The case hasn't even be determined to have merit. So Apple is being a bad actor. Apple can destroy a business simply because someone else claims something has happened with no evidence. When the people can only get apps from 1 source, then that source must be held to a high standard.
This is what happen at ad companies... with ANY product.
"The whole practice of science, private and public is essentially profit driven." only for an extremely liberal definition of 'profit'.
"Until we start rewarding scientists for negative results as well as we do positive results," science does something even better. It rewards people for finding provable fault in others work.
"we're going to see a lot of faulty positive data published" of course. IT's to be expected. It would surprise you if you bothered to understand that the first real peer review happens post publication. It's really the most logical way to do it. You get to the most experts in the field, quickly, evenly and cheaply.
Pre publication peer review, for the most part, is about seeing glaring errors.
"provide more suffering in the form of side-effects, than the disease they are designed to treat" So? When it's done, and the disease is gone is far better then death. It hurt more to have an arm reset then to leave it deformed. Should it be left deformed?
"It's generally accepted that these companies are genuinely apathetic to the medical issues" Only among the stupid, and ignorant. People who actually look into them and use rational thinking know otherwise.
and? Frr people who continually show up in ER with vaguen non deterministic symptoms' its good advice. But what's it have to do with the conversation? Not to mention the book is incredibly dated.
Because pulling an app based on one companies say so is wrong. Why is Apple suddenly the de facto arbiter in a court dispute?
Apple should wait until they get an order from the court to pull it. Until that time they have exactly zero increased liability. At least that's what they should do if they gave a crap about their customers.
The courts haven't decided if the case even has merit to continue.
And this goes for all apps, not just an overpriced app used to help children.
" Why not complain to PRC and SCS to have them issue a statement that they will indemnify and hold harmless" people can complain to more then one group; each group has a different stake, and becasue until a court says apple can't distribute it there is nothing to indemnify.
The courts haven't even decided if the case has merit. If it does have merit, then Apple should wait for a judge to tell them to stop supplying the App.
Yet another case of Apple not really carrying about their customers needs.
It's not a clone. The medical device are for more clumsy to use. Both the device and the UI.
It has icons with pictures and words on it, and a database to store what is used most often.
The people make a ton of money off the bloated hardware, and now they have shown it's not really worth 8K. They see a better solution in the market, so the are suing. I can't find any place the list specific complaints, and the court are only look at it right now to see if the suit even has merit to proceed, so Apple had jumped the gun here. But, don't they always jump the gun against their consumers in favor of the business?
she could get it from other sources, as well as updates.
Welcome to the Apple fenced garden.Screwed devs and customers. People who would buy an iPad primarily for those app, and spend 300 bucks on the app, would certainly by an android device. They don't care about the device, they care about helping their child.
"The story in an MMO should never require reading any quest text." I agree.
"Story is great - but it needs to be what I do, not what I read." That's fine but not always true. Not to say YOU need to play a game where the story is critical to out come. And story doesn't have to mean 'reading'. Cut scenes, NPC dialog, etc.. can all be part of the story.
Very few games are actually about what YOU do as much as getting you to figures out how to beat the boss. The fact that you can where different armor doesn't mean you aren't on a rail.
"Pool of Radiance isn't Wizardry" No Shit Sherlock.
" It's a tactical RPG, where success depends on how you develop your characters, where you place your characters" Tactical, sure but primitive, and not very tough. In this case tactical is cover speak for 'Min/Max'. and keep saving until you get the random result you want.
" It's only repetitive in the way that multiple games of chess are repetitive. " No, it's only repetitive that once you finished with the game, doing it again is trivial.
"t was more sophisticated than Diablo a decade before the first Diablo." How can you make the rest of the post, then post that? By your own examples its a different type of game, altogether. No comparison is valid.
"It's a real shame that SSI was devoured by Ubisoft." true.
Slashdot Mirror
One is one paper, the other is scientific consensus. Please troll elsewhere.
Because they want to overcome the speech disorder?
Maybe when you break a leg, we should tell you to just limp.
So?
The case hasn't even be determined to have merit.
So Apple is being a bad actor. Apple can destroy a business simply because someone else claims something has happened with no evidence.
When the people can only get apps from 1 source, then that source must be held to a high standard.
Except Climate scientists have evidence, predictions, and data.
Please take you trolling elsewhere.
no.
This is what happen at ad companies... with ANY product.
"The whole practice of science, private and public is essentially profit driven."
only for an extremely liberal definition of 'profit'.
"Until we start rewarding scientists for negative results as well as we do positive results,"
science does something even better. It rewards people for finding provable fault in others work.
"we're going to see a lot of faulty positive data published"
of course. IT's to be expected. It would surprise you if you bothered to understand that the first real peer review happens post publication. It's really the most logical way to do it. You get to the most experts in the field, quickly, evenly and cheaply.
Pre publication peer review, for the most part, is about seeing glaring errors.
Also, not all publications are equal. The ;problem is that the media and the general populace don't understand that and thing publishjing a paper equals proven and fact. some groups love to abuse that ignorance:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/foolishness-or-fraud-bogus-science-at-nccam/
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/reporting-preliminary-findings/
"provide more suffering in the form of side-effects, than the disease they are designed to treat"
So? When it's done, and the disease is gone is far better then death.
It hurt more to have an arm reset then to leave it deformed. Should it be left deformed?
"It's generally accepted that these companies are genuinely apathetic to the medical issues"
Only among the stupid, and ignorant. People who actually look into them and use rational thinking know otherwise.
and? Frr people who continually show up in ER with vaguen non deterministic symptoms' its good advice. But what's it have to do with the conversation?
Not to mention the book is incredibly dated.
The vast majority of the time it is.
You have been brainwashed by anti medical science FUD.
SO you are comparing to separate medical issues....why?
This iPad App worked great, far better then the alternatives, and far cheaper.
Barney.
But human work in social groups for the common good, therefore humans are socialists, there for they are bad.
" I don't see anything wrong with her."
with your magic eyes and extensive medical training?
you are a slime ball who will have a hard life. sadly, it won't be as hard as you deserve and you will probably inflict it on others.
Because pulling an app based on one companies say so is wrong. Why is Apple suddenly the de facto arbiter in a court dispute?
Apple should wait until they get an order from the court to pull it. Until that time they have exactly zero increased liability.
At least that's what they should do if they gave a crap about their customers.
The courts haven't decided if the case even has merit to continue.
And this goes for all apps, not just an overpriced app used to help children.
" Why not complain to PRC and SCS to have them issue a statement that they will indemnify and hold harmless"
people can complain to more then one group; each group has a different stake, and becasue until a court says apple can't distribute it there is nothing to indemnify.
Well, that whole post is a lie.
The courts haven't even decided if the case has merit.
If it does have merit, then Apple should wait for a judge to tell them to stop supplying the App.
Yet another case of Apple not really carrying about their customers needs.
It's not a clone. The medical device are for more clumsy to use. Both the device and the UI.
It has icons with pictures and words on it, and a database to store what is used most often.
The people make a ton of money off the bloated hardware, and now they have shown it's not really worth 8K.
They see a better solution in the market, so the are suing. I can't find any place the list specific complaints, and the court are only look at it right now to see if the suit even has merit to proceed, so Apple had jumped the gun here. But, don't they always jump the gun against their consumers in favor of the business?
she could get it from other sources, as well as updates.
Welcome to the Apple fenced garden.Screwed devs and customers.
People who would buy an iPad primarily for those app, and spend 300 bucks on the app, would certainly by an android device. They don't care about the device, they care about helping their child.
Anyways, there are so many stupid issues here:
299.99 for an app that does this:
http://www.speakforyourself.org/About_The_App.html
really?
Using an app that is platform dependent? for this?
ug.
".. it's much cheaper."
Style has value.
Macs have a very high resale rate, BTW.
Thin laptops are sexy and hip.
Ftter ones are for 'nerds'.
Yes it did, and it still does. It's a perfectly valid complaint.
Something to be weighed when considering the whole.
Except the didn't take it, they copied it.
The are saying go after the people who have your data they copied.
They aren't saying to pay the feds.
The headline is sensational, misleading, crap.
The solution is to have more the one point of failure.
"The story in an MMO should never require reading any quest text."
I agree.
"Story is great - but it needs to be what I do, not what I read."
That's fine but not always true. Not to say YOU need to play a game where the story is critical to out come.
And story doesn't have to mean 'reading'. Cut scenes, NPC dialog, etc.. can all be part of the story.
Very few games are actually about what YOU do as much as getting you to figures out how to beat the boss. The fact that you can where different armor doesn't mean you aren't on a rail.
Pool. Pool of Radiance.
I wouldn't play anything called Poo of Radiance.
Well, maybe an American Dad game.
No, that's my argument against old games like Poo of Radiance.
"Pool of Radiance isn't Wizardry"
No Shit Sherlock.
" It's a tactical RPG, where success depends on how you develop your characters, where you place your characters"
Tactical, sure but primitive, and not very tough.
In this case tactical is cover speak for 'Min/Max'. and keep saving until you get the random result you want.
" It's only repetitive in the way that multiple games of chess are repetitive. "
No, it's only repetitive that once you finished with the game, doing it again is trivial.
"t was more sophisticated than Diablo a decade before the first Diablo."
How can you make the rest of the post, then post that? By your own examples its a different type of game, altogether.
No comparison is valid.
"It's a real shame that SSI was devoured by Ubisoft."
true.