18 inches? Wow. How can you see at that distance? I don't own an iPhone, but when I borrow my friend's I typically hold it at 6-8 inches, so I can read the website text. And yes I can see the "jaggy" edges.
Yes it does. It has light sensitive spots which can be considered the equivalent of pixels (picture elements), same as a CCD has. True the eye is biological and the CCD is mechanical, but the basic principle is the same..... millions of these pixels make-up the image we see.
>>>so it may be 18 inches for "true" retina display versus 12 inches. Ok... Big deal.
The big deal is that it's false advertising. Steve said it produces an image greater than the human eye can see, when held at 10-12 inches length but that's not true. The eye can resolve approximately 500 pixels per inch at that distance, and the iPhone is only 320 ppi, so Steve's claim is not true.
If another company like GM or BP had made a false claim, you'd be all over them and demanding the government sue them, but because it's your corporate "friend" Apple, you ignore the sin of false advertising..........and speaking of false advertising, the new TV screen that advertises 4 primary colors (RB and yellow) is ridiculous. MPEG-encoded video only assigns values to the Red, Green, Blue, and Luminance (black-and-white). The yellow does not exist. The yellow phosphors will never light up.
It's a well-known fact that the Beeb is biased towards greater Parliament control. And more recently, BBC is pro-EU biased with stories that assume the central government should be regulating any nook-and-cranny of citizens' lives
Bzzzz. News corporations don't control my funds. I send zero dollars to news organization because I CHOOSE not to subscribe. *I* hold the power over my dollars. I hold the power of choice. ----- Why on earth would I want to give-up that power and hand it to Congress?
A monopoly on funds is still a monopoly. For example if I was forced to send $1000 to Microsoft every year, even though I can choose some other OS, well it doesn't matter - MS is still holding a monopoly over that thousand dollars..... year after year after year
>>>So if I wanted to, I should be able to pay 0 taxes? I should be able to not contribute towards hospitals, roads, schools, fire departments, police, jails, military, public servants, courts?
If the tax (or power) is not listed in the U.S. Constitution or your local State Constitution, then no you should not be paying tax towards that program. If the tax/power is listed, then yes you must obey that supreme law (example: paying funds to support a navy).
That said, I can not lay my hand on any part of the 2 Constitutions (US and State) that force me to provide funds to a government-run newspaper. It doesn't exist
That was a good joke. As if representatives listen to us. "Polls indicate 80% of Americans are against the Bailout Bill (TARP)." So it passes anyway. "Polls indicate 68% want the healthcare reform bill voted down." So it passes anyway. "Polls indicate 72% think the war should be ended." And yet here we are three years later, still fighting it.
Yeah we really have a lot of "choice" don't we?
I'd rather have the choice directly in MY hands (i.e. as a customer), not some body of fools 2000 miles away that don't listen when the People speak
>>>As we share the burden of the investment, so we get to share the benefits of the payout.
Sounds good but a Government-run Newspaper or channel would end-up like the Government-run schools --- a means to brainwash at worst; poor barely-adequate service at best. I think the Government-running of services like schools, trains, and post offices should be turned-over to private companies* which operate more efficiently and can not be controlled by Congresscritters. Put the power directly in the hands of the customer. That's a pro-choice solution, not anti-choice (government monopoly).
* *For those students too poor to pay the bill, free tuition would be provided, as is done at the college level.
You have a NATURAL (not government-given) right to share news with other citizens, and even charge for it (newspaper and cable news subscriptions), but you don't have a right to make me pay your bill. Take it out of your own pocket, instead of picking mine.
You also have a right to a free press, which is not possible when government controls the funds (as is the case with our PBS). He who holds the funding holds the reins.
Don't ALL foods cause anal leakage? When you go to the toilet? Yes of course.
Anyway I've never had any problem with Pringles. Better to have the fake fat exit my body, then have real fat "hang around" and make itself at home blocking my arteries.
Bush gets blamed (by MSNBC, CNN, and others like yourself) for the Gulf Oil Spill, and he hasn't been in office for over a year. So if we follow that logic to its conclusion, Clinton may be blamed for the attack which happened approximately one-half year later.
First off I don't consider smoking marijuana or any other drug a crime. If you're DUI then sure you should be arrested for endangering others, but if you're at home watching Star Trek there's no reason for the government to stop you from enjoying your own body. It's YOUR property, not theirs.
Two, freedom means freedom. You're not free it you're shackled via your phone to some FBI or CIA watching your every move. That's serfdom not freedom
Three, I'd rather risk a few criminals using anonymous phones now, than ~20 years in the future some Tyrant tracking me down (via phone) and leading me to the Guillotine
>>>Complying with the copyright holder's takedown request shields Google from any possible liability.
Yes but the law also says Google MUST put back the item when the creator provides a formal document stating the ap does not infringe upon anything. At the point Google shall be held blameless by the courts, and the Tetris company has to sue the individual directly.
If Google refuses to follow the law (refuses to put app back up), then the owner can sue Google directly for a criminal offense (violating DMCA)
Fixed that for you. And if that's true, then we can't really blame Clinton for 9/11, Bush for Katrina, et cetera. We should be blaming the corporations and the Congresscritters who are their puppets.
Apple did almost go bankrupt in 1996, due to previous lousy years.
Many people including me thought Apple would go-out just like Atari and Commodore went out of business. The Microsoft deal was announced in 1997 a partnership with Microsoft. Since that happened when Apple was near-bankruptcy many viewed it as MS saving Apple.
(1) I suspect Apple's stock has been inflated above its real value. Yes they make iPods which are popular, but does that make them the second most-valuable company? Not really. It's hype. Apple's iPod could be dead tomorrow, just as Sony's Walkman eventually lost relevance. And what would be left? 5% share in the computer business?
Apple's stock appears to be a "bubble" based on hype rather than reality. I hate Microsoft but still think their TRUE value is far higher - 90% of computers, plus Xbox gaming, plus the solid 20+ year backing of businesses (via sales of MS Office). I'd feel safer investing in MSFT than APPL.
(2) This brings new insight as to what Apple is acting like Microsoft. Big megacorp == acting to protect that wealth, at the cost of users' freedom, via locking down devices.
I went almost as long. To me a PC was always married to the label "IBM". Microsoft didn't enter my consciousness as a serious player until Windows 3.x (about 1993). I had known Microsoft developed software like "MS Basic" for 8-bit machines, but otherwise they were just a small player compared to Atari, Apple, Commodore, and IBM, and of no more importance than MicroProse or Electronic Arts.
But as long as you keep buying "stuff" you are helping keep this system alive. The quickest-and-easiest way to bring down this house of cards is to say "no" to the latest whizabang gadget that's not really any better than the old one. We drove Circuit City to bankruptcy - we can do the same to the whole stock market - and get back to things that matter, like family and friends.
You have a right to news, but you don't have a right to make me pay your bill. Take it out of your own pocket, instead of picking mine.
You also have a right to a free press, which is not possible when government controls the funds (as is the case with pro-government-leaning PBS). He who holds the funding holds the reins.
Well that's how feudalism works - one set of laws for the serfs and another set for the masters. We need to go back to the ideals of the revolution, where everyone was treated equally under the law. WB should be fined several million dollars.
Slashdot Mirror
18 inches? Wow. How can you see at that distance? I don't own an iPhone, but when I borrow my friend's I typically hold it at 6-8 inches, so I can read the website text. And yes I can see the "jaggy" edges.
>>>Your retina doesn't even have pixels!
Yes it does. It has light sensitive spots which can be considered the equivalent of pixels (picture elements), same as a CCD has. True the eye is biological and the CCD is mechanical, but the basic principle is the same..... millions of these pixels make-up the image we see.
>>>So I think the original statement by Steve is squishy enough to hold up to this scrutiny.
I thought we were talking about the iPhone, not Steve's pancreas?
Too soon?
>>>so it may be 18 inches for "true" retina display versus 12 inches. Ok... Big deal.
The big deal is that it's false advertising. Steve said it produces an image greater than the human eye can see, when held at 10-12 inches length but that's not true. The eye can resolve approximately 500 pixels per inch at that distance, and the iPhone is only 320 ppi, so Steve's claim is not true.
If another company like GM or BP had made a false claim, you'd be all over them and demanding the government sue them, but because it's your corporate "friend" Apple, you ignore the sin of false advertising..... .....and speaking of false advertising, the new TV screen that advertises 4 primary colors (RB and yellow) is ridiculous. MPEG-encoded video only assigns values to the Red, Green, Blue, and Luminance (black-and-white). The yellow does not exist. The yellow phosphors will never light up.
It's a well-known fact that the Beeb is biased towards greater Parliament control. And more recently, BBC is pro-EU biased with stories that assume the central government should be regulating any nook-and-cranny of citizens' lives
Bzzzz. News corporations don't control my funds. I send zero dollars to news organization because I CHOOSE not to subscribe. *I* hold the power over my dollars. I hold the power of choice. ----- Why on earth would I want to give-up that power and hand it to Congress?
A monopoly on funds is still a monopoly. For example if I was forced to send $1000 to Microsoft every year, even though I can choose some other OS, well it doesn't matter - MS is still holding a monopoly over that thousand dollars..... year after year after year
>>>So if I wanted to, I should be able to pay 0 taxes? I should be able to not contribute towards hospitals, roads, schools, fire departments, police, jails, military, public servants, courts?
If the tax (or power) is not listed in the U.S. Constitution or your local State Constitution, then no you should not be paying tax towards that program. If the tax/power is listed, then yes you must obey that supreme law (example: paying funds to support a navy).
That said, I can not lay my hand on any part of the 2 Constitutions (US and State) that force me to provide funds to a government-run newspaper. It doesn't exist
hahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahaahahaha!
That was a good joke. As if representatives listen to us. "Polls indicate 80% of Americans are against the Bailout Bill (TARP)." So it passes anyway. "Polls indicate 68% want the healthcare reform bill voted down." So it passes anyway. "Polls indicate 72% think the war should be ended." And yet here we are three years later, still fighting it.
Yeah we really have a lot of "choice" don't we?
I'd rather have the choice directly in MY hands (i.e. as a customer), not some body of fools 2000 miles away that don't listen when the People speak
>>>As we share the burden of the investment, so we get to share the benefits of the payout.
Sounds good but a Government-run Newspaper or channel would end-up like the Government-run schools --- a means to brainwash at worst; poor barely-adequate service at best. I think the Government-running of services like schools, trains, and post offices should be turned-over to private companies* which operate more efficiently and can not be controlled by Congresscritters. Put the power directly in the hands of the customer. That's a pro-choice solution, not anti-choice (government monopoly).
*
*For those students too poor to pay the bill, free tuition would be provided, as is done at the college level.
You have a NATURAL (not government-given) right to share news with other citizens, and even charge for it (newspaper and cable news subscriptions), but you don't have a right to make me pay your bill. Take it out of your own pocket, instead of picking mine.
You also have a right to a free press, which is not possible when government controls the funds (as is the case with our PBS). He who holds the funding holds the reins.
Don't ALL foods cause anal leakage? When you go to the toilet? Yes of course.
Anyway I've never had any problem with Pringles. Better to have the fake fat exit my body, then have real fat "hang around" and make itself at home blocking my arteries.
Bush gets blamed (by MSNBC, CNN, and others like yourself) for the Gulf Oil Spill, and he hasn't been in office for over a year.
So if we follow that logic to its conclusion, Clinton may be blamed for the attack which happened approximately one-half year later.
First off I don't consider smoking marijuana or any other drug a crime. If you're DUI then sure you should be arrested for endangering others, but if you're at home watching Star Trek there's no reason for the government to stop you from enjoying your own body. It's YOUR property, not theirs.
Two, freedom means freedom. You're not free it you're shackled via your phone to some FBI or CIA watching your every move. That's serfdom not freedom
Three, I'd rather risk a few criminals using anonymous phones now, than ~20 years in the future some Tyrant tracking me down (via phone) and leading me to the Guillotine
>>>Complying with the copyright holder's takedown request shields Google from any possible liability.
Yes but the law also says Google MUST put back the item when the creator provides a formal document stating the ap does not infringe upon anything. At the point Google shall be held blameless by the courts, and the Tetris company has to sue the individual directly.
If Google refuses to follow the law (refuses to put app back up), then the owner can sue Google directly for a criminal offense (violating DMCA)
Under DMCA all you need to do is submit a Document declaring your work does not infringe anything, and the item MUST be put back up
- If Google refuses, then you can sue them for breaking the law (the DMCA)
- If they put it back up, then everything should be good. The only thing you need to fear is being sued, directly, by the Tetris Company.
>>>[Corporations] runs the American government..
Fixed that for you. And if that's true, then we can't really blame Clinton for 9/11, Bush for Katrina, et cetera. We should be blaming the corporations and the Congresscritters who are their puppets.
Apple did almost go bankrupt in 1996, due to previous lousy years.
Many people including me thought Apple would go-out just like Atari and Commodore went out of business. The Microsoft deal was announced in 1997 a partnership with Microsoft. Since that happened when Apple was near-bankruptcy many viewed it as MS saving Apple.
Apple did not become profitable again until 1998.
http://www.osnews.com/story/16056
You forgot the exclusion of Flash. How am I served if I can't access my online accounts (some of which use flash).
(1) I suspect Apple's stock has been inflated above its real value. Yes they make iPods which are popular, but does that make them the second most-valuable company? Not really. It's hype. Apple's iPod could be dead tomorrow, just as Sony's Walkman eventually lost relevance. And what would be left? 5% share in the computer business?
Apple's stock appears to be a "bubble" based on hype rather than reality. I hate Microsoft but still think their TRUE value is far higher - 90% of computers, plus Xbox gaming, plus the solid 20+ year backing of businesses (via sales of MS Office). I'd feel safer investing in MSFT than APPL.
(2) This brings new insight as to what Apple is acting like Microsoft. Big megacorp == acting to protect that wealth, at the cost of users' freedom, via locking down devices.
I went almost as long. To me a PC was always married to the label "IBM". Microsoft didn't enter my consciousness as a serious player until Windows 3.x (about 1993). I had known Microsoft developed software like "MS Basic" for 8-bit machines, but otherwise they were just a small player compared to Atari, Apple, Commodore, and IBM, and of no more importance than MicroProse or Electronic Arts.
Personally I like the Pringles fat free potato chips (uses olestra). The Lays variant isn't too bad either, but not as flavorful
But as long as you keep buying "stuff" you are helping keep this system alive. The quickest-and-easiest way to bring down this house of cards is to say "no" to the latest whizabang gadget that's not really any better than the old one. We drove Circuit City to bankruptcy - we can do the same to the whole stock market - and get back to things that matter, like family and friends.
You have a right to news, but you don't have a right to make me pay your bill. Take it out of your own pocket, instead of picking mine.
You also have a right to a free press, which is not possible when government controls the funds (as is the case with pro-government-leaning PBS). He who holds the funding holds the reins.
Well that's how feudalism works - one set of laws for the serfs and another set for the masters. We need to go back to the ideals of the revolution, where everyone was treated equally under the law. WB should be fined several million dollars.