Slashdot Mirror
Rush Limbaugh Begs Steve Jobs For Bug Fixes
jlgolson writes "Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh complained on his radio program about some problems that he was having with his Mac: 'Mr. Jobs, please help me. I know we don't agree on anything ... But can you put me to somebody that can get this going, because I know it's gotta work for most people. What am I doing wrong?' Eventually he shared that he was running into actual problems with Time Machine and Back to My Mac. Can you fix them?"
'stuff that matters' ???
The only reason Steve Jobs co-founded Apple was so that he could eventually get even with assholes like Rush Limbaugh. These bugs were invented just for him.
Get a PC!
Time Machine works just fine with Mail - you can restore one message or a whole deleted mailbox if you like. It wouldn't work with Entourage or any other mail program with a single massive database, or with an IMAP server, both for obvious reasons ...
Rush, Here's how to fix your Mac. - Get off drugs - Shower - Learn how to be nice - Lose weight - Volunteer for NASA flights to Saturn
Oh, lord. A story that brings together the Mac-vs-PC debate and the Conservative-vs-Liberal fight.
It's the Reese's Peanut Butter Cups of Internet flame wars. I predict a global meltdown of the entire Net within a week.
But from a glance at the last name I, for just a brief second, saw the article title as
"Steve, what happening? Look, I've got some problems with my Mac here, it's being a bit of a bother... yeah... so if could you come in on Saturday to fix it, maybe even Sunday... that would be terrific... mkay?"
Not that I really want to dignify your post with a response, but I'm gay and you straight people can keep that son of bitch!
Someone from "high up" at Apple corporate ("a West Coast guy", he said) called his office on the morning of Valentine's Day. Now they've got IT people working it out.
Helping you would be welfare. You want a handout? What do you think this is, soviet Russia? Its leftist pinko commies like him that are ruining America. They want something for nothing, and they want you to pay for it. Well let me tell you about this little thing called the free market. It means if you want something done, you have to pay for it. Its the American Way. And if you don't like it, go live with the commies in China.
Oh what, it isn't supposed to apply to him?
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Okay, I don't really listen to your radio program Mr. Limbaugh, but from what I can tell it seems your a complete jackass. However, as a life long IT guy, I've always tried to help out a user even if they are a nut case.
1.) Screen Sharing - Use VNC. http://www.redstonesoftware.com/products/vine/server/vineosx/index.html. Its free, easy to use, and if someone whines about it being insecure - kick them, hard.
2.) Email backup with Time Machine - You failed to mention just what email program you are using, I fear you may be using Apple Mail. If so you have you have my condolences as Apple Email is not truly an email program, but some sort of psychological test program designed at driving its users insane. I suggest using thunderbird - http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/. There are many add-on for backup email. Again its free and easy to use.
Somewhere along the line Apple got this reputation that ANY thing they make is solid gold and perfect in all ways. I can assure you this is very much not true. Hopefully this helps and lets you get back to your insane rantings.
The world isn't run by weapons anymore, or energy, or money. It's run by little ones and zeroes, little bits of data.
He can probably be helped... unless he's already installed the 10.5.2 update. Those of us that made that mistake are totally screwed.
Maybe I am somewhat new here, but this place seems to be overrun with Republicans.
Yeah, there's plenty of moderate opinions (known in America as "the left"), but the amount of right-wing posts and moderation here seems a little strange. (election year?)
Welcome to Costco, I love you.
the most vapid post I have read in a long, long time on Slashdot.
And I just finished up a lengthy back and forth with a Ron Paul guy - so that's saying something.
No one denies that bugs are a part of life. No one denies that we all have experience with them. The article is noteworthy - and Slashdot assigns it primarily, and appropriately - to the "it's funny" tag because, well, it's funny to hear a national talk show host discuss not only bugs with software, but to discuss them quite specifically. It's also fairly rare to hear bugs in a fairly niche OS get national play like that. Bonus points for Limbaugh using a machine manufactured by a company of which Al Gore is a part. As a Mac user, I even find myself sympathizing with him.
So grow up and deal with it. Yes, we all deal with bugs, but they rarely get this exposure.
And then there's this gem:
Before the Rwandan massacres, they had similar radio programs pumping the audience full of hate and anger with deadly results.
That kind of behavior has made him a wealthy man, but I don't see why it should get him any love from Slashdot, or any priority over anyone else who has technical issues.
It's hard to imagine a more asinine allusion. Really, you can't honestly be trying to compare the two, can you? I mean, this is either one of the sickest pieces of political posturing or the most feeble-minded reasoning I have read in some time - and like I said, I've been talking with Ron Paul fans, so that's really saying something.
Are we really going to equate Rush Limbaugh to these people? Oh, I'm sure we'll all get to hear some nonsense about him "stoking the flames of war with Iraq" or whatever, and you'll do your best to provide a tenuous link between Limbaugh and ongoing U.S. military action, but really - when was the last time Limbaugh got on the radio and told anyone to grab a machete and go murder their neighbors of a different ethnic group next door - really, when? Or are you just spouting nonsense? You even further your claim by arguing that he is getting wealthy off of such comments. According to Wikipedia (yeah, I know...) twice as many people listen to his show as there are in the entire population of Rwanda. Where's the uprising?
So, assuming you believe that Limbaugh can lead a bunch of hillbillies or whoever to load up and start gunning down their neighbors, what do you suggest? Since you feel free to make allusions, should I? Should I assume that you believe we should regulate political speech? Should we prevent people from being paid for political speech? Should we only allow the good, happy, cheerful thoughts to be put out over the airwaves, so as to avoid the mere possibility of genocide? (A genocide which, as it just so happens to be, has never occurred in the U.S. and is exceedingly unlikely to occur?) Should we simply prevent criticism? Free discussion? Should we shut up radio announcers here who happen to express ideas you don't like because a bunch of a slaughter that occurred in the third-world that just so happened to use radio as a medium of passing along information?
The scary thing is that the government - and, one would assume, the party in government you yourself would favor - is trying to do that exact same thing with attempts to return to the so-called "Fairness Doctrine". We just can't have people expressing their ideas over the radio, can we?
And you have the gall to refer to others as "Orwellian"? It would appear that we were reading very different copies of Mr. Blair's work.
Hell, I don't even like Limbaugh.
Man you're crazy.
Rush is definitely a hyperpartisan, but he's an opinion man. Most of what he says is just opinion. He's not comparable to Rwandan massacres, and he's probably more accurate than Air America, (I enjoy both, but Rush is a lot more chill, frankly).
Rush is following a high tradition: free speech. Yeah, I disagree with a lot of it, but I wish all hyperpolitical folks did their work with such a sense of humor about them. I certainly don't think he's dangerous. He's been attacked by censors who are linked to powerful political dynasties, and a lot of the "hate radio" label has come from them. They are your enemy, my friend. They wan tto shu Rush up so they gain some miniscule political advantage. Let Rush speak, and feel free to speak against him. That's what democracy looks like.
It's sad that liberals aren't all like me, and willing to let everybody give their best argument. I don't pretend anyone has all the answers, so no one out there can claim to always be right and Rush to always be wrong. Listen to him sometime, an be serious about it. He's full of goading and he's biassed as all hell, but he really isn't that angry.
Spoken like somebody who has never actually listened to Rush's radio show.
He had two: Time Machine didn't back up his mail (and can't backup web-mail that isn't on his computer), and the second was that he couldn't use Back to my Mac (because his router didn't support UPnP or NAT-PMP). What's a digital fruit peddler to do?
That's right. They should have tagged it Viagra!
if (userName=='Rush Limbaugh')
{
ramdomError();
}
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
Let me get this straight- you are criticizing Rush Limbaugh because you think he insults people, and you chose to do that by... insulting him?
Its been my experience that the people that most vocally accuse Limbaugh of hate speech have not formed that opinion through their own experience of listening to the show, but rather through what other media and Limbaugh's political opponents report that he said. Is that the case with you?
Lets take the Michael J Fox story that you mentioned as an example. Mr. Limbaugh stated on-air that he thought Michael Fox had exaggerated his Parkinson's symptoms in a political ad, and that he had done so for theatric benefit. It was clearly in Fox's best interest to make his disease look as debilitating as possible, and his tremors in the ad were much more pronounced than we usually saw from him. Limbaugh said that he would be the first apologize to Fox if that wasn't the case. But guess what? Rush was right. Fox later admitted that he purposely skips his medication before public events like this so people will see his worst case symptoms. Here is a video clip of him admitting this.
So was that hate speech, or was it an attempt to inject more honesty in a charged political debate? Unfortunately, the partisans have already made their minds up on the answer to that.
"The defense of freedom requires the advance of freedom" - George W Bush
I made up my mind on that when I did my own research and discovered that Fox's movements during the commercial were actually indicative of high-dose L-DOPA use (necessitated by tolerance) rather than being symptoms of untreated Parkinson's disease.
That's nice and all, but the clip shows him admitting that he skipped his meds before speaking to congress. It has nothing to do with the political ad that Rush commented on.
-Jeff
Please learn the difference between a dissenting opinion and a troll before you moderate.
Isn't that a bit...metrosexual? For him, I mean?
I've listened to his show. Years ago back before he was the poster child for what's wrong with the war on drugs. It wasn't that I dissagreed with his point of view, it was that it was so obviously shallow and completely lacking in anything beyond the moment's sensationalist vocal vomit, that I couldn't stand him. After claiming for years that drug users should be treated harshly, we find that this is just a bunch of hypocrisy, Rush would be the first to condemn the poor to suffer and the first in line for welfare and unemployment if he needed it.
Creative Spelling Copyright (2002). May use without Persimmons
I'll do the obligatory "I listen to all forms of political commentary" cuz I do. I'm an avowed moderate. That being said, I listened to a lot of Limbaugh. He offended me often especially when making fun of the homeless and such. I think he has some price to pay in the afterlife for that. All of that being said, I found his detailed commentary and explanations of congressional votes very interesting. I must admit that, at times, he would show a cspan clip of a vote and explain, in layman's terms, what was happening. Amazingly, he had the ability to take boring, monotone events such as this and bring them to life. I would then go google the event and learn more.
Bottomeline: there's a bit more to him than meets the eye. Yes, he's a zealot, offensive, etc., but he is not useless. Everyone has something to offer, and we must glean what we can from all people in our lives whether we meet them in person, watch them on tv or listen to on the radio, or even read their thoughts from a book. Even Hamlet found Claudius intriguing at times.
Nietzsche had to look into the abyss to discover it looked back....
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
Smart people who are angry at the world because they're not getting any?
which is totally what she said
you are criticizing Rush Limbaugh because you think he insults people, and you chose to do that by... insulting him?
Hey jackhole, get a clue. When a bloated gasbag spews lies about an advocate for people with a debilitating disease, you're goddamned right he gets insulted. And when Rush mocks the disease's effects , shaking his body spastically around on camera to mimic Fox's illness, oh holy crap does he deserve to be insulted. Shakespeare didn't write enough insults for sick bastard whores like Rush Limbaugh.
But guess what? Rush was right. Fox later admitted that he purposely skips his medication before public events like this so people will see his worst case symptoms. Here is a video clip of him admitting this.
Guess what, you brain-dead moron? In that video clip Fox denies what he supposedly admitted, saying explicitly -- listen to your own video clip --
Which of course pustulent corpse-raper Rush Limbaugh quotes as:
Here, as usual, Rush listeners learn their facts about the world exactly backwards. It's the price you pay for giving a fat, impotent, parasitic slug-worm an invitation into your living room. Lend credence to the sneering ringmaster of a national freakshow and what happens is that you become stupid. Let me give you another example. If you'd bothered to learn something instead of lazily gulping down Limbaugh's diarrhea, you might have known that the visible tremors Rush was mocking come from the medication:
I'm not the president of the Michael J. Fox fan club or anything. But the guy has to take his meds in order to be able to talk and move and interact with the world with some kind of normalcy. Without the medication, Parkinson's patients' muscles become rigid, their movements slow, and they even become unable to move at all. At the start of the filming day, Fox doesn't know if he's going to nail the ad in one take or is going to be there all day, so you can only imagine how carefully he plans out how much medication he's going to take and when, to ride the tightrope between his disease's wracking paralysis and the cure's tremors. Did he guess exactly right? I don't know, maybe not. Is Rush Limbaugh the biggest hate-smeared asshole the world has ever seen for second-guessing a prescription for someone he's never met, someone who is just trying to help a cause he believe
No, techies and trekies tend to focus on the problems they think can be solved through the use of science and technology, and call the potential solutions smart, even though they may not necessarily work in the real world.
They also think that they are being quite successful thanks to their wit and they can't see why everybody cannot do the same, and consequently wonder why they should pay for social security. Hence, they lean to the right. Techies are not very good with empathy, usually.
However, when the whole planet catches on and starts threatening their job, they call for government intervention.
I hear so much about how conservatives are evil jerks and liberals are "loving" and "tolerant." This is a prime of how stereotypes bite the dust.
It's ok to hate someone because I disagree with him!
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Rush actually HAS a disability, which got hidden in his ADMITTED drug addiction. He's deaf (or was, before some implants) through complications. He didn't make a big deal of it until one day on radio he admitted it to his audience and went and got help. Hasn't spoken all that much more about it.
Actually I find a mix of liberals and libertarians, few conservatives in the mix.
I find Rush at his best when he is doing analysis on the popular media. He breaks down - practically every day - the pronounced biases on the left of many media networks. True, there is a lot that goes unreported (which gives some credence to left-wing claims of right-wing media bias), but he shows how journalism is typically left of center.
Compared to hearing himself, I'd call deafness a blessing.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
"It just works!!!"
love the taste, hate the texture
Rush Limbaugh and his chauffeur were out driving in the country and accidentally hit and killed a pig that had wandered out on a country road.
Limbaugh told the chauffeur to drive up to the farm and apologize to the farmer.
They drove up to the farm, the chauffeur got out and knocked on the front door and was let in. He was in there for what seemed hours. When he came out, Limbaugh was confused about why his employee had been there so long.
"Well, first the farmer shook my hand, then he offered me a beer, then his wife brought me some cookies, and his daughter showered me with kisses," explained the driver.
"What did you tell the farmer?" Limbaugh asked.
The chauffeur replied, "I told him that I was Rush Limbaugh's driver and I'd just killed the pig."
Disclaimer: this joke is not original...
Rush, I can fix it! I have just the thing to fix your problem. It's called a "Rootkit." We'll install it right away!
I take it you've never seen Al Gore.
I cried real tears when Li Mu Bai died.
Rush Limbaugh knows how to use a computer? A Mac specifically? I thought those were just the tools of the liberal media to spread porn and socialist ideas to our youth.
In an effort to conform with internet communication standards, please note that the above comment is 100% biased opinion
That the fat hypocritical bag of shit can even operate a computer.
There is a war going on for your mind.
Please give Rush Limbaugh the benefit of actually reading what Michael J. Fox said--he's admitting to 'tinkering' with his meds--but he did it not to be 'theatrical', but rather to be 'uncomfortable' during his presentation. [...] I'm left with the impression that Fox *did* (at one time) deliberately 'tinker' with his medications...
Here's what Fox actually said:
Fox is explicitly denying the "impression" that you claim you have. You are using a quote from Rush Limbaugh, who chopped off the preface "It isn't as if," which gives the quote the exact opposite meaning.
And then you chastised me for not using the "entire quote." Wow.
I mean maybe you want to say Fox is a big liar or whatever, but to selectively edit his quote to pretend he's saying the exact opposite of what you say he's saying...? C'mon.
What Fox was saying was that he didn't do anything special with his meds that way, but (as he's explained elsewhere) he has good days and bad days, and it did seem somehow appropriate for him to be having a kind of bad day on that particular day. These two things can both be true.
I know you already said you like Glenn Beck, but... try to think for yourself please. Sheesh.
"I'll debate you with one hemisphere of my brain tied behind my back."
Well, Rushie, looks like you can finally put that fallow mass of inert grey matter to some use after all. And who knows, maybe that other half of your brain might actually be smarter than the one you claim to use. That is, of course, not saying a whole lot.
I just don't think there's a common point of reference.. just because its English doesn't mean we're talking about the same thing. On the political compass I, my friends, and most of the politicians I know of are on the bottom left square. The entire US political system maps onto the top right.. but I know lots of people I'd consider 'right wing'.
OTOH that's not the whole story. The terms don't mean the same thing. eg. in the UK Christians, if they're anything, tend to be associated with what we call left wing policies* - social justice, feeding the poor, equality, welfare state, etc. In the US they're universally described as right wing, for, I presume, similar reasons.
The terms used by the political compass, clearly US based, are interesting reading - we see extreme right wing as about control (a legacy of world war two I suspect) and left wing as about freedom (power to the people etc.).. whereas the political compass defines them in completely opposite.
Basically until we can agree on clearly defined terms that mean the same globally it's meaningless to even try to compare. The best you can do is agree/disagree on certain points and form your own unique political stance - then vote for the best candidate at the next available election.
* That's a simplification - there are plenty of christian conservatives (again that word doesn't mean the same thing it does in the US).
Apple does a lot of rigorous testing on all of the platforms and configurations that they expect will be used by their customers.
Can you really blame them for not bothering to test for compatibility with Republicans?
- RG>
Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
Yeah, Europe is so much better than America where you'll be prosecuted for criticizing those in power. Thank God the Europeans have those laws or someone might try to say something bad about Mustached Germans, Italians with helmets, or Russian "presidents" who poison their political opponents.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
"No, techies and trekies tend to focus on the problems they think can be solved through the use of science and technology
Yeah, and everybody knows that the conservative right is all about the "science and technology" based solutions. They have no use for "faith" or "religion" based solutions.
"But this one goes to 11!"
"While yes, there are those on the left who say one thing and do another, there are just as many, if not more, folks on the right who are just as hypocritical."
WHO CARES?
If you're doing something wrong, it is completely irrelevant that someone else is doing it too and in no way absolves you.
Saying "he did it too" is the kind of thing that belongs in an elementary school classroom, not in a discussion amongst adults. And yes, that applies just as equally for the people who scream "BILL CLINTON GOT A BLOW JOB!!!!" every time someone says something about Bush.
STOP MAKING EXCUSES FOR LEADERS WHO BEHAVE LIKE CHILDREN.
"You might want to look in the mirror the next time you think only one side are hypocrites."
I see no claim of that anywhere. Nowhere in the post is any attempt to claim that it is only liberals that are hypocrites. No other claims were forwarded, or even implied.
It is not ok if liberals behave hypocritically, even if every single non liberal does behave hypocritically. Sadly, your reaction is all too common, despite the fact that so many Slashdotters profess to be more educated and enlightened.
Well, I'll step up I guess and do what you didn't. Yes, liberals behave hypocritically. The question is not whether it occurs, but whether it benefits the greater good when it happens. Hypocrisy is not by itself an indicator of anything except a willingness to reconsider one's position if necessary. I would hope my leaders would do that, specifically, if they realize a previous policy decision had failed.
See how easy that was? I was able to derail the "hypocrisy" argument without resorting to 3rd grade rhetoric. It saddens me that people genuinely think an appropriate response to criticism of their leaders is to denounce the other guys choices.
"I will not give in to George Bush. I will not become fearful."
Too late. You're clearly so afraid of him that you'll blindly defend people who don't deserve it. The way to "not give in" is to INSIST that your leaders are better, and answer for what they do, not cover up criticism of them with attacks on the other side.
This is just proof that those sycophantic Repugnicant fat slobs with microphones are just moronic idiots lacking even the meager technical prowess of a used Kleenex.
Come-on, gimme some Dittos.
I thought it was Techies and Trekies have longs necks, and are good at blowing themselves(having long since moved past patting themselves on the back).
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Stocks are for suckers. It's almost as bad as trusting social security.
You're still abdicating way too much control.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
The assumption is that if you want the other side of the argument, you're smart enough to research it for yourself. Limbaugh only presents one side of the issue because he feels that the other side already has adequate representation. It's understandable if you don't agree with that position, but it doesn't invalidate it.
Niggardly comes from a Scandavian language, and just happens to sound similar a racist term that refers to black people. Other then sounding similar, there is no connection. On the other hand, "ricer" is a derogitory term for Japanese, that then applied to a subset of the Japanese, that then applied to people who were similar to that subset regardless of race. Because the origin of the term is racist, it has racist connotations that niggardly does not.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
All religion requires a suspension of disbelief.
Like bridges and monster trucks, the more widely disseminated the religion, the more massive the suspension.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
If we could do that, there would be no posts.
Ummmm...so the tendancy of journalists - who graduate from liberal arts schools, and typically vote Democrat, is right-wing? Please.
I don't think you know what "liberal arts" are. Liberal Arts in the academic context has nothing to do with political affiliation, and more to do with an academic philosophy based on balancing practical knowledge with more esoteric cultural studies and arts. Thus you can't just go to school for your MBA, you must also take some humanities. A Liberal Arts school is one with a focus ON humanities, I'm guessing.
"Liberal" has many meanings. If I make liberal use of butter in my recipe, does that mean I'm intoning the "Communist Manifesto" over my butter?
Looking at the 3 big cables news networks, I don't see any latent bias, left or right. Fox is mainly right leaning, CNN is slightly to the right with Beck, but Dobbs is schizophrenic enough to balance that out. MSNBC leans hard to the left with Obermann, but not too far because of that Tucker guy balances that out. But then again these networks are about ratings, and part of ratings is finding audiences. People want to hear what they agree with, thus all niches are filled.
The journalists themselves have less to do with any perceived bias then the corporate executives, who are generally more right leaning, and who select journalists based on what perceived audience they want to convince to watch ads.
Thanks to the FCC, there really isn't that much difference between newspapers and TV, since they are largely owned, and controlled, by the same people. Ditto with radio. These "bias" is again selected by corporate folk, to align the selected media towards the perceived audience.
Actually the media is leaning MORE leftward now, thanks to a groundswell of disgust in the Republican policies of the last 12 or so years (since the Gingrich coup taking the House), and especially of the last eight. Before the anti-war movement got authentic grass-roots groundswell status, the media was largelly right leaning in coverage. I heard NO critique of the war, or the rampant attacks on American freedom from the media until it became popular despite the media.
That said, this might be my selection bias, just as the leftist media theory could be due to yours.
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
HAHAHAHA!
After attacking democrats for years, he finally gives in to pleading to a prominant corporate democrat for help. Boy, I love the sweet smell of irony in the morning.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.