Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #57794

Re: charging policy

From "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk>
Newsgroups comp.mobile.android
Subject Re: charging policy
Date 2018-11-22 21:26 +0000
Organization 255 software
Message-ID <v7Vb5OUX8x9bFwoL@255soft.uk> (permalink)
References (4 earlier) <221120180150118477%nospam@nospam.invalid> <WwElr2JSbt9bFwPQ@255soft.uk> <221120181157503404%nospam@nospam.invalid> <pCzKXLONbu9bFw6F@255soft.uk> <221120181254418054%nospam@nospam.invalid>

Show all headers | View raw

In message <221120181254418054%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam 
<nospam@nospam.invalid> writes:
>In article <pCzKXLONbu9bFw6F@255soft.uk>, J. P. Gilliver (John)
><G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>> >> >tl;dr use the device normally and don't worry about it.
>> >>
>> >> Define "normally". (For example, is a laptop that is normally connected
>> >> to the mains "normal"? I suspect that for a lot of people, it is.)
>> >
>> >some might, but most people buy laptops for portability. if they're
>> >going to leave it plugged in all the time, they would be better served
>> >with a desktop.
>>
>> I doubt it; these days, people who want portability buy a tablet.
>
>tablets are a different use case than laptops. one does not replace the
>other. there is some overlap, but they are optimized for different
>tasks.

Agreed.
>
>> A lot
>> of households, also, don't want a "computer" taking up space in the
>> living room or whatever, but will tolerate (I'm thinking of partners
>> here - and not _necessarily_ female ones, either) the computer
>> user/addict using a laptop. Those who have an "office", where it's part
>> of a business, are a different matter - though a lot of even businessmen
>> use laptops too - but plug them in when they can.
>
>in other words, portability.

You have omitted the tidiness/concealability factor.
[]
>> When I see it, I think it means "I CBA to read through what you've just
>> said/typed". If you meant to apply it to an explanation _you've_ just
>> given, then some other expression is required - "to cut a long story
>> short", for example, or if that's too long, "in short". "Tl;dr" isn't
>> appropriate for your _own_ words. (And it _is_ critical: the "t" is
>> negative. "L;dr" would be less so.)
>
>cut a long story short is what tl;dr means. it's a quick summary.

We have picked up on different meanings. You have picked up on "too 
long, don't read" - in other words, I've just written a long 
explanation, but if you want a shorter version, here it is. I've picked 
up on "too long, _didn't_ read" - in other words a response to something 
someone _else_ has written, saying it's waffle. Which of the two is the 
correct interpretation of the abbreviation, I'm not sure; certainly, if 
I see someone say it immediately after quoting what someone _else_ has 
said, I assume the disdainful meaning is intended.

Since it also makes me think of top-level domains, I don't think I'll 
use it anyway.
-- 
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Have you ever heard about a petition, disagreed with it, but been frustrated
that there's no way you can *show* that you disagree? If so, have a look at
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/232770 - and please pass it on if you
agree, especially to twitter, facebook, gransnet/mumsnet, or any such forum.

Quantum particles: the dreams that stuff is made of - David Moser

Back to comp.mobile.android | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

charging policy "Linea Recta" <bleep.bleep@bleep.invalid> - 2018-11-21 18:24 +0100
  Re: charging policy Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-11-21 17:36 +0000
    Re: charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-21 19:02 +0100
      Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-21 15:10 -0500
  Re:charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-21 18:53 +0100
    Re: Re:charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-21 18:42 +0000
    Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-21 15:10 -0500
      Re: charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-22 07:13 +0100
        Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 01:50 -0500
          Re: charging policy Libor Striz <poutnik4REMOVEnntp@CAPITALSgmail.com.INVALID> - 2018-11-22 09:15 +0100
            Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 16:09 +0000
            Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 11:57 -0500
          Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 16:18 +0000
            Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 11:57 -0500
              Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 17:26 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 12:54 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 21:26 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 01:14 -0500
                Re: charging policy Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2018-11-23 09:28 +0000
                "tl; dr" (was: Re: charging policy) "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 15:28 +0000
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 18:39 -0700
            Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 10:22 -0700
              Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-22 18:45 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-22 13:47 -0500
                Re: charging policy "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2018-11-22 20:40 +0000
                Re: charging policy David Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2018-11-22 21:29 +0000
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 18:39 -0700
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-22 18:39 -0700
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-22 21:30 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 01:14 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 15:26 +0000
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-23 16:13 +0000
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-23 19:52 +0000
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-23 21:29 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 16:40 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 21:48 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 17:06 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-23 22:09 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-23 17:23 -0500
                Re: charging policy The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2018-11-23 21:00 -0800
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 09:05 -0500
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-24 15:46 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 10:51 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 10:01 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 12:55 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 13:07 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-24 16:33 -0400
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 18:52 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 00:42 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 11:33 -0700
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-25 19:06 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 14:46 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 19:37 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 22:07 -0500
                Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-26 04:46 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-26 00:32 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 22:37 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 14:46 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-25 19:37 -0700
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-26 15:45 +0000
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-26 10:49 -0500
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-26 16:04 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-26 19:11 -0500
                Re: charging policy Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2018-11-24 20:14 +0000
                Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-24 18:52 -0700
                Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-25 00:42 -0500
    Re: charging policy Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2018-11-26 10:36 +0200
      Re: charging policy "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2018-11-26 16:37 +0000
  Re: charging policy nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2018-11-21 15:10 -0500
  Re: charging policy 123456789 <12345@12345.com> - 2018-11-21 15:01 -0700

csiph-web