There are many different types of disasters, and certainly plenty that won't necessarily cause the Internet to go down. And as far as people panicking if grandma isn't tagged as safe, that's the whole point of letting friends mark other friends as safe. Maybe grandma was able to call uncle Jimmy 1000 miles away and so he was able to mark her as safe.
My company has been using the MVC framework CakePHP for quite a few projects over the last few years. It never seems to get any public attention, but it works really well for us and has a lot of nice features.
Why does the average worker need access to facebook and twitter? they are paid to work not to slack of tweeting and updating profiles.
Maybe because when you give your employees a bit of freedom, they don't feel like they're working under a fascist regime and are therefore happier to be at work and become more productive.
64 percent favoring the former governor from Massachusetts, and only 41 percent favoring the incumbent president
It's been awhile since I've been in school, but aren't percentages like this supposed to add up to 100? Also, if this is [somehow] correct, how can a 23% difference be called slight, as the title says?
And the analog joystick has far more precision for movement than WADS does. It's still just a matter of personal preference and familiarity.
I'd reckon that a team of console players would get completely slammed by a team of K&M players. This would be especially true if the console players had the auto-aim disabled (which is present by default in nearly every console FPS). I don't see how personal preference enters into it. Clearly, one of these tools is better for the job.
It's believable that the GPS system got disrupted, but it's hard to believe that this somehow forced them to land. If they were doing recon, then GPS is pretty critical so that they can exactly pinpoint what they're surveying. However, even the lowliest pilots can navigate without GPS (this is required to pass any level of flight school, let alone military-level). I can understand the mission being scrapped due to this type of disruption, but I can't believe that they were in any sort of danger.
Isn't the iPhone's A4 CPU supposedly some hundred MHz slower than the the one in the Nexus S, giving it better battery life? I don't think this has anything to do with strangling web apps, just different design goals.
The iPhone 4 is 777 MHz while the Nexus S is 1 GHz. Both are based on the ARM Corext-A8 and both have 512 MB of RAM. Given the difference in CPU speed, the results of the page load tests don't seem far departed from what would be expected. While the Nexus S is still proportionally a little faster, it isn't so wildly so that it can't be attributed to some minor tweaks in the OS or browser software. Using the term "spanked" seems a bit sensationalist in this instance.
In the practical sense, I don't see why Android is considered more "open" than iOS. I realize more of the OS components for Android are fully open source. However, developers are still subject to the rules of the Android store. The phone manufacturers are carriers still have the final say on which features of the OS are actually shipped intact. Users still have to jailbreak Android phones to side-step these artificial limitations. Maybe I'm missing some critical bit of information -- and if so, I'd love to be corrected -- but I don't see much of a difference between the "openness" of the two platforms when it comes to practical usage.
Right now, Minecraft saves worlds by making a huge tree of directories that stores individual data chunks in various sub-directories. Even though the total amount of data is small (my server is only about 10 megs), any time a copy needs to be made to backup or test, it takes an eternity because there are literally over 10,000 files on the disk.
I'm hopelessly in love with the game, but with the frequent software updates, there is also a need for frequent backups to make sure I don't lose all the work of everyone on the server.
So, where's the part where you explain why it's not going to happen? AT&T had branding all over their phones before the iPhone came around, so what makes you think Verizon would be unwilling to make the same concession? As far as hardware is concerned, if they go with a combined CDMA/GSM chip, it's likely that the cost to buy the chips from the supplier will be nearly the same, or negligibly higher (~$1-2). For that price, they get access to close to half of the US cell phone market that they didn't have previously. Seems like a good deal to me. If history is any indicator, most of Apple's partners eventually concede to Apple's way of doing business (see: everything in the iTunes store).
Software should not be able to destroy hardware, period. The GPU's cooling system should be designed to safety operate for sustained periods at peak load --- anything less is artificially crippling the hardware and leads to both security and reliability problems.
Great job, NVIDIA: now, malware can not only destroy your files, but destroy your expensive graphics card as well.
This shouldn't be surprising to anyone. Software (or firmware, if you want to make the distinction) has been used to control fans on GPUs, CPUs, northbridges and plenty of other components for many, many years. I think people don't think about the alternative: putting hardware exclusively in charge of fan control. If you choose the hardware method, there is just as much chance of it becoming fucked up due to lack of testing, poor design choices, etc. However, if you ship a million units with faulty hardware, that means you have a million broken units and there is no choice but to recall/replace them. If you use software and you fuck it up, you can patch it, saving your customers the time and hassle of having to return their product or being stuck without a solution for an extended period of time, and at the same time saving your company from potentially devastating financial losses. Frankly, I think all parties benefit with a software solution.
AT&T (per usual)
$15/mo for 250 MB or$30/mo for unlimited
Free use of AT&T Wi-Fi hotspots
Uses GSM Micro SIMs and will work with any GSM provider that has these cards, all models are "unlocked" and not bound to a carrier
I have both an iPhone and a MacBook and I use and love both everyday. However, I've never thought to myself, "how great would it be to have a 10-inch iPhone?" After watching the live coverage for the last hour, that's basically all this is. The OS and UI are basically the same, just upscaled and optimized in some places for the larger screen. As far as I can tell, there are none of the clever innovations that are typically present in a new Apple product. The only people that I can see this thing appealing to would be people that have a strong fascination for touch screens and people that don't feel that they can properly lounge about with a laptop (as exemplified by Steve Jobs lounging in a love seat during the presentation). I think the only obvious application would be as an ebook reader (side note: I nearly had a fit when they decided to reuse the term iBook to brand their ebooks). The presentation still isn't done so there isn't a word on price, but if it can't come within range of the Kindle and similar devices, I'd say this thing is purely novelty.
Dropping all formats that Windows play by default is IMO a bad decision. It may make the CCCP Project more popular and spur more people to install Quicktime (yuck), but it'll also drive away lots of inexperienced users.
A quick look at the Windows Media Player 12 Wikipedia page indicates that h.264 in an MP4 container (and by extension, a renamed M4V) plays fine in the current version of WMP that ships with Win 7. However, the post says that Handbrake dropped DivX and XviD, which were only given support in the latest version of WMP as well. So really, Handbrake has never supported native WMP formats before WMP 12, unless more was dropped than just DivX and XviD (I'm too lazy to do the research).
I was really hoping this was going to be a fully programmable system that would allow a programmer to dynamically elevate arbitrary parts of the screen, but it seems to be completely static, so I don't really see the point. Ultimately, what I think people would want for devices like an iPhone would be to have fully dynamic "buttons" that are programmed using the windowing/widget API so that you maintain the application-specific dynamic UI that makes devices like the iPhone awesome while adding the tactile feedback that so many people seem to enjoy. I think the requisite of a pneumatic or hydraulic pumping system would make it extremely difficult to get something like this into a small package, though. Maybe there's a material that will expand suitably from electrical stimulation rather than pneumatics.
The kind of shot in the arm that PC gaming needs isn't at the high end but at the low end. If something better than Intel graphics became common on slimline PCs (as opposed to bulky towers), that would open up the market for gaming on home theater PCs.
The really great news about this card is that it's relatively inexpensive compared to what most top end cards cost at launch. The 5870 is going for $380 just about everywhere, while typical high-end cards launch closer to $500. I hope this is an indication that prices will drop across the board and therefore affect the low end, as well. As far as better graphics getting in to SFF PCs, we've long since left the realm of the "sane" when it comes to thermal requirements on decent graphics chips, but if you poke around, there are some compact, passively-cooled solutions that might not perform as well, but would definitely be considered acceptable by most people.
I suspect many people have the same irrational fear of guns, therefore if you carry ANYTHING that even resembles a gun their first instinct is to call for help (aka "call 911"). It's a phobia which is NOT rational, and it's no wonder they irrationally identified a toygun as an AK-47.
Why is it irrational to fear guns? They have the potential to hurt people, whether intentionally or unintentionally. If I pointed a loaded gun at your head and promised you that I wouldn't pull the trigger, would you not feel nervous anyway? You don't know if I adhere to gun safety rules. You don't know if I'm malicious. It's silly to be afraid of beetles because beetles can't do anything to you, even if they tried. People with guns can hurt you _without_ even trying if they don't know what they're doing, and you can't trust an arbitrary person on the street to know how to handle a fire arm in a safe fashion.
I think it's important to recognize that this philosophical divide regarding binary drivers has collateral damage as exemplified here. Personally, the debate seems rather petty in the grand scheme of FOSS, but if something like this is legitimately keeping a potentially huge software title from making it to the platform, then I think some attitudes need to be adjusted a bit. At the end of the day, a platform is only as good as the software that runs on it.
You don't think the 180 you are paying them a year should cover the expansions? What if you had played the original game for years? Considering Blizz sells the expansions to stores for much lower than the $40 you end up paying... it just seems quite petty to me. Where's the loyalty to your customers?
Welcome to the free market. If you think the pricing structure is unfair, don't buy it. If enough people feel the way that you do, they won't buy it either and Blizzard will change the pricing structure. I'm tired of hearing this ridiculous argument. If people are willing to pay, then the price is fair! That's how this system works.
Sure, I guess I'm a little arrogant today, but this kind of delusion really annoys me. It really boils down to this: companies are going to take advantage of people's desire to be environmentally friendly. They will talk up their "tech" to get buyers and investors, but when it comes down to it all they will be selling is the good feeling of going green. The Tesla hasn't produce anything new or innovative. There's no industry changing technology coming from them that I can see. Even there business model isn't new, it is basically duping consumers, investors and government. They're promising the world and delivering nothing.
And as to not be so arrogant and full-of-myself, please someone tell me how Tesla is going to make electric cars more efficient and affordable? I'm pretty damn sure it all boils down to batteries, but they use standard computer batteries. Are they going to take the millions of dollars of government money and develop better battery tech? What is their plan? And will it really benefit us or will the Tesla people get rich and jump ship?
If you would bother to read a few paragraphs from the Wikipedia article, you'd understand a little better what they've accomplished. They promised a $100k electric sports car that would perform comparably to a $100k gasoline sports car (sub-4 second 0-60 time, less than 13 second quarter mile, although top speed is a little weak at 125 mph) and delivered 600 of them. Oh and by the way, they go about 240 miles on one charge, which is much farther than any other electric vehicle, so there must be something to this "efficiency" thing. So who's being duped here? The people who bought it got what they were promised and now the investors are seeing profits.
If you think what makes electric cars more efficient is just the batteries, you're pretty off base. A lot of the same things that make gasoline cars efficient have to be re-done for an electric version. For example, since the entire drive train and power system are completely different, it has to be designed in such a way to fit in the chassis properly and keep the car's weight balanced, otherwise you get undesirable handling characteristics. Electric cars use a completely different type of transmission. The Roadster originally used a 2-speed, but then changed (and retrofitted existing cars) to a single speed that shaved 1.7 seconds off its 0-60 time, which is a huuuuuuuge amount. There are cooling and ventilation issues that needed to be solved. There is software that monitors and adjusts a zillion parameters all the time to keep from wasting power. So no, it's not as simple as just having better batteries, even though that is a major factor in efficiency.
Honestly, you sound like someone that doesn't know the first thing about automobiles, physics, or anything mechanical, but you're choosing to troll the one company in the US that's coming anywhere close to walking the walk with regard to electric vehicles.
So far, they sell one nice electric sports car. And they announced to make a sedan for a somewhat wider audience. But Tesla does not have the market share yet to put real pressure on the major car makers.
I disagree. I think it absolutely puts pressure on major car makers because Tesla has proven (with a fraction of the capital and manufacturing resources) that manufacturing a viable electric car is not only possible, but profitable. What this does is make the consumer ask, "what the hell is wrong with all these big companies with more money and more manufacturing infrastructure? Why can't they do this and make these cars at 10x the volume and half the price?" The end result is the devaluation of the brands of the major manufacturers because they look incompetent when faced with Tesla's results, and rightfully so. Now that Tesla has shown profitability, there is no excuse anymore for the major manufacturers not to get their acts together.
By the way, at the time I looked into iphone development, there was a non disclosure agreement that prevented you from publishing your sources. Is it still active? How are you supposed to comply with the GPL under NDA? Does that preclude you from using any GPL code?
It has been quite some time since this NDA has been lifted, which is why there are plenty of books and tutorials readily available for anyone to buy/read (this wasn't the case when the SDK was first released). These publications generally contain a healthy dose of source code, so obviously it's fine to share. The only significant NDA that still exists regarding the iPhone SDK only covers beta releases of the SDK, which are only available to people who have signed up for the paid developer program.
Apple does not allow "duplication of functionality" and they would surely reject such resubmissions.
Not quite accurate. Apple does not allow duplicating the functionality of Apple's apps. They don't care if you're the 1000th person to create a twitter client or a "flashlight". They still may reject an app for a million other reasons, but they only care about people impinging on their own territory.
Slashdot Mirror
There are many different types of disasters, and certainly plenty that won't necessarily cause the Internet to go down. And as far as people panicking if grandma isn't tagged as safe, that's the whole point of letting friends mark other friends as safe. Maybe grandma was able to call uncle Jimmy 1000 miles away and so he was able to mark her as safe.
People blah blah about MVC
My company has been using the MVC framework CakePHP for quite a few projects over the last few years. It never seems to get any public attention, but it works really well for us and has a lot of nice features.
a sign that BSD is becoming less relevant to modern computing needs
Obligatory remark about how Mac OS X and iOS are BSD and are used by tens of millions of people everyday, blah, blah, blah.
Why does the average worker need access to facebook and twitter? they are paid to work not to slack of tweeting and updating profiles.
Maybe because when you give your employees a bit of freedom, they don't feel like they're working under a fascist regime and are therefore happier to be at work and become more productive.
64 percent favoring the former governor from Massachusetts, and only 41 percent favoring the incumbent president
It's been awhile since I've been in school, but aren't percentages like this supposed to add up to 100? Also, if this is [somehow] correct, how can a 23% difference be called slight, as the title says?
And the analog joystick has far more precision for movement than WADS does. It's still just a matter of personal preference and familiarity.
I'd reckon that a team of console players would get completely slammed by a team of K&M players. This would be especially true if the console players had the auto-aim disabled (which is present by default in nearly every console FPS). I don't see how personal preference enters into it. Clearly, one of these tools is better for the job.
It's believable that the GPS system got disrupted, but it's hard to believe that this somehow forced them to land. If they were doing recon, then GPS is pretty critical so that they can exactly pinpoint what they're surveying. However, even the lowliest pilots can navigate without GPS (this is required to pass any level of flight school, let alone military-level). I can understand the mission being scrapped due to this type of disruption, but I can't believe that they were in any sort of danger.
Isn't the iPhone's A4 CPU supposedly some hundred MHz slower than the the one in the Nexus S, giving it better battery life? I don't think this has anything to do with strangling web apps, just different design goals.
The iPhone 4 is 777 MHz while the Nexus S is 1 GHz. Both are based on the ARM Corext-A8 and both have 512 MB of RAM. Given the difference in CPU speed, the results of the page load tests don't seem far departed from what would be expected. While the Nexus S is still proportionally a little faster, it isn't so wildly so that it can't be attributed to some minor tweaks in the OS or browser software. Using the term "spanked" seems a bit sensationalist in this instance.
In the practical sense, I don't see why Android is considered more "open" than iOS. I realize more of the OS components for Android are fully open source. However, developers are still subject to the rules of the Android store. The phone manufacturers are carriers still have the final say on which features of the OS are actually shipped intact. Users still have to jailbreak Android phones to side-step these artificial limitations. Maybe I'm missing some critical bit of information -- and if so, I'd love to be corrected -- but I don't see much of a difference between the "openness" of the two platforms when it comes to practical usage.
Right now, Minecraft saves worlds by making a huge tree of directories that stores individual data chunks in various sub-directories. Even though the total amount of data is small (my server is only about 10 megs), any time a copy needs to be made to backup or test, it takes an eternity because there are literally over 10,000 files on the disk.
I'm hopelessly in love with the game, but with the frequent software updates, there is also a need for frequent backups to make sure I don't lose all the work of everyone on the server.
So, where's the part where you explain why it's not going to happen? AT&T had branding all over their phones before the iPhone came around, so what makes you think Verizon would be unwilling to make the same concession? As far as hardware is concerned, if they go with a combined CDMA/GSM chip, it's likely that the cost to buy the chips from the supplier will be nearly the same, or negligibly higher (~$1-2). For that price, they get access to close to half of the US cell phone market that they didn't have previously. Seems like a good deal to me. If history is any indicator, most of Apple's partners eventually concede to Apple's way of doing business (see: everything in the iTunes store).
Software should not be able to destroy hardware, period. The GPU's cooling system should be designed to safety operate for sustained periods at peak load --- anything less is artificially crippling the hardware and leads to both security and reliability problems.
Great job, NVIDIA: now, malware can not only destroy your files, but destroy your expensive graphics card as well.
This shouldn't be surprising to anyone. Software (or firmware, if you want to make the distinction) has been used to control fans on GPUs, CPUs, northbridges and plenty of other components for many, many years. I think people don't think about the alternative: putting hardware exclusively in charge of fan control. If you choose the hardware method, there is just as much chance of it becoming fucked up due to lack of testing, poor design choices, etc. However, if you ship a million units with faulty hardware, that means you have a million broken units and there is no choice but to recall/replace them. If you use software and you fuck it up, you can patch it, saving your customers the time and hassle of having to return their product or being stuck without a solution for an extended period of time, and at the same time saving your company from potentially devastating financial losses. Frankly, I think all parties benefit with a software solution.
Details:
AT&T (per usual)
$15/mo for 250 MB or$30/mo for unlimited
Free use of AT&T Wi-Fi hotspots
Uses GSM Micro SIMs and will work with any GSM provider that has these cards, all models are "unlocked" and not bound to a carrier
I have both an iPhone and a MacBook and I use and love both everyday. However, I've never thought to myself, "how great would it be to have a 10-inch iPhone?" After watching the live coverage for the last hour, that's basically all this is. The OS and UI are basically the same, just upscaled and optimized in some places for the larger screen. As far as I can tell, there are none of the clever innovations that are typically present in a new Apple product. The only people that I can see this thing appealing to would be people that have a strong fascination for touch screens and people that don't feel that they can properly lounge about with a laptop (as exemplified by Steve Jobs lounging in a love seat during the presentation). I think the only obvious application would be as an ebook reader (side note: I nearly had a fit when they decided to reuse the term iBook to brand their ebooks). The presentation still isn't done so there isn't a word on price, but if it can't come within range of the Kindle and similar devices, I'd say this thing is purely novelty.
Dropping all formats that Windows play by default is IMO a bad decision. It may make the CCCP Project more popular and spur more people to install Quicktime (yuck), but it'll also drive away lots of inexperienced users.
A quick look at the Windows Media Player 12 Wikipedia page indicates that h.264 in an MP4 container (and by extension, a renamed M4V) plays fine in the current version of WMP that ships with Win 7. However, the post says that Handbrake dropped DivX and XviD, which were only given support in the latest version of WMP as well. So really, Handbrake has never supported native WMP formats before WMP 12, unless more was dropped than just DivX and XviD (I'm too lazy to do the research).
Where's my CDMA droid?!
The Motorola Droid is a Verizon exclusive and Verizon is CDMA.
I was really hoping this was going to be a fully programmable system that would allow a programmer to dynamically elevate arbitrary parts of the screen, but it seems to be completely static, so I don't really see the point. Ultimately, what I think people would want for devices like an iPhone would be to have fully dynamic "buttons" that are programmed using the windowing/widget API so that you maintain the application-specific dynamic UI that makes devices like the iPhone awesome while adding the tactile feedback that so many people seem to enjoy. I think the requisite of a pneumatic or hydraulic pumping system would make it extremely difficult to get something like this into a small package, though. Maybe there's a material that will expand suitably from electrical stimulation rather than pneumatics.
The kind of shot in the arm that PC gaming needs isn't at the high end but at the low end. If something better than Intel graphics became common on slimline PCs (as opposed to bulky towers), that would open up the market for gaming on home theater PCs.
The really great news about this card is that it's relatively inexpensive compared to what most top end cards cost at launch. The 5870 is going for $380 just about everywhere, while typical high-end cards launch closer to $500. I hope this is an indication that prices will drop across the board and therefore affect the low end, as well. As far as better graphics getting in to SFF PCs, we've long since left the realm of the "sane" when it comes to thermal requirements on decent graphics chips, but if you poke around, there are some compact, passively-cooled solutions that might not perform as well, but would definitely be considered acceptable by most people.
I suspect many people have the same irrational fear of guns, therefore if you carry ANYTHING that even resembles a gun their first instinct is to call for help (aka "call 911"). It's a phobia which is NOT rational, and it's no wonder they irrationally identified a toygun as an AK-47.
Why is it irrational to fear guns? They have the potential to hurt people, whether intentionally or unintentionally. If I pointed a loaded gun at your head and promised you that I wouldn't pull the trigger, would you not feel nervous anyway? You don't know if I adhere to gun safety rules. You don't know if I'm malicious. It's silly to be afraid of beetles because beetles can't do anything to you, even if they tried. People with guns can hurt you _without_ even trying if they don't know what they're doing, and you can't trust an arbitrary person on the street to know how to handle a fire arm in a safe fashion.
I think it's important to recognize that this philosophical divide regarding binary drivers has collateral damage as exemplified here. Personally, the debate seems rather petty in the grand scheme of FOSS, but if something like this is legitimately keeping a potentially huge software title from making it to the platform, then I think some attitudes need to be adjusted a bit. At the end of the day, a platform is only as good as the software that runs on it.
You don't think the 180 you are paying them a year should cover the expansions? What if you had played the original game for years? Considering Blizz sells the expansions to stores for much lower than the $40 you end up paying... it just seems quite petty to me. Where's the loyalty to your customers?
Welcome to the free market. If you think the pricing structure is unfair, don't buy it. If enough people feel the way that you do, they won't buy it either and Blizzard will change the pricing structure. I'm tired of hearing this ridiculous argument. If people are willing to pay, then the price is fair! That's how this system works.
Sure, I guess I'm a little arrogant today, but this kind of delusion really annoys me. It really boils down to this: companies are going to take advantage of people's desire to be environmentally friendly. They will talk up their "tech" to get buyers and investors, but when it comes down to it all they will be selling is the good feeling of going green. The Tesla hasn't produce anything new or innovative. There's no industry changing technology coming from them that I can see. Even there business model isn't new, it is basically duping consumers, investors and government. They're promising the world and delivering nothing.
And as to not be so arrogant and full-of-myself, please someone tell me how Tesla is going to make electric cars more efficient and affordable? I'm pretty damn sure it all boils down to batteries, but they use standard computer batteries. Are they going to take the millions of dollars of government money and develop better battery tech? What is their plan? And will it really benefit us or will the Tesla people get rich and jump ship?
If you would bother to read a few paragraphs from the Wikipedia article, you'd understand a little better what they've accomplished. They promised a $100k electric sports car that would perform comparably to a $100k gasoline sports car (sub-4 second 0-60 time, less than 13 second quarter mile, although top speed is a little weak at 125 mph) and delivered 600 of them. Oh and by the way, they go about 240 miles on one charge, which is much farther than any other electric vehicle, so there must be something to this "efficiency" thing. So who's being duped here? The people who bought it got what they were promised and now the investors are seeing profits.
If you think what makes electric cars more efficient is just the batteries, you're pretty off base. A lot of the same things that make gasoline cars efficient have to be re-done for an electric version. For example, since the entire drive train and power system are completely different, it has to be designed in such a way to fit in the chassis properly and keep the car's weight balanced, otherwise you get undesirable handling characteristics. Electric cars use a completely different type of transmission. The Roadster originally used a 2-speed, but then changed (and retrofitted existing cars) to a single speed that shaved 1.7 seconds off its 0-60 time, which is a huuuuuuuge amount. There are cooling and ventilation issues that needed to be solved. There is software that monitors and adjusts a zillion parameters all the time to keep from wasting power. So no, it's not as simple as just having better batteries, even though that is a major factor in efficiency.
Honestly, you sound like someone that doesn't know the first thing about automobiles, physics, or anything mechanical, but you're choosing to troll the one company in the US that's coming anywhere close to walking the walk with regard to electric vehicles.
So far, they sell one nice electric sports car. And they announced to make a sedan for a somewhat wider audience. But Tesla does not have the market share yet to put real pressure on the major car makers.
I disagree. I think it absolutely puts pressure on major car makers because Tesla has proven (with a fraction of the capital and manufacturing resources) that manufacturing a viable electric car is not only possible, but profitable. What this does is make the consumer ask, "what the hell is wrong with all these big companies with more money and more manufacturing infrastructure? Why can't they do this and make these cars at 10x the volume and half the price?" The end result is the devaluation of the brands of the major manufacturers because they look incompetent when faced with Tesla's results, and rightfully so. Now that Tesla has shown profitability, there is no excuse anymore for the major manufacturers not to get their acts together.
By the way, at the time I looked into iphone development, there was a non disclosure agreement that prevented you from publishing your sources. Is it still active? How are you supposed to comply with the GPL under NDA? Does that preclude you from using any GPL code?
It has been quite some time since this NDA has been lifted, which is why there are plenty of books and tutorials readily available for anyone to buy/read (this wasn't the case when the SDK was first released). These publications generally contain a healthy dose of source code, so obviously it's fine to share. The only significant NDA that still exists regarding the iPhone SDK only covers beta releases of the SDK, which are only available to people who have signed up for the paid developer program.
Apple does not allow "duplication of functionality" and they would surely reject such resubmissions.
Not quite accurate. Apple does not allow duplicating the functionality of Apple's apps. They don't care if you're the 1000th person to create a twitter client or a "flashlight". They still may reject an app for a million other reasons, but they only care about people impinging on their own territory.