My job is in security. And among other things, we do test and break security features of mobile phones. Unfortunately that meant that in the more recent past, I could not recommend using iPhones anymore. Which kinda sucks, because I really liked them. Cook insists in using technology that just isn't there yet, all for the sake of looking cutting edge and offering some flashy gimmicks that can be used in ads as a "look, shiny!" distraction.
Same thing with the emojis and animojis and whatnot. Yes, they're nice and sure, they were created as a side project somewhere, why not ship them? What I didn't get was how they were touted as the next best thing since sliced bread and a must-have feature, one that supposedly sells the phone. That was the bit I didn't get about them. Yes, they sure don't hurt, but... THAT is the selling point? It kinda makes you think that they're grasping at straws when they have to use that for their sales pitch.
The removal of various jacks strikes me as unnecessary. it feels a little like an attempt to squeeze more money out of their users by forcing them to buy more dongles and accessories that in the end make the whole ensemble look simply unappealing. There isn't much gain in aesthetics if the main unit looks sleek, but the whole thing is a mess once it's assembled in a configuration that's actually usable.
Jobs understood this. Back in the Jobs era, these were absolutely awesome systems. Personally, I don't really see that anymore. It gets clunkier, messier and overall it starts to feel more and more like what Apple tried to distance itself in the past: A cluttered, unmanageable mess like anything Microsoft made. I miss that "just works" factor that really made Apple stand out.
Wait, kids in the US can choose what school to go to? More importantly, they even KNOW that there are other schools and they are able to determine which ones are good or bad at the age of 6?
Never had a job offer where you're supposed to send your resume through Facebook? Or seen companies offer certain deal only via Facebook, or only accept logins by Facebook (or Twitter, yeah, great alternative)?
If you don't use it, you really start to notice such things...
Don't you love it when everything's back to normal? Us old folks who remember the good ol' days of the 70s and 80s were kinda miffed at those newfangled enemies. The only boogeyman that could hold a candle to the Russians were the terrorists, and they were kinda bland. Faceless, nameless, not something you could point at. The Russians were different. You knew where they were, you didn't have to wage war with them and lose young guys, but the cold war kept the military industrial complex well funded. Perfect war, great for the economy and nobody has to die.
Far better than that war with the terrorists where people actually get killed.
Plus, the Russians never sent anyone to our country, neither to blow shit up nor as refugees. They even made sure that everyone stayed where they belonged.
Yes, I long for our old, beloved enemies. It's good to see that they're coming back in style.
Could we phase out those other ones, those terrorists? I mean, we don't really need them now anymore, now that the Russians want to play again, and they get kinda pesky. Plus, they're SO completely nuts that our government doesn't have to pretend to be the good guys with them. That's something the Russians always managed to do really well for us.
The problem is that they are not shoving those things up their own asses, we wouldn't complain so much if they did. The problem is that they try that on our asses, despite being the far greater assholes.
Again, we seem to have diverging ideas what 'innovate' is supposed to mean.
They will continue to produce new gimmicky toys if Cook stays true to his line so far. Whether they will sell them depends on whether this is actually what Apple users really want. I know I wanted an iPhone back when the first came out. I also know I don't want an iPhone X.
Unfortunately life doesn't give a shit about "meant to be". Some people think they're meant to be rap stars but guess what, it ain't gonna be.
I have no work ethic. I have a job that pays more money than I can spend but work ethic? Please. Yes, that's unfair. And I understand anyone pretty well that thinks that way too and would ditch such a meaningless, idiotic job faster than any bozo manager can yell at him.
I suspect you never were in that situation that you have to manage a family besides such jobs. You simply don't have the time (or energy) to find anything better, simply because your day only has 24 hours and you should spend some of them sleeping if you don't want to go bananas before long.
A shitty job would only be the motivator for me to find a gun and go have fun, to be blunt.
So having a dead-end, meaningless, "you-want-fries-with-that" job is motivational?
If anything, those soul-rending treadmills are what strips any kind of motivation from you. By the time you're done with the work, any kind of motivation is solidly beaten out of you and all you want is to forget the world around you exists.
How bureaucratic can a country be if even the effin' EU where more than a dozen countries have to get to an agreement could get a law addressing this issue done by now?
Businesses are among those that suffer the most from things like credit card fraud. Because who do you think foots the bill? The customer gets his money back and credit card issuers don't pay for fraudulent card use.
Ask any credit card company whether there are damages every single time some credit card processor gets raided. Oh, wait, no, they won't tell you. Because that would tell people to stop using those cards, because the amount of credit card fraud due to cards stolen in data breaches is through the roof. Want proof? Just call your credit card company and dispute some purchases. They don't even investigate anymore. They just refund you, have you sign a shut-up paper and issue a new card.
I don't know about your country and waitresses there, and maybe if you paid them a decent salary they wouldn't be tempted, but I know that my chance to see my card being used in Generistan to buy shit that cannot be tracked is heaps higher than seeing it used to buy shoes of an internet platform.
It's not a justification, it's a question: How comes that there's always money to save the rich from having to go a year with less than a million bucks to blow on shits and giggles, but never any to save those that actually need it to survive?
Where did bank bailouts work that way? You know what happened here? Banks needed bailouts. So they needed money, from the state. The state did not have that money, so what did the state do? Lend it of course. Where? Well, banks.
What REALLY happened here is that the state stood as guarantor for banks' liabilities, usually paying more for interest and fees than they got from the banks that needed the bailout. In the end, I don't know of a single state or country that went away with a plus from the deal.
After literally hundreds of data leaks and personal information having become a play toy for companies to be bought and sold with impunity, after Sugarhill had to testify in front of Congress to that effect (so they can't really say that they never ever noticed anything like this), WHAT THE FUCK more do you need to establish a need?
Hey, I tuned it down already. Originally it was "and if Cook doesn't get his head out of his ass (or what- or whoever's in there right now)", but I didn't want to come across as homophobic.
Slashdot Mirror
You might be in a position where you can turn a job offer down. Many people are not.
To having my phone unlocked by a person who knows how to etch a PCB and use play-doh? Yes.
My job is in security. And among other things, we do test and break security features of mobile phones. Unfortunately that meant that in the more recent past, I could not recommend using iPhones anymore. Which kinda sucks, because I really liked them. Cook insists in using technology that just isn't there yet, all for the sake of looking cutting edge and offering some flashy gimmicks that can be used in ads as a "look, shiny!" distraction.
Same thing with the emojis and animojis and whatnot. Yes, they're nice and sure, they were created as a side project somewhere, why not ship them? What I didn't get was how they were touted as the next best thing since sliced bread and a must-have feature, one that supposedly sells the phone. That was the bit I didn't get about them. Yes, they sure don't hurt, but ... THAT is the selling point? It kinda makes you think that they're grasping at straws when they have to use that for their sales pitch.
The removal of various jacks strikes me as unnecessary. it feels a little like an attempt to squeeze more money out of their users by forcing them to buy more dongles and accessories that in the end make the whole ensemble look simply unappealing. There isn't much gain in aesthetics if the main unit looks sleek, but the whole thing is a mess once it's assembled in a configuration that's actually usable.
Jobs understood this. Back in the Jobs era, these were absolutely awesome systems. Personally, I don't really see that anymore. It gets clunkier, messier and overall it starts to feel more and more like what Apple tried to distance itself in the past: A cluttered, unmanageable mess like anything Microsoft made. I miss that "just works" factor that really made Apple stand out.
Now I wonder about the odd spelling you have for 12 millions.
Wait, kids in the US can choose what school to go to? More importantly, they even KNOW that there are other schools and they are able to determine which ones are good or bad at the age of 6?
Talk about growing up early!
Never had a job offer where you're supposed to send your resume through Facebook? Or seen companies offer certain deal only via Facebook, or only accept logins by Facebook (or Twitter, yeah, great alternative)?
If you don't use it, you really start to notice such things...
Don't you love it when everything's back to normal? Us old folks who remember the good ol' days of the 70s and 80s were kinda miffed at those newfangled enemies. The only boogeyman that could hold a candle to the Russians were the terrorists, and they were kinda bland. Faceless, nameless, not something you could point at. The Russians were different. You knew where they were, you didn't have to wage war with them and lose young guys, but the cold war kept the military industrial complex well funded. Perfect war, great for the economy and nobody has to die.
Far better than that war with the terrorists where people actually get killed.
Plus, the Russians never sent anyone to our country, neither to blow shit up nor as refugees. They even made sure that everyone stayed where they belonged.
Yes, I long for our old, beloved enemies. It's good to see that they're coming back in style.
Could we phase out those other ones, those terrorists? I mean, we don't really need them now anymore, now that the Russians want to play again, and they get kinda pesky. Plus, they're SO completely nuts that our government doesn't have to pretend to be the good guys with them. That's something the Russians always managed to do really well for us.
The problem is that they are not shoving those things up their own asses, we wouldn't complain so much if they did. The problem is that they try that on our asses, despite being the far greater assholes.
It's more that they keep fucking up and that everyone else has to foot the bill for their blunders.
I guess I was under a wrong impression. I thought it was something like "by the people, for the people", not "by the people, for the money".
A country is no company.
Again, we seem to have diverging ideas what 'innovate' is supposed to mean.
They will continue to produce new gimmicky toys if Cook stays true to his line so far. Whether they will sell them depends on whether this is actually what Apple users really want. I know I wanted an iPhone back when the first came out. I also know I don't want an iPhone X.
Sorry, English is only my third language. Peut-être nous pouvons continuer en Francais? Oder wäre Dir Deutsch lieber?
So I used a word wrong. Could we get back to the discussion?
Unfortunately life doesn't give a shit about "meant to be". Some people think they're meant to be rap stars but guess what, it ain't gonna be.
I have no work ethic. I have a job that pays more money than I can spend but work ethic? Please. Yes, that's unfair. And I understand anyone pretty well that thinks that way too and would ditch such a meaningless, idiotic job faster than any bozo manager can yell at him.
I suspect you never were in that situation that you have to manage a family besides such jobs. You simply don't have the time (or energy) to find anything better, simply because your day only has 24 hours and you should spend some of them sleeping if you don't want to go bananas before long.
A shitty job would only be the motivator for me to find a gun and go have fun, to be blunt.
It wasn't small or revolutionary for the 28 countries in the EU?
So having a dead-end, meaningless, "you-want-fries-with-that" job is motivational?
If anything, those soul-rending treadmills are what strips any kind of motivation from you. By the time you're done with the work, any kind of motivation is solidly beaten out of you and all you want is to forget the world around you exists.
How bureaucratic can a country be if even the effin' EU where more than a dozen countries have to get to an agreement could get a law addressing this issue done by now?
Businesses are among those that suffer the most from things like credit card fraud. Because who do you think foots the bill? The customer gets his money back and credit card issuers don't pay for fraudulent card use.
Ask any credit card company whether there are damages every single time some credit card processor gets raided. Oh, wait, no, they won't tell you. Because that would tell people to stop using those cards, because the amount of credit card fraud due to cards stolen in data breaches is through the roof. Want proof? Just call your credit card company and dispute some purchases. They don't even investigate anymore. They just refund you, have you sign a shut-up paper and issue a new card.
I don't know about your country and waitresses there, and maybe if you paid them a decent salary they wouldn't be tempted, but I know that my chance to see my card being used in Generistan to buy shit that cannot be tracked is heaps higher than seeing it used to buy shoes of an internet platform.
Now add that the system is SO fucked up that even if mommy and daddy are happy together it's more sensible for them to claim they're not...
It's not a justification, it's a question: How comes that there's always money to save the rich from having to go a year with less than a million bucks to blow on shits and giggles, but never any to save those that actually need it to survive?
Where did bank bailouts work that way? You know what happened here? Banks needed bailouts. So they needed money, from the state. The state did not have that money, so what did the state do? Lend it of course. Where? Well, banks.
What REALLY happened here is that the state stood as guarantor for banks' liabilities, usually paying more for interest and fees than they got from the banks that needed the bailout. In the end, I don't know of a single state or country that went away with a plus from the deal.
After literally hundreds of data leaks and personal information having become a play toy for companies to be bought and sold with impunity, after Sugarhill had to testify in front of Congress to that effect (so they can't really say that they never ever noticed anything like this), WHAT THE FUCK more do you need to establish a need?
That's going to be done for them right after the data leak.
Hey, I tuned it down already. Originally it was "and if Cook doesn't get his head out of his ass (or what- or whoever's in there right now)", but I didn't want to come across as homophobic.