes) would not be preferable to have that capability built into phone instead of having to buy / set up a second another piece of equipment?

24 days ago on Back from the dead: why do 2013's best smartphones have IR blasters? 1 reply

Comment

This LINK has photos of the younger brother both at the gas station (hood up) and ATM (beige cap on). You should make sure you’re not confusing not having seen evidence for yourself with it not existing. Especially since most of this stuff is part of an ongoing investigation that is more concerned with getting answers and a conviction than assailing the doubts of skeptics ahead of any trial.

And in general, if something seems odd you should ask why is that and consider the alternatives (assuming you’re not just trying to rationalize a foregone conclusion). Consider what you said about the guy parking on the side of the road for no reason? 1) why assume he had no reason? Is it possible that investigators/reporters just didn’t think that was important to ask or report about compared to info about the carjacking and suspects? 2) what’s actually so odd about it? I know I’ve done that more than once looking up directions, places to get some late night food, waiting for someone, or just making a call.

24 days ago on They're watching: why city-wide surveillance failed to stop the Boston bombing 1 reply 2 recommends

Comment

I think part of the idea is that if you’re pushing content from your phone to your TV then you don’t necessarily want to switch back and forth between the phone and tv remote for different functions (ex: turn the volume up on the tv, rewind the video on the remote).

25 days ago on Back from the dead: why do 2013's best smartphones have IR blasters? 1 recommend

Comment

I don’t necessarily disagree with you to the point that I’d want to get into a big debate but I was curious about your comment and so tried a quick search. ACLU has a page on what’s wrong with public video surveillance here that includes some examples of how it has hurt people.

25 days ago on They're watching: why city-wide surveillance failed to stop the Boston bombing

Comment

Is there not also the chance though that a would be bomber would look at this event and it’s outcome and think that if they’re going to get apprehended/eliminated anyways, that they may as well go for a plan that causes greater damage but includes their own death?

I mean, the older brother was said to have charged at police with a bomb strapped to his chest. I think that shows he was willing to die for his convictions… if he knew it would end like that, what’s to say that instead of running at police that are shooting at him he wouldn’t instead opt to have strapped a bomb on him at the marathon and charge at a crowd of people rushing to help the injured?

I think a lot of times people who will do these kind of things have already committed to the idea of “dying for their cause”. These people are dangerous b/c they have nothing to lose when they’re willing to give up their life. Thinking that the idea that these actions will definitely result in death or lifetime incarceration will dissuade them seems illogical to me.

25 days ago on They're watching: why city-wide surveillance failed to stop the Boston bombing

Comment

http://www.wmur.com/news/nh-news/Suspected-bombers-carjacking-victim-says-he-s-lucky-to-be-alive/-/9857858/19851310/-/20gftnz/-/index.html

That was the report that seems to be the source for that quote. The reporter starts off saying that he did talk directly to him and there is some other info there that was not in the court document.

I’m doubting any CCTV footage will be made public before the trial. Apparently though, that guy that had his legs blown off did try to describe the bomber as soon as he was able to talk. If I remember correctly I think he said he saw a guy with glasses and hat drop the bag. That description in itself doesn’t help much but he should be able to confirm that a picture of one of the brothers that day matches the guy he was trying to describe if any journalists think/thought to ask him.

25 days ago on They're watching: why city-wide surveillance failed to stop the Boston bombing 1 reply 1 recommend

Comment

Can you point out where “gun shot wound straight down their throat” came from? And if it’s your own colouring of the situation can you not see how that’s twisting things in a certain direction?

But the facts are 1) the kid is alive… not sure how common an outcome that is from “a gunshot wound to [the] neck” (<— ie: the actual quote) so my guess offhand is that the wound was not fatal. 2) the criminal complaint against him cited that “He had visible injuries, including apparent gunshot wounds to the head, neck, legs, and hand.” So chances are he did in fact have a wound on his neck despite your expert analysis of that stunningly clear photo.

You got to remember that’s a signed statement on a legal document that will see scrutiny from defense lawyers (b/c you know, ultimately the kid is alive and being tried as a civilian) and probably the media & public. And it’s easily confirmed or denied by the medical reports. I don’t believe he had an injury to the throat b/c the media said so, I believe it b/c it was stated as a contestable fact as part of a legal case.

How the wound came about is another question but ultimately you asked for reports as to whether he had any weapons with him or fired any shots. I provided one that suggested he did have weapons with him on the boat and that he may have fired at least one shot from the boat even if it was at himself. What you do with that info is your choice, but if you want to claim that he didn’t have a weapon or fired any rounds it will be contrary to the report linked.

26 days ago on Sympathy for the devil: #freejahar spreads across Twitter as Boston bombing suspect charged 1 reply

Comment

I’m saying they did not go there with the intent of killing him, their directive was almost certainly to take him alive if possible and that unloading onto the boat was most likely in reaction to something Dzhokhar did…ie: they were trying to prevent further death/injury of innocents, not them handing out a death sentence for suspected crimes as you seemed to be suggesting. Your original statement was “They tried to kill this kid, no judge, no jury , no trial”, asking if that was due process as though the cops were taking the place of the rest of the legal system.

Let me ask, if Dzhokhar fired off a round do you think the police would be wrong to open/return fire in an attempt to stop Dzhokhar before he shot an officer or civilian?

26 days ago on Sympathy for the devil: #freejahar spreads across Twitter as Boston bombing suspect charged

Comment

That’s true, but I also don’t think I implied that you did. You did however question the lack of credibility given to the parents that were advocating their innocence and continued to then suggest we question reports that would further implicate the brothers. I don’t think it’s unfair to call you out on that. It sounds like saying, “why not believe this source” and “why are you believing that source”. That’s not exactly how truth works out… everything deserves scrutiny. To that end I’m all for moderation but looking just at what has been presented so far as part of the court filings in this case, it’s all pretty damning of the brothers.

26 days ago on Sympathy for the devil: #freejahar spreads across Twitter as Boston bombing suspect charged

Comment

So just to be clear here, assuming this kid is guilty = not ok, but assuming the cops on the scene were in fact attempting to kill this kid = ok? Do you not see the problem with your logic there?

But lets be honest here, at this point this kid was a prime suspect for the bombings at the marathon. Even putting that aside he was at least an accomplice to the hijacking, kidnapping and robbery of the SUV owner, a police chase and fire fight including IEDs in a residential area which reportedly ended with injured officers and Dzhokhar attempting to run down the officers apprehending his brother. It’s fair to think that police should have done all in their power to take him alive (and I’ll remind you that currently he is in a hospital bed and not a coffin) but you can not expect them to put his safety ahead of their own or potential bystanders. He himself gave them plenty of reason to assume the worst.

As to reports re: whether he had a weapon him, a quick search turned up this article from the NY Times LINK

The authorities said they believed that he had tried to kill himself, because a gunshot wound to his neck “had the appearance of a close-range, self-inflicted style,” the senior United States official said.

The authorities found an M-4 carbine rifle — a weapon similar to ones used by American forces in Afghanistan — on the boat where the younger suspect was found Friday night in Watertown, Mass.

26 days ago on Sympathy for the devil: #freejahar spreads across Twitter as Boston bombing suspect charged 2 replies

Comment

To answer one of your questions, from that link;

“declared to [the victim] that they were the Boston Marathon bombers and would not kill him because he wasn’t American,”

Apparently a few media outlets have interviewed him and you can be sure the police took a statement already.

Also, while I linked to a news report the car jacking was briefly outlined in the court documents filed, which presumably should carry more weight LINK (paragraphs 19-21). In case you opt to not read it, let me point out that it affirms that one of them identified themselves as the person responsible for the Boston explosion and that the owner of the SUV did indeed flee when they got out of the car at the gas station.

The man pointed a firearm at the victim and stated, “Did you hear about the Boston explosion?” and “I did that.” The man removed the magazine from his gun and showed the victim
that it had a bullet in it, and then re-inserted the magazine. The man then stated, “I am serious.”

The two men and the victim then drove to a gas station/convenience store in the
vicinity of816 Memorial Drive, Cambridge. The two men got out of the car, at which point the
victim managed to escape.

Presumably he signed off on a police statement / will be expected to testify to that effect while under oath when this goes to trial.

And to come back to your question… Even if we assume that the didn’t kill him b/c he wasn’t American thing is false, Is it a compromise to their security to kill a potential hostage? When he fled, did they have a chance to really stop him? Would it better serve their purpose to dash after a guy or fire shots at a gas station when they’re presumably trying to be as low profile as possible? It’s not as absurd as you think… incompetent maybe, absurd.. not really.

Also I think it has to be pointed out that it’s funny how your first response was that these reports should be taken with a grain of salt when this was a reply to how you were apparently arguing that the family’s claims should be given more weight. You can’t pick and chose what to believe as it suits your arguement.

27 days ago on Sympathy for the devil: #freejahar spreads across Twitter as Boston bombing suspect charged 2 replies

Comment

I think you’re missing that elation is probably a justified response when someone commits a terrorist act and the remaining person suspected as responsible for that act is taken into custody alive / with out further blood shed after a violent night of chase?

I’d be more worried about people calling for torture or death before due process than people that were happy / proud when the remaining suspect got taken in. Especially given that regardless of their involvement in marathon bombings these brothers were at the centre of two fire fights in residential areas that day.

27 days ago on Sympathy for the devil: #freejahar spreads across Twitter as Boston bombing suspect charged 1 reply

Comment

Out of curiosity, what’s your response to reports that the brothers admitted to being behind the bombs to the owner of the SUV?

Here’s one source I found quickly

27 days ago on Sympathy for the devil: #freejahar spreads across Twitter as Boston bombing suspect charged 1 reply