Slashdot Mirror


Apple Sued For Man's Porn Addiction

coolnumbr12 writes "Chris Sevier, a 36-year-old man from Tennessee, got so addicted to porn videos that his wife took his children and left him. Now he has sued Apple saying the company failed to install any filter in its devices to prevent his addiction. In a 50-page complaint, Sevier calls Apple a 'silent poisoner' responsible for the proliferation of 'arousal addiction, sex trafficking, prostitution, and countless numbers of destroyed lives.' Sevier is seeking damages from Apple, but said he we will drop the lawsuit if Apple agrees to sell devices with a 'safe mode.'"

509 comments

  1. False Flag by digitrev · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Normally, I'm not this paranoid, but this reads like a false flag operation by some religious group looking to get filters installed by default. At the very least, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that they're helping fund this insane lawsuit.

    --
    Cynical Idealist
    1. Re:False Flag by digitrev · · Score: 3, Funny

      And now having re-read the article, I realize that this man is patently insane. Primarily because he blames Apple for driving sex shops out of business.

      --
      Cynical Idealist
    2. Re:False Flag by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

      Who cares, let them do whatever they want. They can file as many suits as they want and, each time, a jury will be able to decide if Apple is the group that is ultimately responsible for some guy who got himself addicted to porn. While he's at it, he can sue Ford for allowing him to drive to the convenience store to buy beer and fuel his alcohol addiction, because that is obviously Ford's fault since they don't ship their cars with a mode that makes the car unable to drive to the convenience store to buy beer.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    3. Re:False Flag by ArcadeMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just because he's insane doesn't mean there's no religious group behind the lawsuit.

    4. Re:False Flag by Gription · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is this sort of stupidity that I think the creationists could use as an effective argument against evolution.
      - The fact that SO MANY people have no ability to take any responsibility for their actions and the fact that people don't overwhelmingly blast them for their insane helplessness seems to be some level of proof that humans have no evolved traits for any self responsibility. I would expect that self responsibility would have to be part of any sort of evolved survival traits.

      (or maybe we need to release more tigers in our cities to get the old awareness going again...)

    5. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      better to have the responsibility lie with the individual who chose it.. blame chain games turn into societal witch hunts very very quickly. these witch hunts destroy liberty. to be honest, it was his wife's choice to end the relationship, not his.

    6. Re:False Flag by pspahn · · Score: 1

      I would suggest he is primarily insane because he has been a serial stalker.

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    7. Re:False Flag by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 5, Funny

      Usually one follows the other.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    8. Re:False Flag by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If I am on a jury, and I hear "Addicted to porn", I'm going to have a really hard time remaining objective about the person speaking.

      As such I'd probably get thrown off the jury and people who actually BELIEVE THIS SHIT will take my place.

    9. Re:False Flag by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      yeah, from a quick glance his wife left him because he was looking for fuck dates on the internets.

      he could also try suing lenovo, dell and microsoft on the same grounds and while at it google, firefox and his isp.
      fucking douche. or apparently not a fucking douche since he is complaining.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    10. Re:False Flag by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Normally, I'm not this paranoid, but this reads like a false flag operation by some religious group.

      Even better:

      Chris Sevier, an attorney from Nashville,is suing Apple...

      Rent-seek much?

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    11. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Personal responsibility is an invented concept driven by societal needs. Fundamental evolution doesn't work well with the concept. In fact shuffling responsibility onto others and suckering them into dealing with it is a fantastic survival strategy we can see throughout the animal kingdom.

    12. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe Apple is behind the whole thing.

    13. Re:False Flag by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is the exact opposite. Humans are selfish and self-serving like no other species can be. This is a direct result of natural selection. Your ancestors weren't the ones holding the door so people could get through, they were the ones trampling old women and children to get theirs first. More recently however, helplessness is a trait that is bred and perpetuated by a society that is ok with just accepting things as is without explanation.

      "How did the universe get here? I dunno, God did it." What is more lazy and helpless than that? It's pretty thematic through out the whole ID debate. Acceptance in spite of investigation and evidence to the contrary. That is the epitome of a lazy and entitled attitude IMHO.

      That being said, fuck yeah, bring on the tigers.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    14. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to be religious to be against pornography...
      For example, against porn are many feminists or atheistic societies (communists) - not to mention many scientists (medical or other) that find porn damaging humans and their societies.

    15. Re:False Flag by interkin3tic · · Score: 2

      But... there already ARE filters on by default. The app store doesn't seem have anything that would rate higher than a PG-13. Safari's default search engine was at least google, maybe they've changed it, but google has safesearch on by default. It's not like you say "Siri, I like dogs" and it goes right to a gallery of people having doggystyle sex.

      ...

      I guess I'm assuming that religious groups would think about it first. You may be right.

    16. Re:False Flag by GameboyRMH · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Mod parent up, was just gonna say this.

      Evolution doesn't give a damn how much of an irresponsible moron you are, only how much you reproduce. And irresponsible morons are especially good at that.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    17. Re:False Flag by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

      It is this sort of stupidity that I think the creationists could use as an effective argument against evolution. .)

      Dunno, I kind of think this guy is the most effective argument against evolution.

    18. Re:False Flag by mwvdlee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which type of people do you think procreate the most; people with or without a sense of responsibility?
      There are whole MTV shows dedicated to demonstrating this principle of evolution.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    19. Re:False Flag by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      And now having re-read the article, I realize that this man is patently insane.

      Gee, ya think so?

    20. Re:False Flag by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 0, Troll

      Porn addiction is a real thing just like a lot of other habit forming activities, but seriously we don't blame the heroine or meth for a junkie becoming a junkie. I don't blame beer for someone being an alcoholic, I blame them for being a weak, simple, and pathetic human being, just like this dude is.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    21. Re:False Flag by Artifakt · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm wondering if this particular Sevier lives in Sevierville. Seveirville is named after John Sevier, a pioneer settler to the region. That part of the state has literally thousands of people with some variant on Sevier as their last name; Mostly Seviers, but with Siviers, Seebers, Seibers, Severs, and even a few Xaviers. I know of only one sex shop in the Sevierville area, but I don't think it's out of business. (It calls itself "Sexy Stuf", and the ex and I don't patronize places that can't spell, but it looked open when we stopped at the Smoky Mountain Knife Museum (It's like a four story mall full of knife dealers, with taxidermied animals and indoor waterfalls, and I'd bet Mr. Sevier would love it if he can stop focusing on sex so much).
              Knoxville, 30 miles away or so, has lots of sex stores still open last I checked - Adult Superstore, Fantasy World, Intimate Treasures, Romantic Escapades, and others. Town and Country seems to be fading fast, but they're kinda disquieting (as in labeling the plus-size video's "fattyporn", and clerks who seem oddly judgemental), so I really doubt it's apple putting them out of business.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    22. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you saying you don't believe it is possible to be addicted to porn, or that you are biased against people addicted to porn?

    23. Re:False Flag by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      It is well within recent event's limits to believe that he is being funded by the FCC... who want to censor real life: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NDPT0Ph5rA

    24. Re:False Flag by amRadioHed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Humans are selfish and self-serving like no other species can be.

      Sure... if by "like no other species can be" you mean "exactly like every other species is".

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    25. Re:False Flag by Golddess · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hey now, I'll have you know I'm perfectly capable of being insane without needing a religious group backing me up, thank you very much. :P

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    26. Re:False Flag by ArcadeMan · · Score: 0

      It doesn't matter, the religious groupswill back you up anyway.

    27. Re:False Flag by jythie · · Score: 2

      That would be less a 'false flag' and more a test case or a poster child.

    28. Re:False Flag by BattleApple · · Score: 1

      Or a joint funding between fuckbook and some religious group.

    29. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually, no. it might be easy to assume that the ones who were the most selfish were the ones to get the most. but in the long run, it doesn't work out that way. again and again game theory and studies of human behavior show that cooperation gives better results overall for both the group and the individual.

      maybe short term greed is just a way to winnow out that aggression from the pool long term?

    30. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not in this case.
      Someone who is addicted to porn to the point of losing his family doesn't really sound like the ladies man...

    31. Re:False Flag by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 0

      Yes, I suppose you're correct. I should have phrased that more carefully.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    32. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not like you say "Siri, I like dogs" and it goes right to a gallery of people having doggystyle sex.

      That's preposterous. Obviously it'd go right to a gallery of people having sex with dogs. ;)

    33. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evolution doesn't give a damn how much of an irresponsible moron you are, only how much you reproduce. And irresponsible morons are especially good at that.

      True, but in the old days nature (aka your fellow man) used to take care of this kind of thing in a manner that prevented the irresponsible moron from reproducing (as well as breathing and consuming scarce resources).

    34. Re:False Flag by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      If I understand you correctly, you're saying that there should be *more* irresponsible morons than any other type of people.

      Hmm. Didn't Cyril Kornbluth write "The Marching Morons back in the early 1950s? Since there is prior art on this subject, you're not allowed to think that.

    35. Re:False Flag by DutchUncle · · Score: 1

      That being said, fuck yeah, bring on the tigers.

      Says a member of the group best known for sitting at their monitors until their muscles atrophy. (note to self: get away from monitor before tigers . . . )

    36. Re:False Flag by JeanCroix · · Score: 3, Informative

      For those not following your link: Sevier lost his law license in 2011 after the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled he can’t practice due to reasons of mental illness. New reports reveal his disability is related to Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome from his time serving in Iraq.

    37. Re:False Flag by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hey, he had kids already, evolution says he's doing better than any of us who don't have kids.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    38. Re:False Flag by Lithdren · · Score: 1

      The end of your first paragraph didn't quite end how I was expecting it to upon first reading it...i'm thankful for this.

    39. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saying "How did the universe get here? I dunno, big bang did it" is no less lazy unless you are actively studying the universe and contemplating the evidence you see. Being right doesn't make you any less lazy and helpless.

    40. Re:False Flag by hermitdev · · Score: 1
      The counterpoint to this is from the TFA:

      His wife abducted his son and disappeared...

      indicating the man has successfully reproduced. Granted the "porn addiction" appears to have started after he reproduced, but he has still reproduced.

    41. Re:False Flag by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      Normally, I'm not this paranoid, but this reads like a false flag operation by some religious group looking to get filters installed by default.

      That requires a Venn diagram overlap of "rich", "organized", and "stupid". Apple's not-really-an-alternative is to implement filters by default and make them 100% infallible, so that no one will ever accidentally see porn who doesn't mean to and so that someone who wants to see porn won't be accidentally blocked from doing so. Put another way, if Apple added filters, they'd be legally obligated to make them work perfectly. I can imagine that they wouldn't be in any rush to take that deal.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    42. Re:False Flag by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      I know you americans like to use "communist" to mean "anything we don't like", but seriously, what does being against porn have to do with being very left wing to the point of saying everyone should share everything equally?

    43. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Yes, you can be insane without being religious, but you can't be religious without being insane. Religion is believing false things that you want to believe despite evidence to the contrary, by substituting faith (credulity) for evidence and reason.

    44. Re:False Flag by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing he picked up the phone an called an attorney. Rather then tell him to sleep off his crazy idea, they latched onto it as a springboard to sue Apple. Jackpot Justice. So even if he loses, the lawyers win via collection of services rendered. It's fucking low that scum like this prey on the mentally disturbed!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    45. Re:False Flag by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That explains a lot about the state of the world.

    46. Re:False Flag by P-niiice · · Score: 3, Funny

      dude, i'm pretty sure if a bernie madoff came to be in the animal kingdom, that pile of bananas would be hard to miss

    47. Re:False Flag by networkBoy · · Score: 2

      Only if my insanity matches their insanity, else they will attempt to bury me. (Or burn me at the stake).

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    48. Re:False Flag by Obfuscant · · Score: 4, Insightful

      but seriously we don't blame the heroine or meth for a junkie becoming a junkie.

      We do, however, blame the guy standing on the street corner handing out free samples of dope trying to get people hooked.

      I blame them for being less perfect than I am, just like this dude is.

      FTFY. Humans are an imperfect animal with build in chemical and psychological pathways that can lead to dependency on many different kinds of things. Some people have had enough support early in their lives that they haven't made bad decisions that lead them down the bad pathways; some people haven't. That doesn't make the person pathetic or weak or even simple, it just makes him human.

    49. Re:False Flag by umghhh · · Score: 1
      it is only partially true. Social animals develop virtues because that allows them to build complex societies. No virtues = no society. This said there are are always some that abuse the system. Society can survive only if number of such indihviduals is limited - this works by means of social cohesion. In liberal societies this seems to work less efficiently as in ones where not paying your dues means gets you ostracised or worse.

      So yes evolution does not give a damn about how irresponsible you are but then we reached extreme levels of population density not because all humans behaved like assholes. You may even theorize about need for having assholes just to prove the system works and keep the defences high - in a sense showing all that are capable of socializing that antisocial types are bad and even evil and some of them may be panished etc.

    50. Re:False Flag by hermitdev · · Score: 2, Informative

      I can't believe I'm actually about to defend Apple, but I think the point is suing Apple for producing a computer that can be used to access any multitude of media and do any number of any other things is absurd as suing Sony for the same thing, because they produce TVs, BluRay & DVD players, and computers that can be used to access the same media.
      Smokers didn't sue their local convenience stores where they bought their smokes, they sued the manufacturers of said tobacco products. This is a classic case of a bullshit, groundless lawsuit, that should be tossed, and the only reason Apple is the plaintiff is because they have deep pockets.
      For this to have any standing (and I don't think it has so much as a termite-ridden peg leg to stand on), he should have gone after the producers of the pornography he had to which he had become addicted (but I bet he didn't watch long enough to see the credits).
      He should also add his ISP to the suit for wantonly providing access to the media.

    51. Re:False Flag by icebike · · Score: 2

      The counterpoint to this is from the TFA:

      His wife abducted his son and disappeared...

      indicating the man has successfully reproduced. Granted the "porn addiction" appears to have started after he reproduced, but he has still reproduced.

      Heh, maybe he should have sued his wife, not Apple. It would have been cheaper, and either way he's not getting anything.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    52. Re:False Flag by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      Actually I would say it proves evolution, specifically that because we humans have evolved with a small tribe mentality (protecting our own small sphere instead of looking at humanity as a whole) and an instinct to protect those in our tribe we are creating a "march of the morons" situation by having a civilization that allows truly stupid people like in TFA to have offspring, thus spreading the stupid like a jackass rolling a porta potty downhill spreads shit.

      Sadly this IS the future of society, a full on "Big Mother" nanny state that every damned thing you see/read/hear, even eat and drink, because it will assume that you are just as big an idiot as the lowest common denominator who of course will think that lowest common denominator is a bot on Transformers.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    53. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Reason and faith are only incompatible when they intersect to the detriment of the former. There's plenty of stuff that could logically exist that we have no evidence for, and possibly never will. You can select an outcome in those cases and they would have to be based on faith.

      And as for everything else, most people without recourse to proper equipment or resources have to take many of the more obscure scientific theories on faith. Some people do not, and that is how you end up with conspiracy theories becoming prevalent in the face of scientific knowledge. Conspiracy theorists are fine with science itself, they just have no faith in the results that have been presented to them by certain authorities. That is an important difference.

      Faith is not important for science, but it is important for the acceptance of the results of science, when those results are not obvious and easily repeatable by the layperson. Scientific advancement benefits as much from credulity, as you would put it, as religion does.

    54. Re:False Flag by gVibe · · Score: 1

      False flag for those who do not know is what the government or any organization does to distract the not-so-smart people while a more sinister plan is enacted. In short: "Look a flying saucer!" meanwhile "BANG!" something blows up.

      --
      Keywords for the NSA overthrow oppressive regime true believers marathon Manhatten the financial district blueprints I
    55. Re:False Flag by leonardluen · · Score: 2

      doesn't google turn on "safe-search" by default?

    56. Re:False Flag by gVibe · · Score: 1

      Can I please speak to Hank? I know he normally only comes out after 8pm, but I have something to show him.

      --
      Keywords for the NSA overthrow oppressive regime true believers marathon Manhatten the financial district blueprints I
    57. Re:False Flag by HaZardman27 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Smokers didn't sue their local convenience stores where they bought their smokes, they sued the manufacturers of said tobacco products

      What's even more bullshit, is that in this case, it is more like suing the company which built the truck used to haul the cigarettes from the factory to the convenience store. At least the convenience store made the conscious decision to sell cigarettes there. The truck company just built a damn truck, which happens to work on highways and is capable of moving cigarettes.

      --
      Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
    58. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know where are you from but i am not an "american"... i am a Greek from Greece! In Greece we didn't had communism (thank God!) but we have many immigrants from former communst states that had experianced that kind of "very left wing" (as you -naively, in my opinion- describe it!) so i wrote "For example, against porn are many [...] atheistic societies (communists) [...]" just as an example (!) of non religious societies i know about that were communistic and against porn.

      * "[...] everyone should share everything equally" - hahaha! sorry, but i find that also naive...

    59. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I blame them for being a weak, simple, and pathetic human being, just like this dude is.

      That's pretty stupid. People are what they are due to their genes and environment. You can no more blame them for what they are than you can blame water for flowing downhill. Free will doesn't exist in any meaningful sense, and the universe is unfolding over time the only way it could, in an endless stream of cause and effect. We're just an effect of the evolution of the universe.

    60. Re:False Flag by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      Well, he might be dreaming on getting a huge payment (if he could ever win). Or at least, he just wants publicity if he sues a corporation (Apple) rather than his own wife, so that he can be [in]famous...

    61. Re:False Flag by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      Probably has to do with the idea that the common welfare is maintained by everyone in a classless society. So if you're being addicted to something like porn or drugs, you are not just hurting yourself, you're hurting everyone.

      There are and were a number of "morality" pushes by communist countries. Granted, a lot of that was the fact that becoming a communist doesn't change some basic ideas that people have about morality. Most people aren't for or against porn or drugs because God says not to do them, they're inherently offended by people who make use of them due to their view of the world.

      For instance, those who view themselves as hard workers will look down on addicts as drains on society. You'll find people who consider it a "Christian" duty to bust drug users. You can very easily come across that sort of viewpoint in a communist country as well, just for different reasons.

    62. Re:False Flag by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Either that or he became "born again" and needed blame someone else for his problems.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    63. Re:False Flag by Altrag · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "How did the universe get here? I dunno, God did it." What is more lazy and helpless than that?

      I don't know about that. It takes a lot of dedicated effort to remain willfully ignorant in today's era of information overload.

      "God did it" made reasonably sense when the state of human knowledge was such that we couldn't have known better. And "God did it" is still a reasonable (if unlikely) reason for the Big Bang happening in the first place. People who want to want to reconcile science and religion are welcome to do so on levels like that if it makes them happy.

      But trying to claim that the world started 6000 years ago when we can date things back millions or billions of years with proven methods are just out to lunch. The absolutely best they can claim is that the devil (or maybe God himself, to "test" us -- ie: make sure we don't try to use the big old brains He gave us) purposely laced our planet with particular datable isotopes and geographic strata and whatever else the smart people use to (reasonably) accurately date things (accuracy within 1% is a reasonable accuracy in many cases, even if it means a potential real error of a million years, for example.)

    64. Re:False Flag by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      You dont understand Evolution at all. Its not about the individual actors, but the ability for a species to carve out a niche and reproduce successfully in a given environment. Even if he is pants-on-head retarded, he is still old enough to have reproduced, thus Evolution was successful for him.

      --
      Good-bye
    65. Re:False Flag by beelsebob · · Score: 2

      * "[...] everyone should share everything equally" - hahaha! sorry, but i find that also naive...

      Like it or not, that's what communism stands for. The fact that it was implemented poorly (or not at all) by many supposedly communist (but actually fascist, totalitarian) states is neither here nor there.

    66. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it possible to sue because the porn isn't as good as it used-to-be ?

    67. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, from a quick glance his wife left him because he was looking for fuck dates on the internets.

      he could also try suing lenovo, dell and microsoft on the same grounds and while at it google, firefox and his isp.
      fucking douche. or apparently not a fucking douche since he is complaining.

      I bet he's using Chrome.

    68. Re:False Flag by fl!ptop · · Score: 4, Funny

      either way he's not getting anything

      Which is probably why he was addicted in the 1st place.

      --
      When you recognize love in another and realize how precious it is, everything else seems so insignificant.
    69. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I totally disagree. No other species cares about the members of another species like humans. Have you ever seen a tiger refuse to kill an antelope and instead ate some grass because he thought his species was exploiting the antelope?

    70. Re: False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Loving in Tennessee should tell you that.

    71. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever heard of ticks, leaches, worms?

    72. Re:False Flag by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      I would expect that self responsibility would have to be part of any sort of evolved survival traits.

      Why? Getting someone else to do your work is in fact a proven survival strategy. The is a large population of innumerable kinds of parasites thriving out there, you know.

    73. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why bother with tigers? We have plenty of serial killers.

      And modern society is getting so difficult to live in, almost one in three people suffer from some kind of mild mental disorder.

    74. Re:False Flag by deathlyslow · · Score: 1

      Heh, maybe he should have sued his wife, not Apple. It would have been cheaper, and either way he's not getting any. There fixed that for you.

      --
      Don't blame me for redundant posts. I can't type very fast. Hence the user ID.
    75. Re:False Flag by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh lord isn't that the truth, to get to my GF's place you have to drive through a trailer park to get to the side road her place is on and....damn. It just blows my mind how you will see these folks living in squalor, everything around them falling apart, yet the women all have kids like stair steps, we are talking 4+ kids on average, all squeezed into these little bitty single wide trailers from the 60s and 70s, I had to show my girl Idiocracy because she asked when I went through there to take her home what "march of the morons was" and after seeing it she said "Its funny but sad, because that is what we are gonna end up becoming". Hell just watch one of the Transformers movies and I'd say we are already getting there, all the "wacky hijinks" with Shia leButt might as well be called "Ass the movie".

      BTW I know this is offtopic so I apologize beforehand, but would the ones that said a prayer a few weeks ago for my mom mind saying one for my dad? I may not have much in the way of faith left but I believe my own eyes and after asking for prayers at my normal haunts even though the docs had written off my mom as a lost cause she made a 100% recovery, she is doing so well now she is back at home with her reality TV and her wiener dog. But now as soon as the customer I'm waiting on picks up his tower i gotta head back to the hospital to sit with dad, he is burning up and having trouble breathing and so far everything the docs have tried has been for naught, they just can't seem to kill the infection.

      All I can say is thank all that is good for my little sweetie, how many would spend their third date in the ER helping me fill out forms on mom and not a month later be cooking for mom and the boys so i can spend time in the hospital with dad? Not many that is for damned sure, if it weren't for my little rock of Gibraltar the stress of this year would have put me in a hospital bed or the morgue, but through it all she just puts her arm around me and says "you need me, I'm here".

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    76. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your not a very good reverand. That might explain why you don't know how to spell your job tittle.

    77. Re:False Flag by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

      But I don't want any group swill.

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    78. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Especially muslims. You should have said "UGLY irresponsible morons".

    79. Re:False Flag by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      I know you americans like to use "communist" to mean "anything we don't like", but seriously, what does being against porn have to do with being very left wing to the point of saying everyone should share everything equally?

      Most Americans base their understanding of communism on our nations history with the U.S.S.R. and China, rather than any specific definition. To that end -

      http://englishrussia.com/2010/08/16/anti-alcohol-soviet-posters/

      Doesn't take a major Puritanical leap to go from demonizing booze to demonizing sexy pictures.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    80. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's an out of work lawyer filing pro se.

      (you know what they say about someone who files pro se)

    81. Re:False Flag by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Interesting

      False flag for those who do not know is what the government or any organization does to distract the not-so-smart people while a more sinister plan is enacted. In short: "Look a flying saucer!" meanwhile "BANG!" something blows up.

      Incorrect:

      False flag (or black flag) describes covert military or paramilitary operations designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities, groups or nations than those who actually planned and executed them.

      Re-using your example: Government agents blow up a hospital and make it appear that a flying saucer (or Al Queda, some militia group, etc.) was actually to blame.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    82. Re:False Flag by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      That's not paranoia it is just a logical and innovative way of analyzing this strange story. Maybe I'm slipping but normally I would think of something like that given such an odd report.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    83. Re:False Flag by Altrag · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have to fully disagree with this argument.

      Humanity has NEVER had a high percentage of smart, responsible people. And we're still trending towards a smarter populace (more people with at least a BA and such metrics.) Also being a more responsible populace is questionable but that's digressing a bit.

      Humanity's cogs have always been the grunts -- they're plentiful and replaceable. But our leaps and bounds have come from the very very few superstars -- the Newtons and Einsteins and Teslas of the world are the ones who progress us.

      The rest of us mass of grunts get to benefit from the achievements of the few visionaries and progress marches on. But there's never been a time when more than a fraction of a percent of humanity has been "smart" in the world-moving (even a small corner of the world) sense. There has of course been times when certain factions have tried to suppress the few visionaries that do pop up during their rule.

      Overall my point is that visionary intelligence is more likely the genetic mistake among a (comparatively) stupid population rather than some goal we're supposed to be moving towards -- as others have pointed out, evolution favors your reproduction far far more than it favors your contributions to other peoples' lives.

    84. Re:False Flag by datavirtue · · Score: 0, Troll

      True, they will be very quick to jump on and support you without examining any of your background given that you espouse something in line with their judgments and beliefs. As soon as they find someone with whom they do not agree on a particular subject they go into spook mode digging up everything in their background that allows them to vilify that person.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    85. Re:False Flag by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 1

      All that shows is that humans have a capacity for compassion, which if you look at some of the horrible things we've done despite this capacity, makes so many things seem so much worse. There's more examples of animals being hunted to extinction than examples of animals being preserved due to exploitation.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    86. Re:False Flag by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      I thought they only burned vivacious buxom females at the stake. Guys are just thrown into the tinder pile at the base of the stake. I learned that from Hollyweird!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    87. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      But trying to claim that the world started 6000 years ago when we can date things back millions or billions of years with proven methods are just out to lunch.

      Exactly! Everyone knows the world started on January 1, 1970. It's only those DOS or Apple heretics that think it started in 1980 or 2001. Silly people!

    88. Re:False Flag by lexx21 · · Score: 0

      But to blame someone else for your actions has become the status quo in this country. When I hear someone say "I couldn't help myself" I have to think: 1) Did he do it in church? 2) Did he do it at the dinner table? 3) Did he do it in front of his parents? 4) Did he do it during business meetings? 5) Did he do it (god forbid) in front of his kids? 6) Did he do it in front of a cop (if something illegal)? I would be willing to bet the answer would be "no" to all of them. Therefore he absolutely could help but do it. Basically he was cruising pics and got caught, probably not the first time either, by his wife who finally had enough. She took the kids and left thinking, which in her mind was due to being at her breaking point. Now left in a state of public disgrace among his peers, he claims an addiction and tries to sue someone for his own idiotic actions. Funny how those things work.........To soothe his ID and make himself feel like a wronged party and a "nice guy", he blames someone else.

    89. Re:False Flag by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 1

      A tittle is the dot above a lower case "i" or "j", dipshit. My misspelling was intentional, you're just dumb.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    90. Re:False Flag by datavirtue · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I acknowledge the nature of an "unseen" world where ideas and thought originate but for which we have no physical proof--some call it "spiritual." I do not believe in it however as I'm still learning more about nature every day. I do not secretly long for the death of those who do not see as I do like the acolytes of these fundamentalist sects do. I grew up in a fundamentalist sect which many people have great things to say about its people, but the truth is that they taught their people that those not in the sect where damned to certain death by god and those real, live, grown up, supposedly adult people believe it and in essence hate and judge their fellowman in their hearts as unworthy of life (while acting perfectly nice to their face). If you think that devout religious people do not view you as a piece of shit then you are wrong. In their eyes you are as good as dead and deserve worse.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    91. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you don't think there's an evolutionary advantage to being a parasite?

    92. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well unless you believe in God or magic, no one is weak, simple or pathetic. They're just a conglomeration of particles moving around and nothing more. Of course, you will believe what you want since you are also just a conglomeration of particles moving around and have no say in what you believe anyway. As if there's really a 'you'.

    93. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What would be the rational basis for acting against self-interest?

    94. Re:False Flag by luther349 · · Score: 1

      its not apples problem to deal with his personal issues. if he wants filters so bad there is plenty available for ios.

    95. Re:False Flag by White+Flame · · Score: 1

      The fact that it was implemented poorly...

      That's not the problem. The problem is the fact that humanity does not work that way in any scale beyond small clan/tribe units.

    96. Re:False Flag by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Mod Parent -1 Brain Rotted by Pop Science Books.

      That is not how evolution works. Natural selection doesn't give a flying fuck about the value judgements you impose on behaviors.

    97. Re:False Flag by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 0

      Cool story bro, but median (raw) IQ scores have been rising for decades if not centuries. Idiocracy is provably false, and, also, a stupid movie.

    98. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because believing an eyewitness is equivalent to believing some dude just making shit up.

    99. Re:False Flag by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 2

      Well ya if you want to believe that Wikipedia is the endall source of information...but...in today's world: "False flag terrorism" occurs when elements within a government stage a secret operation whereby government forces pretend to be a targeted enemy while attacking their own forces or people.

      You must be drunk. You just repeated your parent.

      For example, a "false flag operation" is a terrorist act committed by one group for the express purpose of discrediting another group, which is framed for it. Just sayin...

      So was your parent. Go home gvibe, you're drunk.

    100. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which makes perfect sense; what the hell do we care what's happening outside? As long as the pizza man can dodge the cats, it wouldn't make any difference to us.

    101. Re:False Flag by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Reason and faith are only incompatible when they intersect to the detriment of the former.

      Always has been, and always will.

      There's plenty of stuff that could logically exist that we have no evidence for, and possibly never will. You can select an outcome in those cases and they would have to be based on faith.

      And as for everything else, most people without recourse to proper equipment or resources have to take many of the more obscure scientific theories on faith.

      No, it isn't faith. It speaks to credibility. My lack of access to a particle accellerator, but accepting the results has nothing to do with faith. The work is there and documented, and I can access it. In addition, If I accept one scientific theory and it is proven to be wrong, I'll look into it, and abandon the old for the new. Faith is much more akin to believing that the world was completely covered with water from rainfall, when it is physically impossible for that to happen, and believing that the man who built the boat put two of every creature on the boat when the dimensions of the boat would obviously not have held two of every creature on earth, and that not every species lived in the middle East, so they would have to swim across the oceans to get there - so that they wouldn't drown. Believing in impossibilities that have been proven wrong is faith. Strong faith.

      Some people do not, and that is how you end up with conspiracy theories becoming prevalent in the face of scientific knowledge. Conspiracy theorists are fine with science itself, they just have no faith in the results that have been presented to them by certain authorities. That is an important difference.

      Most conspiracy theorists I know are more aligned with the faith crowd. And they will believe pretty much the opposite of whatever happens to be known. Their reasonong is backwards, say that dirty so and so's belive in something, and since I don't like them, whtever they say, do or think must be wrong. I find it to be more an abberation of human behavior, and in many ways, very manipulable by cynical politicians.

      Faith is not important for science, but it is important for the acceptance of the results of science, when those results are not obvious and easily repeatable by the layperson. Scientific advancement benefits as much from credulity, as you would put it, as religion does.

      Well, at least you didn't pull out the old "Atheism is a religion" canard. But once again the mistake of confusing credulity for credibility. Inasmuch as we mere mortals do not have the time or the resources to investigate every facet of human knowledge, there are some things we take as credible. But if I need to learn about something, it's easy to find the work and review it.

      If I need to look up a formula for some electronics application, I can do that. I know where to look, and I have pretty fair confidence the formula will be correct. Because if it isn't, the project won't work, and as likely as not, I'll contact the author so they can correct the mistake. If I had faith that the formula was correct, I'd refuse to accept that it wasn't, and that perhaps I should sacrifice a lamb or somesuch so that the circuit would work the next time.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    102. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think you are confusing trust in the scientific method and the peer review process with faith. That trust is always provisional, always conditional, and scales up or down based on the evidence presented and the confidence I have in it unlike faith which is unconditional. Looks like a false equivalence fallacy to me.

    103. Re:False Flag by msi · · Score: 1

      You where a lot closer than the USA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Civil_War

    104. Re:False Flag by crutchy · · Score: 0

      sex shops are small businesses that hire local people... in a country where unemployment is a major concern, anyone attacking small business is a target (and rightfully so)

      i don't care for anyone's addiction to pr0n, but i really don't give a fuck about apple... i hope the guy wins

    105. Re:False Flag by crutchy · · Score: 0

      I thought they only burned vivacious buxom females at the stake

      only the religions that enjoy spit roast... breast is especially good eatin'

    106. Re:False Flag by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Well ya if you want to believe that Wikipedia is the endall source of information...but...in today's world: "False flag terrorism" occurs when elements within a government stage a secret operation whereby government forces pretend to be a targeted enemy while attacking their own forces or people.

      You must be drunk. You just repeated your parent.

      For example, a "false flag operation" is a terrorist act committed by one group for the express purpose of discrediting another group, which is framed for it. Just sayin...

      So was your parent. Go home gvibe, you're drunk.

      Butbutbut... Wikipedia!

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    107. Re:False Flag by crutchy · · Score: 0

      Religion is believing false things that you want to believe despite evidence to the contrary, by substituting faith (credulity) for evidence and reason.

      science isn't without faith

    108. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Town and Country seems to be fading fast, but they're kinda disquieting (as in labeling the plus-size video's "fattyporn", and clerks who seem oddly judgemental), so I really doubt it's apple putting them out of business.

      Life must be pretty rough for the social conservative / religious fundamentalist forced to seek employment at a sex shop due to the shitty economy. It's got to be mentally exhausting to have to judge every customer that wants to be rung up ("Ew, another devil worshiping pornography addict? Dear God, cast out ye sinners and send in some customers who just want to buy morally neutral batteries"), etc. My heart bleeds for the poor dears. ;P

       

    109. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but I can't agree with you at all. There is the known and the unknown. Attributing God or some other faith based concept as a coverall for the unknown is just disguised ignorance.

      The danger of associating the unknown with faith is that challenging the unknown through science meets resistance. Let me cite some examples for you:

      1. Women should not be educated (Science has proved there is no difference in the intellect and ability of the sexes) - Pakistani Taliban
      2. Condoms and birth control are evil (How can a piece of latex be evil?) - The Vatican
      3. Abortion is a "spiritual" issue rather than a woman's choice (Regardless of a pro-life stance, it has nothing to do with faith) - Christian Fundamentalist groups across the world

      And finally, faith adds no value to the acceptance of science. Repeatable results do. Planes fly, electricity powers equipment, mobile phones communicate, antibiotics fight bacteria. Faith in science is irrelevant.

    110. Re:False Flag by lgw · · Score: 1

      I swear, we should just rename the fallacy "no true communist" as it would end half of /. political threads. The word "communist" as commonly used by most speakers (you know, the way we say how words are defined in English) means exactly all those real-word totalitarian states. It's also what actually happens every single time "real communism" is tried on a large scale. Maybe you need a different word or phrase to capture your concept, like "unattainable ideal communism" or something.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    111. Re:False Flag by Gription · · Score: 1

      You are right! That has been proven time and time again by animals in the wild that just stand there going, "Save me. I obviously can't be bothered!". I mean really, what would the world look like if you had all these organisms actively doing something for their own benefit? You would see things like zebras and gazelles running away from lions because of some silly evolutionary pressure for "self responsibility" would include running away from large things with teeth.

      Yeah. It would look like a TV show on the Nature channel. That's only TV so that doesn't ever happen for real...

    112. Re:False Flag by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      And "God did it" is still a reasonable (if unlikely) reason for the Big Bang happening in the first place.

      Apples and oranges. Who (or what) is responsible isn't the same thing as "via what mechanism".

      The absolutely best they can claim is that the devil

      Most creationists don't believe that the devil was responsible for creation.

      or maybe God himself, to "test" us -- ie: make sure we don't try to use the big old brains He gave us

      Perhaps God did it to give us all something to do with our "big old brains" while we're here on this planet? Most people who "do science" seem to enjoy it. Figuring out how something was done is still interesting, even if you leave out the question of who did it. Why does it matter if "God did it" or "it happened from a random chance accident of random molecules" when one is studying how DNA works?

      accuracy within 1% is a reasonable accuracy in many cases

      Claims of accuracy require a known correct value. It is precision that deals with repeatability and consistency between numbers of unknown accuracy.

      If you seek across the world wild web, you'll find places that give the age of the universe ranging from 16+-5, 12.0+-1.5, 13.7+-0.2, and 9-11 GYears. Over the last few hundred years of that process, scientists have told us that the Earth is 2 GY, between 20 and 400 MY, 22MY, 200 MY, 56 MY, 50-150 MY. Radiometric dating has given answers from 1.3 GY to 3.8 GY. And now, with dedicated certainty, 4.54 GY, ref here.

      I don't see anyone having their "big old brains" limited by anything, in fact, lots of "big old brains" have been having a lot of fun working on this. And there is nothing inherent in the statement "God did it" that stops people from being scientists and seeking knowledge.

    113. Re:False Flag by gVibe · · Score: 1

      There is no law against Slashdot`ing while drunk...in fact...some of the best posts on Slashdot are from drunks. There is no law against Slashdot`ing while drunk...in fact...some of the best posts on Slashdot are from drunks.

      --
      Keywords for the NSA overthrow oppressive regime true believers marathon Manhatten the financial district blueprints I
    114. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the exact opposite. Humans are selfish and self-serving like no other species can be. This is a direct result of natural selection. Your ancestors weren't the ones holding the door so people could get through, they were the ones trampling old women and children to get theirs first.

      This is completely incorrect. Humans have evolved a genetic predisposition to cooperate, as this was highly beneficial since the groups that worked together and formed villages and societies prospered far more than the isolated and uncooperative individuals.

      Our ancestors were the ones forming groups and villages and working together, the ones who went it alone or were strictly self serving all died out.

    115. Re:False Flag by cffrost · · Score: 1

      Sir... You're making a scene.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    116. Re: False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      If you really believe that I am sorry. There are two types of Christian churches: those who care about man made rules, traditions and controls and those who only exist to glorify Jesus Christ. The former is what you are referencing. The latter should be welcomed with open arms by every person in the human race.

    117. Re:False Flag by ArsonSmith · · Score: 2

      "Addicted to porn" is not an issue I think would stand up in court. It may be a deep penetrating issue, but all it does is allow us to watch a bunch of people get screwed. Watching evidence I'd have a really hard time too. In the end he'll probably get off.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    118. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      evolution doesn't give a shit how much you reproduce either.

    119. Re:False Flag by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      In those same old days, his estranged wife would have been 'encouraged' to continue performing her 'wifely duties' regardless of her opinions on the matter.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    120. Re:False Flag by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I think evolutionarily that both approaches are selected for. The selfishness basically extends to the person and to the person's offspring, but also to the person's family and tribe though not as strong. Ie, they will hold the door open for their tribe but trample over others who are not in the tribe.

    121. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      * "[...] everyone should share everything equally" - hahaha! sorry, but i find that also naive...

      Like it or not, that's what communism stands for. The fact that it was implemented poorly (or not at all) by many supposedly communist (but actually fascist, totalitarian) states is neither here nor there.

      hmm... not exactly: "from each based to his ability, to each based to his need needs" - Karl Marx. But even if that ("everyone should share everything equally") was "what communism stands for", would still be naive (against human nature). And please... let us stop with that excuse about communism "implemented poorly" - it was implemented as it was supposed to be implemented (dictatorship of the proletariat, e.t.c.).
      As a Greek i have experiance from communism only from neibour (Slavic) countries and immigrants from there, but i think the people that suffered communism don't blame the way it was implemented but the ideology itself my friend...

    122. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We do, however, blame the guy standing on the street corner handing out free samples of dope trying to get people hooked.

      Speak for yourself. Not all of us are dumb cunts.

    123. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's better to lick it raw (and alive).

    124. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we Greeks were a lot closer to communism than USA, mostly because we were bordering Slavic communistic countries that wanted a geo-strategic exit to the Aegean sea - thank God (and our Western Allies) we managed to defeat the Greek communists that had great support from the neibouring communistic countries.

    125. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Links for the above statement:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brood_parasite

    126. Re: False Flag by xlsior · · Score: 1

      If he were to win, it would set a bad precedent. Consider this: how would forcing corporations like apple to automatically redirect Web traffic for a valid domain to a DIFFERENT domain 'because they should have known that's what I meant' be in anyone's best interest? It would be a bad day for ANY website that's not already in the top 50 most visited sires on the net...

    127. Re:False Flag by ThurstonMoore · · Score: 1

      "We do, however, blame the guy standing on
      the street corner handing out free samples
      of dope trying to get people hooked."

      Where is this street corner?

    128. Re:False Flag by LordLucless · · Score: 0

      (It calls itself "Sexy Stuf", and the ex and I don't patronize places that can't spell, but it looked open when we stopped at the Smoky Mountain Knife Museum (It's like a four story mall full of knife dealers, with taxidermied animals and indoor waterfalls, and I'd bet Mr. Sevier would love it if he can stop focusing on sex so much).

      You bastard. That missing parenthesis is going to bug me all day.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    129. Re:False Flag by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      No, it isn't faith. It speaks to credibility. My lack of access to a particle accellerator, but accepting the results has nothing to do with faith. The work is there and documented, and I can access it.

      How do you know that the documents are true? The virgin birth of Christ was documented as well.

      You have faith that the scientific community is not one giant conspiracy. If everyone at CERN conspired to fabricate results, you have faith that one of them would blow the whistle and expose the fraud.

      I have been looking for some kind of objective standard by which it makes sense to believe science over Christianity. I don't think there is one. I think it is ok to just believe scientific findings because they produce more convincing magic. They have convincing pictures of people walking on the moon and I have been on airplanes flying. I own a computer and a laser pointer. Thus far, I have never seen or talked to Jesus or any other religious icon. All we have for religion is stories in an old book and a string of "miracles" that have either been proven to be fake, or are otherwise just unconvincing (e.g. shroud of turin, etc).

      Science has lots of confirmed miracles and religion has zero.

      If you ask another person, he may have a different opinion of the situation.

      It's all subjective.

    130. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure what your post is addressing, because the previous AC post was to deal with the ambiguity in its parent post: was the poster saying porn addiction is BS in all cases, and was that the BS they were referring to later? It is moronic to blame Apple for porn addiction, but it is also stupid to say the concept of pron addiction is BS, even if people use the concept to pass the blame.

    131. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you describe is not religion, but rather politics. This is frequently described as religion by its proponents, but it's not.
      As an example, Jesus specifically taught us that we are to love everyone, even our enemies. Yet, many people who call themselves Christians act exactly as you state, hating those who are not approriately "blessed" by the church, church leaders, or whoever.
      This is precisely the opposite of the way they're supposed to act, according to their own claims of following Jesus' teachings.

    132. Re: False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. This is like suing Sony because you watched porn on their tv. If it's not a false flag op, I'd argue this guy is a first rate nut job.

    133. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought they only burned vivacious buxom females at the stake ... I learned that from Hollyweird!

      Whereas in fact the English witch burnings have been shown to be mainly of ugly, old and poor women. Four culturally undesirable traits and then you get fried, man like sux for some people.

    134. Re:False Flag by Calydor · · Score: 1

      We do, however, blame the guy standing on the street corner handing out free samples of dope trying to get people hooked.

      Exactly. That would be the porn websites.

      Blaming Apple here is like blaming the city for building the street corner where the dope dealer is standing. (I know Apple didn't make the internet, but it's as close as we get in the analogy)

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    135. Re:False Flag by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      No, it isn't faith. It speaks to credibility. My lack of access to a particle accellerator, but accepting the results has nothing to do with faith. The work is there and documented, and I can access it.

      How do you know that the documents are true? The virgin birth of Christ was documented as well.

      I can look up and investigate all the researchers, all their papers, as well as have a peer reviewed document to look at in the first place, reviewed by experts in the field. No faith required. The depth of conspiracy needed to have every single person in the pathway is as close to impossible as can be. But I would not assign it as 100 percent impossible. I have not the faitfh to do that.

      You have faith that the scientific community is not one giant conspiracy.

      It takes a certain amount of hubris to define another person's position for them. Taken from Merriam Webster:

      Faith

      1a : allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty

      1b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions

      2a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion

      2b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust

      3: something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs

      I see nothing in there that assigns faith to credibility built upon the likelyhood of research being true and or accurate, determined by the ability to research the work and worker.

      Especially given that "2b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust" is the exact opposite of the scientific method.

      I completely reject the idea that one word can have two completely opposite definitions. I really do believe that the confusion is baed on the inability for people of faith to understand that there are people who do not think like they do. It is probably necessary for them to believe that lack of faith is faith, and no religion is religion.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    136. Re:False Flag by EuclideanSilence · · Score: 1

      Your post needs 1 more close parenthesis.

      Just sayin.

    137. Re:False Flag by realityimpaired · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Cool story bro, but median (raw) IQ scores have been rising for decades if not centuries.

      The median IQ score is, by definition, 100....

      While the specific skills being taught to obtain that median are different today than they were 200 years ago, I would hardly be as bold as to say that we're smarter today than we were back then. You very likely couldn't survive on your own 200 years ago, or even 100 years ago most likely, because most of us lack skills that would have been considered basic survival. In an agrarian pre-industrial society, your average computer geek would be considered very much a fool.

      Case in point, the standard education given 150 years ago included multiple languages, classics, history, literature, logic, and mathematics. In order to graduate from University, you had to be proficient in all of these. Latin and quite often Greek were not optional, nor were the major European languages: English, Spanish, French, and German. Today, we teach a *very* different array of skills as a base point, but it's not any harder or easier for us than it was for them.

      About the only basis for your point that actually makes some sense is that nutrition, especially in early childhood, has a *huge* impact on your brain development and performance later in life, but even that's a bit of a failing argument: our nutrition today is worse than it was 50 years ago because of the prevalence of junk food in the modern diet and the sedentary nature of the modern lifestyle.

    138. Re:False Flag by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      Why does it matter if "God did it" or "it happened from a random chance accident of random molecules" when one is studying how DNA works?

      The bone of contention there is that sometimes people use the "god did it" as an excuse not to look deeper. Evolution is, for example, a fairly well accepted theory for why the different species came to be, but some people stick their fingers in their ears and refuse to even consider its validity because it runs counter to their idea that "God did it".

      This is not the case for everybody who chooses to have a religion, but it is the case for the ones who are making this difficult for those who don't want religion to dictate everything in their life.

      The world would be a much better place if *everybody* recognized that religion is a personal decision and choice you need to make for yourself, and that another's choice doesn't have to match your own for you to both be happy.

    139. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the exact opposite. Humans are selfish and self-serving like no other species can be. This is a direct result of natural selection. Your ancestors weren't the ones holding the door so people could get through, they were the ones trampling old women and children to get theirs first.

      That's pretty much straight up wrong. Humans are naturally cooperative within small, familial groups and competitive between such groups. We're pack animals, and altruism to people we consider "one of us" is one of our biggest evolutionary advantages, without which human civilization would be impossible.

      You need a better appreciation of the animal kingdom with you think we're more selfish and less altruistic than male lions or cuckoos or any number of parasites.

    140. Re:False Flag by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      Nobody needs an argument against evolution -- intelligent people already know its far from well-proven but interesting to test against until it fails to hold up.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    141. Re:False Flag by MikeBabcock · · Score: 2

      Damn, I wish I could remember the book I perused from a Toronto professor stating that rape was obviously an evolutionary trait to improve the species ... morality and evolution really don't get along when you think about it.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    142. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you think porn addiction isn't real? I mean, for crying out loud, people get addicted to stupid stuff like gambling and working out thanks to the wonderful dopamine pathways in our brains. We have people who are addicted to actual sex, and it can utterly destroy their lives. Why wouldn't porn be addictive, with nearly all the neurochemical rewards and almost none of the economic and social costs that trying to hook up with real people does -- especially when it's easy to find novelty and to escalate into bigger and bigger "hits" via more extreme fetishes that a real partner might balk at?

    143. Re: False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do they glorify some random man who lived and died thousands of years ago? Why would I ever welcome that? Did he do something special?

    144. Re:False Flag by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up, was just gonna say this.

      Evolution doesn't give a damn how much of an irresponsible moron you are, only how much you reproduce. And irresponsible morons are especially good at that.

      Evolution doesn't give a crap how many kids you pop out. That only determines your survival (Natural Selection).

      Evolution is primarily driven by a need to change.

      I expected Slashdot to know the difference between Natural Selection and Evolution. I am disappoint.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    145. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ......

      How do you know that the documents are true? The virgin birth of Christ was documented as well.

      .....

      If I recall one discussion on this the "definition" of virgin was different at that time. So sure, well documented except the language and translation of language was different.

      There was a time not too long ago where babies were conceived by magic. Sex and babies were not connected. Some modern day primitive cultures still have no cause and effect connection.

      Worse I know of healthcare counselors that have encountered client individuals that also had no clue. One individual believed that babies happened by rubbing hips together until there was a spark. Yes rub balloons on you hair sparks....

      There is no limit on stupidity.

    146. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In their eyes you are as good as dead and deserve worse.

      I'm okay with that. What makes me all loopy is why they think *they* aren't as good as dead and deserve worse. Ie, it's their lack of humility and humanity that's the problem.

    147. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding? They went out of their way to save up the money for retirement just to buy a sex shop. What better place can they sit and be incredibly judgmental about everyone who enters with a, "My God! I'm way better than them!" I mean, as a fundamentalist, you need to browbeat your superiority over everyone else precisely because you're so convinced you'll be the first (and maybe only) one in line for hell.

    148. Re: False Flag by crutchy · · Score: 0

      there's been too many bad precedents already allowing corporations to get away with everything. one in the opposite direction certainly won't turn the tide against corporate favour, and it would be fought and appealed to death anyway, but this case is possibly at least one that apple's traditional entourage of lawyers might not have had much experience with so it's probably more likely to get further than any kind of patent or copyright infringement where apple can just open up their standard templates for court documents.

    149. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have faith in a lot of things. But I draw the line at invisible, omnipotent but evidently dis-engaged, genies in the clouds.

    150. Re:False Flag by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      The median IQ score is, by definition, 100....

      Yet another example of, "If you give a man half a book, you make a fool of him."

      Did you miss the word raw? The IQ score is a normalized score. The raw score is a raw score on the same test. People today with 100 IQs on MODERN IQ tests score higher than 100 on OLD tests.

      Let me google that for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=IQ+rise+over+time&l=1

    151. Re: False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He is the definition of good and he is the most influencial man in human history. If you believe nothing else, that is a start.

    152. Re:False Flag by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Dude while you may be correct that real geniuses with vision have probably stayed at the same level when I was a kid we at least had a high percentage with what we called "street smarts" or basic common sense, now we seem to be creating people that are too fucking stupid as to even understand basic cause and effect, see the woman who fed nothing but Mickey D's to her kids for a decade and then tried to sue because she didn't know a decade of 24/7 fast food would make kids fat and diabetic as just one of a billion examples I could post here.

      Maybe its because when I was a kid any woman that had a litter of kids by different men would have been looked upon as a whore and the guys who fathered those kids as worthless scum if they didn't step up but you didn't see the whole "half a dozen kids with half a dozen dead beat dads living like animals" shit like you do today. Hell when I come back from my babe's place, even late at night, I had to dodge kids just running loose like dogs, its seriously fucked up man, and its no wonder we are breeding so many dumbasses when you have kids that aren't being taught shit and left to run loose like animals needless to say their little brains are gonna get exactly jack and shit for stimulation.

      At the end of the day you could take the smartest baby on the planet and put them in a house where nobody bothers to even talk to the kid and the babysitter is reality shows and they'll grow up to be just another moron on the march, you have to put in real effort and do the work when it comes to kids. I should know as I raised my two nephews as my sister lay dying and her ex, their father? Idiot. yet they are both HIGHLY intelligent and I would attribute that to constantly giving them new things to learn and do, if they wanted to play a video game? i would show them how the game was made, so that they knew how everything worked, i even let them build their own PCs at 11 years old, explaining how each piece they were installing worked and how the ones and zeroes were turned into images on a screen.

      Maybe I'm just old fashioned but unless a kid has brain damage or some other mental defect if a kid ends up booger eating stupid i tend to blame the parents. Naturally they can't all be Einsteins but if there is two things little kids loooove its finding out how things work and using their imagination. If the parents would actually give a fuck instead of just letting their kids run wild and ignoring them? Then i think we could avert the march of the morons. Instead sadly it will more likely be like what i saw when I'd pick the boys up from one of their friends houses, a place without so much as a magazine in the house and parents that would just sit watching stupid shit that was the equivalent of "Oww my balls" while making sure junior had a console and a set to keep him out of their hair. Its no damned wonder we have so many dumbasses per square foot now, that is the seeds that society has sewn.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    153. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instead of comparing people to zebras and gazelles it might be wise to compare people to other primates. Start with the other Great Apes. You could start with a Google search for great ape social behavior You'll find in our closest cousins that the weak are often taken care of and that the selfish are often ousted. An ousted chimp will die if it doesn't find another tribe.

      Evolution works on groups. If we do consider zebras they are a great example of evolved traits that are more beneficial as a group than an individual. The stripes on a single zebra are not nearly as effective on an individual as they are in a group. Evolution selected the trait on the group. Not every individual even has to reproduce to contribute to the survival of the genetic code. This is taken to the extreme in many insects.

      Consider. If Bob does not have children but his sister Mary does then he can still contribute the survival of the closest copy of his DNA that's around by helping ensure the survival of his nieces and nephews. In a capitalist society there is a strong likely-hood that the labor supply and labor demand will not always be equal. In theory, zero unemployment would mean no movement in the labor market. That's not necessarily good. I've read somewhere around 4% is good.

      Regardless of the number, we need to accept that economic ups and down means fluctuating unemployment. Which society do you think is more likely to survive? The one that feeds its poorest or the one that lets the poor go hungry? The bottom 40% of our species in the land known as the United States have access to .2% of its wealth. We can cut social aid and see how evolution responds to that if you wish but historically the 'let them eat cake' attitude doesn't seem to be that successful.

    154. Re:False Flag by Evtim · · Score: 1

      Often the self-interest aligns with the interest of the group. No human can survive on its own (OK, perhaps a few dozens can, but that is in the noise).

      The technological advancements only make it more so. Today, to exaggerate a bit, the action of anyone affect everyone.

      At the end, it is in your best interest to act according to the golden rule. The most selfish thing to do - be an altruist!

    155. Re:False Flag by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I can look up and investigate all the researchers, all their papers, as well as have a peer reviewed document to look at in the first place, reviewed by experts in the field. No faith required. The depth of conspiracy needed to have every single person in the pathway is as close to impossible as can be. But I would not assign it as 100 percent impossible. I have not the faitfh to do that.

      So you made a jump form "every single person would have to be involved" to "therefore it is close to impossible". What did you use to make that jump? Was it Science? Can you use science to prove science? Logic? Even logic itself says that logic can;t be used to prove the correctness of logic. Logical axioms, by definition, have no evidence. They must be taken for granted. What is belief in something without evidence, but faith?

    156. Re:False Flag by inasity_rules · · Score: 2

      Not all "creationists" are young earthers. In fact doubt in that particular interpretation dates back to Augustine.

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    157. Re:False Flag by Altrag · · Score: 1

      Who (or what) is responsible isn't the same thing as "via what mechanism".

      Precisely my point. While nothing is ever 100% provable (especially over astrological or evolutionary timescales,) we have some very good theories for things like planet generation and the evolution of life as we know it. No our theories are not 100% complete, but they're complete enough that "The universe winked into instance 6000 years ago" has become an obviously false mechanism.

      If you want to talk about "who" did it well then we can take that to the logical extreme as well -- God is also responsible for the scientists who figured all those theories out being there in the first place, so therefore belief in God itself proves creationism false. Really, we can talk these points in circles forever because short of the second coming, there's no way to prove (or disprove) God did squat all even if He exists. All you have is faith, and faith alone is not a scientifically valid argument. Being written in the Bible is still useless because you have to take it on faith (again) that not only was the Bible truly Gods word, but that 2000+ years of human dickery hasn't corrupted God's words into something wholly unlike His original direction. That's a lot of faith and while the Bible certainly contains fact, it is not in itself sole evidence of said facts (scientifically speaking.)

      Most creationists don't believe that the devil was responsible for creation.

      I never said that. I suggested a possible claim that the devil fucked around with the planet (post-creation, presumably) in order to confuse us as a counterargument to any dating schemes that would disprove the creationist "theory" of a 6000 year old Earth.

      Why does it matter if "God did it" or "it happened from a random chance accident of random molecules" when one is studying how DNA works?

      No idea, and I have absolutely no problem with this line of thinking. Where I run into problems is when someone tells me the former faith-based "theory" wholly rejects the latter science-based theory.

      Claims of accuracy require a known correct value. It is precision that deals with repeatability and consistency between numbers of unknown accuracy.

      To be absolutely certain of your claim yes (but then why would you need estimates?) But multiple independent sources verifying a claim can be interpolated with the magic of statistics can be used to make an educated guess as to the accuracy of your estimate. Yes its still fallible (all of your sources could be incorrect) but its a hell of a lot better than just picking a number out of a book and claiming with absolute certainty that that number is correct because that same book said it is.

      If you seek across the world wild web, you'll find places that give the age of the universe ranging from 16+-5, 12.0+-1.5, 13.7+-0.2, and 9-11 GYears. Over the last few hundred years of that process, scientists have told us that the Earth is 2 GY, between 20 and 400 MY, 22MY, 200 MY, 56 MY, 50-150 MY. Radiometric dating has given answers from 1.3 GY to 3.8 GY. And now, with dedicated certainty, 4.54 GY, ref here.

      Absolutely. New measurements are being made all the time. Some verifying previous measurements, some refuting them. Looking back billions of years is hard to be sure. But none of those measurements are anywhere close to 6k years. I don't even want to guess never mind compute how many sigmas you'd need to get an estimate (never mind many estimates) in the MY or GY range if the real value is 6k. It would be a hell of a margin of error.

      I don't see anyone having their "big old brains" limited by anything, in fact, lots of "big old brains" have been having a lot of fun working on this. And there is nothing inherent in the statement "God did it" that stops people from being scientists and seeking knowledge.

    158. Re:False Flag by Altrag · · Score: 1

      I can't disagree with your examples. What I disagree with is the premise the people haven't always been that fucking stupid. I think the biggest difference we're seeing isn't an increase in stupidity and irresponsibility (at least not a great disastrous one,) but an increase of general knowledge of these things.

      Reality shows are to life what porn is to sex -- over-the-top appeals to the senses. Different senses generally but nonetheless. What they do have in common is that neither of them are particularly realistic. Sure if you look hard enough, you can find someone who fits a reality show to a T (hell they find those people somewhere..) but if you look hard enough you can find a girl who wants to fuck like a porn star too. But because they exist doesn't mean they're particularly common.

      Lets take a fun example of humanity's "responsibility" and "common sense" over history -- The royal families in many nations! Inbred so much that their blood doesn't clot and half of them are functionally insane. Yet even without knowledge of genetics, practically any good animal breeder from any point in history could have told them the likely outcome of too much incest. And these are the people who ruled our nations, sacrificed our lives in wars the average person knew or cared nothing about and so on.

      I'd wager to say that humanity has always been just as stupid as we are now, on average. We've just invented better ways (social, technological, political) for the extremely stupid to make a name for themselves in ways that were previously unheard of. Its just too bad that the extremely smart (some of whom built those "better ways!") rarely get the same public attention -- watching the act of inventing a better TV isn't nearly as exciting as watching some moron make an ass of themselves in front of it.)

    159. Re: False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And IQ tests are infamously biased, and demonstrably ineffective at measuring "intelligence". So rising IQ scores means very, very little

    160. Re: False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Genetic diversity.

    161. Re:False Flag by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      There is no such thing as a "need" to change at the level of nature. Evolution is not much more than the statement "things change, including living things". Nothing has to change. It just so happens that on a evolutionary scale, if a species does not, its chances for survival diminish.

    162. Re:False Flag by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      Do not give them any ideas. If they patent insanity, then they are going to try suing me.

    163. Re: False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In your opinion.

      Try being a little more open minded. Not everyone believes as you do and to imply that everyone should is the height of arrogance.

    164. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are confusing education with intelligence.

    165. Re:False Flag by Cobonobo · · Score: 1

      But think how much deeper down the rabbit-hole they could lead you...

    166. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the USSRs leaders were very explicit in stating that what they were implementing was not communism. They believed that communism was a great thing to aim for, but that to get to it you needed to go through an unhappy stage in which a dictatorship trained everyone into the communist philosophy.

    167. Re:False Flag by dywolf · · Score: 1

      very few people actually make those claims

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    168. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the end he'll probably get off.

      That's why he's in court in the first place!

    169. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >...that pile of bananas would be hard to miss

      Shaped into that big pyramid as it was ...

    170. Re:False Flag by lericah · · Score: 1

      Religion is starting to die out, will it die before any more serious damage is done?

    171. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But cash registers should have a filter to prevent the sale of tobacco products. And the trucks could be equipped with tobacco sensors and - in the default settings - refuse to drive.

    172. Re:False Flag by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      So you made a jump form "every single person would have to be involved" to "therefore it is close to impossible". What did you use to make that jump?

      What jump was that? If you have to have some times thousands of people involved in a conspiracy, `many of whome would be professionally destroyed if that involvement was found out, it is no "jump" to say it would be very unlikely to the point of near impossibility. No jump required, unless you are now redifning logical jump to include rational conclusion.

      Was it Science? Can you use science to prove science? Logic? Even logic itself says that logic can't be used to prove the correctness of logic. Logical axioms, by definition, have no evidence. They must be taken for granted. What is belief in something without evidence, but faith?

      Logic isn't science. Perfectly logical arguments can be made starting from known non-truths. Your argument has now gone circular. You can now use it to state that I have "faith" that say, a reaction between a given acid and a given base will be the same each time. If say we take a simple reaction between sodium bicarbonate and acetic acid that produces large amounts of Carbon dioxide, that I am taking it on faith that every time you combine the two, the same thing will happen. If the two components are mixed together, the same thing will happen. We can look up the reason why. And thereason why is dtetermined at a molecular level, and is repeatable. Defining my acceptance of that reaction, and the belief of some people that if they accept some deity as their God, they will be rewarded in some afterlife as identical things is silly and useless. You perform the interesting exercise of making two opposite concepts identical, and forcing one word upon them both.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    173. Re:False Flag by similar_name · · Score: 1

      There's little evidence that people are getting genetically smarter. It has more to do with improved nutrition and education than anything else.

    174. Re:False Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evolution is primarily driven by a need to change.

      And you're disappointed. Natural selection and change are mechanism within the Theory of Evolution. Change is an observation. Natural selection is an observation. Evolution is an explanation of those observations.

    175. Re:False Flag by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Doesn't change the FACT that there is zero evidence of any decline.

    176. Re:False Flag by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      I didn't logic was science. I was asking how you made the jump. I accept that logical arguments can be made from known truths. What I am asking you is why you have decided to believe in logic. If you have decided that there is a good logical argument to believe in logic, then it is you who has resorted to a circular argument.

      If I use your chemistry example, where you say mixing 2 chemicals also yields the same result. You say there is a good reason to believe this at the molecular level. What leads you to believe that the molecules will always behave in the same way for all eternity? It is a fundamental axiom of science that the universe is governed by laws and that these laws never change. You can't, by definition, prove that this is true, especially not with science. It is an axiom. You are supposed to just believe it.

      If you believe the scientific method is a good way to test the truth of various claims about the universe, how do you test the scientific method itself as a valid method of determining truth? Is there an experiment you can do to prove the scientific method itself is correct? Is this experiment valid if you use the scientific method to do this test?

      I will state that I wholeheartedly follow science. I am an atheist. But I do recognize that science and logic fall into the same problem that religion does. Christianity bestows divinity on the Bible and uses the Bible as proof of the divine. God is always provably true within the rules dictated by the religion.

      For example: God is real because every blade of grass is a miracle and only God is capable of miracles.

      To me this sounds like nonsense. But thats because I have already adopted a scientific world view. If I had adopted the world view that everything is a miracle and only God can perform miracles, then the claims of science to explain things with natural laws rather than a divine creator would seem ridiculous (and do to many religious people).

      Believers of science, logic, and mathematics take axioms of those disciplines on faith. Christians take the Bible on faith. What's the difference? The only difference I can see is the results that can be produced by the practitioners of these disciplines. I don't see a fundamental differences of the claims themselves.

      If Christians upon praying could do magic like shooting laser beams and bring back people from the dead, this would increase the credibility of their claims. But so far I consider their claims to be basically worthless. The claims of science are very convincing.

    177. Re:False Flag by gravis777 · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't surprise me.

      Interesting way to make your voice heard - threaten to sue, but say you will drop the lawsuit if you do this (interesting, sounds kinda like blackmail - we will sue unless you do this).

      May not be such a bad idea though - first time you setup your computer, you get asked if you want to enable a porn filter or not (or whatever you want to call your web filter). You probably don't even have to really maintain it - just block Playboy.com , the .sex and the .xxx domains and say that you provided a filter. Something that could be coded up in a few minutes, just add another screen that users have to click through, and get all of these nut cases off your back.

      Of course, and even better idea might to be to actually provide a functioning filter. Could be a great selling point for many families. To turn said filter off (after you turn it on - remember, you have to turn it on during the setup) requires an admin password. The fact that the user may know the admin password is moot.

      So yeah, its a stupid stupid lawsuit, but it may not be that bad of an idea for Apple to actually do it.

    178. Re:False Flag by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      While nothing is ever 100% provable ... but they're complete enough that "The universe winked into instance 6000 years ago" has become an obviously false mechanism.

      You started out right and then took a quick U-turn at the end. "Obviously false"? "Winked" is not the correct verb. I think you are not speaking pedantically and are instead making an offhand reference to literal interpretation creationism.

      There are people on this planet who make a living fooling others. They copy something of value and pass it off as the real thing. Some of them are very good at it. Sometimes they even fool the experts. A work of art that was allegedly painted in 1600 was actually painted in 2000. How could this be? Because the "artist" went to great lengths to duplicate the materials and methods that would make it look like the painting was done 400 years ago instead of 10.

      Piltdown Man. The missing link in 1920. A fake in 1953.

      Now, if there is a being that can create a universe by speaking a word, do you not imagine that he could create it in such a way that it looked billions of years old to a human? To a being for whom time is irrelevant, do you not think he could speed up or slow down physical processes so that even if they began in the state we assume they did they would achieve a state we assume they would be in 13.7Gy later? If a human can fool other humans, how can you claim that a God cannot? Are you trying to claim that God is some kind of rube who can't figure out how to skip past the "coming attraction" ads when playing a DVD he rented? If God DID create the universe he must have done it 13.7Gy ago and he couldn't possibly have fast-forwarded through the boring bits to get to the interesting parts: humans? I'm not trying to convince you that is what happened, but I'm talking specifically to your claim of "obviously false". It is only "obviously false" because you assume as false that which you want to be false, and then the natural result is that what you've assumed to be false, is.

      If you want to talk about "who" did it well then we can take that to the logical extreme as well -- God is also responsible for the scientists who figured all those theories out being there in the first place, so therefore belief in God itself proves creationism false.

      What an absurd line of reasoning. God created scientists who claim God does not exist, therefore God does not exist? That's your argument in a nutshell. You're assuming what you need to prove -- that scientists are right -- to prove that scientists are right. You're ignoring that those theories deal with process and not actor. And you're abandoning the true meaning of "theory" in your attempt at religion-bashing.

      All you have is faith, and faith alone is not a scientifically valid argument.

      In science these are called "assumptions". Belief in things unseen. Nobody was around to measure the rate of radioactive decay 10,000 years ago, yet the assumption is that it was the same as what is measured today. From this faith comes the age of the Earth. Assumptions are all around us in science, yet few seem to understand (or just admit) their significance.

      In high school, I was fascinated by geometry. Five assumptions lead to all of Euclidian geometry. But what if one or more of those assumptions are wrong? Lobachevsky was someone who questioned the assumptions about parallel lines. Now, in our local bit of space (which has been expanding over time) Euclid seems to be right. The universe is a large place. He's not "obviously right" (nor Lobachevsky "obviously wrong") when you consider the size of the problem. Just as Newton wasn't "obviously wrong" about classical physics, nor is what we now know is "obviously wrong" useless.

      To be absolutely certain of your claim yes (but then why would you need estimates?)

      No. Accuracy does not mean you are absolutely certain of your numbers. It mean

    179. Re:False Flag by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      No, that's called a "distraction". A "false flag" is the CIA bombing the WTC, and setting up a terrorist orgnaization to take the fall. Bonus Flase Flag points if the reaction to the initial operation benefits yours. The original uses included simply running a false flag on a see going vessel to foil IFF (visual "what flag is that" at the time) to get close enough to kill the target, and deliberately running a specific flag in such an operation so survivors would report the wrong perpetrators to cause problems between the attacked and the blamed. The latter was more effective than the former, so "false flag" is generally assumed to be the latter, unless specified otherwise.

    180. Re:False Flag by Altrag · · Score: 1

      I think you are not speaking pedantically and are instead making an offhand reference to literal interpretation creationism.

      Not offhand -- I mentioned on several occasions that I was referring specifically to literal creation theories (and even more specifically to the zealotous creationists that make the most media noise.) I have no problem with you or anyone else reconciling religion's ancient teachings with what modern science has taught us about the world. I have a problem when you claim that religion's teachings deny scientific fact.

      As for your examples -- I have never claimed science is infallible. In fact I explicitly stated an example where that's not the case (Newton's gravity which is a hell of a lot more accurately measured than anything from the Earth's history -- and still found to be wrong 400 years later.)

      The difference is that science can be proven wrong. The religious zealots I've been discussing on the other hand do not believe that the Bible (and to be specific since apparently reading between the lines is hard, I mean their interpretation of the Bible) can be proven wrong in even the slightest context.

      God created scientists who claim God does not exist, therefore God does not exist? That's your argument in a nutshell.

      Way to rip out context. No, God created scientists who claim specific parts of the Bible are incorrect. For those people who believe the Bible must be 100% correct, having proof to the contrary is equivalent "God does not exist." The scientists who came up with such a proof are not making that claim -- the zealots are the one claiming that the proof must be wrong because of this (false) logic.

      If you want a good historic example -- the number zero was banned from mathematics for a few hundred years because some zealot in the church decided that zero == void == no God and since the assumption was that God existed, zero obviously could not exist (it was church ruled time after all -- anyone who didn't agree with that assumption was shown "proof" in the form of a whip if not a gallows.)

      Nowadays not even the craziest zealot (well ok, maybe the craziest one) would believe zero == no God, but that wasn't just a whacky theory at one point it was a fundamental belief.

      In science these are called "assumptions". Belief in things unseen. Nobody was around to measure the rate of radioactive decay 10,000 years ago, yet the assumption is that it was the same as what is measured today. From this faith comes the age of the Earth. Assumptions are all around us in science, yet few seem to understand (or just admit) their significance.

      Absolutely, but this goes back to having the ability to prove the assumptions wrong. That is a critical component of any scientific theory and the major feature that distinguishes a scientific theory from a faith-based one. The faith-based one can by nature never be disproved which intrinsically makes it non-scientific. Few people and no legitimate scientists would claim science is complete and 100% correct.

      No, it wouldn't take a great "margin of error" in a measurement that is based on flawed assumptions for it to be completely wrong.

      Right, which is why you need multiple independent sources for verification. Yes its possible that they're ALL wrong but the more you have the less likely that possibility is. You're absolutely correct that we don't have a 100% accurate estimate for the age of our planet -- but we've got enough estimates from various sources that all put it way way beyond 6000 years that we can be fairly certain a literal interpretation of the Bible's timeline is incorrect.

      Hm.. my quoting of your post is getting out of order, but I'm not going to worry about that on a day+ old thread, so continuing on...

      And yet, scientists do this every day of their lives. Well, almost. If I

    181. Re:False Flag by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      Case in point, the standard education given 150 years ago included multiple languages, classics, history, literature, logic, and mathematics. In order to graduate from University, you had to be proficient in all of these. Latin and quite often Greek were not optional, nor were the major European languages: English, Spanish, French, and German. Today, we teach a *very* different array of skills as a base point, but it's not any harder or easier for us than it was for them.

      How would demographics compare between modern universities and universities from 150 years ago?

      I'm guessing, pretty reliably I'd imagine, that today a considerably larger proportion of the population is educated. For example, education in the UK wasn't even compulsory until 1880. In the population as a whole, education levels are massively improved over those found 150 years ago. Where I see risk is in education becoming too narrowly focused on stuff that makes money.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    182. Re:False Flag by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      Education being mandatory isn't indicative of a person's intelligence. Learning, yes, but intelligence is something that's extremely difficult to quantify, in part because it doesn't actually rely on learning and book smarts. :)

    183. Re:False Flag by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      Raising kids is tricky business, and they don't come with instruction manuals.

      I agree with you that just ignoring your kids is a recipe for complete disaster. Not only will their brains fail to be stimulated in a positive manner, they will also grow up feeling insecure, unloved, and unwanted. However, I thought I'd take a moment to chime in with what kids *do* need, in case anybody is reading this.

      First, kids need to feel like their parents love them and need to feel safe when they're with their parents. If you don't love them, fake it.

      Developmentally, little kids need to learn to think symbolically and then abstractly. You and I do this intuitively, so we don't even think about it, but just the act of thinking of a toy train as a toy and a train rather than a piece of painted wood is insanely important. To help them along this path, you need to get down on the floor and play with them.

      Crucially important is reading to them. Helps their language and with abstract thinking. This is difficult if mom has a 3rd grade education, but at the same time, if the kid isn't read to from the start, the kid will most likely present as "booger-eating stupid" starting in middle school when abstract reasoning is required. It'll be one of those, "why the fuck don't you get this? No seriously, this is dead easy, why can't you process it? Are you broken?" sort of way.

      Also, playing "make believe" with them. Same reasoning as the above. You need to develop their curious little brains from the very beginning.

      In closing, I just want to say that every kids is different and all bets are off. You need to be attentive and do what's right for your kid and not follow generic guidelines blindly.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    184. Re:False Flag by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      "Addicted to porn"

      Porn is addictive? I need to confirm this firsthand.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    185. Re:False Flag by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      It's not like you say "Siri, I like dogs" and it goes right to a gallery of people having doggystyle sex.

      That's preposterous. Obviously it'd go right to a gallery of people having sex with dogs. ;)

      Technically, it -should- call up pictures of the speaker having sex with dogs. If it's a truly smart program, it will be able to photo-manip two pictures together to show it.

    186. Re:False Flag by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      False flag for those who do not know is what the government or any organization does to distract the not-so-smart people while a more sinister plan is enacted. In short: "Look a flying saucer!" meanwhile "BANG!" something blows up.

      That's actually more "Wag the Dog."

  2. In Soviet Tennessee by instagib · · Score: 4, Funny

    pr0n looks for YOU!

    1. Re:In Soviet Tennessee by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2

      pr0n looks for YOU!

      in Soviet Xbone, Porn looks at you.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  3. safe mode by RichMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Remove the battery. Your device is now configured in safe mode. Unless you are disturbed by a black screen the device is now configured not to present offensive material.

    Any material is possible to be a problem to someone. As "safe mode" cannot be sufficiently defined yet leave the device with any function at all "safe mode" is impossible".

    1. Re:safe mode by alen · · Score: 5, Funny

      remove the battery? this is an iphone we are talking about

    2. Re:safe mode by war4peace · · Score: 1

      I would mark you as Informative. Every day :)

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    3. Re:safe mode by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Safe mode for this moron: Get hammer, apply to device repeatedly until offensive content is no longer shown.

      PS - this was a macbook.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    4. Re:safe mode by rullywowr · · Score: 1

      Safe mode for this moron: Get hammer, apply to anatomical device repeatedly until offensive content is no longer shown. There, FTFY.

    5. Re:safe mode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Remove the battery. Your device is now configured in safe mode. Unless you are disturbed by a black screen the device is now configured not to present offensive material.

      I don't know. Those screens are awfully reflective...

    6. Re:safe mode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you had read the article, you would know that he was using a Macbook Pro to visit kink.com or other sites..

    7. Re:Safe Mode by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Well apple could offer devices with safe mode on them. These devices would be unable to connect to the internet (no NIC) or have any non keyboard/mouse I/O which would provide the necessary safe mode. This means no: internal expansion, USB, Firewire, Thunderbolt, DVD, CD-ROM, etc. All apple would have to do is offer them for sale (don't even bother making one) since I don't think they will be able to sell a single one.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    8. Re:Safe Mode by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      His claim is a little more precise than that. He recounts a chain of events:
      1. He wanted to look at facebook.
      2. He typoed something (probably one of those idiots who puts 'facebook' into the address bar and lets the search engine add a .com) and ended up at a porn site.
      3. Upon being confronted with porn, he was struck by an irresistable instinctive urge to look at it for hour after hour, week after week, destroying his life.

      His claim is based on the idea that if Apple sold devices with filtering installed and enabled by default, the chain would be broken between steps two and three. That appears to be the only part of his argument that makes sense though - most of it consists of crazed ramblings that suggest his mental state may be impaired.

    9. Re:safe mode by kthreadd · · Score: 2

      Well, you can remove the battery. It may be news to some but many things are not impossible just because it can't be done in 2 seconds.

    10. Re:safe mode by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 2

      Smashing it with a sledgehammer does not count as a viable battery removal technique.

    11. Re:safe mode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parental Controls already exist on the laptops and desktops. It's not Apple's fault that he bought the wrong tool for the job. Oh wait, he's the parent in this story.

      heh, and my captcha is "stiffen"

    12. Re:safe mode by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      In that case, electrician's tape over the glass would work.

    13. Re:safe mode by CCarrot · · Score: 1

      when i saw "safe mode" i thought about Windows safe mode. Press F8 to enter safe mode. gah, i've been using Windows too long. lol

      Mr. Chris Sevier meant a browser mode that applied filters to search engines and blocked adult websites.

      so Mr. Chris Sevier actually wrote a fifty page complaint. wow, that is a long complaint.

      Especially when you're writing it one handed...

      --
      "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
    14. Re:safe mode by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      I wonder if he's going to blame Apple for the fact that much of the kink.com content requires a subscription to view. You know, they twisted his arm by allowing his payment to be processed or something.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    15. Re:safe mode by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      last I checked, no sledgehammer is necessary to remove screws... unless your an android user I guess...

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    16. Re:safe mode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's African American screen, you insensitive clod!

    17. Re:safe mode by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      No, you use a safe pry tool, some fancy screwdrivers, and a soldering iron to remove the battery from an iphone.

      --
      Not a sentence!
  4. Not his fault by MrEricSir · · Score: 5, Funny

    What was he supposed to do? It's not his fault Apple makes such sexy hardware.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    1. Re:Not his fault by e_armadillo · · Score: 2

      Yes, the hardware *was* asking for it :-)

    2. Re:Not his fault by cyclopropene · · Score: 5, Funny

      What was he supposed to do? It's not his fault Apple makes such sexy hardware.

      Get an iBurka?

      --
      Shouldn't you be doing something useful?
    3. Re:Not his fault by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Funny

      What was he supposed to do? It's not his fault Apple makes such sexy hardware.

      Please observe the symbol on reverse side of your Apple product, facing away from the screen. Look at that: A tasty apple, with a bite taken out.

      The fool. He picks up an internet connected device marked with the symbol of man's descent into sin(and nakedness) and then is surprised when his concupiscent flesh is besotted with unclothed harlots? Isn't that the most plausible outcome?

    4. Re:Not his fault by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Dammit,of all the days to not have mod points. +1 funny

      --
      Time to offend someone
    5. Re:Not his fault by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Computers don't download porn; people download porn.

      --
      the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
    6. Re:Not his fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm surprised he didn't sue Apple because he couldn't find porn fast enough.

    7. Re:Not his fault by AdamStarks · · Score: 1

      Gives a whole new meaning to "Steve Job"s.

    8. Re:Not his fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fool. He picks up an internet connected device marked with the symbol of man's descent into sin(and nakedness)

      Technically the nakedness was before they ate the apple and pants were one of the results of eating the apple.

    9. Re: Not his fault by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 2

      To stop a bad guy with a porn addiction you need a good guy with a porn addiction?

      --

      I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
    10. Re:Not his fault by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Computers don't download porn; people download porn.

      Strictly speaking, the computer does download the porn. The person just tells the computer to do it.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    11. Re:Not his fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Computers don't download porn; people download porn.

      Sssssh! Shut up, dude! I've almost got my girlfriend convinced that's where the all the videos on my pr0n drive came from!

    12. Re:Not his fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Source? I've inserted Cat5 into every orifice I have and I still can't get it to work.

    13. Re: Not his fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To stop a bad guy with a porn addiction you need a good guy with a porn addiction?

      That was the funniest thing I read today. Well played sir, well played.

    14. Re: Not his fault by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      And to protect the children, we need a good guy armed with porn stationed at every school?

    15. Re:Not his fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They way most Appel* fanatics blather on, fight the dumb fight, etc., one might be led to assume they were receiving those steve-jobs, not giving 'em out.

      * Oops, I made a spelling error; I guess I should've "GET A MAC!"ed instead of getting this boring-looking computer. ;o(

    16. Re:Not his fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see nothing in your referenced source talking about an apple.

    17. Re: Not his fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather a lack of will [to stop watching porno]” - Vince Lombardi

  5. A safe mode by EvanED · · Score: 1

    Sevier is seeking damages from Apple, but said he we will drop the lawsuit if Apple agrees to sell devices with a 'safe mode.'"

    Apple machines do come with a safe mode. Here is the relevant documentation (though primarily geared toward leaving safe mode).

  6. Personal Responsibility by Sparticus789 · · Score: 5, Funny

    If this continues, every item sold within the US is going to have a 89-page disclaimer. It is bad enough that insulated cups have warnings about the contents being hot, now electronic devices need to have a disclaimer about the internet having pornography? This guy is literally, blaming the messenger (company that makes the device), for this his own actions and lack of self-control. Plenty of people can use the internet and even peruse sexual content without having their lives destroyed.

    Maybe he should have tried getting a life and setting his priorities, instead of watching the Farrah Abraham video.

    --
    sudo make me a sandwich
    1. Re:Personal Responsibility by DigitAl56K · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If this continues, every item sold within the US is going to have a 89-page disclaimer.

      I believe Apple already serves this with every iTunes update.

      Case dismissed!

    2. Re:Personal Responsibility by bonehead · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I remember a time when people were expected to take responsibility for their own actions. The world was a much better place then.

      Now everyone who engages in anti-social / psychopathic behavior is a "victim". We blame government. We blame society. And best of all, we blame inanimate objects. But under no circumstances can we point out that the guy actually chose to behave in the way he did, and that he is entirely, 100% to blame for the situation he finds himself in.

      (I'm not saying that viewing pornography is "in general" anti-social behavior, however, within the context of the boundaries of his marriage, it apparently qualified.)

    3. Re:Personal Responsibility by MrKevvy · · Score: 1

      "It is bad enough that insulated cups have warnings about the contents being hot..."

      You have a point: Hallowe'en Superman costumes contain the disclaimer "Costume does not enable wearer to fly."

      --
      -- Insert witty one-liner here. --
    4. Re:Personal Responsibility by Sparticus789 · · Score: 2

      That would make MUCH more sense on the Green Lantern costume. Everyone KNOWS that Superman can fly because of the Earth's yellow sun, not his costume.

      --
      sudo make me a sandwich
    5. Re:Personal Responsibility by maliqua · · Score: 0

      I personally blame the USA since you guys seem to have a monopoly on this retarded litigious crap but luckily your media spreads far and wide so your insidious sickness and sense of entitlement will spread to the rest of us eventually

      your country is like a plague on the competence of the world

    6. Re:Personal Responsibility by Sparticus789 · · Score: 1

      So what country are you from which does not have a "sense of entitlement"?

      --
      sudo make me a sandwich
    7. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does it matter, literally every where else in the world is more reasonable and understands its not always someone else fault when you do something stupid, everywhere else in the world doesn't resort to OMG i made a mistake lets see if i can sue someone and pass the blame along, perhaps i'm not stupid perhaps its the company that provided me with the tools that's stupid for letting me use them

    8. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This won't continue. The guy can't win against Apple. If he did it on home wifi - he paid for the internet access. If he used the cell data connection, he paid for the access, and the phone company mandated he have a data plan. If he did it at Starbucks, well, then he can sue Starbucks.

      Other bad things might happen, but in this case Apple is the wrong target.

    9. Re:Personal Responsibility by Ioldanach · · Score: 1

      If this continues, every item sold within the US is going to have a 89-page disclaimer. It is bad enough that insulated cups have warnings about the contents being hot, now electronic devices need to have a disclaimer about the internet having pornography? This guy is literally, blaming the messenger (company that makes the device), for this his own actions and lack of self-control. Plenty of people can use the internet and even peruse sexual content without having their lives destroyed.

      Maybe he should have tried getting a life and setting his priorities, instead of watching the Farrah Abraham video.

      Hey, it's not his fault his wife found his link to Lesbian Spank Inferno!

    10. Re:Personal Responsibility by maliqua · · Score: 1

      there really is no right target in this, the man is weak and pathetic and needs to own up to what he has done

    11. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      You seem to be confusing the word "American" with the word "Democrat"

    12. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's like the difference between pig shit and sheep shit, it all gets shoveled in the same pile at the end of the day

    13. Re:Personal Responsibility by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Green lantern can only fly because of his ring. The problem with the costumes is just that they rarely come with the charging device.

    14. Re:Personal Responsibility by greg1104 · · Score: 1

      Coffee cups are a really bad example to bring up here. The warnings are there to try and dislodge ideas like the McDonald's coffee lawsuit. The reason that woman won a large judgement against McDonald's is that they were knowingly selling an unsafe product and just didn't care what happened to their customers.

      So the problems leading to the warnings were not so much that people were stupid. It was that some number of corporations selling coffee were acting irresponsibly. In a social environment where legal penalties are the only way to add corporate accountability for unsafe behavior, you're kind of stuck with suing them to make a useful change. And when that happens, you can expect that those companies are going to add warnings to try and reduce their liability. That's not really connected to consumers being dumb in the coffee case.

      The reason why that's a particularly bad example is that people see that sort of necessary legal action, and then apply it to shifting blame for any problem with a product. The subtle difference is that the McDonald's coffee was unfit for its stated purpose as sold, making it defective by objective measures. You cannot measure anything wrong with an Apple product because it lets you view porn. That's a subjective, moral issue rather than something you can build a factual case around.

    15. Re:Personal Responsibility by greg1104 · · Score: 1

      You kids and your new fangled reboot nonsense. Real fans know Superman can fly because Earth's gravity is lower than Krypton's.

    16. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's the law of large numbers, civil law, and the attention whoring media.

      In a country the size of the US where anyone can sue anyone over anything, you're bound to get some really stupid lawsuits. Then when the media hears about a real gem they blow it out of proportion because it gets attention.

      This guy has zero chance of winning his suit. But we hear about it because it's an extreme case, and therefore "interesting" whereas the countless other civil suites that are less redicilous get no coverage because they're "boring".

    17. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TROLL?!

      troilll!

      how is that a troll the guy was the only reasonable post in this entire line, yet he gets modded troll that fuck you slashdot shitheads

    18. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure the judge is going to laugh and laugh at this poor disturbed fool. I wouldn't take some nut filing a lawsuit as anything that's going to lead to product disclaimers.

    19. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. You are too. I am okay with that message of entitlement being spread.

    20. Re:Personal Responsibility by CCarrot · · Score: 1

      If this continues, every item sold within the US is going to have a 89-page disclaimer. It is bad enough that insulated cups have warnings about the contents being hot, now electronic devices need to have a disclaimer about the internet having pornography? This guy is literally, blaming the messenger (company that makes the device), for this his own actions and lack of self-control. Plenty of people can use the internet and even peruse sexual content without having their lives destroyed.

      Maybe he should have tried getting a life and setting his priorities, instead of watching the Farrah Abraham video.

      Indeed, right along the lines of an alcoholic suing the manufacturer of his/her favorite beer. "If it wasn't so damn good I wouldn't want it so often and I wouldn't be addicted, y'r honor!"

      I's a BS money grab, or someone seeking his fifteen minutes. Seriously, I thought this kind of thing was what the Jerry Springer show was supposed to be an outlet for...too bad it's cancelled. At least when it was on, it was an automatic skip-channel reflex...now it seems that that's half of the current programming...

      --
      "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
    21. Re:Personal Responsibility by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      It is bad enough that insulated cups have warnings about the contents being hot, now electronic devices need to have a disclaimer about the internet having pornography?

      It's worse than that. Disclaimer on peanut butter jar, "ALLERGY WARNING: CONTAINS PEANUTS".

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    22. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      googling Farrah Abraham now...

    23. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the current age Green Lanterns can fly because they will it through their rings, so where do the Green Lanterns' costumes come into play, because they are shown as ring constructs these days as well.

    24. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes your entitled to THOSE THINGS.

      Not entitled to a life of zero liability, no consequences and coddling by society

      you sir are what the world hates about america

    25. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We blame government. We blame society. And best of all, we blame inanimate objects.

      I blame the TERRORISTS!

    26. Re:Personal Responsibility by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      I personally blame the USA since you guys seem to have a monopoly on this retarded litigious crap but luckily your media spreads far and wide so your insidious sickness and sense of entitlement will spread to the rest of us eventually

      your country is like a plague on the competence of the world

      We may hold guns to the heads of innocent black youths in the US, but we don't hold a gun to the head of residents of Whereverthefuckyouarefromistan and make you consume our music, movies, tv shows, and books. If your local culture is so devoid of value that you must partake of ours, the fault is not us.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    27. Re:Personal Responsibility by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      You kids and your new fangled reboot nonsense. Real fans know Superman can fly because Earth's gravity is lower than Krypton's.

      Sounds like some Golden Age crap where he basically 'super jumped' like the Hulk does sometimes.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    28. Re:Personal Responsibility by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      You have to wonder why he doesn't suffer from loss of bone density, given he was raised since a small child within earth's gravity. Surely Krypton's gravity is irrelevant as he doesn't live there most of the time, he would have adapted to Earth's gravitational forces before he could walk.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    29. Re:Personal Responsibility by Macgrrl · · Score: 2

      Oh, because it's got naked women in it! Look, I like naked women! I'm a bloke! I'm supposed to like them! We're born like that. We like naked women as soon as we're pulled out of one. Halfway down the birth canal we're already enjoying the view. Look, it's the four pillars of the male heterosexual psyche. We like: naked women, stockings, lesbians, and Sean Connery best as James Bond. Because that is what being a bloke is. And if you don't like it, darling, join a film collective. I want to spend the rest of my life with the woman at the end of the table here. But that does not stop me wanting to see several thousand more naked bottoms before I die. Because that's what being a bloke is. When Man invented fire, he didn't say "Hey, let's cook!" He said: "Great! Now we can see naked bottoms in the dark!" As soon as Caxton invented the printing press we were using it to make pictures of - hey! - naked bottoms. We've turned the Internet into an enormous international database of... naked bottoms. So, you see, the story of male achievement through the ages, feeble though it may have been, has been the story of our struggle to get a better look at your bottoms. Frankly, girls, I'm not so sure how insulted you really ought to be.

      Steve - Coupling

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    30. Re:Personal Responsibility by greg1104 · · Score: 1

      Right, the whole yellow sun thing didn't show up until the silver age era in the early 60's. Before that he was jumping--"able to leap tall buildings in a single bound"--and they modeled the low gravity powers based on speculation about what a man on the moon would be capable of doing.

    31. Re:Personal Responsibility by greg1104 · · Score: 1

      His bone density is going to be lower than someone who lives on Krypton itself. But if all of the structural components to his body, from bone to muscle to neurons, are adapted to be just plain stronger, some of that might be retained even without as much load on your body.

      At this point we know just how much things like time in space degrade physical function, suggesting that a body's natural high gravity capability is trumped by recent environment stress. But the high-gravity powered Superman was the one of the 30th through 50's. The shift from a gravity powered hero to the magic yellow sun powers happened during the 60's, partly due to understanding of this area improving so much then. You can almost see how Superman's power explanations evolved in step with early space exploration.

    32. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see any problem with insulated cups having a heat warning.

    33. Re:Personal Responsibility by mjwx · · Score: 1

      If this continues, every item sold within the US is going to have a 89-page disclaimer.

      I believe Apple already serves this with every iTunes update.

      Case dismissed!

      And none of it is legally enforceable.

      Case re-opened.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    34. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not every anti-social/psychopathic person gets the opportunity to chose the behave the way they do. I suffer from Bipolar Disorder Type 1, social anxiety, and delusional paranoia. I can guarantee that the belief that my wife of 15 years is trying to poison me, nor the mood swings that are borne from thoughts like that, is definitely NOT something I chose to do. I also do not chose to get extremely anxious in a crowd full of people that I believe want to harm me...or have the mood swings that are borne from situations like that. Have I made my point yet? These things are as natural for me as the "flight or fight" response is in anyone. I get what you were trying to say but please avoid blanket statements in the future. They do not help you prove your point.

    35. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as the government wants to stick its nose up everyone's ass I don't care where the blame comes from.

    36. Re:Personal Responsibility by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Ahh, silver age Superman, birthplace of Superdickery and Super-ventriliquism.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    37. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually this guy may have a case. By Apple removing all pornographic material from the itunes store and going as far as banning all questionable content on their devices they are actually taking responsibility for making their devices safe for porn addicts. If their efforts are not effective enough to get rid of all porn on their devices then they in my opinion are liable because they didn't deliver what they were promising. Had this guy sued google I would say he didn't stand a chance. Google doesn't make such promises. But apple does.

    38. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Back in the Microsoft world that preceded his i-World, he could be guaranteed of a system crash every couple of hours. Nothing gets rid of a boner quite like having to do a filesystem check on boot up.

      Apple made their stuff too reliable. Now, there's nothing stopping him wanking himself into oblivion on a 24x7 basis. I'm surprised he's even able to leave the house to visit his lawyer. Oh wait... he's going to be appearing in court on a video screen ;-)

    39. Re:Personal Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If a device comes with a disclaimer that it can be used to download porn, someone will sue them for inciting them to do just that.

    40. Re:Personal Responsibility by Crimey+McBiggles · · Score: 1

      "Literally"? Care to back that up?

      --
      Crimey
    41. Re:Personal Responsibility by bonehead · · Score: 1

      I fully understand that you may not chose those thoughts.

      You do chose your actions.

  7. I'm suing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...McDonald's for making me fat. They have failed to install a filter to prevent me from installing unhealthy food into my body.

    1. Re:I'm suing... by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      ...McDonald's for making me fat. They have failed to install a filter to prevent me from installing unhealthy food into my body.

      You need to replace your filter, as it obviously isn't working. I have the most up to date filter imaginable for that. I gag even thinking about trying to choke down anything from McDonalds.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    2. Re:I'm suing... by Sparticus789 · · Score: 1

      Remember the rule. When you go to the hardware store and buy a new AC filter and batteries for your smoke detectors, you have to replace your unhealthy filter. Brought to you by the Ad Council.

      --
      sudo make me a sandwich
    3. Re:I'm suing... by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      I have a filter for it but it happens later. My body seems to reject fake food like that. I can get it into my stomach but it refuses to digest it. It feels like I ate a rock and after about 2 hours of feeling like crap I end up puking. Same thing happens with most fast food places and other very processed food.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    4. Re:I'm suing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Um... This actually sounds like a serious medical condition to me. You might want to discuss this with your Doctor on your next checkup and get a liver function panel. Might have gall stones there Bob, and they can kill you.

    5. Re:I'm suing... by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      You need to replace your filter, as it obviously isn't working. I have the most up to date filter imaginable for that. I gag even thinking about trying to choke down anything from McDonalds.

      Same here.

      I remember reading that food from McDonalds, over-processed and over-sweetened, doesn't taste good to a person who hasn't eaten it before, it's only through repeated consumption that the body adjusts to handle food that unhealthy that it tastes "good" and you get cravings. I took that with a grain of salt (sounded like bullshit to me) but I always wondered how truthful that was.

  8. Only in US... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    That's what happens when you don't have English Rule (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_rule_%28attorney%27s_fees%29), and you have personal bankruptcy.
    There lawsuits doesn't happen in Europe for these 2 exact reasons, you'll have to pay the attorney fee's if you lose, so you have something at stake as well.

  9. Will he ever grow up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So others are to blame for his addictions now?

    1. Re:Will he ever grow up? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      I blame the government.

    2. Re:Will he ever grow up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You betcha. It's the wave of the future in legal business. Find something to blame on somebody else and SUE SUE SUE... It helps if you can shop venues some and if you have some emotional angle to play that might trick a jury into a big award on that EVIL large company/person/government for no real reason.

      Personally, I think we (as in the USA), should adopt the English approach of requiring the looser of a lawsuit to pay the winners legal fees. That way you are free to sue, but you darn well want to be certain you will win because lawyers are expensive.

    3. Re:Will he ever grow up? by cusco · · Score: 1

      You must be a Libertarian. :-)

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    4. Re:Will he ever grow up? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      If your addictions are caused by a chemical imbalance which drive an intense desire for balance that can be achieved through some addictive action, whose "fault" is it, and where would you put the blame?

  10. I'm suing slashdot by nitehawk214 · · Score: 5, Funny

    For years and years of not getting my work done.

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    1. Re:I'm suing slashdot by DigitAl56K · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm suing slashdot

      "... just as soon as I get off slashdot."

    2. Re:I'm suing slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "... just as soon as I get off

    3. Re:I'm suing slashdot by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      "... just as soon as I get off

      on slashdot?

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    4. Re:I'm suing slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My lawyer told me I can't discuss my ongoing legal case with Slashdot, so now I have to post anonymously :/

    5. Re:I'm suing slashdot by shikaisi · · Score: 1

      For years and years of not getting my work done.

      I'd like to join your class action suit.

      --
      No left turn unstoned.
  11. Everyone knows by maroberts · · Score: 3, Funny
    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

    1. Re:Everyone knows by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      ... So grab your dick and double-click!

      Damn that's a great song.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:Everyone knows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank You, sir!

  12. What are we going towards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A Safe-Mode? What would they call it?
    iCondom
    ICondemn

    And would you need a new name when it's disabled?
    iSin
    iLonely

    1. Re:What are we going towards? by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      A Safe-Mode? What would they call it?
      iCondom
      ICondemn

      And would you need a new name when it's disabled?
      iSin
      iLonely

      iGoatse.

      Every time you even think about viewing porn, the safe mode kicks in and pops up a high def Goatse on your screen, causing instant bone kill.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    2. Re:What are we going towards? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      iBone, surely?

  13. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    whenever my wife does this, i use beer and sports as my behavior modifier.

    chicks are attention whores, take it away and they will do anything to get it back

  14. And this is why we can't have nice things by denis-The-menace · · Score: 0

    If this does goes bad, religious whack-jobs will have a blueprint on forcing people to fit THEIR morality.

    I doubt it will work thought.

    --
    Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
  15. Trying to look the nice guy, just wants cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A safe mode strikes me as something that has absolutely nothing to do with his situation. Would he have handed it to his wife and said "could you please enable safe mode on this iPad and not tell me the password to remove it?" Sure, that would help with kids, but with an adult who bought the device and theoretically manages it?

    This smells of the guy trying to provide an option that makes it sound like he's not in it just for the money, but which you can be pretty sure the company is not going to do. Apple isn't likely to put tons of development into something like that just based on this lawsuit. So he gets to feel like he's suing for a good reason, when he's really just hoping for a settlement somewhere below the cost for Apple to implement a "safe mode".

    1. Re:Trying to look the nice guy, just wants cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find it hard to believe that there aren't already several internet filter apps available for the iPad. It'd be funny if Apple's response was to send the guy 99 cents to just fucking buy one of them.

    2. Re:Trying to look the nice guy, just wants cash by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      This smells of the guy trying to provide an option that makes it sound like he's not in it just for the money, but which you can be pretty sure the company is not going to do. Apple isn't likely to put tons of development into something like that just based on this lawsuit. So he gets to feel like he's suing for a good reason, when he's really just hoping for a settlement somewhere below the cost for Apple to implement a "safe mode".

      Actually, I think this story smells more like a guy from a very conservatively religious community who is trying to shift blame away from him to Apple, saying he was helpless to avoid his divorce or viewing of porn. The article mentions that he talks about things like the ACLU inventing homosexuality in the 50s, and about God and how porn affects man's spirituality. This, or he has a certifiable mental illness, because a lot of his claims noted in the article make no sense and have no bearing on his argument. Either way, no lawyer should have agreed to take on this case and they should immediately be disbarred.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    3. Re:Trying to look the nice guy, just wants cash by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      My money would be on 'certifiable mental illness'.

      He is currently on "Disability Inactive Status" per Tenessee Supreme Court Rule 9, Section 21.

      That isn't nearly as bad as some sort of overt moral turpitude; but it doesn't make your incoherent filing full of trivially verifiable nonsense and assorted non sequitors look any saner.

    4. Re:Trying to look the nice guy, just wants cash by bonehead · · Score: 1

      This smells of the guy trying to provide an option that makes it sound like he's not in it just for the money,

      No, this smells of the guy grasping at straws, hoping in vain to find validation for his bullshit belief that he is not responsible for his own actions.

      In short, he's a pathetic, useless waste of oxygen.

    5. Re:Trying to look the nice guy, just wants cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sadly he has already lost his chance at a darwin award since he has already reproduced.

    6. Re:Trying to look the nice guy, just wants cash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My mothers side of the family is from North Indiana and they have lived there and in West Virginia/Tennessee for a long time. Unsurprisingly, my grandpa on her side died a few years back and he went straight up religious crazy in his latter years. My uncle also went down the same path around the same time. Those sound like things they would say.

      People in these areas, we'll call them Southern Baptist to be kind, have a habit of shifting moral and ethical judgement and responsibility pretty much entirely from people to the flying spaghetti monster. And their arguments and statements rarely make sense. Just saying.

      Also the captcha I got was "idiotic". I thought that was appropriate so I had to cancel and go back to editing to include that.

  16. Why would you use an Apple product? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    My mac pro is shiny, pure and innocent. I want to keep it that way. If I want to watch porn i use the dirty old dell in the garage. Now that dell is a big whore.

    1. Re:Why would you use an Apple product? by camg188 · · Score: 2

      My mac pro is shiny, pure and innocent.

      Now sullied by slashdot.

    2. Re:Why would you use an Apple product? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      My mac pro is shiny, pure and innocent.

      Now sullied by slashdot.

      Meh, that's merely a dry finger bang compared to what he'd get at 4chan, SA, etc.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  17. Not Safe Mode... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sevier is seeking damages from Apple, but said he we will drop the lawsuit if Apple agrees to sell devices with a 'RETARD mode.'"

    There, fixed that for you.

  18. OMFG... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does he want hammers with a "safe mode" that prevents you from hitting his thumb? Does he want cars that have a mode that prevent you from turning without using your blinker? Does he want a diaper and a baby bottle to carry with him all day long because he's obviously too fucking irresponsible to be a functioning adult?

    This is what you get when you construct a society that encourages people to blame others for every action they take which has any negative consequences.

  19. Re:What? by emilper · · Score: 1

    modded "overrated" by mistake, undoing it ...

  20. Nanny State by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would like to start a petition such that anyone found incapable of taking responsibility for their own actions should hear by no longer be a citizen of this country. they should loose voting rights, any rights to healthcare and any support from the government. i think its a fair statement to state that true citizenry requires the person in question to accept responsibility for their own choices and it also requires said person to hold other people to the responsibility of their choices.

    1. Re:Nanny State by bonehead · · Score: 1

      Fuck a petition.

      Make this a referendum on a ballot. I'll vote for it.

    2. Re:Nanny State by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      That doesn't go far enough. Make it a constitutional amendment.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    3. Re:Nanny State by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      I would like to start a petition such that anyone found unwilling to take responsibility

      FTFY - mentally ill people are incapable, ego-maniacal fuckwads are unwilling.

      Don't saddle the mentally ill with the problems caused by ego-maniacal fuckwads.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    4. Re:Nanny State by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      Mentally ill and developmentally retarded (in the literal sense) can have diminished capacity, much like a minor.

      Unfortunately that doesn't help us with the case in question as the guy has been certified as suffering from a mental illness (PTSD).

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    5. Re:Nanny State by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Mentally ill and developmentally retarded (in the literal sense) can have diminished capacity, much like a minor.

      Unfortunately that doesn't help us with the case in question as the guy has been certified as suffering from a mental illness (PTSD).

      Alright, then I guess he gets a pass.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    6. Re:Nanny State by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      It would have to be, as it's a direct violation of a treaty we've signed. A law would be illegal and invalid. We'd need to formally break the treaty, or put it in the Constitution. Otherwise, we aren't allowed to de-citizen anyone who isn't a dual-citizen.

  21. As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    For several years, pornography ruled my life. I lost my family over it. I lost my self respect over it. It was causing such deep depression that I nearly lost my life over it. Being in IT, I could get around any filters. If I wanted porn online, I found porn online. Simple as that. I finally broke my addiction to it and got my life back together. So, I feel the pain of the person who TFA speaks of.

    That all being said...

    This. Is. Stupid. Why not just sue The Internetz and your ISP and your carrier and every person who's ever produced pornography, and Samsung for making iPhone screens and... you get the point.

    Stopping the addiction does not rely on Apple blocking porn on your iPhone. It involves taking responsibility, getting help, and STOPPING.

    1. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This.

      I too am a recovering porn addict. 15 months 'sober.' There is much that could be discussed about the causes of, and methods of overcoming, a porn addiction, but blaming the manufacturers of devices is ludicrous. My last look at porn was on an iPad - which I no longer have.

      With statistics showing that 50% or more of men now look at porn regularly, porn addiction is a pretty big deal. And no - it's not just a religious sort of thing. It's a ruining marriage, losing job, lost productivity, wasted time and money and quality of life sort of thing.

    2. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by bonehead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It involves taking responsibility,

      Unfortunately, this is now seen as an archaic notion, which has no place in our "modern" and "enlightened" society.

      We must blame all problems on inanimate objects, or else we run the risk of someone feeling bad.

    3. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Thanks to both of you for sharing this - I think it's an important point of view not often heard. A porn addiction can cause as much trouble as addiction to alcohol or controlled substances, and it is even more ubiquitous - you can always find it for free, and without ever being seen in public.

      But this guy's case is without merit. It's like suing a grocery store for selling liquor to an alcoholic. I'm sorry, but personal responsibility here is the answer.

    4. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what is wrong with porn? I'm sorry that your wife is a prick and you can't enjoy porn with your wife. I watched porn with my wife, she like it. I still watch porn every now and then, and why should I not? Just go to the bathroom and watch some porn, who cares.

      Let me compare that with other addiction, like alcohol. Does it damage your health? No. Are you doing criminal things to get porn? No. Are you spend every dollar you have for porn? No.

      From Wikipedia:
      There is no diagnosis of pornography addiction in the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

      Still other experts believe that sex addiction is itself a myth, a by-product of cultural and other influences.[11][12] Some who have expressed doubts about the existence of sex addiction argue that the condition is instead a way of projecting social stigma onto patients.[11]

      An example of how far this critique sometimes goes is Marty Klein's claim that "The concept of sex addiction provides an excellent example of a model that is both sex-negative and politically disastrous."[13]:8 Klein singles out a number of features that he considers crucial limitations of the sex addiction model:[13]:8

              pathology oriented
              pathologize non-problematic behavior
              clinically incomplete
              without context (both individual and situational)
              culturally bound
              politically exploited

      Klein states that the diagnostic criteria for sexual addiction are easy to find on the Internet (www.sexhelp.com/sast.cfm).[13]:9 Drawing on the Sexual Addiction Screening Test, he states that "The sexual addiction diagnostic criteria make problems of nonproblematic experiences, and as a result pathologize a majority of people."[13]:10

    5. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      For several years, pornography ruled my life. I lost my family over it. I lost my self respect over it. It was causing such deep depression that I nearly lost my life over it.

      ... and then I became post-pubescent. Problem solved!

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    6. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by jandrese · · Score: 2

      Eh, before blaming society for enabling this guy's lack of personal responsibility, lets wait and see if his case gets laughed out of court.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    7. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But this guy's case is without merit. It's like suing a grocery store for selling liquor to an alcoholic. I'm sorry, but personal responsibility here is the answer.

      I'd say it's more like suing your car manufacturer because they didn't add a feature to disable your car from driving to the liquor store.

    8. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      I don't understand porn addition.
      You can only masturbate so much until the pain makes you stop. And I am pretty most of all already do close to the limit.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    9. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by wisnoskij · · Score: 2

      How do you not temp yourself.
      I know alcoholics just (according to movies) never touch alcohol again.
      But it would be pretty hard to never see a video with erotic content ever again. Hell, you cannot even watch Disney without seeing erotic content.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    10. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      ***And I am pretty SURE most of US already do close to the limit.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    11. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by AvderTheTerrible · · Score: 4, Insightful

      One could also argue that the near ubiquitous availability of porn is simply allowing men to get what they want without a lot of hassle. Namely dating, courtship, and maintenance of a girlfriend/wife who, while attractive, good company, and (hopefully) a very good friend, simply does not live up to the task of keeping the mans sexual drive satisfied.

      Porn addiction should be looked at in a couple different directions.The first is the direction that is being talked about so far in this discussion, namely of men who can't control themselves and spiral out of control with an addiction.

      Another direction to look is what kind of family life does he have? Does his gf/wife make sure to tend to his needs? Does she care enough about him to get interested in things that he enjoys, sex among them? If there is sex, is it kept interesting? Or has it gotten incredibly stale and any attempts to make it interesting have been failures, either because they just didn't work, or worse, because the woman had no interest in exploring those options and simply expected the man to be satisfied with what he had? Or is this man in a worst case scenario where he has tried his best to find companionship, only to be left out in the cold and judged as not worth anyone's time in a relationship?

      What a lot of people need to come to terms with is simply that people have sexual urges. For extensive periods of time our societies have placed a great amount of weight on suppressing those urges and judging them to be "unclean", meaning that only the boldest or most well connected had access to avenues of sexual experimentation. Now with porn literally everywhere, everyone can experience, at least at a distance, almost anything sexually imaginable. The game has changed, quite literally.

      With sexual freedom comes a lot of people discovering urges they may never have been able to realize they had. And to be honest up to this point the majority of those people discovering themselves sexually have been men. Women are getting there, but it is taking them longer because of natures built in sexual imbalances. And this is one of the main parts of the problem.

      Men have discovered that they want more than to just take a girl out to dinner and a movie on a regular basis, and if they are lucky, they get to have sex on rare occasion. Men have discovered that they want to have sex a lot more often than in the past and women are taking a long time to adapt to these new sexual demands.

      Women hold the keys to the sexual kingdom quite closely and refuse to open the gates unless great sacrifice is made in order to get there. Men have simply started to decide that the price of admission is too high, and they are choosing substitutions that are more easily accessible.

      As misogynistic as it sounds, the porn problem is caused in part by women making themselves unrealistically unavailable when demand has never been higher. The same thing happens in any high demand, low supply market. High demand and unavailability of any alternatives means everyone competes tooth and nail to pay top dollar for one unit of the coveted item. Then something else that works to satisfy the same demand comes along and suddenly everyone starts to wonder why they're paying out the ass for the cow when the imitation milk is damn near free.

      It's simple economics only with sex as the currency. Men want sex but are tired of having to pay for the hassle of dates that may not be enjoyable, relationships that become stale after so long, and escalating costs for lower and lower returns. Until women start to become sexually open as well, porn will continue to be a huge problem for society because men gotta have it, and now they don't need women to get it anymore.

      Porn addiction is the end result of mens biological imperative being artificially suppressed for thousands of years by societies that looked down on it and left most men with little to no way of actually expressing it, and suddenly removing that suppression by way of all manner of se

    12. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's not easy - but it's possible. You have to decide what's more valuable - watching movies, or health. My wife and I use a website called kids-in-mind.com to check movie reviews. Right now - while my recovery is still fairly 'new' - we won't watch anything without a 1 or 2 in that first rating on the site. Does that mean I can't watch movies? Nope - I thoroughly enjoyed World War Z. Can I watch Game of Thrones? Nope. But my marriage and my health are more important than any movie or TV show.

    13. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by stud9920 · · Score: 1

      Thanks to both of you for sharing this

      I'd rather they shared links to the porn so filty it caused them to quit

    14. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is oversimplifying it dramatically - but here is a bit of it works: (disclaimer - I'm no more an expert on porn addiction than an alcoholic is on alcoholism). Looking at porn and masturbating cause your brain to produce dopamine. This makes you feel good - happy - relaxed - etc. But the feeling goes away. Something comes up (stress, pain, sadness, etc.) and your brain says "hey - I don't like feeling this - I want to feel good - go do that thing that made me feel good last time." And you go do it again.

      Over time - your messed up brain wants the high more and more - and meanwhile each time you - er - engage - you get less and less satisfaction from it. So you're doing it more and more - but getting less and less out of it.

    15. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      How do you not temp yourself.
      I know alcoholics just (according to movies) never touch alcohol again.
      But it would be pretty hard to never see a video with erotic content ever again. Hell, you cannot even watch Disney without seeing erotic content.

      No kidding, that Ariel is fucking hot!

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    16. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can be addicted to anything. It's not hard to break the pleasure/reward mechanism in the human brain. Porn is just easy and available with the advent of the internet, and males are "hardwired" to respond well to it.

      Porn isn't the problem. Weird obsessive behavior over anything will ruin your life, though this is mitigated by social acceptability. (People might find it more acceptable if you're an extreme sports nut or a Jesus nut, but a porn nut is creepy)

    17. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I take it you're not a women. Women want sex too, but it's a high risk action while it's a low risk action for men.

    18. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure there are a few on here who may struggle with the same problem.
      Here is a good site with lots of science to help explain and then kick the habit.
      It's free. It's does not promote any religion. Not that there's anything wrong with religion.
      I have never found anything close to as good as this before.
      http://yourbrainonporn.com/

      It's not anti-sex just anti-porn.

      PS: If nothing else, kicking porn makes you a hell of a lot better programmer. I'm not kidding. Watch the videos on this site (science videos you wise-acres) and you'll see how too much dopamine and delta fos B will really wreck your ability to solve complex problems.
      The bright side is, your brain can re-wire in 60 - 90 days.

    19. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go to YourBhttp://apple.slashdot.org/story/13/07/15/1550223/apple-sued-for-mans-porn-addiction#rainonPorn.com follow the (totally free) suggestions and let your brain rewire during a 90 day reboot.

    20. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Men have discovered that they want to have sex a lot more often than in the past and women are taking a long time to adapt to these new sexual demands.

      WTF are you talking about? The modern Western woman is having more sex, with more men, than ever in recorded history. Indeed it is the mark of a liberated woman - the repressed woman will, by definition, have sex with few men or one man.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    21. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you start the real question:
      Why cannot porn be blocked from a device, just because it can connect to the internet?

      And the answer is:
      Because there's no current special setup for porn vs anything else. There's no special setting for XXX sites to separate them from another site, to the device.

      That means that, currently, one cannot simply turn on or off "porn ability". If, let's say, each porn site *HAD* to start with "xxx." instead of "www.", then the device could disable the ability to go to xxx.jackoff.com. It's just something that wasn't thought of when things first got going on the www. The fact that over 85% of the internet usage revolves around porn doesn't help. In this way, maybe the dude should sue God for making pussy so attractive? Myself, I could easily get addicted to porn, as I'm always up for it. However, in my case, I look at porn, then go fuck my wife's brains out.

      Another good point is that masturbation itself can become addictive with the right mindset, and in this way, porn is just the mental lube used. Cut out porn, ok, but can you stop masturbating as often? Dunno man, life's strange and it's all up to each of us to do what we feel is right, or tendencies can get the best of us. After all, those tendencies are there for a reason.

    22. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > look at porn regularly ... wasted ... money

      You were doing it wrong.

    23. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by shikaisi · · Score: 1

      I don't understand porn addition.

      1 stack of porn + 1 stack of porn = 1 big stack of porn

      Next week's lesson... porn multiplication

      --
      No left turn unstoned.
    24. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TL;DR - Porn addiction exists because men have "needs" and women aren't slutty enough.

      Bollocks.

    25. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "More than ever in recorded history" meaning "more than the victorian prudes" does not at all counter the argument that women are not quite there yet, when it comes to wanting sex as often as surfing to a porn site.

      While women are becoming more liberated, there's still a long way to becoming as liberated as a web browser.

      Wake me up when women want sex so much that some of them would even consider me an option. Until then, your argument fails.

    26. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, all the women I know have had way more partners than most men I know

    27. Re:As a recovering porn addict, I find this stupid by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Women will never consider you as an option. They are only interested in the top 10% of men. What, you thought that monogamy just appeared one day cut out of whole cloth? It was designed by men so that every man could have a woman. In contrast to the earlier harem paradigm.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  22. Only takes a hammer. by GodInHell · · Score: 1

    Works every time.

    1. Re:Only takes a hammer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brings a whole new meaning to "Hit any key to continue..."

      CAPTUA: "pounds" Really? Pun much?

    2. Re:Only takes a hammer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Beating it", is what he's trying to stop.

  23. Carpel Tunnel ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If he can set good precedent, then I'll get rich from the thumb carpel tunnel that I received from my IPhone ....

  24. Re:What? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

    He probably turned to it because she was using/withholding sex as a behavior modifier (or is grossly overweight).

    Probably? What's the basis for that assessment?

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  25. Third option by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Judge laughs him out of court and nothing changes.

    1. Re:Third option by HiThere · · Score: 1

      And sanctions his lawyer for filing a frivolous lawsuit.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  26. I like it! by wjcofkc · · Score: 4, Funny

    While I think he's completely crazy to blame his addiction on Apple, the 'Safe-Mode' is not an altogether bad idea. Wouldn't it be nice to know your kids new MacBook had sex simply turned off?

    It would take them days, perhaps even weeks to find a way to circumnavigate the measure. Just think how much our kids could learn about BSD! The really aspirational ones might even learn to cover their tracks with a terminal and Vim!

    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
    1. Re:I like it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The really aspirational ones might even learn to cover their tracks with a terminal and Vim!

      ASCII pr0n?

    2. Re:I like it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank God for aalib!

  27. Safe Mode by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    Assuming that Safe Mode is a mode that the owner can turn off and on, isn't that just the same as just not going to the porn sites? At least if you are the owner and an adult and not playing the "think of the children" game?

    His offer sounds like he either wants to impose his values on others, or he knows that such "safe surfing" isn't really technically feasible so he can make to offer to sound like he's a decent guy rather than a pervert trying to profit big.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  28. Yeah, right by OzPeter · · Score: 1

    From TFA

    started when he “accidentally” replaced the “a-c-e” in Facebook with a “u-c-k.”

    and

    adding that until he got the MacBook, he had never seen porn of any kind or been to a strip club or sex shop.

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    1. Re:Yeah, right by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      I'm sure we have all had typos that have been bad but really how does one accidentally replace “a-c-e” in Facebook with a “u-c-k”? I could see fat fingering it and getting incorrect but near letters, transposing letters, skipping a letter, or putting the wrong tld (I do that far too often when I want to go to weather.gov but type in weather.com and end up with bleeding eyes), but his claims are absurd to say the least.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    2. Re:Yeah, right by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      At a guess, he - like so many users - doesn't actually know of 'facebook.com.' He just enters 'facebook' into the browser address bar, and lets it automatically send that to a search engine then clicks the top result. Combine a typo with the often over-aggressive techniques some dodgy porn sites use to lure in viewers, and it's possible that one could have overtaken facebook for some sufficiently mangled query.

    3. Re:Yeah, right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it knew what he was looking for (Autocomplete ftw)

    4. Re:Yeah, right by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      You'd be surprised how common some typos are. Like this one.

    5. Re:Yeah, right by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      At a guess, he - like so many users - doesn't actually know of 'facebook.com.' He just enters 'facebook' into the browser address bar, and lets it automatically send that to a search engine then clicks the top result.

      ... and doesn't double check his queries, or even look at the links he clicks on.

      In other words, he's a fucking moron who did it to himself. Case dismissed.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    6. Re:Yeah, right by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      What keyboard was he using where "a" is near "u", or "e" is near "k"?

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    7. Re:Yeah, right by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Hence my statement about the absurdity of his claims. I could see it as a typo of fscrbook, fascebook, or some other common typo like that but even on my worst day I haven't had a typo that bad where I used the completely wrong hand and letter positions.

      --
      Time to offend someone
  29. I suppose that could be a new sales blurb by lexx21 · · Score: 3, Funny

    "We at Apple make the most spank-o-licious computer on the market"

  30. Total Lack of Self-Responsibility by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 2

    Blaming a device maker for your actions with it shows a complete lack of self-responsibility and requires a child-like understanding of one's own self-control. I can see this guy testifying before Congress or whomever in favor of legal requirements for some sort of restricted mode, because he can't control himself, so everyone else should have to bear a burden of increased cost. A potential legal requirement would be easily met by Apple, but FOSS could be further limited by such laws, as not meeting requirements for schools, etc.

    This is different from accessibility requirements, since the folks who need those cannot simply choose to see/hear. All this guy had to do was put the infernal device down.

    1. Re:Total Lack of Self-Responsibility by davidwr · · Score: 1

      Blaming a device maker for your actions with it shows a complete lack of self-responsibility

      In this case, yes, absolutely, a bazillion times over, but please don't over-generalize.

      Blaming my computer for my greatly-increased productivity compared to pencil, paper, and abacus does not show a complete lack of self-responsibility.

      I can see this guy testifying before Congress or whomever in favor of legal requirements

      No, I can see this guy being invited to testify, seeing the microphone, grabbing it, and, well, let's just say CSPAN will be glad they put in a few-second delay or if they didn't, they'll wish they had.

      --
      Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    2. Re:Total Lack of Self-Responsibility by hAckz0r · · Score: 1
      You had to go and ruin it for me. I was just getting ready to call my lawyer to sue Apple for not preventing me from setting my home page to Pizza-R-Us. How can I possibly create a case for causation of excessive weight gain if people like you are actually going to speak using logic and common sense? .

      On the other hand, that means I don't have to chow down on a 200lbs of pizza to gain enough weight to convince a jury. While it originally sounded like a good plan, I kind of like not being fat.

    3. Re:Total Lack of Self-Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We know, we know my friend.

      It's just, apparently, here in Amerikhastan, we're perfectly fine with letting this complete bullshit continue to happen. The dumb McDonalds coffee lady wasn't enough. People literally breaking in to your house, and injuring themselves while you are on vacation and then suing YOU and winning, that's not enough. Maybe I should sue Great Clips because my hair grew too long for me to see and do my job.

      I mean it was there right down the street and I knew where it was and how to use it. In this hypothetical situation.

    4. Re:Total Lack of Self-Responsibility by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

      Blaming a device maker for your actions with it shows a complete lack of self-responsibility and requires a child-like understanding of one's own self-control. I can see this guy testifying before Congress or whomever in favor of legal requirements for some sort of restricted mode, because he can't control himself, so everyone else should have to bear a burden of increased cost.

      Nah, think further back in the chain. Make it illegal for women to appear unclothed or in some state of undress. Not just on-screen, in public too. Cover the hair and eyes, too. Guys like him can't control their urges, after all, so dammit others should have the responsibility to ensure he's not titillated and commits a sin in the process.

      :rolleyes:

    5. Re:Total Lack of Self-Responsibility by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      The McDonalds Hot Coffee lady wasn't just being dumb, she suffered third-degree burns in her pelvic region when she accidentally spilled hot coffee in her lap and was hospitalized for eight days while she underwent skin grafting, followed by two years of medical treatment.

      McDonalds had previously received numerous complaints from people that the coffee was being served at excessively hot temperatures and chose to ignore that advice. They consistently served coffee at higher than recommended temperatures and temperatures that were higher than were the industry norm.

      While this case is frequently cited as an example of frivolous litigation it was anything but. The plaintiff went to court only asking for her medical costs to be covered, it was the jury who decided on the large punitive damages.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  31. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's true, however, society condones her passive aggressive behavior because she's assumed 'oppressed' while demonizing your assertive behavior because you're an assumed oppressor. Welcome to identity politics. If she chose, she could use your tactic as 'evidence' that you aren't 'committed' and file fault divorce papers, leaving you with the bills, child support, and vaginamony. There's already precedent set that such behavior is considered 'abuse', but of course, only for your behavior, not hers.

  32. Man's Porn Addiction? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny

    What's with the redundancy in the headline?

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  33. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As any probability claim, it is the result of examining similar situations and developing generalities that can be applied to new specific situations to develop a partially educated response when the full truth of the details are not available.

    TL:DR version:
    Experience.

  34. I'm addicted to tentacle porn hentai by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

    I'm going to sue Adobe for making Photoshop, the best image-editing software ever created, available for Microsoft Windows and Apple OS X.

    1. Re:I'm addicted to tentacle porn hentai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope that man's lawyer is available because i'd really like to sue camera manufacturers for providing the tools for the porn industry to actually shoot pictures and videos. Oh, and when we're done with that we'll sue the tarmac manufacturers - without streets I wouldn't have had that accident that resultet in a severe brain damage..

    2. Re:I'm addicted to tentacle porn hentai by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Don't forget to sue the estates of Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla, for coming up with those electrical transmission setups that facilitated your access to porn. Oh, and Gutenburg (remember when we used to pay for porno, in magazine form? Barbaric times, I tell you what!)

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  35. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are you kidding?

    most divorces are settled very easily. you have to do something very dumb to get stuck with the bills and everything else

  36. Re:What? by gl4ss · · Score: 1, Interesting

    his excuse is that he typoed facebook as fuckbook. 99.999% chance he was looking for some bitch to fuck - so the complaint is religious to the max to hide that he is that kind of a guy who had a wife and went on to look for sex dates on the internets...

    I mean, who the fuck goes to fuckbook.com for porno and get real, the guy claimed he had never seen a pornographic image in his life in which case he probably got a hard on from evening news and wanked to mtv which doesn't sound sensible at all.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  37. Parental controls by Quila · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's been built-in for years. The problem is that a person with a problem isn't going to use them to restrict himself.

  38. Applying the knee-jerk logic... by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

    Guns enable murder, so ban guns

    Let's apply the same logic to:
        Water enables drowning, so ban water
        Cars enable homicide, so ban cars
        Apple enables porn, so ban Apple

    Yep. Seems like the correct logic for progress as a species.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
    1. Re:Applying the knee-jerk logic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupidity enables totalitarianism, so ban stupidity.

    2. Re:Applying the knee-jerk logic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A better analogy for porn vs. guns would be if Apple sold an application called iGangRape in the AppStore, functioning as follows: any mildly deranged individual point his camera towards you, click a button and out of nowhere a band of well hung men, preferably black, would sodomize you to death while the said individual is watching.

      I can hear it now: iGangRape does not sodomize to death, people do. There are many lawful uses for iGangRape: you can have a gang-bang party in your back yard and teach your kid how to fire; you can defend yourself in the wilderness and gang rape a grizzly bear etc.

    3. Re:Applying the knee-jerk logic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A) Very few are calling for a ban on guns, they are calling for a ban on some guns, and/or restriction on who can own guns.
      B) A gun's sole purpose is to inflict damage to something or someone that is not the operator.
      C) We already regulate driving. We mandate insurance, safety equipment, and have restrictions on who can get a license.
      D) Why am I arguing with someone who is either an idiot or a troll?

    4. Re:Applying the knee-jerk logic... by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      A) Yes, that's a problem.
      B) Yes, that's what it was invented for.
      C) Driving/insurance/safety equipment are daily activities that are a part of mundane everyday life. Guns are protection from people who no longer believe the laws to be worth following. (and those trying to remove said defense to allow the action to occur)
      D) Everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot or a troll. Why are you arguing?

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
  39. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    He probably turned to it because she was using/withholding sex as a behavior modifier (or is grossly overweight).

    Or she could just no longer be attracted to you anymore. I mean, who finds bitterness and disdain for your gender attractive in a sexual partner?

    Or was I being unfair in assuming that you're speaking from personal experience here? (I doubt it.)

  40. Classic case by Fuzzums · · Score: 0

    Real problem: Not taking responsibility for own actions; blaming others
    Verdict: Grow up; get a life.

    And I bet that 50 page complaint was written left-handed.

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
    1. Re:Classic case by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      What's so sinister about writing left handed?

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    2. Re:Classic case by arkane1234 · · Score: 1

      It's something people assume of left-handed people. Most of the time it's assumed that left-handed people are libertarian or liberal-leaning political individuals, which automatically means that the person making the assumption is a right-wing political individual. That bias automatically boils down to "different == sinful/evil".
      It's kinda cute :-)

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    3. Re:Classic case by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      Woosh!

      I was actually referring to the latin where dexter means right-handed and sinister means left-handed.

      but your explanation is cute too.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  41. Bill of Perceived Rights by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

    WTF is going on with people these days? It seems over the last decade or so, our actual civil liberties - you know, the right to free expression, bearing arms, freedom from search/seizure without warrant - seem to be slowly fading out, while a brand new set of perceived rights is taking their place. Seriously, what the fuck is up with that?

    FWIW, there is no such thing as:

    the Right to Not be Offended
    the Right to Determine What Rights Other People Have
    the Right to Feel Safe

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    1. Re:Bill of Perceived Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're in favor of laws requiring us to be frightened and offended at all times? I believe that falls under "Ideas so ridiculous that addressing them in the Bill of Rights just didn't occur to anyone".

    2. Re:Bill of Perceived Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF is going on with people these days? It seems over the last decade or so, our actual civil liberties - you know, the right to free expression, bearing arms, freedom from search/seizure without warrant - seem to be slowly fading out, while a brand new set of perceived rights is taking their place. Seriously, what the fuck is up with that?

      FWIW, there is no such thing as:

      the Right to Not be Offended
      the Right to Determine What Rights Other People Have
      the Right to Feel Safe

      you hypocrite.

    3. Re:Bill of Perceived Rights by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      I'm not "determining" shit, you jackass, the Constitution does.

      Do the world a favor - rub the 2 brain cells you have left together until they catch fire.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    4. Re:Bill of Perceived Rights by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      So you're in favor of laws requiring us to be frightened and offended at all times?

      Crack or booze? I can't fathom that someone would have such a blindingly idiotic thought whilst sober.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  42. Ridiculous by flippy · · Score: 1

    This is the most absurd lawsuit I've heard of in some time. It's like suing Stop & Shop for selling beer, saying that it caused one's alcoholism.

    1. Re:Ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm. That's the argument used against casinos.

    2. Re:Ridiculous by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      And it's still stupid.

      If casinos only had one result, gambling addiction, then you'd have a point. Most people who go into a casino drop some money there, but don't ruin their lives.

  43. This Happens All the Time by Grashnak · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sevier claims that his addiction started when he “accidentally” replaced the “a-c-e” in Facebook with a “u-c-k.” Sevier said this F***book site “appealed to his biological sensibilities as a male,” and he started to prefer the images on the screen to his own wife.

    Man, that happens to me all the time. One time, I reached for the skim milk and accidentally drank a 40oz bottle of vodka.

    Another time, I was making a peanut butter sandwich and accidentally injected heroin into an artery.

    Someone should pay!

    --
    Life needs more saving throws.
    1. Re:This Happens All the Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another time, I was making a peanut butter sandwich and accidentally injected heroin into an artery.

      You too? We should start a class action lawsuit against the bread companies. How can they get away with not stopping us from using the other hand while making a sandwich!?

  44. Failed judicial system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the kind of lawsuit that would be laughed away in the courts in Canada on the first date in court. Yet Americans have convinced themselves that this determination can only properly be done after tens of thousands of lawyer fees have been racked up.
     

  45. Important Comment on ArsTechnica by FuzzNugget · · Score: 3, Informative

    According to this comment in the ArsTechnica discussion of their report on this story, the plantiff is actually a suspended lawyer who was formerly deployed and is now dealing with mental illness.

    Maybe the commenter is taking the piss, but really ... that's the only explanation that makes any sense.

  46. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So your reaction to people assuming men are at fault is to assume women at fault and you think that is a better equivalent? What happened to not assuming anything when little to no information was given... even though in this case there is some information like the guy sounds like an idiot.

  47. Not fully competent by mick129 · · Score: 1

    http://abovethelaw.com/2013/07/lawyer-apple-should-protect-me-from-my-porn-addiction/

    At the end of this article, it notes that Chris Sevier has been placed on disability inactive status by order of the Tennessee Supreme Court due to “mental infirmity or illness.”

    --
    Move along, no sig to see here.
    1. Re:Not fully competent by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      Where's NYCL when you need him, I'd really like to see his take on the legitimacy of his claims from a legal stand point (rather than just a common sense, man up point of view).

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  48. Parental Controls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OSX comes with a parental controls option. When he came home I suppose he was supposed to say "Honey, don't forget to make your self admin so that you can turn on parental controls and block all the porn sites that I like".

  49. Overwait? Blame your fork! by kawabago · · Score: 1

    Likewise, if you are fat, you can sue the manufacturer of your fork for not installing anything to prevent over eating. What happened to all that 'personal responsibility' America crows about?

    1. Re:Overwait? Blame your fork! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In America, 'personal responsibility' is the opposite of a dictatorship. We're against dictatorship, unless we get to be the dictator.

  50. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    most divorces are settled very easily.

    Said the person who has obviously never been through a divorce, nor had someone close to them go through one.

  51. Mine was in safe mode when I got it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then I took it out of the box.

    It also goes into safe mode every time the battery gets very low.

  52. CORRECTED Re:Everyone knows by davidwr · · Score: 1

    the internet is ... porn

    There, fixed that for you.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  53. Worked in Iowa by kgamiel · · Score: 1

    Iowa supreme court recently upheld decision that dentist was within his right to fire assistant because he was "too attracted" to her.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/13/us/iowa-court-reaffirms-dentists-firing-of-woman-he-found-too-attractive.html?_r=0

  54. Lets be honest here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A porn addiiction is probably cheaper than having a wife and kids. He should be THANKING Apple....

  55. The actual lawsuit is a must-read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:The actual lawsuit is a must-read by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      +1, would read this fantasy author again, trips dangerously close to triggering Poe's Law on occasions but is so over the top as to dispel any reasonable belief that this is serious.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    2. Re:The actual lawsuit is a must-read by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      I wonder if anyone has ever told this guy that women watch porn too. On second thoughts, it might break his little brain even further.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  56. Not redundant Re:Man's Porn Addiction? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    The following are also sensible headlines for other stories:
    Man's gambling addiction
    Teenager's porn addiction
    Man's porn collection

    So, as you can see, the following headlines would not be as specific as "Man's porn addiction":
    Man's addiction
    Porn addiction
    Man's porn

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  57. only grounds he's got by swschrad · · Score: 1

    is if it was badly done porn.

    you want to appeal, turn your head upward... but The Big Guy doesn't buy blaming others.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:only grounds he's got by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      is if it was badly done porn.

      you want to appeal, turn your head upward...

      ...and open wide...

  58. I hate this idiot by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 1

    He should not have access to any computing device, not even a calculator.

  59. Don't laugh by davidwr · · Score: 2

    If a previous user had visited that URL, and "facebook" was never visited on that phone, I would expect the auto-fill to do that.

    I've accidentally gone to site "A" instead of site "B" in my web browser if my most recent visit was to site "A" and they both start with the same letter and I'm not paying attention.

    In any case, it's not the web browser publisher's fault, it's mine for not watching what I'm doing.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  60. Lawyer should be sanctioned for abuse of courts by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Is apple specifically marketing to people with porn problems? To people with self-control issues? To kids? To demographics groups known to have high rates of porn- or self-control problems?

    If not, their only "duties to protect the user from harm when using the product as designed" are

    • those which either the general public shouldn't be expected to protect themselves against, like batteries catching fire, and
    • those things which significant numbers the general public might do if they weren't either warned not to do it or prevented from doing it by technical measures AND which TYPICALLY have "high cost" results, like running their battery down so low that it won't recharge without a technician's help

    If Apple used shoddy batteries that caught fire on more than a very infrequent basis or if they didn't cause the device to shut off well before the battery was drained to the point of requiring a service call, then it would be reasonable for the government or courts to strong-arm them into changing their design.

    But allowing a user to go astray through a typo while web-browsing is TYPICALLY not a high-cost failure. In fact, the cost of preventing such failures is, on the whole, higher than the cost of the occasional typo.

    --

    Regarding legal liability for porn: If Apple starts encouraging employees start hanging around Junior High Schools offering "no blocking, and we won't tell your parents" iPhones out of their trenchcoats then we'll have a problem. Until then, carry on.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  61. Proof that Apple is evil right here by ulzeraj · · Score: 1

    How? People are already replacing the devil with Apple in the "The ........ make me do it" sentence.

  62. Will probably get thrown out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's easy to believe that there's a massive "junk lawsuit" problem in America when we see a news story about ridiculous lawsuits like this but never see the follow up news story where a judge looks at the lawsuit, laughs, and throws it out. The funny thing is, he's probably trying to file a ridiculous lawsuit because of all the other ridiculous lawsuits he's seen in the media that ultimately arrive at nothingness but get reported on anyway.

  63. "How did the porn get here? I dunno, God did it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If God didn't want there to be porn he/she wouldn't have created it.
    You don't see a three headed chicken or a duck that walks on its wings.
    Or an square chilly pepper. Its because God didn't want them.
    But porn, its his/her creation so it must be good and something God wants
    us to have. So isn't Apple doing Gods work?

  64. where did his wife and kids go? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where's his wife? I'll take her! She'll NEVER discover MY porn!

  65. Let's add by SirGarlon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Let's add that the US media run the most shocking, bizarre, or outrage-causing stories they can find, regardless of the actual importance of the events. Since our population is over 300 million, you can manage to find a couple of those stories every day if you have thousands of reporters scouring the country. Then they harp on those stories for weeks. This gives the impression that everyone in the USA is some kind of freak.

    What disturbs me is the number of people here who believe it -- who carry a gun because they actually believe they'll get attacked, or who think they'll get sued if someone spills hot coffee.

    So perhaps stupid lawsuits like this occur (rarely) in other countries as well, but the media don't deem them newsworthy so you don't hear about them.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:Let's add by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 4, Funny

      Just because you might never have been a victim of violent crime - which has a tendency to concentrate itself in certain geographic areas, including the one where I was born and still live today - does not mean everyone else is so fortunate. I grew up in what would now be considered the ghetto. From the time I started working around age 10 (delivering papers), until the time I got a car and moved to the suburbs, which was when I was in my early 20s, I was violently assaulted roughly every year. About two thirds of those times I fought off my attackers with a deadly weapon (although none of those times ever resulted injury to anyone - I only needed to display it for them, cowardly bullies they were, to turn around and run off). One time I was able to run to safety and another time I was able to lock myself in a room until the attackers left. But on the remaining 2 or 3 occasions I was beaten badly and robbed of everything I had on me. I was very lucky I did not get shot (there were guns pointed at me on all those occasions as well as one or two of the others). Now that I don't have to hang out at bus stops at weird hours of the night, and live in a relatively safe part of town, that kind of stuff doesn't happen to me anymore, but at one time it did, and during that time, the fact that I was armed very likely saved my life. Some of the people I grew up with have similar stories, and one of them (that I know of) was brutally murdered, for no apparent reason, 2 or 3 months ago. You may be sheltered enough not to have to worry about this sort of thing, but a lot of us are not so fortunate, and I think I can speak on behalf of many of them, at least, when I tell you that their decision of whether and how to arm, train, and protect themselves and those around them is absolutely none of anyone else's business.

    2. Re:Let's add by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

      You're reading too much into my remarks. If you make your decision of what weapon to carry, when, and where based on personal experience and observations, you're not the sort of person I was complaining about.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    3. Re:Let's add by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      OK. My apologies then.

    4. Re:Let's add by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't been punched or threatened since like third grade. Why the hell would you not say WHERE you lived? I want to avoid this place as if it is hell on Earth.

      I'm really sick of the whole "a big city" this or that.. like saying Chicago or St Louis or New York is suddenly going to give the NSA the last piece of the puzzle, or some former employer is going to connect the dots that Joey Vegetables in Oklahoma is the SAME Joey and he posted when he said he was sick and --... I don't buy it anymore.

      I'm just going to assume you're making it up, as there's no way any individual would be attacked that regularly. I have personally lived 29 years and encountered three people that asked me for money. Separately, there was also one situation where this guy made me kind of uncomfortable, so I went to the drinking fountain and faked so that he would go in a different elevator than me.

    5. Re:Let's add by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moderated as Funny? Most of you dicks didn't grow up in a Ghetto.

  66. Addict? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you jerked off to porn until your dick bled - and STILL kept going? I would consider that to be an addiction.

    Or you really liked porn because you are bored shitless with your life or your wife has turned into a completely unattractive fat pig?

    I knew a guy l like that. He married this hottie who blimped out after a couple of years of marriage and now he has to watch a bit of porn just to do her.

  67. Happy? by drainbramage · · Score: 1

    Are you happy to see me or is that an apple on your laptop?

    --
    No brain, no pain.
  68. Can we stop w/ the "man sues for..." stories? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    Any idiot can sue for absolutely anything. I can sue my chair manufacturer for making me fat because it's so comfy. Now, if someone *wins* one of these ridiculous suites, THAT is news!

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  69. Easy win by Tolkienfanatic · · Score: 0

    I think it is going to be relatively simple for Apple's legal team to demonstrate that the sequence "a-c-e" comes nowhere close to "u-c-k". On that note, Chris Sevier sounds like a real asshole.

  70. Opt-in controls for OCD? by edelbrp · · Score: 1

    How could that possibly work? He's actively looking for pr0n, so he'd simply turn off any controls that inhibit that.

    1. Re:Opt-in controls for OCD? by CCarrot · · Score: 2

      How could that possibly work? He's actively looking for pr0n, so he'd simply turn off any controls that inhibit that.

      And if he couldn't, then he'd go out and get a laptop or something else to feed his addiction with. If he cancelled his ISP, soon he'd be out piggybacking on his neighbors feed, or hanging around the shadier internet cafes...

      What, does he think that alcoholics are cured just because their local grocery store is out of beer or decided not to carry it anymore?

      Land of the free = land of "you're responsible for your own damn actions"

      --
      "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
  71. What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is he going to sue his lawyer for not stopping him from becoming a huge douche?

  72. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, this is like suing your auto maker for the car you drove to the nearest hooker. Whatever, man. Stop blaming others for your mess.

  73. Nice by nbritton · · Score: 2

    I wonder how far that strategy will work with a speeding ticket, lets just call it entrapment that they designed a car that knowning violates the law when a simple technical solution could be implemented to make the car never exceed the posted limit.

    In all seriousness though, I'd pay $2k to $3k extra for a button in a car that you could push to make it cruise exactly at the posted limit, as well as never exceed the limit going down hills, and it logs sensor data that can be used in court. It won't happen however, these fine only violations are what law enforcement calls their bread and butter.

    1. Re:Nice by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      In all seriousness though, I'd pay $2k to $3k extra for a button in a car that you could push to make it cruise exactly at the posted limit, as well as never exceed the limit going down hills, and it logs sensor data that can be used in court. It won't happen however, these fine only violations are what law enforcement calls their bread and butter.

      From a practical point of view: When there is a speed limit restricting the driving speed, a small number of drivers will go under the speed limit, most will go a little bit above, and a few will go a lot above the limit. Assuming the speed limit is there to keep things safe, the police or whoever puts up the speed limit, would know that, and set the limit so with this mixture of speeds the street would be safe. So in a perfect world, this button would allow you to exceed the limit within a safe margin (and with no speeding ticket). Which may be safer than everyone going exactly the same speed.

    2. Re:Nice by dkf · · Score: 1

      Which may be safer than everyone going exactly the same speed.

      For a particular stretch of road there's going to be a natural safe speed to drive it at. That speed will depend on all sorts of things, such as the condition of the road surface, the number of junctions, the likelihood of pedestrians walking out into the road, etc. As long as people stay within the natural safe limit, the accident rate will be low. That's true even if everyone drives at the same exactly identical speed, which isn't gonna happen in reality! Let's get real here! Unfortunately, some people, let's call them "asshole jerkwads that are a waste of their father's spooge", feel that driving within the safe natural limit is not for them. These are the folks for whom law enforcement's involvement in traffic speeding offenses is intended, as they're a hazard to everyone in the area. We can deplore the fact that this is necessary, but some people just plain are asshole jerkwads that are a waste of their father's spooge. Once you've got that, you've got to post official speed limits and so on. Those official speed limits aren't always a precise match for the road's natural limit, but it's usually best to keep them fairly close; encouraging people to disregard or disrespect official notices is idiotic.

      This is all quite apart from fact that there are some jurisdictions that regard speeding tickets as a way to extort money from the law-abiding. That's a different sort of asshole jerkwaddery, but it's still asshole jerkwads that are the problem...

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
  74. Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obligatory comments incoming:

    AMERICA!

    And...."I don't want to live on this planet anymore."

  75. There is an old saying... by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 1

    "It's a poor workman who blames his tool."

    Very applicable, and yes, pun intended.

  76. Re:What? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

    his excuse is that he typoed facebook as fuckbook.

    Well, they are only two letters apart. Letters that are nearly at the opposite side of the keyboard from the letters he wanted, but still only two letters.

  77. What a wanker by SpaghettiPattern · · Score: 2

    What a wanker.

    --

    I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
  78. group swill? by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

    But if you did, I am sure there is a web site for group swill.

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  79. Re:What? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

    his excuse is that he typoed facebook as fuckbook. 99.999% chance he was looking for some bitch to fuck

    *Looks at keyboard*

    Yea, considering how far apart the "a" and "u" keys are, I figure that's a safe assumption to make...

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  80. Really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know I half-lost a girlfriend because of porn and I didn't sue Microsoft. Then again I broke up with her. Also I'm a fucking adult and not a giant baby in diapers.

  81. It will probably work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google put in mandatory safe search for everyone at the request of absolutely nobody, so I'm sure Apple has something like that up its sleeve, too.

  82. Addiction by phorm · · Score: 2

    What are the qualifications for it to be considered an "addiction?"

    I'd assume taking precedence over your job/relationship/family? While I don't doubt many I know view such material on a regular basis, they're not likely sneaking out for a dirty mag instead of a smoke-break, or missing junior's baseball game.

    1. Re:Addiction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are a number of definitions of addiction. The one I've heard that was the least clinical and easiest to understand was: You are an addict when you try to stop doing something, and not only find yourself continuing to do it, but getting worse. I'm not a psychologist, just one of the ACs above.

  83. Lawyer by phorm · · Score: 1

    So what does it mean to be suspended? I suppose it only means he can't sue on the behalf of other people.

    1. Re:Lawyer by FuzzNugget · · Score: 1

      It means he's suspended from practicing law. He cannot represent clients in any solicitary capacity, but he can still deal with any legal proceedings of his own, just like any citizen can technically do (just not practically)

  84. safe mode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when i saw "safe mode" i thought about Windows safe mode. Press F8 to enter safe mode. gah, i've been using Windows too long. lol

    Mr. Chris Sevier meant a browser mode that applied filters to search engines and blocked adult websites.

    so Mr. Chris Sevier actually wrote a fifty page complaint. wow, that is a long complaint.

  85. People with no self control by Nyder · · Score: 1

    should put out of their misery then they get this stupid.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  86. Go apple go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate everything about Apple but I hope their lawyers give this guy what he has comming and let it serve as a warning to any future nutcases who persuit the same.

  87. Uhm, actually people download a simple text file by Marrow · · Score: 2

    Then the computer goes crazy! and downloads hundreds of things you never explicitly asked for. Some are porn. Some are ads. Some are probably viruses. And some are more text to download more more more. 1 click = 100s of downloads.

  88. I too suffer from Ostepornosis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is a degenerate disease.

  89. Is this a joke? by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    It's not Apple's fault your addicted to porn, it's yours. When will people stop blaming everyone else and just accept they are weak, sorry excuses for humans. For instance, alcoholics claiming they have a disease or smokers claiming they didn't mean become hooked. Just accept the fact that if you have an addiction and it starts over taking your life that you're just a sorry example of a human being. It's not Apple's fault or the beer company's or the cigarette company's or anyone else, it's yours. The simple and real truth is, is that you can quit any addiction you have by will power. If you find something overtaking your life and IT IS NOT DUE TO A CHEMICAL IMBALANCE!!!!!!! then you just have to stop doing that thing. If you find yourself unable to stop under your own will then seek immediate help and give it up. The fact is company's and substances are not responsible for causing addiction, a person weak and sorry self control is. This man is addicted to porn because he wants to be just like a smoker chooses to be smoke and an alcoholic chooses to drink. Stop blaming everyone else, you're simply a weak person and you need to accept that!

    1. Re:Is this a joke? by mitcheli · · Score: 1

      I was scanning these comments to moderate them and I ran across this one. On the surface, I agree with what you said regarding personal responsibility, however, addictions are chemically imbalanced. Your body does indeed build up a physical need for the substance that you're addicted to. I've seen alcoholics die when they tired to become sober because their body didn't have the substances that it needed. So I must respectfully disagree with you on that front. Many addictive substances alter the brain chemistry to change the way a person processes those substances. And yes, porn produces endorphins and other hormones, which can also be addictive. This cycle is what leads to the ever increasing need for more of the substance. Hard core drugs like Meth and Heroine are perfect examples of this. So yes, Alcoholism and Drug Abuse are very much diseases in much the same manner that mental disorders are a disease. They take a lot of effort to overcome and is not as simple as just "stopping".

      --
      Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
  90. Tragic state of affairs, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one should be surprised when he wins a large judgment!

    1. Re:Tragic state of affairs, but... by arfonrg · · Score: 1

      It probably won't get as far as a judgement, Apple will probably pay him something to make him go away. WELCOME TO THE WORLD OF TORT.

      --
      Your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
  91. NOW COMES the Plaintiff ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's really is how it begins. http://www.scribd.com/doc/153168246/Chris-Sevier-Apple-Complaint

  92. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Said the person who has obviously never been through a divorce, nor had someone close to them go through one.

    Said the person who didn't bother with prenups because he knew his wife-to-be's lawyer would never try to take him for a percentage of everything he had.

  93. hey, maybe he should embrace his actual self? by strstr · · Score: 1

    being a porn addict must be in his character, perhaps influenced by his neurological functioning and DNA. he should embrace it, instead of treating it like it's a problem. he lost his kids and shit, so what? move on, find a whore who's equally into porn as you are.. and enjoy your porn without restriction, because you are what you are, dude. apple isn't going to change or fix that.

    1. Re:hey, maybe he should embrace his actual self? by strstr · · Score: 1

      people should be taught to embrace their impulses and to indulge in everything they like. he needs to work it into his live with control, like it's a special trait he has. there are tons of other women, men out there who are just the same, and living lives where this is not a problem. I mean, they embrace it, rather than try to victimize themselves over it. people in the country aren't told how to manage themselves or things they come into contact with, and by manage, I mean to embrace and have insight into.

  94. The greatest commandment - love by raymorris · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Weirdo fundamentalist sect <> faith

    When Jesus was ask what was the greatest commandment, he said "love". Love your neighbor and love God, all the law and the prophets hang on those two, Christ said. So anyone teaching hate toward anyone is teaching the opposite of Christianity.

    Certainly that happens, just as the guy selling fake "bomb detectors" claimed science, fools and charlatans sometimes claim God. Their claim is just as bogus though, as Christ clearly directed us to love those who oppose as we love ourselves, even fact even MORE than we love ourselves, love them as he loved us.

    1. Re:The greatest commandment - love by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The religious have all sorts of weasel ways. They don't outright say that they hate you, but if you do or believe differently from them, they won't hesitate to tell you about all of the horrors that they believe you will suffer. It's a way of saying that they hate you via proxy and allows them to still offer their unsolicited, unwanted, artificial "love".

    2. Re:The greatest commandment - love by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The problem is that Christianity is quite contradictory. It teaches both love and hate. You could just as easily say "The Bible teaches hate, so if anyone tries teaching love, it's the opposite of Christianity". The fact that you choose to ignore the hateful parts of Christianity says more about about you than Christianity. There is enough of varying aspects of Christianity to give plenty of justification to both the hateful and loving Christians.

      The same is true for most religions

      What do you expect from a man made phenomenon? Why wouldn't it be full of contradictions and both good and evil? It just seems so unremarkable if 2 billion people didn't claim to believe it.

    3. Re:The greatest commandment - love by realityimpaired · · Score: 3

      The problem is that Christianity is quite contradictory. It teaches both love and hate.

      It doesn't really. The Bible has this contradiction in it, but the thing that most of the hateful xians seem to forget is that, according to their own dogma, Christ came to Earth and died on the cross in order to complete the old covenant established by the rules of the old testament, and to establish a new relationship with their God based on love. It's true that Jesus had more than a few quite famous temper tantrums and blowups against certain people in the book, but that was never about the person themselves, or the actions even, it was the location for the actions. The parable about the money changers in the temple, for example, wasn't about the moneychanging itself, it was about the fact that it was happening inside a temple, and was debasing the purpose of the temple to become a financial institution. And of course, the favourite thing for the "devout" to hate, homosexuality, isn't even mentioned in the gospels.

      The ones who actually practice what they preach (and what's taught in the book they espouse) are quite accepting of those around them, and are usually pretty easy to deal with.

      And no, I'm not a Christian. I was raised in a fairly liberal and open-minded Anglican family, and don't really have much use for the Christian God in my life. I don't really care one way or another whether God exists, nor do I feel like I need fear of damnation to give me a reason to treat those around me with respect.

    4. Re:The greatest commandment - love by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you think past the teachings of Jesus described in the Bible. The rules of the universe. The ones that necessitated that the death of the purest human on earth needed to be killed in order for God to have a new relationship with man, is abhorrent. It is one thing if that was just the way things were. But they aren't. The Christian God decided they had to be the way. The Christian God decided that people who did not accept Jesus had to go to hell for eternity. This is his design. This God's moral standards do not even measure up to the moral standards of modern western civilization. I don't see any evidence of divinity in these ideas. To me this smells of bronze age thinking.

    5. Re:The greatest commandment - love by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll comment on that if I ever get past the old testament - man that book is boring....

  95. Apple can't be to blame by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 2

    Apple can't be to blame because if they were culpable, all that pr0n out there would be in glorious Quicktime instead of crappy Flash or WMV format. Not that I would know this.

  96. Re:What? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    his excuse is that he typoed facebook as fuckbook.

    Well, they are only two letters apart. Letters that are nearly at the opposite side of the keyboard from the letters he wanted, but still only two letters.

    Three sir, three!

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  97. Re:What? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    Ugh, I think I have a little bit of the family dyslexia going on...

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  98. Interesting by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

    I find it interesting that the complaint paperwork was filed by himself. After reading TFA it was quite clear that this guy was insane, but I was wondering if he'd actually found a lawyer as equally insane to handle the case.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  99. Re:False Flag - the I word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Incentive is the word you are missing here. Our society creates masses of perverse incentives that Incentivise people to be irresponsible, in effect weakening the power of Democracy and bringing it into the control of a few puppet masters. For example, suppose you research a set of three candidates over a few weeks and find that one has a major conflict of interest, the second is only power mad, and the third is simply a poor dresser. After all this you make your decision to vote. Now, your vote was just steamrolled by the 10 people that gave up their vote for a pack of cigarettes. (Of course, ' get out and vote'!)

  100. Definition ( was Re:safe mode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, it can be defined.

    From the filing (and retyped, since scriibd wants to get intimate to let me copy or download)

    Introduction
    Point 14
    "...pre-set filters block any picture, photograph, drawing, sculpture, motion picture film,or similar visual representation or image of a person or a portion of the human body, which depicts nudity, sexual conduct, excess violence, or sadomasochistic abuse, and which is harmful to minors and adult males"

    Easy peasy. Flip a couple of switches and away you go.

    Hey, and about those adult females? Anything goes. Open season.

    -les common, also concerned about excess violence...

    who really oughta sign up here, coward that he isn't...

    1. Re:Definition ( was Re:safe mode by RichMan · · Score: 1

      > ,or similar visual representation or image of a person or a portion of the human body, which depicts ... and which is harmful to minors and adult males"

      So that would be ankles, elbows, hair, eyes and simply the presence of females no matter how covered. Also this could be extended to any representation of the human form.

      The definitions are not complete enough. The pharase "which is harmful to minors and adult males" opens it right up. And why were adult females not included? That makes the request itself sexist. The definitions need to be much more specific to be applicable.
      Keep in mind monty python sketches discussing simply "areas".

      Representations that are "harmful" are fully open to cultural interpretation. And given personal freedoms you can't manage to adjust to the cultural interpretations of a population?

  101. factually false by raymorris · · Score: 0

    Your claim is quite simply factually false. Christ never taught hate. the ancient Jewish Scriptures acknowledged that hate, that war, did exist. Christ taught that the old law had been so badly misinterpreted that it needed to be replaced by the new law, and that the all of the law is based on two things - love and love.

    1. Re:factually false by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 3, Interesting

      First of all I said "The *Bible* teaches hate". I don't know why you chose to misinterpret what I said. The fact is that Christians could have simply omitted the old testament from their holy book. They chose to keep, and are therefore subject to criticisms of the old testament.

      The "ancient Jewish scriptures" didn't simply acknowledge that hate existed. They are included in your Bible as the word of God, and command hate. If you don't think the old testament should be included in the Bible, maybe you should create your own sect of Christianity as many others have done.

      Even if you did this, it wouldn't mean that Christianity was only love. It would only mean that your version of Christianity was only love. Everyone else's version would still be a mix of hate and love, until you converted them to your version.

      Second of all, the new testament also has some pretty terrible stuff in it. On the whole it looks quite progressive compared to the old testament, but compared with modern sensibilities it is barbaric.

      Thirdly it is all irrelevant anyway because it's not real. Religion evolves. The leaders will continue to have "divine revelations" of new scripture or new interpretations of scripture in order to continuously drag this antiquated mythology into the present, ever diluting and politically correcting it's message.

      How much can you change Christianity and still have it count as Christianity? They've already gotten rid of genocide, slavery, mysogeny, through new interpretations. Maybe we can get rid of miracles and Jesus and God.

      The new message can be this:

      Sure Jesus was just a man. That's why his teachings were full of flaws that contradict our current knowledge and sense of morality. We modern Christians are able to fix these flaws in a way that we think Jesus (if he lived today) might approve. We still believe in the golden rule and being compassionate, but we've grown out of the idea of supernatural deities as childish and primitive.

    2. Re:factually false by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christ taught that the old law had been so badly misinterpreted that it needed to be replaced by the new law

      Matthew 5:17 disagrees with you. Jesus is very specific that he is not their to abolish the old Law but to fulfill it.

    3. Re:factually false by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... two things - love and love.

      That's just one thing. Are you stupid?

  102. OSX does have a built in Porn filter by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    Parental Controls comes with a porn filter. it's a couple clicks to turn it on. Of course you can also turn it off if you are the super user. So exactly what is he asking for, a way to turn it on irrevocably? That sounds more like a job for a Baracuda box upstream than the computer itself.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  103. iPod Condom by Monsuco · · Score: 1

    If I remember right, that new porn law means he'll have to have an iPod condom right?

  104. safe mode exists by Xicor · · Score: 1

    there is already a safe mode... all he would have had to do is put on a child filter on his own computer... problem solved

  105. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't control myself from looking at porn, so everyone better take care of my addiction or I am going to sue.......for free porn

  106. Freedom from Porn Apple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The company who had a controversy for actually doing something about stopping porn proliferation?, that's the one you are going to sue, now say, Microsoft, with it's near monopoly?

    Not that I'm supporting this, but pick your targets.

  107. That thing in the Apple Store by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sex trafficking, prostitution, and countless numbers of destroyed lives

    Did you tap that young thing at the Store? The sweetest rounded ass in the business for the money and your soles. I mean soules. Dammit! iSouls!

  108. It all their by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1

    ffaaa fall ggaaa Oh My Godddd yeah. Never mind I'm good for now.

  109. Apple reply was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go jack off.

  110. Too Dumb To exist by b4upoo · · Score: 1

    Blaming Apple for porn addiction is about like me trying to sue a grocery store for failing to protect me from beer and wine.

  111. Apple much? by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    EVERY Apple customer EVER. Blame everyone else. They're themselves perfect. Ultra arrogant and living in their own little world.

  112. He already sacrificed his family for sex... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now he sues Apple. I wonder if he is still possessed of sex while suing. He clearly needs money to accomplish his deviant fantasies. He was tired of masturbating. With the money comes the power to do what he has seen on the web all this time.

  113. My addiction is suing people who sue people by Tyr07 · · Score: 1

    I can't help it. Every time I see someone sue someone for something stupid I have to sue them. It's an addiction, an illness brought on by people suing people for dumb reasons, and then I have to sue them. It's out of my control, I demand the people suing install a sue filter known as common sense and that in the future all people born come with 'common sense' pre-installed and enabled by default. I agree with the freedom of people who really want to turn off 'common sense' but it needs to be a default option on all future humans.

  114. let's sue Apple! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a perv, pay me! Lots and Lots of money.

  115. Courtroom drama in the making by oDDmON+oUT · · Score: 1

    Apple lawyer: "Who clicked the mouse?"

    Defendant: [inarticulate mumble]

    Apple lawyer: "I'm sorry, the court can't hear you. Your Honor, would you please inst..."

    Defendant: [Yells] "I can't take it anymore! I DID! I clicked it! God help me...I did."

    Apple lawyer: "Your Honor, I rest my case."

    --
    Some days it's just not worth
    chewing through my restraints.
  116. Nobody forced him to buy apple. by seeker_1us · · Score: 1
    If he wants a computer with safe features he can install linux on a PC and put in free software to block porn on the computer he owns.

    There's probably a 3rd party program for Apple that does the same thing.

  117. Safe mode by hgifford · · Score: 1

    All computers already have a "safe mode". It's called the off button.

  118. This is retarded by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a "safe mode" was included in their software, what would prevent an adult from disabling it? Also, what about self control?

  119. Sue Jack Daniels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm suing Jack Daniels for my alcaholism. My wife took my kids and left me. Jack Daniels failed to install a filter in their bottles to prevent my addiction. Jack Daniels is a silent poisoner responsible for chemical addiction, wife-beater T-Shirts, barf stains and countless numbers of destroyed lives. I am seeking damages from Jack Daniels but will drop the lawsuit if Jack Daniels sells whisky bottles with a "safe mode."

  120. Re:What? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    My parents went through one. It was settled very easily. The lawyers exist to keep them from having to be in the same room, not to actually argue anything. The only thing wrong with divorce at the moment is that the person demanding the children often also demands support. It shouldn't be allowed to argue that you are best for the children and you can't afford to care for them in the same sentence. "If you can't afford them, you can't care for them properly." should be the immediate response, and they get to choose whether they want the kids or the money, they can ask for only one.

  121. According to Jobs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linux is the OS for porn, not Apple!