Re:Extremely easy to disable, and more info
on
iTunes is Malware?
·
· Score: 1
If everybody assumes that Apple is not doing anything just because they're Apple, it sets a bad precendent with them that may lead them to take advantage of that trust. You can help safeguard this by raising hell over the possibility, since they did not take acceptable measures to disclose the potential data collection, nor to ask permission.
But if they're not doing it, what is there to disclose? Shouldn't it be assumed that when interacting with a store that there are some recods that are going to be kept? At what point does it become extrodinary, and if they're not crossing that line, why should they have to state that they're not?
Don't make broad generalizations about what intelligent people think. Quite a few people that are intelligent don't like information about their habits being collection, and even more take exception with same being done without their permission.
Yes, but security and privacy experts agree that aggregate data poses no threat. Only an uninformed person would disagree with that fact, since it is well documented. Similarly, rational people wouldn't be upset by aggregate data collection either, since most all of human decision making is based on aggregate data collection in your own brain. If the data isn't tied to your personal information (which Apple doesn't necessarily have, remember, so the data *can't* be tied to your personal information by default), it's of no harm to you. Aggregate data is just plain not a privacy concern.
I suggested that it would be safest to assume the feature was allowing for data collection and should be treated as a privacy concern.
Assume, and verify. Don't assume, accuse, and convict without verification. I'm not saying you shouldn't be paranoid, I'm saying you should have all the facts before you come to a conclusion.
I *would* suggest that Apple proceeded improperly and should be chastised for doing so.
If it turns out that they did wrong, I agree. You can not say at this point with any definition that they have though. You can only assume. You said so yourself.
The current high pricing on next-gen disc media players is impacted hardly at all by manufacturing costs. There's a need to recoup development costs and the manufacturers probably also have to pay some technology licensing fees.
You can't count those costs for a few reasons. The easy one is the licensing... Sony owns the technology. As for recouping the development costs, well, that can happen over decades, there's no reason to assess the costs to some arbitrary number of early units. For that reason the analysts don't count those costs in their estimates, and neither should you.
The costs we're discussing here, and the costs you see in the news will strictly be manufacturing costs.
A huge deal was made about how much less the PS2 cost than a standalone DVD player, since at the time the pricing was announced DVD players cost $1000+, but before release day came, DVD player prices were down in the $100-$120 price range (I paid $120 for a Toshiba DVD player 2 months before the PS2 release) because the PS2 anouncement took the premium value away from the standalone players. Those player manufacturers certainly weren't taking a loss on the players at the lower price point, and they didn't get 90% more efficient at building them in a matter of weeks either...
The biggest expense in producing BluRay players is all the electronics to generate an HD signal, and all that stuff is in next-gen consoles anyway. There will be a moderate increase in the cost of the optics and the price of the patent licenses (which sony doesn't have to pay to itself), but other than that it costs essentially the same amount to build a BluRay reader as DVD reader. The manufacturers just want everybody to think it costs so much so they can make a ton of profit selling to early adopters. Sony has played the PR game so well that ever these stupid analysts believe the cost is high, and the analysts that are smart enough to see through it don't get publicity because they aren't saying anything controversial. Publishing a story like that wouldn't generate any ad revenue.
Re:Extremely easy to disable, and more info
on
iTunes is Malware?
·
· Score: 1
Have you examined the data that is sent to Apple as part of the recommendation query? Do you know that they don't send anything unique to your machine, or some other data stored on that machine (ie: machine owner data).
If I had, would I be participating in a discussion where my primary argument is that judgement shouldn't be passed until there's proof? You read my posts and realize that's what I'm saying, right?
they still could be sending an installation ID that uniquely identifies your copy of iTunes. This, itself, is a breach of privacy
Nobody intelligent considers collection of aggregate data a violation of privacy.
There is no chance of libel here, since I made no statement that Apple was *doing* any of this.
You, and to a greater extent the parents of this thread, suggested that Apple should be treated as if they were actually doing this until it is proven otherwise. Would you not agree that such a tactic would result in all of the bad publicity damage that would occur if it was ture, even in the case where they weren't guilty? You know that if the story was "Apple violates your privacy" and it turned out to be wrong, the followup would be a slashback somewhere that nobody would bother to read, or a story that had an equally incriminating headline like "More on the Apple privacy violation".
The dirty little secret of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD is that the difference in manufactuing cost between them and DVD is less than the manufacturing cost difference between CD and DVD when DVD came out. In other words, not nearly as much as they want you to think. At $1500 for a standalone player, I'll bet that $1470 is profit.
Fresh from the mouths of the same analysts that said the PSP would be $300-$400...
If any of you are reading this, I'll bet you $399 that the launch price will be $399.
What a bunch of free press whores. You know this is only on CNN because the analysts that are predicting $399 are saying something too boring to be worth discussing...
Re:Extremely easy to disable, and more info
on
iTunes is Malware?
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunately, the safe bet *is* to assume that they are tracking data, until confirmed otherwise.
I'm going to go with your method, and assume that you're a total moron until you prove otherwise.
Now, with that out of the way, explain this to me:
Where does iTunes get your information from in order to track you? You don't have to register. You can download it with an obviously bogus e-mail address in the download form (a valid address still wouldn't associate your copy with you anyway), and you don't need an iTMS account to use iTunes, the iTMS (unless you want to purchase something), or this feature. So if it's tracking you, how the fuck does it know who you are?
Is your bet still so safe? Now take into account that if you make the accusations without proof, and it turns out you're wrong, you're now guilty of libel, which you could be sued over. Genius.
Nope not kidding, and I don't think what I'm suggesting is unusual. Sony is odd about what it supports, but it's always some combination of standard and proprietary. Look at the PS2. There's standard USB ports on there.
What you're going to see is that the ports will be on there for the image and video functions of the PS3, but you'll only be able to save games to the MemoryStick Duo slot (which is the same slot that the PSP uses for saves). There will then be software that allows transfers between the ports just like on the PS2. That would be par for the Sony course; an odd combination of standard and proprietary. Certainly not an "about face".
Re:Extremely easy to disable, and more info
on
iTunes is Malware?
·
· Score: 1
You sound like somebody having paranoid delusions. How else could a feature that shows you other albums by the artist you're currently listening to work other than by transmitting the artist name? When iTunes looks up the CD info when you rip/play a CD, is that tracking you too? How hard is opting-out when all you have to do is not use the feature? Why does the transfer of an artist name automatically mean that they're associating that with your identification information in some database somewhere?
And this all still assumes that they're tracking you, and not just fetching information based on a keyword sent to their server.
So, since flavor-of-the-moment did it, it's OK?
Do you hate Apple for some reason? That's the only reason you should have totally ignored what I said, assumed I said the opposite, and used it as a rationalization for an attack on Apple. I never said it's OK. I said it hasn't been proven yet, and you shouldn't "blast" anybody until you're sure they're guilty. Data transfer doesn't imply tracking (see above), and they, just like anybody else, should be innocent until proven guilty.
See, that would be funny if it was some outrageous claim, like home many of trillions of tri-textured polygons per nanosecond it would be able to push... For something as boring and boolean as a memory card slot, something that either exists or doesn't, it just makes you look like an Xbox fanboy.
Many "cheat code" discs for the PS2 will let you transfer data between your memory cards and a USB drive. Unfortunatly standalone backups aren't possible due to the "Magic Gate" DRM in the memory cards.
The PS3 is supposedly going to support a variety of standard flash storage devices including SD and MemoryStick.
Re:Extremely easy to disable, and more info
on
iTunes is Malware?
·
· Score: 1
along with cookie information that may identify you
Ooohhh... It may identify you? How about some proof before you pass judgement? To me it sounds very similar to how CDDB might "track" you.
The argument, even from apple, has never been that 100 DPI is optimal, or that they're going for ease on the eyes. The argument was that the DPI should be uniform across their entire product line so your work looks the same on your desktop or your laptop or your iMac at home...
I had the same thought, as it's the only thing I've used a modem for in years, but even faxes are going the way of online these days. There's no good reason to fax with a modem anymore unless you like limiting your access. Find yourself a good fax server. It will cost you less than long distance anyway.
You have to replace all your discs before even the first one fails. The maximum possible life doesn't matter. If your CD can last between 5 and 100 years, you'll be pretty pissed if you assume 10 and find out they all went bad after 6.
Incorrect. Unless the fuel is mined and transported, the plant built, and the workers fed and watered without the use of any hyrocarbons then they are still being used.
You're being pedantic to a fault.
Widespread adoption of nuclear power would create a plentiful source of hydrogen for use in fuel cells. That would, over time, replace the diesel fuel used in mining equipment and trucking. You can't make an omlet without breaking a few eggs.
How often do you leave it in your car? High heat and freezing kill LiION batteries. It's probably the most common cause of iPod battery failure next to age.
Your dad bought you your first computer in 1996... Does that make you 18? 19? That's right about the time that many genetically inherited vision problems start to kick in. You may even have been slightly myopic for years but had an astigmatism that compensated, and now your myopia is getting severe enough to be noticed.
Rather than blowing a ton of money on some ergonomic crap, just go see an eye doctor. They'll be able to tell you without any doubt what has caused your vision problems and how to deal with them (probably corrective lenses).
but lets not even take that into account and assume some new engineering will improve safety to satisfactory levels
You don't have to take it into account because new engineering already has improved it to satisfactory levels. This is more than true when you compare even the worst case scenario with the number of people killed by coal every year.
Of course I realize all that. But instead of advocating resource control for fossil fuels, I advocate use of an alternative that is much cleaner and more plentiful.
It's hard for me to figure out what your goal is from your statements. It could be that you just want western lifestyles changed, but if what you're going for is fair distribution of wealth, sustanable consumption of resources, and a clean environment, think of this... That SUV the parent poster was talking about... If you got rid of all of them, and the people who drove them started riding a bicycle instead, how much energy would be saved and how much would our emissions be reduced by? 1%? 2%? Now... If we converted all our coal power plants to nuclear fission, guess how much we'd reduce fossil fuel consumption and emissions.... Well over 50%. Additionally, we'd reduce energy costs; potentially to the point that would spur economic development in poorer regions. Try and acomplish that with taxes or regulations. We could instantly and permenantly reduce our emissions by 50%, but we don't because uneducated or mis-educated people are afraid of nuclear power.
It's amazing to me that Europe is figuring this out before the US since you all lived through Chernobyl and we didn't.
Carbon tax is a negative feedback control; you wanna drive to the movies on a SUV you'd better pay for the "privilege", I'll have my Smart thanks!
Oh, one more thing. There are serious ethical issues with using taxation to control behavior. If you're ever considering it, it's just plain wrong. There's always a reason, and for this particular issue the reason is obvious.
Energy consumption is quality of life. Think about it. So your little tax here means the rich can still afford their big car and warm house, but the poor get screwed. Your tax may be "progressive" and cost more for the rich than the poor in terms of actual dollars, but in terms of quality of life it's the poorest people who get screwed the most.
Backwards, why? Carbon tax is exactly an attempt to encourage positive behaviour in consumers. It doesn't punish anyone, it simply monetizes in an straightforward way the link between energy consumption and its effects.
That's true only if you completely ignore the positive economic effects of energy consumption. It's no coincidence that the the nations which consume the most energy produce the largest percentage of the worlds GDP with a near linear correlation. If you ignore that effect, then sure, I can see why you'd think a carbon tax is a good idea.
Of course, if we use nuclear fission, there's no carbon involved, so as long as you're willing to build a bunch of nukes (please, put one in my back yard), then go ahead and tax carbon emissions... Just make sure you're clear it's not energy consumption that is the negative behavior, it's the carbon emissions.
Slashdot Mirror
If everybody assumes that Apple is not doing anything just because they're Apple, it sets a bad precendent with them that may lead them to take advantage of that trust. You can help safeguard this by raising hell over the possibility, since they did not take acceptable measures to disclose the potential data collection, nor to ask permission.
But if they're not doing it, what is there to disclose? Shouldn't it be assumed that when interacting with a store that there are some recods that are going to be kept? At what point does it become extrodinary, and if they're not crossing that line, why should they have to state that they're not?
Don't make broad generalizations about what intelligent people think. Quite a few people that are intelligent don't like information about their habits being collection, and even more take exception with same being done without their permission.
Yes, but security and privacy experts agree that aggregate data poses no threat. Only an uninformed person would disagree with that fact, since it is well documented. Similarly, rational people wouldn't be upset by aggregate data collection either, since most all of human decision making is based on aggregate data collection in your own brain. If the data isn't tied to your personal information (which Apple doesn't necessarily have, remember, so the data *can't* be tied to your personal information by default), it's of no harm to you. Aggregate data is just plain not a privacy concern.
I suggested that it would be safest to assume the feature was allowing for data collection and should be treated as a privacy concern.
Assume, and verify. Don't assume, accuse, and convict without verification. I'm not saying you shouldn't be paranoid, I'm saying you should have all the facts before you come to a conclusion.
I *would* suggest that Apple proceeded improperly and should be chastised for doing so.
If it turns out that they did wrong, I agree. You can not say at this point with any definition that they have though. You can only assume. You said so yourself.
The current high pricing on next-gen disc media players is impacted hardly at all by manufacturing costs. There's a need to recoup development costs and the manufacturers probably also have to pay some technology licensing fees.
You can't count those costs for a few reasons. The easy one is the licensing... Sony owns the technology. As for recouping the development costs, well, that can happen over decades, there's no reason to assess the costs to some arbitrary number of early units. For that reason the analysts don't count those costs in their estimates, and neither should you.
The costs we're discussing here, and the costs you see in the news will strictly be manufacturing costs.
Exactly.
A huge deal was made about how much less the PS2 cost than a standalone DVD player, since at the time the pricing was announced DVD players cost $1000+, but before release day came, DVD player prices were down in the $100-$120 price range (I paid $120 for a Toshiba DVD player 2 months before the PS2 release) because the PS2 anouncement took the premium value away from the standalone players. Those player manufacturers certainly weren't taking a loss on the players at the lower price point, and they didn't get 90% more efficient at building them in a matter of weeks either...
The biggest expense in producing BluRay players is all the electronics to generate an HD signal, and all that stuff is in next-gen consoles anyway. There will be a moderate increase in the cost of the optics and the price of the patent licenses (which sony doesn't have to pay to itself), but other than that it costs essentially the same amount to build a BluRay reader as DVD reader. The manufacturers just want everybody to think it costs so much so they can make a ton of profit selling to early adopters. Sony has played the PR game so well that ever these stupid analysts believe the cost is high, and the analysts that are smart enough to see through it don't get publicity because they aren't saying anything controversial. Publishing a story like that wouldn't generate any ad revenue.
Have you examined the data that is sent to Apple as part of the recommendation query? Do you know that they don't send anything unique to your machine, or some other data stored on that machine (ie: machine owner data).
If I had, would I be participating in a discussion where my primary argument is that judgement shouldn't be passed until there's proof? You read my posts and realize that's what I'm saying, right?
they still could be sending an installation ID that uniquely identifies your copy of iTunes. This, itself, is a breach of privacy
Nobody intelligent considers collection of aggregate data a violation of privacy.
There is no chance of libel here, since I made no statement that Apple was *doing* any of this.
You, and to a greater extent the parents of this thread, suggested that Apple should be treated as if they were actually doing this until it is proven otherwise. Would you not agree that such a tactic would result in all of the bad publicity damage that would occur if it was ture, even in the case where they weren't guilty? You know that if the story was "Apple violates your privacy" and it turned out to be wrong, the followup would be a slashback somewhere that nobody would bother to read, or a story that had an equally incriminating headline like "More on the Apple privacy violation".
That wouldn't be a fair comparison. From DVD availability day one it was cheaper to build a DVD player than the equivalent VHS player.
The dirty little secret of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD is that the difference in manufactuing cost between them and DVD is less than the manufacturing cost difference between CD and DVD when DVD came out. In other words, not nearly as much as they want you to think. At $1500 for a standalone player, I'll bet that $1470 is profit.
Fresh from the mouths of the same analysts that said the PSP would be $300-$400...
If any of you are reading this, I'll bet you $399 that the launch price will be $399.
What a bunch of free press whores. You know this is only on CNN because the analysts that are predicting $399 are saying something too boring to be worth discussing...
Unfortunately, the safe bet *is* to assume that they are tracking data, until confirmed otherwise.
I'm going to go with your method, and assume that you're a total moron until you prove otherwise.
Now, with that out of the way, explain this to me:
Where does iTunes get your information from in order to track you? You don't have to register. You can download it with an obviously bogus e-mail address in the download form (a valid address still wouldn't associate your copy with you anyway), and you don't need an iTMS account to use iTunes, the iTMS (unless you want to purchase something), or this feature. So if it's tracking you, how the fuck does it know who you are?
Is your bet still so safe? Now take into account that if you make the accusations without proof, and it turns out you're wrong, you're now guilty of libel, which you could be sued over. Genius.
Nope not kidding, and I don't think what I'm suggesting is unusual. Sony is odd about what it supports, but it's always some combination of standard and proprietary. Look at the PS2. There's standard USB ports on there.
What you're going to see is that the ports will be on there for the image and video functions of the PS3, but you'll only be able to save games to the MemoryStick Duo slot (which is the same slot that the PSP uses for saves). There will then be software that allows transfers between the ports just like on the PS2. That would be par for the Sony course; an odd combination of standard and proprietary. Certainly not an "about face".
You sound like somebody having paranoid delusions. How else could a feature that shows you other albums by the artist you're currently listening to work other than by transmitting the artist name? When iTunes looks up the CD info when you rip/play a CD, is that tracking you too? How hard is opting-out when all you have to do is not use the feature? Why does the transfer of an artist name automatically mean that they're associating that with your identification information in some database somewhere?
And this all still assumes that they're tracking you, and not just fetching information based on a keyword sent to their server.
So, since flavor-of-the-moment did it, it's OK?
Do you hate Apple for some reason? That's the only reason you should have totally ignored what I said, assumed I said the opposite, and used it as a rationalization for an attack on Apple. I never said it's OK. I said it hasn't been proven yet, and you shouldn't "blast" anybody until you're sure they're guilty. Data transfer doesn't imply tracking (see above), and they, just like anybody else, should be innocent until proven guilty.
See, that would be funny if it was some outrageous claim, like home many of trillions of tri-textured polygons per nanosecond it would be able to push... For something as boring and boolean as a memory card slot, something that either exists or doesn't, it just makes you look like an Xbox fanboy.
Many "cheat code" discs for the PS2 will let you transfer data between your memory cards and a USB drive. Unfortunatly standalone backups aren't possible due to the "Magic Gate" DRM in the memory cards.
The PS3 is supposedly going to support a variety of standard flash storage devices including SD and MemoryStick.
along with cookie information that may identify you
Ooohhh... It may identify you? How about some proof before you pass judgement? To me it sounds very similar to how CDDB might "track" you.
The argument, even from apple, has never been that 100 DPI is optimal, or that they're going for ease on the eyes. The argument was that the DPI should be uniform across their entire product line so your work looks the same on your desktop or your laptop or your iMac at home...
I had the same thought, as it's the only thing I've used a modem for in years, but even faxes are going the way of online these days. There's no good reason to fax with a modem anymore unless you like limiting your access. Find yourself a good fax server. It will cost you less than long distance anyway.
Those of you who are thinking, "Well, duh, just keep your laptop away from your kids" [...]
What about those of us who are thinking "Well, duh, just keep your kids away from your laptop?"
You have to replace all your discs before even the first one fails. The maximum possible life doesn't matter. If your CD can last between 5 and 100 years, you'll be pretty pissed if you assume 10 and find out they all went bad after 6.
Incorrect. Unless the fuel is mined and transported, the plant built, and the workers fed and watered without the use of any hyrocarbons then they are still being used.
You're being pedantic to a fault.
Widespread adoption of nuclear power would create a plentiful source of hydrogen for use in fuel cells. That would, over time, replace the diesel fuel used in mining equipment and trucking. You can't make an omlet without breaking a few eggs.
How often do you leave it in your car? High heat and freezing kill LiION batteries. It's probably the most common cause of iPod battery failure next to age.
Your dad bought you your first computer in 1996... Does that make you 18? 19? That's right about the time that many genetically inherited vision problems start to kick in. You may even have been slightly myopic for years but had an astigmatism that compensated, and now your myopia is getting severe enough to be noticed.
Rather than blowing a ton of money on some ergonomic crap, just go see an eye doctor. They'll be able to tell you without any doubt what has caused your vision problems and how to deal with them (probably corrective lenses).
Welcome to the beginings of old age.
but lets not even take that into account and assume some new engineering will improve safety to satisfactory levels
You don't have to take it into account because new engineering already has improved it to satisfactory levels. This is more than true when you compare even the worst case scenario with the number of people killed by coal every year.
Of course I realize all that. But instead of advocating resource control for fossil fuels, I advocate use of an alternative that is much cleaner and more plentiful.
It's hard for me to figure out what your goal is from your statements. It could be that you just want western lifestyles changed, but if what you're going for is fair distribution of wealth, sustanable consumption of resources, and a clean environment, think of this... That SUV the parent poster was talking about... If you got rid of all of them, and the people who drove them started riding a bicycle instead, how much energy would be saved and how much would our emissions be reduced by? 1%? 2%? Now... If we converted all our coal power plants to nuclear fission, guess how much we'd reduce fossil fuel consumption and emissions.... Well over 50%. Additionally, we'd reduce energy costs; potentially to the point that would spur economic development in poorer regions. Try and acomplish that with taxes or regulations. We could instantly and permenantly reduce our emissions by 50%, but we don't because uneducated or mis-educated people are afraid of nuclear power.
It's amazing to me that Europe is figuring this out before the US since you all lived through Chernobyl and we didn't.
So no, consuming more energy does not increase GDP
That's not what I said though...
Think about what you said: energy consumption is simply a side effect of lots of production.
Isn't my argument obvious in that context?
Carbon tax is a negative feedback control; you wanna drive to the movies on a SUV you'd better pay for the "privilege", I'll have my Smart thanks!
Oh, one more thing. There are serious ethical issues with using taxation to control behavior. If you're ever considering it, it's just plain wrong. There's always a reason, and for this particular issue the reason is obvious.
Energy consumption is quality of life. Think about it. So your little tax here means the rich can still afford their big car and warm house, but the poor get screwed. Your tax may be "progressive" and cost more for the rich than the poor in terms of actual dollars, but in terms of quality of life it's the poorest people who get screwed the most.
Way to kick 'em while they're down.
Backwards, why? Carbon tax is exactly an attempt to encourage positive behaviour in consumers. It doesn't punish anyone, it simply monetizes in an straightforward way the link between energy consumption and its effects.
That's true only if you completely ignore the positive economic effects of energy consumption. It's no coincidence that the the nations which consume the most energy produce the largest percentage of the worlds GDP with a near linear correlation. If you ignore that effect, then sure, I can see why you'd think a carbon tax is a good idea.
Of course, if we use nuclear fission, there's no carbon involved, so as long as you're willing to build a bunch of nukes (please, put one in my back yard), then go ahead and tax carbon emissions... Just make sure you're clear it's not energy consumption that is the negative behavior, it's the carbon emissions.