Correlation does not equal causation, but there's a good theory for why it would work, and the evidence seems to support that theory. I'm also not aware of any well supported alternative explanation. It's by no means conclusive, but we could dip our feet in the water by legalizing self-shot pornography by minors. In such cases, there generally isn't anyone who can really be held liable for the production.
Are you suggesting that we should encourage video taping of the molestation of children in order to reduce child molestation?? That is just stupid.
Where did you get that idea from? The production of CP can be illegal while allowing possession and distribution to be legal.
The laws that make child pornography illegal is a separate but related issue to child molestation. It is related because in order to create child pornography a child must be molested. It is separate in that it can stand on its own. The idea that for child pornography to be illegal it must aid in the apprehension of child molesters is absurd.
To be an exception to free speech, there is a burden to prove that there is a dire need for it to be illegal. That child pornography is tied to molestation is essential to that proof. That's why in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, they ruled against a provision that would prohibit simulated child pornography.
Without Apple, Foxconn would be at 10% of their actual size and there would be no iPhone.
How do you figure that? Foxconn makes up an enormous share of all computer components. Without Apple, Foxconn would probably make about the same amount because whoever filled those niches would use them to a similar extent.
In what universe does that make Jobs somehow inexperienced and/or ignorant? His priorities were different than your priorities. That is all.
It shows he doesn't have a fundamental understanding of his product. That is the very opposite of Walter White.
And once again, so what if he was antagonistic towards science? That also is not an indication of experience and knowledge, especially when dealing with the market approach which is a very efficient rival to the scientific method for finding knowledge in the areas where markets apply
Science is the root of understanding, and if you don't understand something, you don't have expertise at it. Jobs' approach would be more akin to Jesse's methods early on, which included putting chili powder in the mix as a signature. Jesse said it was an art, while Walt said it was a science. What Jobs understood was how to manipulate others around him. He wasn't an engineer or a scientist. He was more of a manager or salesman, hell, even a performer.
The last part of that statement is not based on actual evidence. He did delay treatment for his cancer for a significant amount of time and that may have resulted in his cancer becoming untreatable. Or it might have already been untreatable at the time of detection. That's as far as the actual evidence goes.
I'm fairly sure that the type and stage of cancer he had had a very low mortality rate. Basically, with the resources available to him, there was no way it would have killed him had he gone with modern medicine from the start.
He was known to fight with his engineers against functionality. He would get mad because something didn't look nice, and insist on having his way, even if it broke the product. If Jobs were cooking meth, he'd be the kind to make a toxic product in order for the crystals to have a better appearance. Jobs was a man often ignorant and sometimes even antagonistic towards science, which is precisely why he is no longer with us.
Walter White had challenged the general attitude of "they are stupid junkies, they'll smoke whatever we give them" by insisting that a higher-purity product will sell better.
I'm not sure if the attitude you are espousing is really all that common. Not really caring about quality is present among junkies, but junkies aren't going to be the most profitable customers, sometimes relying upon sexual favors in lieu of cash. Also, due to the contraband status of drugs, there is a significant advantage to having a concentrated product. Having less on you is preferable for not getting caught, so more profit per gram is highly advantageous. What Walter brings to the table is knowledge and expertise, which isn't really an area where Steve Jobs fits the parallel.
There were times when Microsoft could have decimated Apple by pulling its Office software from the Mac platform or choosing not to invest $150 million in the company, as it did back in the '90s. Instead, Microsoft let Apple continue and, in refusing to see Apple as a serious threat, lost the mobile phone, portable music, online video and tablet markets to Apple. It's increasingly ceding ground in computer software as well.
It wasn't about underestimating Apple, but rather, needing a visible competitor to not be broken up via an antitrust suit. Also, in what universe does apple have the 'online video' market?
here's little way to pretend that won't happen, because it's already starting to happen now. Barring a pretty damn sudden shift in rates of change, tablets will outsell traditional PCs within the next two years, maybe even sooner. It IS going to happen, and it is going to become the dominant consumer platform, but you'll still be able to buy PC-like systems, just not as cheap.
I'm not so sure about that. Smartphones are going to be an important part of computing, but I'm not sure that tablets are really an area with extended growth. Despite various organizations trying to shove them down our throats, they haven't surpassed 'traditional PCs.'
I'm sure there will at least be a market that opens up for drivers who want to personally drive a car. A good stretch of private road and a few boilerplate waivers and we'll all be driving in that same setting car commercials take place in.
I would suspect the first waves of cars would be big companies like Google running tests. In that case, they could meet the legal requirements for insurance themselves. After that, we'll probably have enough data to calculate the risks with far greater accuracy than human drivers.
Except that trade secrets aren't legal monopolies, and trade secrets, trademarks, and trade dress are not covered under Article 1, Section 8, clause 8. Trademarks are actually a useful system, so long as they are limited to identification of the source of a product or endorsement by a particular agency.
A long time ago in a warehouse far far away (in Van Nuys), Trey and Amy made a little spoof about one of the other pilots in that famous attack on the Death Star. To our surprise it became a huge hit, garnering millions of views on Atom.com and was selected by George Lucas himself for the Grand Prize in the official Lucasfilm Star Wars Fanfilm contest.
Also
Stacy even holds the distinction of being the first fan-created Star Wars character to become an official Star Wars character - she makes a cameo appearance in Timothy Zahn's novel Allegiance.
Most patents on their own look obvious, especially in hindsight.
Something being obvious in hindsight doesn't mean it wasn't also obvious beforehand.
The reality is that smartphones in 2006 sucked. Once the iphone came out, we had a wealth of amazing smartphones.
And if you aren't a complete and total moron, you'd realize that by far the most important innovation that the iPhone brought to the table was targeting general consumers instead of just nerds and businessmen.
He did say that, so it isn't exactly misattributed, although he mistakenly claimed it came from Pablo Picasso. However, Picasso didn't say that, at least not in those words. Those particular words did come from Jobs, and T.S. Eliot is the first conclusively known source I'm aware of for this sentiment. However, it almost certainly didn't originate with him, either.
If you hold someone responsible for only infringing on part of a patent's steps, then we've got a serious problem. For example, Intel can be sued for every single software patent that they don't own. Patents are supposed to be very precise for a damn good reason.
They are distinct areas of law with distinct histories and substantial differences in operation and the underlying philosophies that support them are very different. They are only a few reasons to support the usage of that term: you are pushing propaganda and possibly drawing a benefit from confusion and conflation of different areas of law, you are an idiot, you are going along with the popular trend established by the first two groups.
They are distinct and have distinct histories, but I wouldn't say they are unrelated. They are both legal monopolies, and the Constitutional purpose of both systems are to promote progress.
Nothing prevents a fully fledged package manager from doing the same. Also, I don't worry about dependencies, that's what the package manager is there for.
I agree completely. If you want to undermine a theocracy, trade sanctions that hurt the people and not the leaders aren't the way to do so. The best way is to give their people tools to share information. Spend 1% of the current US 'defense' budget on FTTH for Iran, and not only will those seeking to overthrow the government have better tools at their disposal, but it's harder to convince someone to kill themselves for a spiritual cause when tons of HD porn is just seconds away.
App stores just deliver self-contained app folders [wikipedia.org]. That's about as far from the Linux definition of a package manager you can get.
Actually, a number of third party apps install mostly self contained folders with all the of dependencies that won't be on virtually every single system in/opt. That works the same way you describe. iOS jailbreaks typically use Cydia, which is a frontend for APT.
I dispute this and anyone who has ever installed an app knows how it really goes: you want to upgrade an app and instead of just downloading a small file, you get to upgrade half the gnome packages and assorted libraries along with them. Sure the application itself may be nominally smaller but you have to download a shitton of crap before you can install it.
I'm not saying that doesn't occasionally happen, but in my experience, you get a much smaller download more than 90% of the time, and when you do have to do something like install half of gnome (which, given that there are only about 3 or 4 full DEs, could happen at most about 8 times), that's about on par with HP printer drivers or iTunes. Oddly enough, the absolute worst problem I've had with superfluous dependencies was LaTeX wanting to install massive documentation packages, although everyone seems to bring up GNOME (despite KDE apps generally being worse in that regard)
Let me put it this way. Windows has "DLL hell", Linux has "dependency hell" and the mac and iOS have...
'Dependency hell' generally refers to when resolving dependencies becomes problematic, either via circular dependencies of version conflicts, and that's something that was pretty only a problem with RPM package distros, and hasn't been an issue for years. The only time I can recall experiencing something like that was when I foolishly mixed debian stable, debian testing, debian unstable, and ubuntu repos, The word you are looking for is 'bloat.' Like I said, I can probably install 2 or 3 complete DEs in less space than a bare Windows install.
I'd say the biggest detriment that Apple had to desktop usage of GNU/Linux was taking the spotlight as a not-Windows option. OS X had a lot of advertisement, so when people wanted to 'stick it to the man' and choose a non-MS OS, the first thing they found was a Mac. In the early days, Macs ran on PPC, so dual booting was not an option. They have also been priced out a truly mainstream market. Apple provided the perfect anemic competition to make the majority of people compliant with a MS-dominated desktop, and in the mind of the general consumer, made a Wintel option seem 'not so bad.' Absent Apple's presence, it's quite likely that the alternative of choice would have been GNU/Linux.
You are an idiot. Are you saying it belongs on the server, and practically speaking, the smartphone (app stores are essentially package managers, just generally less powerful), but not on the desktop? Also, while sometimes an app may have a large amount of dependencies, on average, the install is less than the minimal install of other operating systems, and on average, it's a significantly smaller download when you want a single program. You could probably install 2 or 3 DEs with a smaller install size than Windows.
I don't have a blanket problem with imitating physical equipment, but this is the worst possible way of dong so. It imitates the lack of standardization amongst audio equipment manufacturers (so, it's presented in a LESS logical way, meaning that you have to learn the positioning of various controls for each module), Also, the lack of a numerical indication of the knob position, ideally below the know, means that you can't quickly type in the controls as a power user, and you have to spend more time looking at the analog knob instead of just reading the precise setting.
Slashdot Mirror
Where did you get that idea from? The production of CP can be illegal while allowing possession and distribution to be legal.
To be an exception to free speech, there is a burden to prove that there is a dire need for it to be illegal. That child pornography is tied to molestation is essential to that proof. That's why in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, they ruled against a provision that would prohibit simulated child pornography.
So, because the countries are nice in many respects, all of their policies are better than those of other countries?
How do you figure that? Foxconn makes up an enormous share of all computer components. Without Apple, Foxconn would probably make about the same amount because whoever filled those niches would use them to a similar extent.
It shows he doesn't have a fundamental understanding of his product. That is the very opposite of Walter White.
Science is the root of understanding, and if you don't understand something, you don't have expertise at it. Jobs' approach would be more akin to Jesse's methods early on, which included putting chili powder in the mix as a signature. Jesse said it was an art, while Walt said it was a science. What Jobs understood was how to manipulate others around him. He wasn't an engineer or a scientist. He was more of a manager or salesman, hell, even a performer.
I'm fairly sure that the type and stage of cancer he had had a very low mortality rate. Basically, with the resources available to him, there was no way it would have killed him had he gone with modern medicine from the start.
He was known to fight with his engineers against functionality. He would get mad because something didn't look nice, and insist on having his way, even if it broke the product. If Jobs were cooking meth, he'd be the kind to make a toxic product in order for the crystals to have a better appearance. Jobs was a man often ignorant and sometimes even antagonistic towards science, which is precisely why he is no longer with us.
I'm not sure if the attitude you are espousing is really all that common. Not really caring about quality is present among junkies, but junkies aren't going to be the most profitable customers, sometimes relying upon sexual favors in lieu of cash. Also, due to the contraband status of drugs, there is a significant advantage to having a concentrated product. Having less on you is preferable for not getting caught, so more profit per gram is highly advantageous. What Walter brings to the table is knowledge and expertise, which isn't really an area where Steve Jobs fits the parallel.
It wasn't about underestimating Apple, but rather, needing a visible competitor to not be broken up via an antitrust suit. Also, in what universe does apple have the 'online video' market?
I'm not so sure about that. Smartphones are going to be an important part of computing, but I'm not sure that tablets are really an area with extended growth. Despite various organizations trying to shove them down our throats, they haven't surpassed 'traditional PCs.'
Developing for smartphones isn't a particularly good way to make money regardless of platform.
I'm sure there will at least be a market that opens up for drivers who want to personally drive a car. A good stretch of private road and a few boilerplate waivers and we'll all be driving in that same setting car commercials take place in.
I would suspect the first waves of cars would be big companies like Google running tests. In that case, they could meet the legal requirements for insurance themselves. After that, we'll probably have enough data to calculate the risks with far greater accuracy than human drivers.
Except that trade secrets aren't legal monopolies, and trade secrets, trademarks, and trade dress are not covered under Article 1, Section 8, clause 8. Trademarks are actually a useful system, so long as they are limited to identification of the source of a product or endorsement by a particular agency.
Also
It seems this project is pretty safe legally.
Something being obvious in hindsight doesn't mean it wasn't also obvious beforehand.
And if you aren't a complete and total moron, you'd realize that by far the most important innovation that the iPhone brought to the table was targeting general consumers instead of just nerds and businessmen.
He did say that, so it isn't exactly misattributed, although he mistakenly claimed it came from Pablo Picasso. However, Picasso didn't say that, at least not in those words. Those particular words did come from Jobs, and T.S. Eliot is the first conclusively known source I'm aware of for this sentiment. However, it almost certainly didn't originate with him, either.
If you hold someone responsible for only infringing on part of a patent's steps, then we've got a serious problem. For example, Intel can be sued for every single software patent that they don't own. Patents are supposed to be very precise for a damn good reason.
They are distinct areas of law with distinct histories and substantial differences in operation and the underlying philosophies that support them are very different. They are only a few reasons to support the usage of that term: you are pushing propaganda and possibly drawing a benefit from confusion and conflation of different areas of law, you are an idiot, you are going along with the popular trend established by the first two groups.
They are distinct and have distinct histories, but I wouldn't say they are unrelated. They are both legal monopolies, and the Constitutional purpose of both systems are to promote progress.
That's a good one.
Nothing prevents a fully fledged package manager from doing the same. Also, I don't worry about dependencies, that's what the package manager is there for.
I agree completely. If you want to undermine a theocracy, trade sanctions that hurt the people and not the leaders aren't the way to do so. The best way is to give their people tools to share information. Spend 1% of the current US 'defense' budget on FTTH for Iran, and not only will those seeking to overthrow the government have better tools at their disposal, but it's harder to convince someone to kill themselves for a spiritual cause when tons of HD porn is just seconds away.
Actually, a number of third party apps install mostly self contained folders with all the of dependencies that won't be on virtually every single system in /opt. That works the same way you describe. iOS jailbreaks typically use Cydia, which is a frontend for APT.
I'm not saying that doesn't occasionally happen, but in my experience, you get a much smaller download more than 90% of the time, and when you do have to do something like install half of gnome (which, given that there are only about 3 or 4 full DEs, could happen at most about 8 times), that's about on par with HP printer drivers or iTunes. Oddly enough, the absolute worst problem I've had with superfluous dependencies was LaTeX wanting to install massive documentation packages, although everyone seems to bring up GNOME (despite KDE apps generally being worse in that regard)
'Dependency hell' generally refers to when resolving dependencies becomes problematic, either via circular dependencies of version conflicts, and that's something that was pretty only a problem with RPM package distros, and hasn't been an issue for years. The only time I can recall experiencing something like that was when I foolishly mixed debian stable, debian testing, debian unstable, and ubuntu repos, The word you are looking for is 'bloat.' Like I said, I can probably install 2 or 3 complete DEs in less space than a bare Windows install.
I'd say the biggest detriment that Apple had to desktop usage of GNU/Linux was taking the spotlight as a not-Windows option. OS X had a lot of advertisement, so when people wanted to 'stick it to the man' and choose a non-MS OS, the first thing they found was a Mac. In the early days, Macs ran on PPC, so dual booting was not an option. They have also been priced out a truly mainstream market. Apple provided the perfect anemic competition to make the majority of people compliant with a MS-dominated desktop, and in the mind of the general consumer, made a Wintel option seem 'not so bad.' Absent Apple's presence, it's quite likely that the alternative of choice would have been GNU/Linux.
You are an idiot. Are you saying it belongs on the server, and practically speaking, the smartphone (app stores are essentially package managers, just generally less powerful), but not on the desktop? Also, while sometimes an app may have a large amount of dependencies, on average, the install is less than the minimal install of other operating systems, and on average, it's a significantly smaller download when you want a single program. You could probably install 2 or 3 DEs with a smaller install size than Windows.
I don't have a blanket problem with imitating physical equipment, but this is the worst possible way of dong so. It imitates the lack of standardization amongst audio equipment manufacturers (so, it's presented in a LESS logical way, meaning that you have to learn the positioning of various controls for each module), Also, the lack of a numerical indication of the knob position, ideally below the know, means that you can't quickly type in the controls as a power user, and you have to spend more time looking at the analog knob instead of just reading the precise setting.