That's good news - the headphone jack is essential to me, but the reason that my next phone won't be a Samsung is because Samsung disables Android's native multiple user profile feature.
And they insist on adding their garbage replacement apps instead of just using the stock Android ones. I never understood why mfgs insist on doing that. Why make a worse app that can't be uninstalled?
There is a rootless app that you can install that lets you uninstall the bloatware samsung apps. Can't remember the name of it but it isn't hard to find.
The majority of the English like strong, essentially unopposed governance. They like be to be able to choose the g'vner occasionally, but they don't want multiple powerful factions.
English maybe, but the rest of the UK has different electoral systems and different popular parties.
And I'm not even sure it's the English public asking for this. Are people really going to say they'd rather a strong government they disagree with than a marginal one that's forced to negotiate for support? No, I think it's English conservatives who have trouble with the concept of loyal opposition and the English press in particular who hate anything that would make politics less of a binary choice.
I think that the majority of the country is generally less comfortable with the idea of coalitions/minority governments/power sharing than many other parliamentary democracies where those things happen more regularly.
Consider the run-up to the 2015 GE when it looked like Labour/Lib Dems/SNP might be able to form a majority coalition even though the Conservatives were likely to be the largest party - there was a lot of sneering at the idea of a "coalition of the losers". That circumstance arises quite frequently and is largely accepted in many other countries, as can be seen from the results of Denmark's recent elections.
Well the LibDems are going to say that but they are not going to win. The other two parties aren't - Labour is going split in half. The Tories might see defections, but will stay together and press ahead with Brexit in the hope of a massive majority.
Agreed, I think Tim Farron was right on point strategy-wise to come out and immediately, unequivocally say that a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote to stay in.
It's just not going to sway nearly enough people to win a majority, and the Tories know that.
True, but if the LibDems can pull enough Blairites away from Corbyn and urban Tories away from May it will give the LibDems a core that they can move forward with. (I don't think they have a hope in hell of actually even getting enough MPs to play kingmakers, but they may be aiming to simply supplant Labour as the opposition party...)
The trouble is, the Lib Dems under Farron have essentially become a single-issue party.
That decision potentially alienates about 1/3 of their previous voter base who voted to Leave, as well as those who did want to Remain but either don't believe in overriding a popular referendum on democratic principles or don't feel strongly enough on the issue to disrupt things further.
Given that we're talking about the Lib Dems here, all of those could be significant groups. It's quite a gamble to bet your whole political strategy on attracting enough voters from other parties because they feel so strongly on Europe, and according to recent polling, it looks like it's a gamble that is going to fail unspectacularly.
Thinking about this more I am convinced Farron is on the right track. The leave/remain issue gives the LibDems an opening to expand and they should take it, there is no future in being 'not nasty enough to vote Tory but not dumb enough to vote Labour' and if both parties are willing to surrender an issue that at one point had the support of 48% of the country (and concentrated in a few areas to make campaigning easier) then you go for it.
Without such a gamble the LibDems will remain in the also-ran group with UKIP and the Greens. You push any issue that gives you a wedge and use it to crack a few ridings and if necessary you write off the 1/3 in the hope of picking up 2/5 of the two larger parties.
I don't think it alienates any of their base. The Lib Dems have always been hugely pro-Europe, I doubt that anyone who voted Leave would have been a supporter in the first place.
FWIW, I know from immediate personal contacts that it does, and not in entirely trivial numbers. I'm in one of the most pro-Remain areas of the country, but also a LD/Lab marginal, so it will be interesting to see what happens as a result. I suspect it won't make much difference here, but if the same effect is evident in more moderate parts of the country, it could actually hurt them.
Sorry to reply twice; I can't edit my previous comment any more.
It looks like there's been another poll today that is consistent with what I've seen reported previously: about 1/3 of Lib Dem voters at the last election voted Leave in the referendum, and currently Lib Dem loyalty is lowest among the major parties, with a similar proportion of Lib Dem voters at the last election expecting to vote for someone else at the next one.
I don't have numbers in front of me, but I also can't think of a riding where the LibDems were within 5% last election that voted Leave. IMHO the odds seem better if the LibDems can claim "Remain if possible, soft Brexit if not" when it comes to picking up Tory and Labour seats.
It's mostly done for economic reasons, but there is a social aspect to sharing too. More so on couchsurfing than airbnb, and i generally prefer to chat to a part time uber driver than to a full time taxi driver.
You can get high on carbs or alcohol sure enough. Try getting high on protein or fat though.
Telling carboholics they need to eat less food is like telling alcoholics they need to drink less liquid. It doesn't work - you've got to be more specific.
It's complicated. If I gave an obese person a bag of sugar or a kilo of lard she probably wouldn't enjoy these things. On the other hand some folk can eat luxury foods regularly without ill effect. It depends on personality and intent as much as upon specific foodstuffs and substances.
And are you sure about protein? Personally I experience a strong desire for meat if I haven't had any for a few days. The fulfillment of that desire creates a visceral pleasure. Furthermore I can't imagine giving up apparently innocuous items like tomatoes, either. For a few months perhaps but after a few years I'm sure I would pine at the memory of fresh juicy tomatoes.
If you go keto/atkins/etc for a while you get sick of meat. At least I have. It becomes tedious to eat and my portion sizes have dropped. I end up eating more vegetables than I ever did before, and take more pleasure from them.
There's certainly some combination of psychology and physiology at play here. There are many nutrients we need that we can't get without a suitably diverse diet, so we're hardwired to seek out variety. Even people who are starving or constantly on the edge will get tired of having a diet that doesn't include much variety.
My father loves to talk about how he can eat the same thing every day, but whenever I visit, he's very quick to suggest going out to eat. He obviously gets tired of eating the same thing over and over, but he doesn't want to deviate too much from his routine since it helps keep him from regaining weight.
I know I'm starting to crave a steak - it's been a few weeks, and normally I would have steak and potatoes on Sundays as a treat after an extra-long workout.
Yup, some folks can have the occasional drink or drink socially. Some folks need to swear off the stuff entirely. For carboholics, probably swearing off refined carbs would be enough.
I'm enthusiastic about the potential for this technology but I don't like either of these options. I feel like both the customer and the product. I'd like an open source, neutral voice assistant that is working for me, not trying to exploit me.
I stumbled upon kalliope recently (https://github.com/kalliope-project/kalliope). I tried it a few weeks ago and was pleased with it in general but it still needed an online connection in order to parse your commands. According to the changelog they added the option for an offline STT recognition now.
Neither of those options is very scriptable either. They just kinda suck. None of them have any compatibility with actually used home automation ("computer ! lights !" is actually useful). You're right. We need an assistant that's just a piece of software. Paid for, working for me, not caring which messenger it has to use.
Yup. I'm not really going to be interested in this landscape until i can get a full NLP / Intent Recognition / Voice Transcripting package in my home, completely offline.
I'm not even paranoid about the NSA/etc either, i'm paranoid about a potential 3rd party listening in and knowing when to rob my home, or viewing my family through the IP camera, etcetc.
I want a smart home. I don't want an internet connected smart home. It's simply too dangerous.
I'm sitting here with my keyboard in my lap. I've recently noticed it is a lot more comfortable too. I'm alternating with keyboard on lap to mouse on lap depending on what I'm doing.
This hands at lap level seems crucial, I don't know how I've missed it for so long. However a laptop doesn't strike me as ideal unless coupled with a monitor at eye level as I'd be looking down constantly.
If, at 5'10, I am experiencing problems related to desk height, I can only imagine problems are worse for those shorter. I wonder if there is a correlation between height and these kind of problems. Standard desk height seems to be designed for someone who is 6'2.
I was considering adding a keyboard tray, but I'm thinking that I mostly use my desk for a keyboard and mouse, I might as well optimize the desk for that use rather than having an add-on for that purpose.
Yeah. Keyboard trays also tend to feel cramped once you add a mouse.
I wonder whether the desk height issue has to do with changes in work? It may be that when desk work mostly involved reading and writing papers (I sort of picture someone leaning over their desk to be closer to the paper), a higher surface was more ergonomic. And then nobody thought to change the default because the transition to computer dominated work was so gradual and unrelated to office furniture replacement cycles?
Probably something to do with the market supplying what the customer wants, and the customer being uneducated. Like me . . . If I had seen a 26 inch high desk when I was purchasing the thing, I probably would have passed on it . . would have thought it too low at the time.
