Droid Bionics "unfixable flaw"?

[cereal killer]

at the rate I'm going I'll have the Droid 1 another year lol

I'll have mine for ever!

Sent from my GimpDroid (Installed by RZR).

Thats an awfully long time guidot. Holy smokes!

 

[mwhartman]

is that why you still have your StarTac??

i kinda miss mine...

at the rate I'm going I'll have the Droid 1 another year lol

at the rate I'm going I'll have the Droid 1 another year lol

I'll have mine for ever!

Sent from my GimpDroid (Installed by RZR).

at the rate I'm going I'll have the Droid 1 another year lol

I'll have mine for ever!

Sent from my GimpDroid (Installed by RZR).

Thats an awfully long time guidot. Holy smokes!

That makes two of us! I've been elegible for an upgrade since last October. I've not found anything that provides the freedom I have with my Droid.
I'm very glad Moto built the Droid like a "Tank"

Mike

 

[huskerkate]

good to see ya Mike!!!

 

[mwhartman]

Thanks Husker. Slow but steady for now.

 

[CellZealot]

Just another FYI. I have multiple sources for my info, but the kicker was when Winston came on and independently confirmed my statements.

 

[huskerkate]

CZ, i don't care what anyone says - i mos def'ly want to hear any other info you have, especially as we get closer to Atrix/Bionic launch! i appreciate you sharing with us, and giving me good reason to pause before making a "gotta have it now" purchase!

 

[JonKyu]

CZ, i don't care what anyone says - i mos def'ly want to hear any other info you have, especially as we get closer to Atrix/Bionic launch! i appreciate you sharing with us, and giving me good reason to pause before making a "gotta have it now" purchase!

+1 definitely gonna wait this out too.



Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

 

[Mortiel]

Mortiel what constitutes credible to you since it's subjective?

Is it an accuracy %? i.e source has 99.9% accuracy or does credibility come from actually knowing the person? What constitutes credibility for you?

There us no such thing, if we want to get philosophical... Credibility is subjective. Subjective means its a fabrication of our conscience, and fabrication, when put into a context with credibility, is rendered a paradox, since fabrication is seen as a synonym to falsehood.

However, my own vision of credibility is what I can personally conceive through logical interpretation of sensory input. This, I should add, is also notably fallible.

Answer your question?

Device: Samsung SCH-I400 Continuum

Yippee SKIPPY!!!! Someone wants to play with words.

Lets play :icon_ devil:

Credibility is a measurement of one or more person's perception of another persons presentation of either shared, and agreed upon, facts or individual perception of an event in their life.

There is no fabrication involved. Perception, by definition, is each persons take on a set of events that has occurred. If enough people agree on the conditions of the perception it becomes a shared event that is then considered fact within that group. If this event is repeated enough times that a very large group shares this common perception it is the elevated to the status of permanent fact. IE the Sun.

The only fallibility that can occur is thru one of four conditions.
1) The person relays the perception incorrectly with malice. IE lies.
2) The person relays the perception of a staged set of events. IE fooled.
3) The person relays the perception without providing all the details. IE forgets.
4) The person relays the perception without seeing the complete event.

The first and second are of malicious intent. One being controllable and the other not. The third and forth are the ones that causes the most confusion for a group of people. Because when the event repeats itself, the regained information for the perception puts doubt on the original perception. This can usually be resolved thru a group discussion. IE 7 witnesses to the same event filling in all the details and another group verifying the accounts until fully reconciled.

So there is such a thing as creditability. The reason for that is simple and I will provide the best example possible.

Creditability - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

The word and its definition is perceived by everyone reading this as fact.

So much for "There us (sic) no such thing".

Mate, you grossly overcomplicate simple truths.

Firstly, truth/lie is a human created morality. Deception is not. Credibility, as I said, is another human fabricated idea to support the moral concept of truth. Yes, there always will be fabrication. The electronic impulses in you brain render, or fabricate, images with no sensory input. We call this "imagination", which chemically has no difference to our brain as "credibility" or "morality". In other words, credibility, in its core, is fabricate by human conscience.

You quote and cite the dictionary, which is know to be completely a human fabrication.

You make it very clear that credibility is based upon, essentially what the majority agrees upon. You know another couple of words that could fall under the same lines? Trend, popular, and style. All are similar fabrications of the humanity.

Yes, all fabrications. You intelligently wrote a rebuttal that was, admittedly, more complete than mine.

Unfortunately it just ended up agreeing with me.

EDIT: Making fun of my swype-typo... Its too easy. "Swypos" I will call them!

Device: Samsung SCH-I400 Continuum

 

[Preach2k]

I'm all for getting information on devices well ahead of time. Better to be a well informed consumer. But thats just me : )

I'd rather pass on a device or wait than jump on it right away and deal with issues.

I will not get this device right away!!! I learned that the hard way with the Storm 1... I will wait at least a month after the release to see what problems come up.. If it has a lot of problems then I will make another choice.

Oh man Preach I feel REALLY bad for you : ) Storm 1

You probably get cold sweats anytime you buy new tech now lol

Tell me about it I gave up my DX to my wife to get the Bionic!!! Now I have her Storm 1 and it is driving me nuts...

 

[dbuglio]

And it looks like the quote from the other person on HoFo doesn't have enough knowledge or education to correctly use a keyboard, let alone a development phone.

If you go to Howard Forums click on his name and click view posts it should let you go back and see all his posts. Look at what he says and look at the dates and see how he's given accurate info before it was announced time after time.

I just did, I see nothing that shows me xbernaut is a insider, few for sale threads, few asking what is the best xxxx I can find. One that he said he will be helping test verizon toshiba phones. I find him highly suspect.

 

[Skull One]

Mate, you grossly overcomplicate simple truths.

Firstly, truth/lie is a human created morality. Deception is not. Credibility, as I said, is another human fabricated idea to support the moral concept of truth. Yes, there always will be fabrication. The electronic impulses in you brain render, or fabricate, images with no sensory input. We call this "imagination", which chemically has no difference to our brain as "credibility" or "morality". In other words, credibility, in its core, is fabricate by human conscience.

You quote and cite the dictionary, which is know to be completely a human fabrication.

You make it very clear that credibility is based upon, essentially what the majority agrees upon. You know another couple of words that could fall under the same lines? Trend, popular, and style. All are similar fabrications of the humanity.

Yes, all fabrications. You intelligently wrote a rebuttal that was, admittedly, more complete than mine.

Unfortunately it just ended up agreeing with me.

EDIT: Making fun of my swype-typo... Its too easy. "Swypos" I will call them!

Device: Samsung SCH-I400 Continuum

I don't agree with you in any respect and neither did my post. Your definition of the human race might as well be "We make stuff up, so why does any of it matter?".

It is a shame you are trying to define us in a way that makes our experiences in life pointless. I am not pointless. My perception of the world is not pointless.

I was once asked "Prove you exist". My answer was very quick and to the point.

Yesterday I perceived the sun rising. My wife shared that perception. My friends also perceived it. This perception has now reached the level of a group consensus and was deemed a fact. I relayed this perception to other people. They perceived my perception as credible because they perceived the same event at the same time I did. We now have a confirmed fact by members outside my group. Those people continued to share this perception and in that sharing discovered many others had the same perception. Six billion people shared that perception yesterday. It was a fact beyond dispute. My credibility was confirmed by the entire human race. I exist.


You can try to defend your position all you want by using the word fabrication. But here is something you have not considered and where you argument implodes on itself. The word fabrication and its definition is a FACT. You have used this word in a CREDIBLE manner albeit in a very poor argument. No one will dispute this perception.

The reality is, you have shown your point as unsustainable. You can't use the English language to defend yourself when the very fact that everyone's perception of the words used are the same and we all consider dictionaries as credible.

 

[Mortiel]

Mate, you grossly overcomplicate simple truths.

Firstly, truth/lie is a human created morality. Deception is not. Credibility, as I said, is another human fabricated idea to support the moral concept of truth. Yes, there always will be fabrication. The electronic impulses in you brain render, or fabricate, images with no sensory input. We call this "imagination", which chemically has no difference to our brain as "credibility" or "morality". In other words, credibility, in its core, is fabricate by human conscience.

You quote and cite the dictionary, which is know to be completely a human fabrication.

You make it very clear that credibility is based upon, essentially what the majority agrees upon. You know another couple of words that could fall under the same lines? Trend, popular, and style. All are similar fabrications of the humanity.

Yes, all fabrications. You intelligently wrote a rebuttal that was, admittedly, more complete than mine.

Unfortunately it just ended up agreeing with me.

EDIT: Making fun of my swype-typo... Its too easy. "Swypos" I will call them!

Device: Samsung SCH-I400 Continuum

I don't agree with you in any respect and neither did my post. Your definition of the human race might as well be "We make stuff up, so why does any of it matter?".

It is a shame you are trying to define us in a way that makes our experiences in life pointless. I am not pointless. My perception of the world is not pointless.

I was once asked "Prove you exist". My answer was very quick and to the point.

Yesterday I perceived the sun rising. My wife shared that perception. My friends also perceived it. This perception has now reached the level of a group consensus and was deemed a fact. I relayed this perception to other people. They perceived my perception as credible because they perceived the same event at the same time I did. We now have a confirmed fact by members outside my group. Those people continued to share this perception and in that sharing discovered many others had the same perception. Six billion people shared that perception yesterday. It was a fact beyond dispute. My credibility was confirmed by the entire human race. I exist.


You can try to defend your position all you want by using the word fabrication. But here is something you have not considered and where you argument implodes on itself. The word fabrication and its definition is a FACT. You have used this word in a CREDIBLE manner albeit in a very poor argument. No one will dispute this perception.

The reality is, you have shown your point as unsustainable. You can't use the English language to defend yourself when the very fact that everyone's perception of the words used are the same and we all consider dictionaries as credible.

Actually, your arguing with me that 6 billion people either saw the sun rise or confirm you exist is a rather ridiculous notion.

Aside, when did I say that nothing matters/has meaning because everything is all seen the way it is due to a culmination of subjective associations? Quite the contrary. I believe that is why things are so beautiful. All because you and I interpret sensory and non-sensory input differently.

I am of the belief that accepting so-called "fact" because the majority agrees upon it is stupidity at its worst. If we all stayed with what everyone agreed was fact, the Earth would still be the center of the universe and be flat.

Yes, dictionaries are considered to be credible, but why? A group consensus agreed this is what the vast majority of the world agreed those words meant. Fair enough, but why should we choose to be limited by what others decide? So maybe I want to use the word fabrication to refer to truth? Am I not "allowed" because Webster is more "credible" than I? I think Shakespeare would agree with me there.

You perceive my argument to be about what a word means or doesn't mean. What human existence means or doesn't mean. Actually my argument, from the beginning, has been than you should not limit your thought to what you logically ascertain as truth from the consensus.

Credibility, in my perception, is yet another thing which limits the vastness of human thought. Why do you have to be credible to exist? You will still invariably exist, regardless of credibility, fabrication, or dictionaries. Why do you need confirmation from anyone else that your perception is credible?

Argue all you want about you being right and me being wrong, and I will simply look at you and say, why does one have to be right or wrong? Why can my perception not differ from yours?

But to keep the debate rolling, because I am rather enjoying this...Regardless of you arguing about credibility existing and me arguing that credibility limits you, you will likely come back with a rebuttal to discredit my statement. But here is the real question: how do you prove to me that I am not credible if I do not believe in credibility?

 

[pc747]

Please stay on topic....

the topic is unfixable flaw.

 

[Skull One]

But here is the real question: how do you prove to me that I am not credible if I do not believe in credibility?

No one has to prove you are not credible. The individual only has to decide if they perceive you as such.

And my point was never to say you as a person were wrong. Only that your assertion that creditability did not exist was incorrect and that your supporting arguments to defend your assertion lacked the ability to be sustained as fact.

Please don't confuse my ability to debate as a personal attack. That would be the farthest thing from the truth. I simply used an interesting point of view to show how and why creditability is credible.

 

[wingdo]

I am of the belief that accepting so-called "fact" because the majority agrees upon it is stupidity at its worst. If we all stayed with what everyone agreed was fact, the Earth would still be the center of the universe and be flat.

Whoa there spanky. What's up with this not flat and not the center of the universe thing?