Google around, you'll find a million similar cases. Developers hear that their apps will be fine, and then at the last minute they are denied and not told why. It takes them alot of calling and emails to Apple and takes months before they can even find out why.
So... Apple's been laying down the ban hammer on any app that had even a whiff of controversy or even a chance of violating their terms. Plenty of long developed apps were suddenly cut off and dropped at the last minute, with no comment from Apple. Developers had to go through hell to deal with Apple, find out why they didn't get approved, and then change whatever arbitrary thing that seemed to bother Apple that time.
If there was ANY possible defense for this kind of extreme, totalitarian control and manipulation of developers, then it would be some kind of quality assurance, or protection of customers.
THIS TEARS IT. You can't have it both ways Apple! Either you're nannying the app store, and you're manually approving of each app, and thus are responsible, OR you have to let everything through that isn't ridiculously offensive or illegal.
This actually IS illegal, and Apple has allowed it? I think that they should be absolutely, undeniably 100% liable for ANY AND ALL DAMAGES to Wolfire Games.
Unbelievable.
I feel like they did a pretty poor job explaining to the layman what exactly the difference is between IPv4 and IPv6.
They really need to stress that sticking with IPv4 isn't an option, its not like 6 is some new hotness that we're trying to sell to them. 4 has a limited number of addresses, and we're running out. If we do run out, then we have big problems. The internet stops working the way you want. However, most people are already IPv6 capable, and its just the ISPs and major online services which need to adapt.
I get the feeling from most of the questions that people were really lost.
I've never been content with their attempts at the death ray. I love mythbusters for the entertainment, but they're really bad at science. They leave out ALL KINDS of variables and possibilities, and seem to only want to test some particular specific implementation. They try to talk science, but there's really very little academic integrity or rigor to their testing.
I thought it was especially odd that Obama came on the program, talked to them, said he "wanted them to revisit the death ray" and then they just redo the exact same experiment but with a bunch of kids, and then declare it busted yet again. Waste of time.
Exactly. The moral of this story is: if you use IE, then your information is being passed to Microsoft and being used. Even if you go to google.
They can say all they want about how it happened, but the fact is, it happened. They're getting results directly as a result of google returning them. There's no two ways about this. Its true, its a voluntary act of certain customers, but that doesn't change that Bing is utilizing Google's results.
Part of the nature of the internet is going to be that there will be feedback loops amongst page ranking, but this is a little too direct.
And yeah, everything that Microsoft said about Google's actions in response sounded like "nuh uh, you do!". Its pretty childish. Click fraud? Really? They just know they can throw out buzzwords like that and people who don't know any better will figure that google is just as guilty as MS. But Google has said that they do not track browsing history in this manner time and again.
We just really need to let people know how bad IE truly is.
Ah, fair point. That would definitely be a drawback with firefox.
Are any of the other competitors (chrome, opera, etc.) any better? Or is IE really the only enterprise solution?
But my point is, they sold vista as a completed OS product, and it wasn't. Almost nobody was happy with it. What should have been FREE service pack updates to improve vista, instead went into a rushed new OS product, that everybody had to buy all over again.
I don't mean to say that windows 7 is absolute trash. Its a solid operating system. But my point is, Vista was trash, and they tried to sell it to us as a solid OS. Then, when we found out it wasn't, rather than support it and those who bought it, they got everybody to buy another so they could bring in more money.
They should fail. The market demands they fail. They've only survived as long as they have because of their artificial Windows monopoly on OSes and software.
Why are they still trying with the Zune? I heard the latest model sold somewhere like 2,000 copies total. Wow. Meanwhile the ipod and iphone are EVERYWHERE. My grandma has one.
Also, they keep pushing IE. And who the hell still uses IE? Its a complete joke. Free products (firefox, chrome, opera, etc. etc.) are far superior. Why do they still put money into fighting a war they long ago lost?
Haha, and then there's Bing. I keep hearing ads on the RADIO for Bing. Like anybody listening to the radio is going to go "oh man, I'll search Bing tonight instead of google!" What a JOKE.
Then there's the great flop that was Vista, so they rushed 7 out the door while it was barely a service pack to Vista so that they could get people to buy more software they didn't need and keep the company afloat.
They have to be bleeding money like nobody's business. Most of their design decisions are terrible. I hate to sound like Steve Jobs, but they have no culture. Everything aesthetic they've just copied from apple or linux. (or, if you go back long enough, xerox)
Frankly, for the good of computing, they need to fail.
Especially Ballmer. Durr, I don't think anybody is going to want to buy an iphone.:p
THE RELIGION GENE. Because, you know, children with very religious parents never turned out secular.
IF there's even remotely a "religious gene" then it would have to be a SLIGHT genetic predisposition to favoring religion. But it seems to me that they started out with "some people have a gene that gives them a slight predisposition" and are now drawing conclusions as if they had said "some people have a gene that makes them religious". No. Absolutely nonsense.
DMs definitely should not be trying to get a TPK (total party kill), and in fact having the party die often is the sign of a REALLY BAD DM.
That said he's definitely not the leader or the judge. The DM is the SETTING, he's the world. The party is free to organize themselves, and they may elect a leader, but the DM certainly shouldn't be leading them.
I can only assume that the defense did a terrible job in this case. I don't see how this makes any sense at all.
If D&D forms gang behavior, then so does BEING LOCKED IN A JAIL TOGETHER.
The question is what exactly are we. I would say we as consciousness are just like the software of the brain, the current state and pattern, and that if you could keep that same pattern going without destructively copying it, you would keep the person intact and "alive" in a new body.
See, thats the whole difference. A boat has no software, its just hardware. But the whole point of humans was that we developed sentience so that we could have infinitely more complexity and variety than before. You can have two humans who are clones, exact genetic copies, but if you let them live for a few years, they will develop into very different people.
The way I see it, we're practically separate. I am a software intelligence that is running on a hardware body, which is almost this homo sapiens creature that I have a symbiotic relationship with. It is alive, but needs me for guidance. I am alive, but need it to sustain my processes. You can say your body is "you", but its just an arbitrary distinction. Philosophically, your iPod is just as much a part of you (you use it to process thoughts, to perform actions, its constantly around you) there's no reason it has to be physically "attached".
Ah, indeed you've hit the primary interesting concept in artificial intelligence, that is, what actually are we as intelligent humans?
Most people do assume a "soul" and I think its complete poppycock.
But, if there is no soul, then you're absolutely right. We can copy the brain, but its a copy; it would be no different than if we were to make a biological clone.
HOWEVER. What if instead of making a copy of your data to an artificial brain, what if we just replace, say, a single part of your brain with a perfect cybernetic replacement? Say, replace your amygdala, or your thalamus, only. Just that one part. Could we engineer something that takes in the biological inputs that the human amygdala does, and then gives the exact same outputs that an amygdala does?
That doesn't seem inconceivable to me. So, that makes you a cyborg, with a mostly human brain, and one robotic part.
So, then we replace another part. And another part. And anther part. And after awhile, piece by piece, you are made robotic completely.
So, which single piece do you stop being yourself, and you're making a "copy" to the machine brain? I don't think thats the case. So yes, while we CAN make copies, I think that transference is ALSO possible!!
Crazy stuff to think about, for sure. Shows just how little we know. Some people are so arrogant, and have no idea.
that one had a sequel, too! It was called Jedi Academy.
And Tribes had a tribes 2, and tribes veangeance...
I for one am frankly tired of seeing people keep dragging the same names out over and over again. Just because you've got an established IP doesn't mean that'll equate more sales! Oh, damn, yes it does.
I just heard that Atari is making a sequel to a game that hasn't been out since the atari 2600. THATS NOT THE SAME GAME ANYMORE!
Everybody's just making sequels. Halo reach, starcraft 2, diablo 3, final fantasy XIV... where are the new ideas?
Yeah, the major media and most politicians seem to have forgotten this very, VERY basic concept.
Correlation != Causation.
If you don't get that, you don't know shit, and have no business telling people what.
Did Nintendo themselves ever actually use the phrase? I thought it was just a pop culture reference kinda thing, never a part of the actual franchise. >_>
I call shenanigans.
TFA says they're using it now to promote the new donkey kong country, but it seems like they're taking a phrase that the public created that is in the public domain and are trying to claim it as theirs.
Yes, downloading music is copyright infringement, and NOT theft. They're legally distinct, and everybody should know this. The PSAs about "you wouldn't steal a car" purposefully try to blur the lines, but they are separate.
On the other hand, you're saying a DoS attack isn't that bad. Well, you may think so, but it is still definitely illegally tampering and interfering with a secure computer system, which is against the law.
And doing something against the law in order to seek revenge for infringements against your copyrights is vigilantism, and is illegal.
I don't see your point. Its like you're saying the pirates aren't that bad, but the RIAA isn't that bad either. But two wrongs don't make a right.
If you don't understand why vigilantism is wrong, you REALLY shouldn't be talking about law.
Oh yeah, so-and-so did X crime, so I don't need to feel bad that some guys went over to his house and shot him. Due process, right? You know, lets just drop this whole expensive legal system and go back to lynchings.
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely wrong. You're very misinformed.
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/20/commodore64-iphone-app-finished-denied-by-apple/
http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/09/13445/
http://www.iphonefreak.com/2011/02/sony-reader-denied-app-store-debut.html
http://mobihealthnews.com/6932/interview-the-iphone-medical-app-denied-510k/
http://gizmodo.com/5611169/why-the-hell-did-apple-pull-camera%252B-from-the-app-store
Google around, you'll find a million similar cases. Developers hear that their apps will be fine, and then at the last minute they are denied and not told why. It takes them alot of calling and emails to Apple and takes months before they can even find out why.
Not just the Bing toolbar according to Google.
http://searchengineland.com/google-bing-is-cheating-copying-our-search-results-62914
They also do it with suggested sites.
So thanks for all your hostility. Clearly I have absolutely no knowledge of technology.
This used to be a fun, community site. Now its populated by trolls and jerks.
So... Apple's been laying down the ban hammer on any app that had even a whiff of controversy or even a chance of violating their terms. Plenty of long developed apps were suddenly cut off and dropped at the last minute, with no comment from Apple. Developers had to go through hell to deal with Apple, find out why they didn't get approved, and then change whatever arbitrary thing that seemed to bother Apple that time.
If there was ANY possible defense for this kind of extreme, totalitarian control and manipulation of developers, then it would be some kind of quality assurance, or protection of customers.
THIS TEARS IT. You can't have it both ways Apple! Either you're nannying the app store, and you're manually approving of each app, and thus are responsible, OR you have to let everything through that isn't ridiculously offensive or illegal.
This actually IS illegal, and Apple has allowed it? I think that they should be absolutely, undeniably 100% liable for ANY AND ALL DAMAGES to Wolfire Games.
Unbelievable.
I feel like they did a pretty poor job explaining to the layman what exactly the difference is between IPv4 and IPv6.
They really need to stress that sticking with IPv4 isn't an option, its not like 6 is some new hotness that we're trying to sell to them. 4 has a limited number of addresses, and we're running out. If we do run out, then we have big problems. The internet stops working the way you want. However, most people are already IPv6 capable, and its just the ISPs and major online services which need to adapt.
I get the feeling from most of the questions that people were really lost.
I've never been content with their attempts at the death ray. I love mythbusters for the entertainment, but they're really bad at science. They leave out ALL KINDS of variables and possibilities, and seem to only want to test some particular specific implementation. They try to talk science, but there's really very little academic integrity or rigor to their testing.
I thought it was especially odd that Obama came on the program, talked to them, said he "wanted them to revisit the death ray" and then they just redo the exact same experiment but with a bunch of kids, and then declare it busted yet again. Waste of time.
Exactly. The moral of this story is: if you use IE, then your information is being passed to Microsoft and being used. Even if you go to google.
They can say all they want about how it happened, but the fact is, it happened. They're getting results directly as a result of google returning them. There's no two ways about this. Its true, its a voluntary act of certain customers, but that doesn't change that Bing is utilizing Google's results.
Part of the nature of the internet is going to be that there will be feedback loops amongst page ranking, but this is a little too direct.
And yeah, everything that Microsoft said about Google's actions in response sounded like "nuh uh, you do!". Its pretty childish. Click fraud? Really? They just know they can throw out buzzwords like that and people who don't know any better will figure that google is just as guilty as MS. But Google has said that they do not track browsing history in this manner time and again.
We just really need to let people know how bad IE truly is.
http://searchengineland.com/google-bing-is-cheating-copying-our-search-results-62914
I have no words.
Ah, fair point. That would definitely be a drawback with firefox.
Are any of the other competitors (chrome, opera, etc.) any better? Or is IE really the only enterprise solution?
But my point is, they sold vista as a completed OS product, and it wasn't. Almost nobody was happy with it. What should have been FREE service pack updates to improve vista, instead went into a rushed new OS product, that everybody had to buy all over again.
I don't mean to say that windows 7 is absolute trash. Its a solid operating system. But my point is, Vista was trash, and they tried to sell it to us as a solid OS. Then, when we found out it wasn't, rather than support it and those who bought it, they got everybody to buy another so they could bring in more money.
Absolutely. GOOD RIDDANCE.
:p
They should fail. The market demands they fail. They've only survived as long as they have because of their artificial Windows monopoly on OSes and software.
Why are they still trying with the Zune? I heard the latest model sold somewhere like 2,000 copies total. Wow. Meanwhile the ipod and iphone are EVERYWHERE. My grandma has one.
Also, they keep pushing IE. And who the hell still uses IE? Its a complete joke. Free products (firefox, chrome, opera, etc. etc.) are far superior. Why do they still put money into fighting a war they long ago lost?
Haha, and then there's Bing. I keep hearing ads on the RADIO for Bing. Like anybody listening to the radio is going to go "oh man, I'll search Bing tonight instead of google!" What a JOKE.
Then there's the great flop that was Vista, so they rushed 7 out the door while it was barely a service pack to Vista so that they could get people to buy more software they didn't need and keep the company afloat.
They have to be bleeding money like nobody's business. Most of their design decisions are terrible. I hate to sound like Steve Jobs, but they have no culture. Everything aesthetic they've just copied from apple or linux. (or, if you go back long enough, xerox)
Frankly, for the good of computing, they need to fail.
Especially Ballmer. Durr, I don't think anybody is going to want to buy an iphone.
Yeah. This seems completely worthless.
THE RELIGION GENE. Because, you know, children with very religious parents never turned out secular.
IF there's even remotely a "religious gene" then it would have to be a SLIGHT genetic predisposition to favoring religion. But it seems to me that they started out with "some people have a gene that gives them a slight predisposition" and are now drawing conclusions as if they had said "some people have a gene that makes them religious". No. Absolutely nonsense.
DMs definitely should not be trying to get a TPK (total party kill), and in fact having the party die often is the sign of a REALLY BAD DM.
That said he's definitely not the leader or the judge. The DM is the SETTING, he's the world. The party is free to organize themselves, and they may elect a leader, but the DM certainly shouldn't be leading them.
I can only assume that the defense did a terrible job in this case. I don't see how this makes any sense at all.
If D&D forms gang behavior, then so does BEING LOCKED IN A JAIL TOGETHER.
We also have College degrees, which tell us that we SHOULD take it seriously :P
The question is what exactly are we. I would say we as consciousness are just like the software of the brain, the current state and pattern, and that if you could keep that same pattern going without destructively copying it, you would keep the person intact and "alive" in a new body.
See, thats the whole difference. A boat has no software, its just hardware. But the whole point of humans was that we developed sentience so that we could have infinitely more complexity and variety than before. You can have two humans who are clones, exact genetic copies, but if you let them live for a few years, they will develop into very different people.
The way I see it, we're practically separate. I am a software intelligence that is running on a hardware body, which is almost this homo sapiens creature that I have a symbiotic relationship with. It is alive, but needs me for guidance. I am alive, but need it to sustain my processes. You can say your body is "you", but its just an arbitrary distinction. Philosophically, your iPod is just as much a part of you (you use it to process thoughts, to perform actions, its constantly around you) there's no reason it has to be physically "attached".
What is a man?
A miserable little pile of secrets! But enough of this, have at you!
Ah, indeed you've hit the primary interesting concept in artificial intelligence, that is, what actually are we as intelligent humans?
Most people do assume a "soul" and I think its complete poppycock.
But, if there is no soul, then you're absolutely right. We can copy the brain, but its a copy; it would be no different than if we were to make a biological clone.
HOWEVER. What if instead of making a copy of your data to an artificial brain, what if we just replace, say, a single part of your brain with a perfect cybernetic replacement? Say, replace your amygdala, or your thalamus, only. Just that one part. Could we engineer something that takes in the biological inputs that the human amygdala does, and then gives the exact same outputs that an amygdala does?
That doesn't seem inconceivable to me. So, that makes you a cyborg, with a mostly human brain, and one robotic part.
So, then we replace another part. And another part. And anther part. And after awhile, piece by piece, you are made robotic completely.
So, which single piece do you stop being yourself, and you're making a "copy" to the machine brain? I don't think thats the case. So yes, while we CAN make copies, I think that transference is ALSO possible!!
Crazy stuff to think about, for sure. Shows just how little we know. Some people are so arrogant, and have no idea.
that one had a sequel, too! It was called Jedi Academy.
And Tribes had a tribes 2, and tribes veangeance...
I for one am frankly tired of seeing people keep dragging the same names out over and over again. Just because you've got an established IP doesn't mean that'll equate more sales! Oh, damn, yes it does.
I just heard that Atari is making a sequel to a game that hasn't been out since the atari 2600. THATS NOT THE SAME GAME ANYMORE!
Everybody's just making sequels. Halo reach, starcraft 2, diablo 3, final fantasy XIV... where are the new ideas?
Exactly. Didn't Ballmer say the iPhone was going to fail?
Seriously, why on EARTH would anybody care what a Microsoft employee has to say about linux, especially if its negative?
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
-Benjamin Franklin
I would say that 3 year olds should never be strip-searched.
Even if the Taliban starts using children en masse, it just isn't worth it.
Yeah, the major media and most politicians seem to have forgotten this very, VERY basic concept.
Correlation != Causation.
If you don't get that, you don't know shit, and have no business telling people what.
Did Nintendo themselves ever actually use the phrase? I thought it was just a pop culture reference kinda thing, never a part of the actual franchise. >_>
I call shenanigans.
TFA says they're using it now to promote the new donkey kong country, but it seems like they're taking a phrase that the public created that is in the public domain and are trying to claim it as theirs.
What're you trying to say?
Yes, downloading music is copyright infringement, and NOT theft. They're legally distinct, and everybody should know this. The PSAs about "you wouldn't steal a car" purposefully try to blur the lines, but they are separate.
On the other hand, you're saying a DoS attack isn't that bad. Well, you may think so, but it is still definitely illegally tampering and interfering with a secure computer system, which is against the law.
And doing something against the law in order to seek revenge for infringements against your copyrights is vigilantism, and is illegal.
I don't see your point. Its like you're saying the pirates aren't that bad, but the RIAA isn't that bad either. But two wrongs don't make a right.
If you don't understand why vigilantism is wrong, you REALLY shouldn't be talking about law.
Oh yeah, so-and-so did X crime, so I don't need to feel bad that some guys went over to his house and shot him. Due process, right? You know, lets just drop this whole expensive legal system and go back to lynchings.
WRONG.
This was my first thought too. This should be HIGHLY illegal. This is vigilantism, plain and simple, and is completely illegal and immoral.
No, and don't call me Shirley!