I'll repeat: I never even implied Apple copied the HTC Touch. I just said similar devices came out at around the same time, so they couldn't have copied Apple (5 months is not near enough time to design, build, and ship a product).
iPhone was nothing like the software on these other devices... in your opinion. I say it was very much alike. There were tons of similarities, most of which are too obvious to mention, and that's exactly my point. The things Apple fanbois claim everybody copied from them are too obvious to mention. Colors? Shape? Tiled icons? Seriously.
Lastly, some models of the iPaq most definitely had phone functionality. Do I need to provide a link? Sheez.
Nokia had advanced software on mobile devices (Maemo). Many other phones came out with touch screens long before Apple (like iPAQ), and other more modern ones came out at the same time (HTC Touch). The only thing Apple was the first with was specifically a multi-touch interface on a phone, that is all.
Deductions are there so you don't overpay in tax. If you get a deduction, that means you paid taxes somewhere else. That's an obvious. As for apartments, while you claim you pay your share of property taxes (as part of your rent) that you can't claim for deductions, you don't pay anywhere near the same as you would living in a house of the same square footage. Even if you were paying the same as in a house with the same square footage, you're still getting a far better deal with the standard deduction. If you are a homeowner, you'd have to spend quite a bit in property taxes in order to get past that standard deduction amount.
Where the rich pay in itemized deductions, the poor get the gimme standard deduction, which is in most cases a FAR LARGER portion of their income than what the rich report for itemized deductions. AKA - the income the poor actually pay taxes on at the end of the ear is much less representative of what they actually made. You make $20k, and you still get $11k in deductions right off the bat. Furthermore, the lower classes are also eligible for various credits. In most cases in the lower tax brackets people walk away with a profit in April with all things factored in.
FICA is the only obvious major difference between those earning less than $106k and those earning more than that. However, you're forgetting the earned income tax credit, which will nullify the largest difference in that (the kid credit). That's the one responsible for outright profits by the lower class come tax time.
I'll remind you that groceries are a huge chunk of your actual needs. There's only a few states that actually tax that. So no, sales taxes aren't near as large a contributing factor as you claim. People don't need liquor, cigarettes, or any of those non-necessities in order to survive. You shouldn't be spend a ton of money on absolute crap you don't need if you consider sales taxes to be a large contributing factor of your total tax burden relative to your income. Why would you even include that in the list. Besides, if your sales taxes actually total to be that much, you can claim those in your income taxes instead of the usual route.
The super rich do find loopholes. However, anybody in between doesn't get that, and can still be defined as "rich". I would argue that the upper-middle class are the ones that get most screwed because they're not eligible for any of the extra credits, deductions, etc that the lower classes get, they don't get government assistance, and their income is right around the FICA cap so they're still paying all of that. The poor, however, are very well taken care of.
Personally, I've been all over the board ranging from "poor" to upper middle class. I have personal experiences in all that, and I know that when I earned less I didn't have to worry about shit as far as expenses went. I had less to spend on the nicer things in life, but I still lived within my means, so I was fine. I now earn 3-4x more than my siblings yet they're the ones with all the fancy toys, have newer vehicles than mine, fridges are packed, and buying new furniture with their fat checks that come in April after claiming like 8 on their withholdings because of all the ridiculous tax credits. I see no evidence of suffering from taxes, and I remember no suffering from taxes when I earned considerably less. The total tax burden just wasn't that much, and it kept getting worse as I kept earning more.
That's the dumbest argument I've ever heard. First off, if you're not making that much, you shouldn't be spending that much. As the saying goes, the more you make the more you spend. Sales tax on non-necessities really just take care of themselves unless rich people don't spend money (yeah, right).
Groceries aren't taxed (except in what, like 4 states??). The rest of the taxes I can think of are gas (the rich will drive more because they can, thus contributing more gas taxes), utilities (larger homes = more utilities), and necessities (like toiletries). The necessities is the only area where I would see the difference. The rich will be far outspending you on everything else. Besides, if you don't make a certain amount, which is a pretty good amount, you're eligible for all kinds of government assistance, so suddenly all those taxes you complain about are completely nullified with the other assistance you get.
Payroll taxes? I assume you're talking about social security and medicare. They do have a cap. That's the only major contributing point I'll concede. But, if you don't make enough to hit that cap then you are in a far lower tax bracket. We're talking a difference of up to 25% in 2011. And to CAP ALL THAT OFF, everybody can take a standard deduction (I think it's around $11k per person) on their federal income taxes, or you can opt to do itemized deductions. If you make $20k/yr (around $10/hr - 40hr/wk) then you just got your taxed income cut in half. If your itemized deductions don't total over the standard deduction, then you're getting a much bigger break than the rich right from the start as a gimme. The lower-class are eligible left and right for all kinds of tax credits as well, so there's an extremely high chance the majority of these people are walking away with a profit when April comes around.
I'm ready to defend that statement to a point. It clearly doesn't apply to everyone, but the majority of people who claim to be "poor" I'm betting can sacrifice one thing or another, and I think that's more along the lines of what the original poster meant. Yes, I know the poster said 'everyone' but I'm reading between the lines here.
You're forgetting he also gave a shitload to charities. Yes, it may be a "tax loophole" but it still helps the public. It's tax-deductible, and without that status charities would suffer. It's not a tax credit. So what would you rather have? Furthemore FICA has a cap, as it should, since people earning more don't tend to use the social services that came out of it. It draws more from people earning less than six figures because that's what the cap is. Lastly, what you put into FICA is taken into consideration when it comes time to pay federal income taxes.
According to you. Look, nobody's denying Apple made a revolutionary product, but pretending any new tech or software that even remotely resembles it is a copy is delusional. By your definition, again, Apple "copied" Nokia. There were an enormous number of points of similarity, so how can you deny it? What, you are denying it? Same thing. Samsung made a phone in a similar shape, that is all. *gasp*
Some things never change. A couple thousand years ago a guy said something along the lines of "those who have will have more, those who don't will lose what they have".
I think it's pathetic that the rich are complaining about taxes. It's the poor who pay a substantial percentage of their incomes in taxes. I saw a thing on Fox yesterday about how the very rich are paying more and more in taxes -- well, duh. They're the only ones whose incomes are rising, of course their tax bill will (and should) rise as well.
The poor get screwed by everyone. It's a lot easier to steal with a pen than it is with a gun, provided you have the resources.
You must be slow. "Rich" people pay a substantially larger percentage in taxes. Your tax bracket changes as you earn more. Once someone who earns $20k a year pays $8k in taxes, come back and talk to me.
I built my "ivory tower" as you put it with my own two hands out of mud. So yes, I don't see why somebody else who's poor and capable shouldn't do the same. It helps if you stop being bitter.
2) I'm going to assume you're biased or you haven't been exposed to that many people. Does assuming make me just as bad as you? Maybe.
3) People with medical bills who can't afford them can always negotiate their monthly bills with the hospital in question. As long as you're paying something they won't bother you that much. While you might be paying that almost nothing bill the rest of your life, that alone won't cause you to go broke. Don't even try claiming otherwise. If you earn that little, you have all sorts of government assistance for basic needs, and you end up not spending that much any more on actual needs.
4) "Surviving" in the US nowadays has a totally different meaning than in an actual poor country. You're not in poverty if you use a cell phone, live in a house, have cable, have an xbox, or just bought that TV on sale at Walmart with your tax credits. If you literally can't save a dime when you have anything like this, 99% chance it's your own fault.
5) Yes, you should live within your means. When you go broke by enjoying spendy things, it's your own damned fault. People who make more money will get to enjoy life more - that's a fact. It doesn't necessarily mean they deserve it more as a human on the purely philosophical level, but life's not fair, they made their money, they're going to spend it because they can. Don't begrudge them for it just because they don't wanna give you a handout one day. Make your own way if you don't like your situation. Your opportunities can be limited by others, but it's not like they ever end. There's always opportunities, and if you work hard you significantly increase your chances of landing a good opportunity. Why the hell does everyone think they're entitled?
6) People making below a decent wage don't pay shit for federal taxes when everything is considered.
Or maybe it just proves, further, that the poor get screwed.
There's also this little thing called delayed gratification. Also, if you "need" one for higher education, chances are the school has computer labs available for use, and that's only if you couldn't get something as part of your school loans. If they don't (highly unlikely) than your local public library probably has something.
Places like Aaron's are not the enemy (though in this case, that was definitely inappropriate). Charging interest is not a crime, and you're not getting screwed because you're the one who agreed to it. Anybody who can rent-to-own a computer is perfectly capable of saving-to-own. It's just a fact of life that if you have more money, you're going to be less inconvenienced if you spend it. That doesn't make rich people bad, and it doesn't make poor people victims. Quit painting a false picture.
First off, Android is an OS, not a phone. Second, all that picture shows me is one phone having a physical keyboard and a small screen while a later one (with better hardware) has a touch screen (which all existed long before iPhone). Third, I see a wide oblong speaker hole on the Android phone that as you said it, appeared before the iPhone. Fourth, either you're a troll or you're so delusional that you feel Apple was the first to come out with a phone with rounded corners and had silver and black colors. Tiled icons? Are you for real? The earliest PDAs (Palm) had that if you wanna compare mobile devices. In fact, anything with icons at all had that.
So no, nobody "copied" that obvious shit from Apple. If anything, Apple "copied" from Nokia as they had advanced mobile phone technology out there far before Apple (including *gasp* tiled icons!).
I totally agree. Thus concludes my love/hate relationship with Ubuntu. I first hated it (thought it too bloated), then loved it a few versions later which lasted for a few blissful years. Then they go and pull this BS. I don't know what Shuttleworth is smokin', but his supplier is bad. I am also looking for a good replacement. It's too bad because they were just getting some momentum too. I would go with Mint but it doesn't have a concrete company behind it like Canonical.
In any dvd rips I make for my personal archival use, I ensure that all audio tracks and all subtitles are included in the final MKV file, complete with language tags. I don't see why anybody else can't do the same.
You'd still need that BD drive to make the rip in high quality. What point are you trying to make?
What use case would adding a BD-ROM or BD-R drive solve that isn't already solved by Netflix streaming, iTunes streaming, or external hard drives?
1. Quality (are you seriously comparing BD quality to Internet streaming quality???)
2. Additional features
3. No need to be connected to the Internet
4. The fact that it's the next disc standard, and has been around for years already
5. Optical discs survive EM pulses, which we'll inevitably have to use once the machines take over
As for Apple taking revenge, I don't know about that: it takes years and years to change CPU roadmaps, and you don't pre-announce switches like that. The A5 may be a Samsung, but it's not actually made by them -- all of Samsung's own fab is memory and LCD screens. It may be merely a supply chain issue, and Intel offered them a better deal than the middleman that is Samsung.
I don't know. Jobs does have a history of making business decisions based on personal agendas. He seems to be a very emotional person.
You should read articles you cite and link to. From the very link you give:
In reality the data shown in the graphic are incorrect
In fact, the iPhone was first shown before the Samsung F700 was first shown, and the iPhone was released before the F700 was released.
IOW, the Samsung F700 was a copy of the original iPhone, and the dates on the graphic from the link you give are a lie.
Check your facts before making such accusations.
I wouldn't say that's evidence of anybody copying anybody. Unless there's a substantial amount of time between when designs were made public, there's no reason to conclude that somebody copied the other. Certainly, the 1 month difference between when the two were shown is clear evidence nobody "stole" anything, but rather independently came up with their own designs. There's only so many ways you can design a touchscreen mobile phone. It was bound to happen.
Copied what exactly? Tiled icons? The shape of the phone speaker hole? Colors? Or just the general shape of the phone? Tiled icons have been around since the dawn of personal desktop computing. The shape of a phone speaker hole isn't exclusive to anybody (unless it's related to a trademark or something like that). Colors? Samsung has used silver and black going back to their dumb phones. Or maybe you're talking about a button being right in the middle bottom of the phone... well guess what, that's been on their line of smart phones for awhile now, and it's an optical pad, like a scroll ball. Seriously, I'm curious as to what people think Apple has such an exclusive right on in regards to (what I'm assuming) is the Galaxy S series.
I do however see this being directly related. Mr. Jobs has a habit of having red-faced 2yr old temper tantrums (maybe behind closed doors) with a resulting everlasting grudge when someone has any little bit of competition or "crossed" him at any point, no matter how minor. He's just pissed they came out with super thin dual-core smart phone before Apple did.
Since TFA cites the example of Miller, may I remind everyone that the rapture is happening this month: http://www.ebiblefellowship.com/may21/ and I predict a recalculation on May 22nd.
Pffff! This guy is so far off. I didn't see any references about sentient AI and an invasion of an army of robots.
If you kill someone, then review their body, and find that they were not wearing a uniform, nor were they carrying any weapons, nor were they strapped with explosives, nor were there any weapons nearby, nor is their likelihood that they were directing others to engage in warfare, then they were a civilian.
And that's the problem. Soldiers can only tell after the fact. Innocent civilians have died because soldiers didn't know if they were going to blow up or pull out a gun or what, and they wouldn't listen to directions to stay back or were engaged in some other slightly suspicious behavior that could mean immediate danger. It's a sad fact, and it's the best weapon the terrorists have in a war.
Not the same. For example, a straight non-residential road with an unusually low speed limit will get tons of speeders, but that wouldn't translate to more high-speed accidents. It just means the limit posted is too low relative to similar roads.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll repeat: I never even implied Apple copied the HTC Touch. I just said similar devices came out at around the same time, so they couldn't have copied Apple (5 months is not near enough time to design, build, and ship a product).
iPhone was nothing like the software on these other devices... in your opinion. I say it was very much alike. There were tons of similarities, most of which are too obvious to mention, and that's exactly my point. The things Apple fanbois claim everybody copied from them are too obvious to mention. Colors? Shape? Tiled icons? Seriously.
Lastly, some models of the iPaq most definitely had phone functionality. Do I need to provide a link? Sheez.
Nokia had advanced software on mobile devices (Maemo). Many other phones came out with touch screens long before Apple (like iPAQ), and other more modern ones came out at the same time (HTC Touch). The only thing Apple was the first with was specifically a multi-touch interface on a phone, that is all.
No, I am factoring all in all the data.
Deductions are there so you don't overpay in tax. If you get a deduction, that means you paid taxes somewhere else. That's an obvious. As for apartments, while you claim you pay your share of property taxes (as part of your rent) that you can't claim for deductions, you don't pay anywhere near the same as you would living in a house of the same square footage. Even if you were paying the same as in a house with the same square footage, you're still getting a far better deal with the standard deduction. If you are a homeowner, you'd have to spend quite a bit in property taxes in order to get past that standard deduction amount.
Where the rich pay in itemized deductions, the poor get the gimme standard deduction, which is in most cases a FAR LARGER portion of their income than what the rich report for itemized deductions. AKA - the income the poor actually pay taxes on at the end of the ear is much less representative of what they actually made. You make $20k, and you still get $11k in deductions right off the bat. Furthermore, the lower classes are also eligible for various credits. In most cases in the lower tax brackets people walk away with a profit in April with all things factored in.
FICA is the only obvious major difference between those earning less than $106k and those earning more than that. However, you're forgetting the earned income tax credit, which will nullify the largest difference in that (the kid credit). That's the one responsible for outright profits by the lower class come tax time.
I'll remind you that groceries are a huge chunk of your actual needs. There's only a few states that actually tax that. So no, sales taxes aren't near as large a contributing factor as you claim. People don't need liquor, cigarettes, or any of those non-necessities in order to survive. You shouldn't be spend a ton of money on absolute crap you don't need if you consider sales taxes to be a large contributing factor of your total tax burden relative to your income. Why would you even include that in the list. Besides, if your sales taxes actually total to be that much, you can claim those in your income taxes instead of the usual route.
The super rich do find loopholes. However, anybody in between doesn't get that, and can still be defined as "rich". I would argue that the upper-middle class are the ones that get most screwed because they're not eligible for any of the extra credits, deductions, etc that the lower classes get, they don't get government assistance, and their income is right around the FICA cap so they're still paying all of that. The poor, however, are very well taken care of.
Personally, I've been all over the board ranging from "poor" to upper middle class. I have personal experiences in all that, and I know that when I earned less I didn't have to worry about shit as far as expenses went. I had less to spend on the nicer things in life, but I still lived within my means, so I was fine. I now earn 3-4x more than my siblings yet they're the ones with all the fancy toys, have newer vehicles than mine, fridges are packed, and buying new furniture with their fat checks that come in April after claiming like 8 on their withholdings because of all the ridiculous tax credits. I see no evidence of suffering from taxes, and I remember no suffering from taxes when I earned considerably less. The total tax burden just wasn't that much, and it kept getting worse as I kept earning more.
That's the dumbest argument I've ever heard. First off, if you're not making that much, you shouldn't be spending that much. As the saying goes, the more you make the more you spend. Sales tax on non-necessities really just take care of themselves unless rich people don't spend money (yeah, right).
Groceries aren't taxed (except in what, like 4 states??). The rest of the taxes I can think of are gas (the rich will drive more because they can, thus contributing more gas taxes), utilities (larger homes = more utilities), and necessities (like toiletries). The necessities is the only area where I would see the difference. The rich will be far outspending you on everything else. Besides, if you don't make a certain amount, which is a pretty good amount, you're eligible for all kinds of government assistance, so suddenly all those taxes you complain about are completely nullified with the other assistance you get.
Payroll taxes? I assume you're talking about social security and medicare. They do have a cap. That's the only major contributing point I'll concede. But, if you don't make enough to hit that cap then you are in a far lower tax bracket. We're talking a difference of up to 25% in 2011. And to CAP ALL THAT OFF, everybody can take a standard deduction (I think it's around $11k per person) on their federal income taxes, or you can opt to do itemized deductions. If you make $20k/yr (around $10/hr - 40hr/wk) then you just got your taxed income cut in half. If your itemized deductions don't total over the standard deduction, then you're getting a much bigger break than the rich right from the start as a gimme. The lower-class are eligible left and right for all kinds of tax credits as well, so there's an extremely high chance the majority of these people are walking away with a profit when April comes around.
I'm ready to defend that statement to a point. It clearly doesn't apply to everyone, but the majority of people who claim to be "poor" I'm betting can sacrifice one thing or another, and I think that's more along the lines of what the original poster meant. Yes, I know the poster said 'everyone' but I'm reading between the lines here.
You're forgetting he also gave a shitload to charities. Yes, it may be a "tax loophole" but it still helps the public. It's tax-deductible, and without that status charities would suffer. It's not a tax credit. So what would you rather have? Furthemore FICA has a cap, as it should, since people earning more don't tend to use the social services that came out of it. It draws more from people earning less than six figures because that's what the cap is. Lastly, what you put into FICA is taken into consideration when it comes time to pay federal income taxes.
According to you. Look, nobody's denying Apple made a revolutionary product, but pretending any new tech or software that even remotely resembles it is a copy is delusional. By your definition, again, Apple "copied" Nokia. There were an enormous number of points of similarity, so how can you deny it? What, you are denying it? Same thing. Samsung made a phone in a similar shape, that is all. *gasp*
Get real.
Some things never change. A couple thousand years ago a guy said something along the lines of "those who have will have more, those who don't will lose what they have".
I think it's pathetic that the rich are complaining about taxes. It's the poor who pay a substantial percentage of their incomes in taxes. I saw a thing on Fox yesterday about how the very rich are paying more and more in taxes -- well, duh. They're the only ones whose incomes are rising, of course their tax bill will (and should) rise as well.
The poor get screwed by everyone. It's a lot easier to steal with a pen than it is with a gun, provided you have the resources.
You must be slow. "Rich" people pay a substantially larger percentage in taxes. Your tax bracket changes as you earn more. Once someone who earns $20k a year pays $8k in taxes, come back and talk to me.
I built my "ivory tower" as you put it with my own two hands out of mud. So yes, I don't see why somebody else who's poor and capable shouldn't do the same. It helps if you stop being bitter.
2) I'm going to assume you're biased or you haven't been exposed to that many people. Does assuming make me just as bad as you? Maybe.
3) People with medical bills who can't afford them can always negotiate their monthly bills with the hospital in question. As long as you're paying something they won't bother you that much. While you might be paying that almost nothing bill the rest of your life, that alone won't cause you to go broke. Don't even try claiming otherwise. If you earn that little, you have all sorts of government assistance for basic needs, and you end up not spending that much any more on actual needs.
4) "Surviving" in the US nowadays has a totally different meaning than in an actual poor country. You're not in poverty if you use a cell phone, live in a house, have cable, have an xbox, or just bought that TV on sale at Walmart with your tax credits. If you literally can't save a dime when you have anything like this, 99% chance it's your own fault.
5) Yes, you should live within your means. When you go broke by enjoying spendy things, it's your own damned fault. People who make more money will get to enjoy life more - that's a fact. It doesn't necessarily mean they deserve it more as a human on the purely philosophical level, but life's not fair, they made their money, they're going to spend it because they can. Don't begrudge them for it just because they don't wanna give you a handout one day. Make your own way if you don't like your situation. Your opportunities can be limited by others, but it's not like they ever end. There's always opportunities, and if you work hard you significantly increase your chances of landing a good opportunity. Why the hell does everyone think they're entitled?
6) People making below a decent wage don't pay shit for federal taxes when everything is considered.
Or maybe it just proves, further, that the poor get screwed.
There's also this little thing called delayed gratification. Also, if you "need" one for higher education, chances are the school has computer labs available for use, and that's only if you couldn't get something as part of your school loans. If they don't (highly unlikely) than your local public library probably has something.
Places like Aaron's are not the enemy (though in this case, that was definitely inappropriate). Charging interest is not a crime, and you're not getting screwed because you're the one who agreed to it. Anybody who can rent-to-own a computer is perfectly capable of saving-to-own. It's just a fact of life that if you have more money, you're going to be less inconvenienced if you spend it. That doesn't make rich people bad, and it doesn't make poor people victims. Quit painting a false picture.
First off, Android is an OS, not a phone. Second, all that picture shows me is one phone having a physical keyboard and a small screen while a later one (with better hardware) has a touch screen (which all existed long before iPhone). Third, I see a wide oblong speaker hole on the Android phone that as you said it, appeared before the iPhone. Fourth, either you're a troll or you're so delusional that you feel Apple was the first to come out with a phone with rounded corners and had silver and black colors. Tiled icons? Are you for real? The earliest PDAs (Palm) had that if you wanna compare mobile devices. In fact, anything with icons at all had that.
So no, nobody "copied" that obvious shit from Apple. If anything, Apple "copied" from Nokia as they had advanced mobile phone technology out there far before Apple (including *gasp* tiled icons!).
I totally agree. Thus concludes my love/hate relationship with Ubuntu. I first hated it (thought it too bloated), then loved it a few versions later which lasted for a few blissful years. Then they go and pull this BS. I don't know what Shuttleworth is smokin', but his supplier is bad. I am also looking for a good replacement. It's too bad because they were just getting some momentum too. I would go with Mint but it doesn't have a concrete company behind it like Canonical.
In any dvd rips I make for my personal archival use, I ensure that all audio tracks and all subtitles are included in the final MKV file, complete with language tags. I don't see why anybody else can't do the same.
You'd still need that BD drive to make the rip in high quality. What point are you trying to make?
What use case would adding a BD-ROM or BD-R drive solve that isn't already solved by Netflix streaming, iTunes streaming, or external hard drives?
1. Quality (are you seriously comparing BD quality to Internet streaming quality???)
2. Additional features
3. No need to be connected to the Internet
4. The fact that it's the next disc standard, and has been around for years already
5. Optical discs survive EM pulses, which we'll inevitably have to use once the machines take over
As for Apple taking revenge, I don't know about that: it takes years and years to change CPU roadmaps, and you don't pre-announce switches like that. The A5 may be a Samsung, but it's not actually made by them -- all of Samsung's own fab is memory and LCD screens. It may be merely a supply chain issue, and Intel offered them a better deal than the middleman that is Samsung.
I don't know. Jobs does have a history of making business decisions based on personal agendas. He seems to be a very emotional person.
You should read articles you cite and link to. From the very link you give:
In reality the data shown in the graphic are incorrect
In fact, the iPhone was first shown before the Samsung F700 was first shown, and the iPhone was released before the F700 was released.
IOW, the Samsung F700 was a copy of the original iPhone, and the dates on the graphic from the link you give are a lie.
Check your facts before making such accusations.
I wouldn't say that's evidence of anybody copying anybody. Unless there's a substantial amount of time between when designs were made public, there's no reason to conclude that somebody copied the other. Certainly, the 1 month difference between when the two were shown is clear evidence nobody "stole" anything, but rather independently came up with their own designs. There's only so many ways you can design a touchscreen mobile phone. It was bound to happen.
Copied what exactly? Tiled icons? The shape of the phone speaker hole? Colors? Or just the general shape of the phone? Tiled icons have been around since the dawn of personal desktop computing. The shape of a phone speaker hole isn't exclusive to anybody (unless it's related to a trademark or something like that). Colors? Samsung has used silver and black going back to their dumb phones. Or maybe you're talking about a button being right in the middle bottom of the phone... well guess what, that's been on their line of smart phones for awhile now, and it's an optical pad, like a scroll ball. Seriously, I'm curious as to what people think Apple has such an exclusive right on in regards to (what I'm assuming) is the Galaxy S series.
I do however see this being directly related. Mr. Jobs has a habit of having red-faced 2yr old temper tantrums (maybe behind closed doors) with a resulting everlasting grudge when someone has any little bit of competition or "crossed" him at any point, no matter how minor. He's just pissed they came out with super thin dual-core smart phone before Apple did.
Since TFA cites the example of Miller, may I remind everyone that the rapture is happening this month: http://www.ebiblefellowship.com/may21/ and I predict a recalculation on May 22nd.
Pffff! This guy is so far off. I didn't see any references about sentient AI and an invasion of an army of robots.
If you kill someone, then review their body, and find that they were not wearing a uniform, nor were they carrying any weapons, nor were they strapped with explosives, nor were there any weapons nearby, nor is their likelihood that they were directing others to engage in warfare, then they were a civilian.
And that's the problem. Soldiers can only tell after the fact. Innocent civilians have died because soldiers didn't know if they were going to blow up or pull out a gun or what, and they wouldn't listen to directions to stay back or were engaged in some other slightly suspicious behavior that could mean immediate danger. It's a sad fact, and it's the best weapon the terrorists have in a war.
Still isn't "fair", as some courses are shared by different majors (Calculus, for example).
Not the same. For example, a straight non-residential road with an unusually low speed limit will get tons of speeders, but that wouldn't translate to more high-speed accidents. It just means the limit posted is too low relative to similar roads.
M-theory provides even less as far as falsifiable predictions goes, doesn't it?
Cuter? Jeepers. I've never read a horror that's given me so many nightmares before!
Maybe in this dimension.