"Well documented" in internet forums. Apple don't communicate unless there's some actual information to be communicated. In this case there's silence until they've documented the bug internally, developed a fix and are either in the final stages of testing or ready to push it out. All the rest is bullshit, nobody's really waiting for a "we're investigating the issue, please be patient" empty PR statement. Can that be annoying ? Sure, but it also means that when they finally do say something at least they're credible.
A small number of users. Haven't had problems myself but it's an x.0 release, so I'm not surprised some people have run into bugs.
"A small number of customers have reported lower-than-expected battery life on iOS 5 devices," Apple spokeswoman Natalie Harrison said in a statement to All Things Digital. "We have found a few bugs that are affecting battery life, and we will release a software update to address those in a few weeks."
1) apparently the game was open source so it's not a complete rip off, just of the art. Stealing is stealing but this does make it harder to investigate. 2) the fraud was apparently taken down after a week which isn't stellar but not that bad of a response time either.
That depends on how successful Apple and Microsoft are at suing Android out of existence. If they succeed, mobile app development will pretty much require using a Mac.
Microsoft doesn't want to due Android out of existence they're the only ones making money off of it. Also, if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.
"they removed the Credits section of the app and inserted a lot of malware that launches with the apps, spamming you with ads and installing shit on your phone (shortcuts to other software)."
The people use a lot more electricity than the politicians do. So that seems a reasonable apportioning of the costs of nuclear power.
Yes, the politicians have villas in Tuscany or the south of France so they won't be using a lot of electricity here. A shame really since they'll be the only ones who will be able to afford it.
in the terrible event that something goes wrong at the plant, you will sleep happily in the political knowledge that the meltdown didn't happen in your country.
You might want to take a look at this this map of french nuclear reactors and notice along which border the top 3 are located. The (significant) costs of this will be borne by the people as usual and the politicians get another board position to retire to. What's wrong with this picture ?
France also export a lot of electricity to their neighbors and have just about the lowest per-kWh prices in Europe. It's French power (plus new brown coal burning plants, yuck!) that will make up for the impending loss of nuclear plants in Germany. I bet the story of Belgium will be somewhat similar.
The belgian energy market is owned by Electrabel, which in turn is owned by the french GDF Suez. We will very soon by forced to import even more energy from France. Of course the two are completely unrelated (!)
This, they're idiots. First they sold off our national energy company to the french, causing prices to skyrocket so we now pay the second highest price for our energy of all of europe (only Ireland beat us.) Now they're closing down the only reliable local source of energy we have which will force further imports and further price rises. They did pretty much the same with our banks too, selling to the french who then sucked them dry and left us with the bankruptcy and the costs. Oh and our national airline,... Belgium's politicians are totally corrupt, or at best hopelessly incompetent. And people wonder why we haven't been able to form a new government for more than 500 days now.
There's no reason why it should be MS. There could be certification authorities run by anyone, you could run your own even. IF the technology was developed right.
Well that's actually a derivative work, an unlicensed derivative work. And the fact you can prove it is unlicensed because it lacks the metadata of the original is valuable by itself. Imagine you upload a picture to Facebook that has a "Creative Commons Free for non commercial use" license embedded in it, if someone exploits the analogue hole and uses it in an ad the fact that it is missing the metadata gives you a legal recourse.
The problem with that isn't that you are being charged for access. People pay for access to a resource all the time. The problem there is that your ownership is being reduced: where you used to own the track or book you are now renting. That's not actually a problem with the technology but with the mindset of the content cartels.
I don't see why the master key to your files couldn't be both managed on the local system(s) and on a cloud server belonging to MS, Apple, Microsoft, FSF, or any other entity. Besides they can already delete all your (remotely stored) data now, the problem is you can't reliably do so. That's the problem they are trying to solve.
So don't use it. Any such scheme would simply allow a file to be "free to copy" too. But people have to make their minds up, the same who are very strongly opposed to any kind of DRM scheme are often also the ones lamenting the loss of privacy and malappropriation of photos through sites such as Facebook but one is a potential (partial) remedy for the other.
But the ability of a user to delete his "cloud" files would be a benefit. DRM is only evil when it gives a third party control over your stuff, not when it gives you control over your own stuff.
There's nothing wrong with DRM when it's used to protect my ownership of my files. Would you be opposed to a DRM scheme that would allow you to totally and irrevocably delete a picture you posted to Facebook because it allows you to retain total ownership ? The problem with DRM is when it's used to take away rights you traditionally hold, i.e. when DRM is used to reduce your ownership instead of increasing it.
You should read the article, you are illustrating their point. They talk about how users associate ownership with having a file on a known physical location and how in order for people to feel comfortable with cloud storage the definition of file needs to be redefined in a way that people feel they have ownership over data that exists "out there".
"[...] ownership is what we are thinking of, when ownership stands as proxy for what used to be knowledge of location and responsibility for that location. What was once a relationship between a user and a physical thing now needs to stand as a relationship between a user and a digital thing. Just what this ownership might be and how it might function in terms of what is specified in this new entity we are thinking of, one that somehow has the properties we have described above and which also allows this new characteristic, we have begun to outline but a beginning is all it is."
Part of this is the ability to be able to delete their data even when it has been put out there in the wild.
"A boundary object needs to be developed that can bridge the abstraction of the user and the one of the engineer, who needs to worry about where this thing that keeps growing and changing, and where the locale of storage changes too, such that when a user says ‘delete’, the thing whatever it is and wherever the entities constitutive of it are, are indeed, done away with."
This is a paper talking about your concerns and how to address them.
Since there's not much of a technical reason the iPhone 4 cannot have Siri, I think a big part of why it's only on the 4s (and not even the iPad 2) is to help Apple understand server load from the service before it goes live for 100 million+ people.
Yes, I've heard Dan Benjamin complain on one of his podcasts that there's some disruption of Siri services when there's a large influx of users, such as when the US east coast wakes up. So this would seem to be at least part of the reasoning.
Slashdot Mirror
After two weeks ? Finally ! :-)
"Well documented" in internet forums. Apple don't communicate unless there's some actual information to be communicated. In this case there's silence until they've documented the bug internally, developed a fix and are either in the final stages of testing or ready to push it out. All the rest is bullshit, nobody's really waiting for a "we're investigating the issue, please be patient" empty PR statement. Can that be annoying ? Sure, but it also means that when they finally do say something at least they're credible.
When the iPhone 4 hit 3 million sold the return rate was 1.7% or about 51.000 phones. Clearly the antenna was horrible (!)
Actually in this case it is in the article (it's one of those sensationalist pieces, the "finally" in the headline is a dead giveaway.)
Other users and Apple disagree with you.
A small number of users. Haven't had problems myself but it's an x.0 release, so I'm not surprised some people have run into bugs.
"A small number of customers have reported lower-than-expected battery life on iOS 5 devices," Apple spokeswoman Natalie Harrison said in a statement to All Things Digital. "We have found a few bugs that are affecting battery life, and we will release a software update to address those in a few weeks."
1) apparently the game was open source so it's not a complete rip off, just of the art. Stealing is stealing but this does make it harder to investigate.
2) the fraud was apparently taken down after a week which isn't stellar but not that bad of a response time either.
That depends on how successful Apple and Microsoft are at suing Android out of existence. If they succeed, mobile app development will pretty much require using a Mac.
Microsoft doesn't want to due Android out of existence they're the only ones making money off of it.
Also, if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.
All the big brains working on Adsense and search probably think a simple iOS app is beneath them and have palmed it off on Tibor the latverian intern.
Google probably labeled it "beta" so you've got to expect some bugs :-)
As opposed to Android, which doesn't charge $99 per year and allows distribution of APKs outside Android Market.
But there you get shit like this story of some guy who got his game ripped off :
"they removed the Credits section of the app and inserted a lot of malware that launches with the apps, spamming you with ads and installing shit on your phone (shortcuts to other software)."
It all sounds pretty Wild West.
The people use a lot more electricity than the politicians do. So that seems a reasonable apportioning of the costs of nuclear power.
Yes, the politicians have villas in Tuscany or the south of France so they won't be using a lot of electricity here. A shame really since they'll be the only ones who will be able to afford it.
Well we're already learning dutch, french, german and english, what's one more language ? Kalispera !
in the terrible event that something goes wrong at the plant, you will sleep happily in the political knowledge that the meltdown didn't happen in your country.
You might want to take a look at this this map of french nuclear reactors and notice along which border the top 3 are located. The (significant) costs of this will be borne by the people as usual and the politicians get another board position to retire to. What's wrong with this picture ?
France also export a lot of electricity to their neighbors and have just about the lowest per-kWh prices in Europe. It's French power (plus new brown coal burning plants, yuck!) that will make up for the impending loss of nuclear plants in Germany. I bet the story of Belgium will be somewhat similar.
The belgian energy market is owned by Electrabel, which in turn is owned by the french GDF Suez. We will very soon by forced to import even more energy from France. Of course the two are completely unrelated (!)
This, they're idiots. First they sold off our national energy company to the french, causing prices to skyrocket so we now pay the second highest price for our energy of all of europe (only Ireland beat us.) Now they're closing down the only reliable local source of energy we have which will force further imports and further price rises. They did pretty much the same with our banks too, selling to the french who then sucked them dry and left us with the bankruptcy and the costs. Oh and our national airline, ... Belgium's politicians are totally corrupt, or at best hopelessly incompetent. And people wonder why we haven't been able to form a new government for more than 500 days now.
There's no reason why it should be MS. There could be certification authorities run by anyone, you could run your own even. IF the technology was developed right.
Well that's actually a derivative work, an unlicensed derivative work. And the fact you can prove it is unlicensed because it lacks the metadata of the original is valuable by itself. Imagine you upload a picture to Facebook that has a "Creative Commons Free for non commercial use" license embedded in it, if someone exploits the analogue hole and uses it in an ad the fact that it is missing the metadata gives you a legal recourse.
The problem with that isn't that you are being charged for access. People pay for access to a resource all the time. The problem there is that your ownership is being reduced: where you used to own the track or book you are now renting. That's not actually a problem with the technology but with the mindset of the content cartels.
I don't see why the master key to your files couldn't be both managed on the local system(s) and on a cloud server belonging to MS, Apple, Microsoft, FSF, or any other entity. Besides they can already delete all your (remotely stored) data now, the problem is you can't reliably do so. That's the problem they are trying to solve.
So don't use it. Any such scheme would simply allow a file to be "free to copy" too. But people have to make their minds up, the same who are very strongly opposed to any kind of DRM scheme are often also the ones lamenting the loss of privacy and malappropriation of photos through sites such as Facebook but one is a potential (partial) remedy for the other.
But the ability of a user to delete his "cloud" files would be a benefit. DRM is only evil when it gives a third party control over your stuff, not when it gives you control over your own stuff.
There's nothing wrong with DRM when it's used to protect my ownership of my files. Would you be opposed to a DRM scheme that would allow you to totally and irrevocably delete a picture you posted to Facebook because it allows you to retain total ownership ? The problem with DRM is when it's used to take away rights you traditionally hold, i.e. when DRM is used to reduce your ownership instead of increasing it.
You should read the article, you are illustrating their point. They talk about how users associate ownership with having a file on a known physical location and how in order for people to feel comfortable with cloud storage the definition of file needs to be redefined in a way that people feel they have ownership over data that exists "out there".
"[...] ownership is what we are thinking of, when ownership stands as proxy for what used to be knowledge of location and responsibility for that location. What was once a relationship between a user and a physical thing now needs to stand as a relationship between a user and a digital thing. Just what this ownership might be and how it might function in terms of what is specified in this new entity we are thinking of, one that somehow has the properties we have described above and which also allows this new characteristic, we have begun to outline but a beginning is all it is."
Part of this is the ability to be able to delete their data even when it has been put out there in the wild.
"A boundary object needs to be developed that can bridge the abstraction of the user and the one of the engineer, who needs to worry about where this thing that keeps growing and changing, and where the locale of storage changes too, such that when a user says ‘delete’, the thing whatever it is and wherever the entities constitutive of it are, are indeed, done away with."
This is a paper talking about your concerns and how to address them.
Since there's not much of a technical reason the iPhone 4 cannot have Siri, I think a big part of why it's only on the 4s (and not even the iPad 2) is to help Apple understand server load from the service before it goes live for 100 million+ people.
Yes, I've heard Dan Benjamin complain on one of his podcasts that there's some disruption of Siri services when there's a large influx of users, such as when the US east coast wakes up. So this would seem to be at least part of the reasoning.
Well maybe among our 7 billion there are enough breeding pairs that are also resistant. The way we're running the world we might find out.