It looks like Apple would disagree. This is literally the first line of the iOS 7 agreement:
[quote]IMPORTANT: BY USING YOUR iPHONE, iPAD or iPOD TOUCH (“iOS DEVICE”), YOU ARE AGREEING TO BE BOUND BY THE FOLLOWING TERMS: A. APPLE iOS SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT B. NOTICES FROM APPLE[/quote]
Followed by this:
[quote]PLEASE READ THIS SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT ("LICENSE") CAREFULLY BEFORE USING YOUR iOS DEVICE OR DOWNLOADING THE SOFTWARE UPDATE ACCOMPANYING THIS LICENSE. BY USING YOUR iOS DEVICE OR DOWNLOADING A SOFTWARE UPDATE, AS APPLICABLE, YOU ARE AGREEING TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, DO NOT USE THE iOS DEVICE OR DOWNLOAD THE SOFTWARE UPDATE.[/quote]
Just out of curiosity though, which OS are you replacing iOS with? The OpeniBoot project hasn't been touched in 2 years and doesn't have any drivers. There isn't exactly a huge community of people actively replacing iOS with another OS.
also there's no stupid customization apps like putting cats everywhere.
I'm not sure how that relates to anything I said. The customization apps pointed to in the article are not stupid, they are useful. Imagine something that is not just a gimmick, but actually useful. It's tough for an iPhone user, I know, but try.
I don't know anybody who pirates shows to a sd card and watches them on their phone. i'm pretty sure that use case is imaginary.
Sorry, I didn't realize you know all smartphone users. I guess the "1 million plus" downloads and 29,294 reviews of The Pirate Bay Browser on the Google Play store are imaginary.
You haven't heard of Cyanogenmod, have you? It's an alternative operating system you can install on Android devices (I know I'm not the only person who twitches when people say "androids" to refer to any Android device, as if all of them are equivalent and running the exact same software).
Are you trying to assert that there exists no use case for external storage? How about a library of movies or TV shows that you downloaded using the Pirate Bay Browser? You have the Pirate Bay Browser on iPhone, right? Oh, you don't, because it's one the apps available for Android but not iOS. The top of that article has links to the previous 2 parts with another 10 apps they highlight.
Whaaaat? You're saying that purchasing a device designed by Apple did not magically cause your wife's life to improve as Tim Cook asserts? But how can that be true when the head of Apple claims otherwise?
Um, some friends of mine got a fatwa from their imam about marriage recommendations last week. The word "fatwa" is the same thing as asking a member of the clergy for written advice.
That's what I was getting at. A fatwa is not a legal declaration, an attorney has nothing to do with it.
I prefer companies that are open about their problems than companies that try to hide problems with "disguised words".
Easy to say when you are not the one at the pointy end of a multi-billion dollar lawsuit.
GM completely deserves this lawsuit, they brought it on themselves. They saw problems, and they decided to ignore them. It's not really the engineer's fault for calling a problem a problem, right? That would be like a programmer not being allowed to refer to bugs as bugs. I once worked with a programmer who never had any bugs, his programs simply had "anomalies" that he could neither figure out the cause of nor fix. He didn't last very long.
It's the classic fomula - GM can either pay for the recall, or pay individual settlements as they come in. If the cost of the recall is expected to be higher, than they don't do the recall. They gambled on that and lost, even though lives were at stake they decided to not do the recall until the pressure was on them. Now they are on the hook for all of the lives lost when they could have informed the public and recalled the cars. Some policy of not using words like "problem" is just a way for them to try and weasel out of their liability (and it is their liability).
It sounds like it is an indication of what the dominant platform is going to be at some point in the future. If 80% of new sales are Android devices, and 15% are iOS devices, then that sounds like the installed base for Android is going to eclipse iOS in the next year or so. If Apple continues to release new phones regularly that fit a demand then that will swing back the other way.
Nothwithstanding the fact that I don't think a single person involved in any of this is guilty of treason, you are blatantly wrong about a few things, like this:
In fact, all the disclosures released so far have shown government ACTIVELY protecting civil liberties of Americans.
This is just wrong, the NSA's net is so large that they can and do collect a lot of information about Americans not suspected of a crime. The three hops rule means that they collect data from millions of people who are so loosely connected with a particular suspect as to make it so that there is no real connection there. The recent proposals of changing how the NSA works also removed the privacy advocate. If the federal government's priority was protecting Americans' civil liberties, why did they remove the person whose job that would be?
Remember, the goal is to expand the powers of government.
The goal of what? The goal of the constitution is to limit, not expand, the powers of government. That is spelled out very clearly. The entire purpose of the constitution is to protect the citizens from the government.
Your role as a citizen is to make sure government continues to function and do its job, because that's what we as citizens have decided.
What happens when the government stops doing its job, or starts abusing its power? If that is happening, wouldn't you want to know about it?
Tying an account to a particular mobile device will limit how many new accounts a scammer can create. Creating false rating is also easily avoidable. e.g., the only person who can rate a particular seller is the person who won the auction. There are plenty of technological ways to make it difficult and time consuming for a scammer to use this. In short, it wouldn't be worth it. Panhandling would have a better return.
What appears to be happening here is that you have an idea of how you think the app should work, and are thus assuming that said idea is how the app actually works.
I'm just arguing about the idea in general, not this specific app. I haven't looked at the actual app (or article, for that matter). There are ways to try and minimize scamming, whether our Italian bro is using them or not. I'm just saying that there doesn't necessarily need to be a large scamming problem if it's approached the right way, in general. People can try to rip other people off, but I don't see that becoming a business in itself.
If by "self-correcting" you mean "perp will just continually re-register as a new user every time
With a new email address, new mobile device, etc. Right. If someone has 10 phones, then yeah, they can scam the system more than someone with 1 phone. Even so, if you see 2 spots offered, and one user has 0 reviews, and the other has 50 good reviews, who are you going to pick?
Seriously, how do you ensure there really is a space and payment? Or that someone who doesn't like the service gets a bunch of people to offer 'spaces?'
Why would the app say which spot it is? It doesn't need to. It says you are bidding on a spot on the north side of this building. Maybe there are 20 spots there, you don't know which one. You make the payment, it gets accepted, the app says ok, wait for the white Mercedes with license plate XXX to move. No one else has that information except the person who won the auction.
... and the first time someone leaves a spot as soon as the check clears, and someone who didn't pay swipes it, the fraud lawsuits will ensure that this "service" ceases to exist.
A lawsuit over a parking spot that you paid $5 for? Get some perspective. How about the app has a rating system instead? You see a spot offered by someone with 5 ratings that say he left without letting you get ready, then you don't bid on that spot. He doesn't get any bidders, he stops making money. It's a self-correcting problem. Leave the lawyers out of it.
You got that backwards... they're not delay leaving, they're threatening to keep there to the point it causes a time-sensitive worker a problem like job loss.
If a time-sensitive worker might lose his job for being late, and he's driving around in a city with more cars than parking places looking for a public parking spot that is open, then he probably deserves to be fired for not managing his time well. Park in a garage. Take public transit. Ride a bike. If his company requires him to drive (i.e., he's driving a company car), then the company will provide parking for their own vehicles.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoops, preview fail.
It looks like Apple would disagree. This is literally the first line of the iOS 7 agreement:
[quote]IMPORTANT: BY USING YOUR iPHONE, iPAD or iPOD TOUCH (“iOS DEVICE”), YOU ARE
AGREEING TO BE BOUND BY THE FOLLOWING TERMS:
A. APPLE iOS SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT
B. NOTICES FROM APPLE[/quote]
Followed by this:
[quote]PLEASE READ THIS SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT ("LICENSE") CAREFULLY BEFORE USING
YOUR iOS DEVICE OR DOWNLOADING THE SOFTWARE UPDATE ACCOMPANYING THIS
LICENSE. BY USING YOUR iOS DEVICE OR DOWNLOADING A SOFTWARE UPDATE, AS
APPLICABLE, YOU ARE AGREEING TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE. IF YOU DO
NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, DO NOT USE THE iOS DEVICE OR DOWNLOAD
THE SOFTWARE UPDATE.[/quote]
Just out of curiosity though, which OS are you replacing iOS with? The OpeniBoot project hasn't been touched in 2 years and doesn't have any drivers. There isn't exactly a huge community of people actively replacing iOS with another OS.
You can jailbreak your phone and modify the functionality of iOS, too.
The fact that this is referred to as "jailbreaking" is telling. My phone didn't start out in jail.
So if I install an OS other than iOS onto my iPhone, can I claim to be comparing iPhone to Android?
If you can do so without violating the terms of use then it's a start, at least.
also there's no stupid customization apps like putting cats everywhere.
I'm not sure how that relates to anything I said. The customization apps pointed to in the article are not stupid, they are useful. Imagine something that is not just a gimmick, but actually useful. It's tough for an iPhone user, I know, but try.
I don't know anybody who pirates shows to a sd card and watches them on their phone. i'm pretty sure that use case is imaginary.
Sorry, I didn't realize you know all smartphone users. I guess the "1 million plus" downloads and 29,294 reviews of The Pirate Bay Browser on the Google Play store are imaginary.
apps: on iPhone you're locked in
You could have just stopped there.
You haven't heard of Cyanogenmod, have you? It's an alternative operating system you can install on Android devices (I know I'm not the only person who twitches when people say "androids" to refer to any Android device, as if all of them are equivalent and running the exact same software).
what was she using external storage for?
Are you trying to assert that there exists no use case for external storage? How about a library of movies or TV shows that you downloaded using the Pirate Bay Browser? You have the Pirate Bay Browser on iPhone, right? Oh, you don't, because it's one the apps available for Android but not iOS. The top of that article has links to the previous 2 parts with another 10 apps they highlight.
which apps weren't available
How about an alternate web browser?
Whaaaat? You're saying that purchasing a device designed by Apple did not magically cause your wife's life to improve as Tim Cook asserts? But how can that be true when the head of Apple claims otherwise?
Um, some friends of mine got a fatwa from their imam about marriage recommendations last week. The word "fatwa" is the same thing as asking a member of the clergy for written advice.
That's what I was getting at. A fatwa is not a legal declaration, an attorney has nothing to do with it.
How exactly could an attorney help someone avoid a fatwa?
I prefer companies that are open about their problems than companies that try to hide problems with "disguised words".
Easy to say when you are not the one at the pointy end of a multi-billion dollar lawsuit.
GM completely deserves this lawsuit, they brought it on themselves. They saw problems, and they decided to ignore them. It's not really the engineer's fault for calling a problem a problem, right? That would be like a programmer not being allowed to refer to bugs as bugs. I once worked with a programmer who never had any bugs, his programs simply had "anomalies" that he could neither figure out the cause of nor fix. He didn't last very long.
It's the classic fomula - GM can either pay for the recall, or pay individual settlements as they come in. If the cost of the recall is expected to be higher, than they don't do the recall. They gambled on that and lost, even though lives were at stake they decided to not do the recall until the pressure was on them. Now they are on the hook for all of the lives lost when they could have informed the public and recalled the cars. Some policy of not using words like "problem" is just a way for them to try and weasel out of their liability (and it is their liability).
Yes, we would know if we saw it. Essentially it would look very close to a white hole
Ah, so it would look like a hypothetical thing that we've never seen. Well that helps.
And we should expect that if wormhole entrances are common
Why should we expect that wormhole entrances are common?
by the Copernican principle we should see some exits near us
On a cosmological scale, sure.
there should be "exits" all over the universe
Why should there be exits? What if they go to another universe? Or alternately, who says there aren't exits all over the universe?
we should have detected stuff coming out of the other side
Why? Is there one nearby that we can observe with our extremely primitive and limited technology? Would we know it if we saw it?
It sounds like it is an indication of what the dominant platform is going to be at some point in the future. If 80% of new sales are Android devices, and 15% are iOS devices, then that sounds like the installed base for Android is going to eclipse iOS in the next year or so. If Apple continues to release new phones regularly that fit a demand then that will swing back the other way.
Nothwithstanding the fact that I don't think a single person involved in any of this is guilty of treason, you are blatantly wrong about a few things, like this:
In fact, all the disclosures released so far have shown government ACTIVELY protecting civil liberties of Americans.
This is just wrong, the NSA's net is so large that they can and do collect a lot of information about Americans not suspected of a crime. The three hops rule means that they collect data from millions of people who are so loosely connected with a particular suspect as to make it so that there is no real connection there. The recent proposals of changing how the NSA works also removed the privacy advocate. If the federal government's priority was protecting Americans' civil liberties, why did they remove the person whose job that would be?
Remember, the goal is to expand the powers of government.
The goal of what? The goal of the constitution is to limit, not expand, the powers of government. That is spelled out very clearly. The entire purpose of the constitution is to protect the citizens from the government.
Your role as a citizen is to make sure government continues to function and do its job, because that's what we as citizens have decided.
What happens when the government stops doing its job, or starts abusing its power? If that is happening, wouldn't you want to know about it?
Tying an account to a particular mobile device will limit how many new accounts a scammer can create. Creating false rating is also easily avoidable. e.g., the only person who can rate a particular seller is the person who won the auction. There are plenty of technological ways to make it difficult and time consuming for a scammer to use this. In short, it wouldn't be worth it. Panhandling would have a better return.
What appears to be happening here is that you have an idea of how you think the app should work, and are thus assuming that said idea is how the app actually works.
I'm just arguing about the idea in general, not this specific app. I haven't looked at the actual app (or article, for that matter). There are ways to try and minimize scamming, whether our Italian bro is using them or not. I'm just saying that there doesn't necessarily need to be a large scamming problem if it's approached the right way, in general. People can try to rip other people off, but I don't see that becoming a business in itself.
If by "self-correcting" you mean "perp will just continually re-register as a new user every time
With a new email address, new mobile device, etc. Right. If someone has 10 phones, then yeah, they can scam the system more than someone with 1 phone. Even so, if you see 2 spots offered, and one user has 0 reviews, and the other has 50 good reviews, who are you going to pick?
Nobody is using my driveway right now. Does that mean some park monkey can auction off it's use while I'm gone?
No they can't, it's private property.
Seriously, how do you ensure there really is a space and payment? Or that someone who doesn't like the service gets a bunch of people to offer 'spaces?'
In-app ratings and reviews for the sellers.
I'm sure the city and private owners will have no trouble with you auctioning off property that isn't yours.
You're not auctioning off property. The winner of the auction does not get a deed for the parking spot.
The state and IRS will also not have any problem with you collecting this extra income under the table.
If you sell a used book or video game to a friend, do you report that to the IRS?
Just use the app, find the spot
Why would the app say which spot it is? It doesn't need to. It says you are bidding on a spot on the north side of this building. Maybe there are 20 spots there, you don't know which one. You make the payment, it gets accepted, the app says ok, wait for the white Mercedes with license plate XXX to move. No one else has that information except the person who won the auction.
... and the first time someone leaves a spot as soon as the check clears, and someone who didn't pay swipes it, the fraud lawsuits will ensure that this "service" ceases to exist.
A lawsuit over a parking spot that you paid $5 for? Get some perspective. How about the app has a rating system instead? You see a spot offered by someone with 5 ratings that say he left without letting you get ready, then you don't bid on that spot. He doesn't get any bidders, he stops making money. It's a self-correcting problem. Leave the lawyers out of it.
You got that backwards... they're not delay leaving, they're threatening to keep there to the point it causes a time-sensitive worker a problem like job loss.
If a time-sensitive worker might lose his job for being late, and he's driving around in a city with more cars than parking places looking for a public parking spot that is open, then he probably deserves to be fired for not managing his time well. Park in a garage. Take public transit. Ride a bike. If his company requires him to drive (i.e., he's driving a company car), then the company will provide parking for their own vehicles.
But I think that door is closing
Why? Who is going to close it, the lawmakers being paid by the finance guys?
Here's your chance for change if that's what you want to see.