with even 50% accuracy. Their recommendations on YouTube for music are sometimes makes excellent, but oftenthe recommendations just leave me scratching my head. Are they that bad or are they pushing certain music on me just because they are getting paid to do so - like the way the prioritize search results? If that's what they are doing than I can't see ever paying for their "service". For free it's occasionally worth it as I find some gems from time to time (which I then buy), but Google isn't better than any other streaming service I've tried (including a free trial of Apple Music). Come to think of it, none of these companies - Amazon, Google, Netflix, Spotify, Apple, etc. are very accurate with their recommendations. Amazon seems to be somewhat better than the others, but only marginally so.
I gave my employer 4 1/2 months notice, but there are some caveats. 1) I trusted my boss who fully understood my importance to the organization. 2) His new boss I didn't trust as much though I've known him a few years. He just go promoted by a Trumpian executive and was eager to please. That guy's boss (the Trumpian) I did not trust a lick. He was fairly new and may not have understood or appreciated what I did. He thought he invented everything himself. 3) However, our HR department bends over backwards to avoid lawsuits and bad publicity so he'd have a problem if he didn't honor my notice. 4) In any case, when I gave my notice I was prepared financially to leave right then. I was better off leaving on my preferred date, but I knew it would not be a disaster if I left right then. They fully honored my date and I worked with a number of folks assigned to take on my work. All of the bosses in the chain appreciated the heads up and my willingness to organize and prune my documentation and work with the people who would inherit my work. The company you are retiring from probably cares about its image and does not want you bad mouthing them once you leave. You are doing them a favor after all. Notice is rarely mandatory.
Funny because I also use Safari and I run Adblock - right now in fact. There are tons of extensions and privacy features. The ad industry is up in arms about the latest Safari feature - no allowing the ad networks to track you across different web sites. I suspect you don't use Safari at all because you don't know anything about it. Do you work for Google or Microsoft?
In the article it says you can use the headphones without the app. Bose "encourages" customers to download and use the app with the headphones. That should give it away. Why do you think they want you to use their app? You can adjust the app settings - presumably what it can and cannot do. It seems what Bose did wrong was not be clear up front as to what the default result of using the app would be. That's not quite as bad as your smart TV spying on you if you connect it to your internet connected LAN.
I'm going to recheck my microwave now. I wonder if I should down this GE microwave app.
Most of the center-right parties in Europe have "Christian" in their names. That doesn't make them Christian. When they win an election it does not mean the country has become more Christian. One wouldn't get many votes in Turkey if your party's name included "Christian". So, you use "Islam". Whatever gets the votes.
Now almost all of Erdogan's opponents in Turkey are also Muslim. Are you saying that Islam is defined by the outcome of Turkish elections? What about all the Muslims in other countries? Most Muslims don't live in Turkey. How do Muslim's vote in the U.S.? If they vote Democrat does it mean Islam supports trans-gender bathrooms? If they vote Republican does it mean the Islam fears and hates it's followers?
What makes you think that a majority of Christians agree on any specific social issue? First of all, "Christian" or "Christianity" is not a religion. It's an umbrella term claimed by many religions. Many denominations, churches and sects identify as "Christian", but not all of them agree on who is or is not. Mormans believe they are Christian. Most other "Christian" groups don't think they are. The KKK and Aryan Brotherhood types identify themselves as "Christian" though I'd think almost every other "Christian" group rejects them and their claim. Islam is similar in this respect. It's not even as simple as Sunni versus Shiite. I've read that most people who identify as Muslim reject ISIS. Is ISIS a Muslim group? Most of Erdogan's opponents in Turkey identify as Muslim. So while it is possible to look at a specifi group and make your argument, Christians and Muslims are not specific groups. T
You are making the mistake of confusing his tactics with some coincidental attribute that he used to bind his followers to him. Erdogan is an authoritarian working to install a one-party dictatorship. He's something of a Fascist. Since he happens to be Muslim along with his people he's using that religious and cultural context to employ pretty universal tactics. The Nazi's and Fascists used some Christian symbols and traditions. Stalin even resorted to Tsarist and Orthodox symbols and traditions to build popular support during World War II. Religion and culture are used to create bonds between the leader and the followers. It's their source of tribal identity. Modi in India uses Hindu culture and traditions. In Myanmar it's Buddhism.
I use both the mac os app store and buy direct. If an app and its publisher are not well known the app store has advantages. It's easy enough to find and you know you can trust it. Reviews give you some idea about its value. Prices tend to be low so its an easy decision to go ahead and buy it. Once I own and am familiar with the app though, I'd be perfectly willing to buy it direct or go direct to the publisher to get an upgrade or related product. So my conclusion is that the mac app store is a good place for developers to start in order to break into a market. Once they are established i.e. are known and liked by users, the store's value diminishes. For established publishers it might still be a good place to sell you entry level versions.
Except for Xcode, I never get my development tools from the app store, but that is a special category.
Apple Pay does not cost the merchants a thing. It also does not keep them from using loyalty cards and such. I have such a loyalty card from Walgreens. It's in my Apple Phone with my credit cards. When I'm checking out it pops up and I scan it and then swipe to a credit card and scan it to pay. Walgreen's gets their data, I get points/ discounts and Apple Pay securely handles the transaction. I only need my watch to pay. So why can't these merchants just copy what Walgreen's does? If they they don't know how then I also don't trust them to secure my credit card information so I'm glad I use Apple Pay.
The merchants and these banks don't want customer freedom or choice. They want more control over the customer. I don't trust them to secure my information or credit card information so I don't want them to be able to bypass Apple's security. Target? TJ Maxx? Kohls? Home Depot? All kinds of stores have had major breaches.
I own several Bose products and have tried others. Many of the products are great if you follow the instructions. Some are crap. If its not a speaker or headphone it's probably crap. If it is then it might be great or it might be crap. I loved my Bose 901's but ended up ditching them because my wife refused to decorate the house around them and their requirements. I still secretly long for that wall of sound. It's true that you could push Bose 901s to volumes that a man likes and still not provoke a woman to say "could you turn that down a bit, please?". Filled the room nicely.
First point about fraud - not true in the U.S. at least If the merchant follows the banks procedures and system and the card is approved, its off the hook. If the merchant commits a fraud or whatever then the bank will deny payment and/or try to recoup payments made.
The fee a merchant pays does not change depending on whether you are using Apple Pay, Android Pay or a physical credit card. So, accepting Apple Pay costs the merchant nothing extra nor does it cost the customer anything extra. The decision by the merchant to accept any credit card payments is the point when the card companies transaction fees come into effect. Apple Pay's fee comes out of the set fee charged by VISA, MasterCard, etc.
Apple Pay does not use the card nor require its presence during the transaction. It does not pass or use your credit card number either. The code it uses is specific to the device and it's relationship to accounts and you is known only to the issuing bank. Any system that relies on the card and a pin still exposes your account number and your identity, does it not?
There apparently isn't much bank resistance as Apple has been pretty successful signing them up. The chip and pin method is better than the magnetic strip we in the US have relied on so their fraud rates are much lower so yes the incentive is less; however the Apple Pay set up is still much more secure than chip and pin. When it starts to be used more on-line it will have much greater benefits for banks. On-line fraud and theft of information is a huge problem everywhere.
Please try to pay attention. You don't pay anything nor does the merchant. The transaction fee paid by the merchant remains the same regardless of whether you use a card or Apple Pay. The fee is paid by the banks which they are willing to do because its a lot cheaper than the huge losses due to fraud they've experienced with credit cards.
You don't give "all your banking information" to Apple. You scan your credit card and its sent to the bank that issued it. They approve it and your phone stores a code they bank created for the card installed on that device. Your data doesn't go to Apple. If you start by using the card you have for iTunes, of course Apple already has that. So Apple doesn't have your info nor does your device. Your device stores your code in a secure enclave on the chip. The OS can't get it either. Just the bank that issued the card. That's as secure as it gets.
It''s not the banks who resist; it's the merchants. When Apple Pay was first introduced it was with blessing of most of the big banks in the U.S. Several, like Chase touted it as the safest and most secure way to use a credit card in existence. Merchants have resisted primarily for 2 reasons: 1) they have ancient card strip readers and they don't want to pay to upgrade to something with NFC and or a chip reader; 2) they like collecting data on their customers so they can market/sell to them more effectively. An Apple Pay transaction is anonymous - unless you do like Walgreens and offer your customers a loyalty card that works in Apple Pay.
Banks in the U.S. and in many countries have to pay for fraud losses, not the merchants so Banks have a huge incentive to get people to use systems like Apple Pay. A rule change in the U.S. says that merchants who don't support and use at least a smart chip reader will have to pay for any fraud incurred as a result. That's merchants' incentive to upgrade.
When you use Apple Pay, no one can skim your card and use it. No one can see your card number or any personal information. The possibility of using Apple Pay in a fraudulent transaction is close to non-existent without physical possession and control over your devices. That's why it reduces the fraud rates.
You can add and remove cards from Apple Pay as you please and you can choose which card you use (override the default you set) when you do the transaction. So if you change banks or cards you don't install another app and set it up as you would if you used bank apps.l That's why these banks don't like it.
Despite the complaints from some merchants about not getting access to their customers data, Walgreens has implemented a loyalty/discount card for Apple Pay. You can - if you choose - use the card to get your points/discounts what ever before using the credit card you choose to pay with. So, it's actually possible to share your data with a merchant to get benefits - but only if you choose to do so. They can't get it without you loading their card in Apple Pay and using it.
Android Pay doesn't have all the privacy safeguards and the charges pass through Google instead of going direct to the bank as with Apple Pay so they know everything. Other than that (a big that for me) the mechanics of it are similar.
Apple Pay doesn't charge the merchants at all. It's the card issuers who pay Apple and they are will to do so because Apple Pay is much more secure than their own systems - chips and strips. It saves the banks money because it drastically reduces the fraud rate. So, no consumers are not paying for this. Another feature of Apple Pay (and Google's version) is that you aren't tied to a bank, a credit card (VISA, MC, etc.). That's what the banks don't like. They want to own the relationship.
If you had a Mac instead of a PC you wouldn't have that problem.;) PC users might consider AOL or Yahoo messenger. You can get access from most any device.
They don't keep 55% of users from messaging you because iMessage can send/receive SMS. Non Apple users just don't get the benefits/features of iMessage. If you want the security then you can use a third party (proprietary) messaging app that runs on iOS and Android. My point is that I don't know of an "open standards" app that provides end to end encryption and the other features of iMessage or similar 3rd party apps.
Apple provides end to end encryption and better abilities to keep spam out, partly due to its being proprietary. Some third party applications also provide these features. I don't know what Facebook will do, but when you are communicating with SMS using its messaging they change the background color from blue to green so that you know your texting in the clear. What "open standard" apps offer this?
Slashdot Mirror
with even 50% accuracy. Their recommendations on YouTube for music are sometimes makes excellent, but oftenthe recommendations just leave me scratching my head. Are they that bad or are they pushing certain music on me just because they are getting paid to do so - like the way the prioritize search results? If that's what they are doing than I can't see ever paying for their "service". For free it's occasionally worth it as I find some gems from time to time (which I then buy), but Google isn't better than any other streaming service I've tried (including a free trial of Apple Music). Come to think of it, none of these companies - Amazon, Google, Netflix, Spotify, Apple, etc. are very accurate with their recommendations. Amazon seems to be somewhat better than the others, but only marginally so.
I gave my employer 4 1/2 months notice, but there are some caveats. 1) I trusted my boss who fully understood my importance to the organization. 2) His new boss I didn't trust as much though I've known him a few years. He just go promoted by a Trumpian executive and was eager to please. That guy's boss (the Trumpian) I did not trust a lick. He was fairly new and may not have understood or appreciated what I did. He thought he invented everything himself. 3) However, our HR department bends over backwards to avoid lawsuits and bad publicity so he'd have a problem if he didn't honor my notice. 4) In any case, when I gave my notice I was prepared financially to leave right then. I was better off leaving on my preferred date, but I knew it would not be a disaster if I left right then. They fully honored my date and I worked with a number of folks assigned to take on my work. All of the bosses in the chain appreciated the heads up and my willingness to organize and prune my documentation and work with the people who would inherit my work. The company you are retiring from probably cares about its image and does not want you bad mouthing them once you leave. You are doing them a favor after all. Notice is rarely mandatory.
Funny because I also use Safari and I run Adblock - right now in fact. There are tons of extensions and privacy features. The ad industry is up in arms about the latest Safari feature - no allowing the ad networks to track you across different web sites. I suspect you don't use Safari at all because you don't know anything about it. Do you work for Google or Microsoft?
Since when do you speak for Slashdot? I find the post interesting and relevant. That doesn't mean I'll run Windows 10 though.
Yes. Next question?
In the article it says you can use the headphones without the app. Bose "encourages" customers to download and use the app with the headphones. That should give it away. Why do you think they want you to use their app? You can adjust the app settings - presumably what it can and cannot do. It seems what Bose did wrong was not be clear up front as to what the default result of using the app would be. That's not quite as bad as your smart TV spying on you if you connect it to your internet connected LAN.
I'm going to recheck my microwave now. I wonder if I should down this GE microwave app.
Most of the center-right parties in Europe have "Christian" in their names. That doesn't make them Christian. When they win an election it does not mean the country has become more Christian. One wouldn't get many votes in Turkey if your party's name included "Christian". So, you use "Islam". Whatever gets the votes. Now almost all of Erdogan's opponents in Turkey are also Muslim. Are you saying that Islam is defined by the outcome of Turkish elections? What about all the Muslims in other countries? Most Muslims don't live in Turkey. How do Muslim's vote in the U.S.? If they vote Democrat does it mean Islam supports trans-gender bathrooms? If they vote Republican does it mean the Islam fears and hates it's followers?
What makes you think that a majority of Christians agree on any specific social issue? First of all, "Christian" or "Christianity" is not a religion. It's an umbrella term claimed by many religions. Many denominations, churches and sects identify as "Christian", but not all of them agree on who is or is not. Mormans believe they are Christian. Most other "Christian" groups don't think they are. The KKK and Aryan Brotherhood types identify themselves as "Christian" though I'd think almost every other "Christian" group rejects them and their claim. Islam is similar in this respect. It's not even as simple as Sunni versus Shiite. I've read that most people who identify as Muslim reject ISIS. Is ISIS a Muslim group? Most of Erdogan's opponents in Turkey identify as Muslim. So while it is possible to look at a specifi group and make your argument, Christians and Muslims are not specific groups. T
You are making the mistake of confusing his tactics with some coincidental attribute that he used to bind his followers to him. Erdogan is an authoritarian working to install a one-party dictatorship. He's something of a Fascist. Since he happens to be Muslim along with his people he's using that religious and cultural context to employ pretty universal tactics. The Nazi's and Fascists used some Christian symbols and traditions. Stalin even resorted to Tsarist and Orthodox symbols and traditions to build popular support during World War II. Religion and culture are used to create bonds between the leader and the followers. It's their source of tribal identity. Modi in India uses Hindu culture and traditions. In Myanmar it's Buddhism.
I'm sure you are correct because I saw your post on the internet.
I don't have an internet!
I use both the mac os app store and buy direct. If an app and its publisher are not well known the app store has advantages. It's easy enough to find and you know you can trust it. Reviews give you some idea about its value. Prices tend to be low so its an easy decision to go ahead and buy it. Once I own and am familiar with the app though, I'd be perfectly willing to buy it direct or go direct to the publisher to get an upgrade or related product. So my conclusion is that the mac app store is a good place for developers to start in order to break into a market. Once they are established i.e. are known and liked by users, the store's value diminishes. For established publishers it might still be a good place to sell you entry level versions. Except for Xcode, I never get my development tools from the app store, but that is a special category.
Apple Pay does not cost the merchants a thing. It also does not keep them from using loyalty cards and such. I have such a loyalty card from Walgreens. It's in my Apple Phone with my credit cards. When I'm checking out it pops up and I scan it and then swipe to a credit card and scan it to pay. Walgreen's gets their data, I get points/ discounts and Apple Pay securely handles the transaction. I only need my watch to pay. So why can't these merchants just copy what Walgreen's does? If they they don't know how then I also don't trust them to secure my credit card information so I'm glad I use Apple Pay. The merchants and these banks don't want customer freedom or choice. They want more control over the customer. I don't trust them to secure my information or credit card information so I don't want them to be able to bypass Apple's security. Target? TJ Maxx? Kohls? Home Depot? All kinds of stores have had major breaches.
I own several Bose products and have tried others. Many of the products are great if you follow the instructions. Some are crap. If its not a speaker or headphone it's probably crap. If it is then it might be great or it might be crap. I loved my Bose 901's but ended up ditching them because my wife refused to decorate the house around them and their requirements. I still secretly long for that wall of sound. It's true that you could push Bose 901s to volumes that a man likes and still not provoke a woman to say "could you turn that down a bit, please?". Filled the room nicely.
First point about fraud - not true in the U.S. at least If the merchant follows the banks procedures and system and the card is approved, its off the hook. If the merchant commits a fraud or whatever then the bank will deny payment and/or try to recoup payments made. The fee a merchant pays does not change depending on whether you are using Apple Pay, Android Pay or a physical credit card. So, accepting Apple Pay costs the merchant nothing extra nor does it cost the customer anything extra. The decision by the merchant to accept any credit card payments is the point when the card companies transaction fees come into effect. Apple Pay's fee comes out of the set fee charged by VISA, MasterCard, etc.
Apple Pay does not use the card nor require its presence during the transaction. It does not pass or use your credit card number either. The code it uses is specific to the device and it's relationship to accounts and you is known only to the issuing bank. Any system that relies on the card and a pin still exposes your account number and your identity, does it not?
There apparently isn't much bank resistance as Apple has been pretty successful signing them up. The chip and pin method is better than the magnetic strip we in the US have relied on so their fraud rates are much lower so yes the incentive is less; however the Apple Pay set up is still much more secure than chip and pin. When it starts to be used more on-line it will have much greater benefits for banks. On-line fraud and theft of information is a huge problem everywhere.
Please try to pay attention. You don't pay anything nor does the merchant. The transaction fee paid by the merchant remains the same regardless of whether you use a card or Apple Pay. The fee is paid by the banks which they are willing to do because its a lot cheaper than the huge losses due to fraud they've experienced with credit cards.
You don't give "all your banking information" to Apple. You scan your credit card and its sent to the bank that issued it. They approve it and your phone stores a code they bank created for the card installed on that device. Your data doesn't go to Apple. If you start by using the card you have for iTunes, of course Apple already has that. So Apple doesn't have your info nor does your device. Your device stores your code in a secure enclave on the chip. The OS can't get it either. Just the bank that issued the card. That's as secure as it gets.
It''s not the banks who resist; it's the merchants. When Apple Pay was first introduced it was with blessing of most of the big banks in the U.S. Several, like Chase touted it as the safest and most secure way to use a credit card in existence. Merchants have resisted primarily for 2 reasons: 1) they have ancient card strip readers and they don't want to pay to upgrade to something with NFC and or a chip reader; 2) they like collecting data on their customers so they can market/sell to them more effectively. An Apple Pay transaction is anonymous - unless you do like Walgreens and offer your customers a loyalty card that works in Apple Pay. Banks in the U.S. and in many countries have to pay for fraud losses, not the merchants so Banks have a huge incentive to get people to use systems like Apple Pay. A rule change in the U.S. says that merchants who don't support and use at least a smart chip reader will have to pay for any fraud incurred as a result. That's merchants' incentive to upgrade.
When you use Apple Pay, no one can skim your card and use it. No one can see your card number or any personal information. The possibility of using Apple Pay in a fraudulent transaction is close to non-existent without physical possession and control over your devices. That's why it reduces the fraud rates. You can add and remove cards from Apple Pay as you please and you can choose which card you use (override the default you set) when you do the transaction. So if you change banks or cards you don't install another app and set it up as you would if you used bank apps.l That's why these banks don't like it. Despite the complaints from some merchants about not getting access to their customers data, Walgreens has implemented a loyalty/discount card for Apple Pay. You can - if you choose - use the card to get your points/discounts what ever before using the credit card you choose to pay with. So, it's actually possible to share your data with a merchant to get benefits - but only if you choose to do so. They can't get it without you loading their card in Apple Pay and using it. Android Pay doesn't have all the privacy safeguards and the charges pass through Google instead of going direct to the bank as with Apple Pay so they know everything. Other than that (a big that for me) the mechanics of it are similar.
Apple Pay doesn't charge the merchants at all. It's the card issuers who pay Apple and they are will to do so because Apple Pay is much more secure than their own systems - chips and strips. It saves the banks money because it drastically reduces the fraud rate. So, no consumers are not paying for this. Another feature of Apple Pay (and Google's version) is that you aren't tied to a bank, a credit card (VISA, MC, etc.). That's what the banks don't like. They want to own the relationship.
If you had a Mac instead of a PC you wouldn't have that problem. ;) PC users might consider AOL or Yahoo messenger. You can get access from most any device.
They don't keep 55% of users from messaging you because iMessage can send/receive SMS. Non Apple users just don't get the benefits/features of iMessage. If you want the security then you can use a third party (proprietary) messaging app that runs on iOS and Android. My point is that I don't know of an "open standards" app that provides end to end encryption and the other features of iMessage or similar 3rd party apps.
Apple provides end to end encryption and better abilities to keep spam out, partly due to its being proprietary. Some third party applications also provide these features. I don't know what Facebook will do, but when you are communicating with SMS using its messaging they change the background color from blue to green so that you know your texting in the clear. What "open standard" apps offer this?