You're probably correct. I know this plays well for foreign sales.
But maybe some geek at the top of a tech superpower, who already has all the money he could ever spend, might just decide to stand for something he believes in.
Why should we care how people with such fucked up concepts call traitors since it comes down to people in their Party can do no wrong while people outside are seen as evil?
Well, we care because this stupidity is among us, and because what stupid people do en masse can sometimes affect the rest of us.
The point is simply that Apple has found itself on the same side of the privacy argument as many of us, but there are factions of citizens who couldn't care less or begin to understand what is actually at stake here.
This is a win-win situation for competitor corporations who might find themselves ideologically aligned with Apple's stance, yet lack the political will to stand against the governors ubiquitous snooping.
If Apple wins, everyone of them win. If Apple loses, and they could, they lose alone.
Listen to the proffered positions of the pretenders to the Presidential nomination. To many non-tech people, Apple's stance is bordering on treason.
Your use of the imperative ("I mean, we really, really had to kill them") is pretty arbitrary and appeals to authority. Who died and made you god?
I'd hate to think of you as some armchair Fed... what are your credentials again?
I have no dog in this fight. I do have some credentials, but they're not pertinent.
These two were not going to surrender. They killed a bunch of people at an office party where he worked.
This was a Wild, Wild West, going out in a Blaze of Glory,no tray slot in the door, type of deal.
You don't think that the second it's been done, that the government won't attempt to reverse engineer the "firmware update" thus enabling them to do it to anyone? Regardless of whether or not it is POSSIBLE to reverse engineer it, the government will try to.
You would fairly be within the realm of probable cause if you suspected your government's information gathering acronyms were breakers of rules.
Don't you think Apple is trying to take the high road and regain some integrity on the international market? Many US corporations, especially tech firms, have suffered from their government's exploits.
We certainly kill more people in the United States by law enforcement misadventure than anyone else, anywhere.
So when I say we had to kill these two gunmen (Is that accurate when one is a woman?), I mean, we really, really had to kill them.
I understand your reaction, and most of the time there are questionable fatalities, but these two had predetermined they were going out like Bonnie and Clyde.
The author's (Moretti) own most dramatic example of a few people in a key moment completely transforming a metropolis was when two local boys Paul and Bill) moved their startup from Albuquerque to Seattle in 1979. Today, the tech hub that is Seattle is well known, and Albuquerque is topping lists like this.
It's pretty straight forward. Places with established infrastructure in related industries tend to attract start ups and industry leaders alike.
Major industries rely on scores of subcontractors and ancillary manufacturers to do their thing. It's difficult to top the advantage of having everything you need nearby.
You're correct, of course...but we're judging life in space based on a infinitely small sample.
There will be bone loss, discomfort, and unpleasant adaptation. There will be deaths. People will sacrifice so we learn, but some will do better than others and pass those genes onto children who can do even better than that.
If we do not begin to spread human life off planet, this eggs in one basket policy is going to backfire.
You are truly alone in the instant an emergency occurs, whether in a submarine leagues beneath the sea's surface, or millions of miles away on extraterrestrial soil.
The difference is clearly the position you're in after you are crafty & resourceful enough to survive the life-threatening event.
You are either waiting for the Coast Guard or wondering if it's really possible to grow vegetables on another planet.
It's a nifty luxury to live in nation in an era where the poorest of us get clean water, food, shelter, fat, and hell, even a little spending money.
It's unfortunate when we live in a nation in an era when there is a disincentive to get off of the government dole.
With food stamps, housing assistance, help with utilities, and a little cash every month, shit, it is not terribly difficult to see that some on the tit would be taking a pay cut to go to work.
Ideologues can't see subtlety. I personally would hate if the congress and courts were only filled with people I agreed with. I'd prefer an honest debate over issues, let the courts struggle to reach fair decisions instead of deciding based upon politics.
Last election cycle, Mitch Romney was famously quoted off the record that 47% of the people would vote for the President (Obama), no matter what. As to the accuracy of his guestimate, I cannot say, but I think it is believable that a portion of the vote for both sides is already set in stone... no matter the quality, character, or makeup of the respective nominee.
Candidates are selected by an astonishingly few primary voters, and then, most party line voters rubber stamp their party's nominee. In some elections, the President is elected by even fewer independent voters; the ones who do not vote straight ideologue.
To get the most out of your vote, and theoretically the best of what's running, vote in the primaries and vote with your head in the general election.
We essentially construct theories to explain the observable symptoms of the universe in action, as yet not worthy to understand the machinations of its underlying condition.
Slashdot Mirror
How ironic that this article is in the This Day on /. box.
It would be wise to remember that Americans began to question authority and their own government in large numbers in the 60's.
Perhaps that reckoning is just as influential as any lessons ingrained during the Cold War.
But maybe some geek at the top of a tech superpower, who already has all the money he could ever spend, might just decide to stand for something he believes in.
I know you're right. Often, smart people are the worst offenders, as if some skill or acumen in an unrelated field leaks over into all things.
Why should we care how people with such fucked up concepts call traitors since it comes down to people in their Party can do no wrong while people outside are seen as evil?
Well, we care because this stupidity is among us, and because what stupid people do en masse can sometimes affect the rest of us.
The point is simply that Apple has found itself on the same side of the privacy argument as many of us, but there are factions of citizens who couldn't care less or begin to understand what is actually at stake here.
If Apple wins, everyone of them win. If Apple loses, and they could, they lose alone.
Listen to the proffered positions of the pretenders to the Presidential nomination. To many non-tech people, Apple's stance is bordering on treason.
Combine equal parts radioactive, missing, and Iraq.
That's all you do. It stirs itself.
A spokesman for Iraq's environment ministry said he could not discuss the issue, citing national security concerns.
Hearing the gov't rep from Iran say it kind of brings home the phrase's absurdity.
Check out Google Sketchup.
Your use of the imperative ("I mean, we really, really had to kill them") is pretty arbitrary and appeals to authority. Who died and made you god? I'd hate to think of you as some armchair Fed... what are your credentials again?
I have no dog in this fight. I do have some credentials, but they're not pertinent.
These two were not going to surrender. They killed a bunch of people at an office party where he worked.
This was a Wild, Wild West, going out in a Blaze of Glory, no tray slot in the door, type of deal.
You don't think that the second it's been done, that the government won't attempt to reverse engineer the "firmware update" thus enabling them to do it to anyone? Regardless of whether or not it is POSSIBLE to reverse engineer it, the government will try to.
You would fairly be within the realm of probable cause if you suspected your government's information gathering acronyms were breakers of rules.
Don't you think Apple is trying to take the high road and regain some integrity on the international market? Many US corporations, especially tech firms, have suffered from their government's exploits.
So when I say we had to kill these two gunmen (Is that accurate when one is a woman?), I mean, we really, really had to kill them.
I understand your reaction, and most of the time there are questionable fatalities, but these two had predetermined they were going out like Bonnie and Clyde.
Priceless.
What? I've clicked on a story that offends my delicate sensibilities?
Heads will friggin' roll for this.
fock it. Clap, clap, clap
Heh heh. I suppose culling the best lawyers would be an exercise not unlike voting in most elections nowadays.
It's pretty straight forward. Places with established infrastructure in related industries tend to attract start ups and industry leaders alike.
Major industries rely on scores of subcontractors and ancillary manufacturers to do their thing. It's difficult to top the advantage of having everything you need nearby.
There will be bone loss, discomfort, and unpleasant adaptation. There will be deaths. People will sacrifice so we learn, but some will do better than others and pass those genes onto children who can do even better than that.
If we do not begin to spread human life off planet, this eggs in one basket policy is going to backfire.
The difference is clearly the position you're in after you are crafty & resourceful enough to survive the life-threatening event.
You are either waiting for the Coast Guard or wondering if it's really possible to grow vegetables on another planet.
It's unfortunate when we live in a nation in an era when there is a disincentive to get off of the government dole.
With food stamps, housing assistance, help with utilities, and a little cash every month, shit, it is not terribly difficult to see that some on the tit would be taking a pay cut to go to work.
Though I'm a decline to state voter.
Interesting voter designation in California. It seems reasonable the two parties benefiting from the duopoly would defend themselves, eh?
Plus, what's up with last night's leftovers leading the front page?
Were we bought out again, this time by the owner of Chick-fil-A?
Ideologues can't see subtlety. I personally would hate if the congress and courts were only filled with people I agreed with. I'd prefer an honest debate over issues, let the courts struggle to reach fair decisions instead of deciding based upon politics.
Last election cycle, Mitch Romney was famously quoted off the record that 47% of the people would vote for the President (Obama), no matter what. As to the accuracy of his guestimate, I cannot say, but I think it is believable that a portion of the vote for both sides is already set in stone... no matter the quality, character, or makeup of the respective nominee.
Candidates are selected by an astonishingly few primary voters, and then, most party line voters rubber stamp their party's nominee. In some elections, the President is elected by even fewer independent voters; the ones who do not vote straight ideologue.
To get the most out of your vote, and theoretically the best of what's running, vote in the primaries and vote with your head in the general election.
That said, it's important that all sides are represented in a democracy, even if that means your side cannot always be solely in power.
We essentially construct theories to explain the observable symptoms of the universe in action, as yet not worthy to understand the machinations of its underlying condition.