As Apple has never bothered the 3rd party implementations of HFS+ (Free or not) it is unlikely that they'll change for APFS. Please post proof if you have it but keep badmouthing unsupported conjecture to yourself.
Oh _I_ am being selective in my reading, am I? The big WOOOOSH that flew above your head is that his point wasn't that women are slightly more neurotic than men (even though there are studies that support that view, just as there are studies that show them to be more empathic than men) it is that people are _different_, and that not _EVERYTHING_ is due to discrimination. Gender binding every single occupation to force parity _because_discrimination_ is nonsense.
Should women and men have the same chance and means to to enter the profession? _Absolutely_!
Should we use the tools of discrimination to right perceived injustices? No. Quota hiring is illegal in California.
Should you need to consult with a rambling fool, use the nearest mirror.
That Damore was _fired_, not for making overtly controversial remarks but for saying "Hey, maybe we should implement policies that have some scientific validity behind them" shows that discourse on the subject has reached Johnathan Swift big endian/small endian levels of ridiculousness.
How would you know? Damore made both controversial remarks and a call for better kinds of discourse. Both arguments happen to have been made in a very sloppy way. It is not obvious (to me) what Google's precise reasoning was here. They do not have to tell us, unless forced to under the bright lights of a courtroom.
I was being charitable. Google firing him for uttering (legally protected political positions) is _NOT_ better.
Besides which, Damore's "controversial" remarks were systematically bookmarked with "I don't claim to be an expert so this is just my opinion but it seems to me that" and "here are the references to what made me believe that". That's far far away from the "rant" that the misinformed who never even read what he wrote are pretending it is.
Those calling it a rant are IMO missing his point, made over and over in the memo which is that by suppressing all opinions from those not in complete agreement on the means for sexual equality and racial diversity, Google is making its claimed objectives of diversity & sexual equality more difficult to achieve.
This you _HAVE_ to agree with me 100% or you're my enemy is in large part why consensus is dying and we get the extremes like Trump/Bernie. That Damore was _fired_, not for making overtly controversial remarks but for saying "Hey, maybe we should implement policies that have some scientific validity behind them" shows that discourse on the subject has reached Johnathan Swift big endian/small endian levels of ridiculousness.
So, I'm just supposed to accept that your opinion that Damore's references did not support his conclusions -- because you say so?
Note that I criticised Tranzistors for commenting without even _reading_ the memo. I haven't been steeped in the controversy for days & just read the memo today.
It'll take some time for me to get through all the references. References to sites that have analysed them (both for and against to avoid bias) would be helpful.
can you tolerate someone against diversity and hostile towards women
You, like so many others appear to have based your options on what others have said about what Damore wrote and not by what he actually wrote.
Damore's memo was not anti diversity. Nor was he hostile in it against women.
He _did_ call into question the means being used within Google to promote diversify as being potentially illegal (affirmative action _is_ illegal in the state of California), and that all sexual diversity in the workplace is not automatically because of repression and that the means being used to combat sexism were counter-productive and/or scientifically inconclusive.
Should you disagree, give quotations of the sections of his memo that say explicitly that he is against diversity and hostile to women.
The revisionists claiming that those who designed the Internet were at fault for not predicting future deficiencies should return to using the OSI networks like X25 that were indeed conceived with every imaginable contributor's input -- but that were so unwieldily that they lost out to IP even with the weight of national every national telecom operator behind them. The AT&Ts the France Telecoms, the BTs, etc, all told us that IP was badly adapted to real world and that it would be quickly replaced with "proper" and "secure" OSI networks.
Not encumbering IP with "solutions" to every future possible problem is in large part why we are using IP today, & not X25.
Android will not be a refuge from Putin's laws as I pointed out - and you ignored.
It should be the user's choice whether to take that risk, and Apple is denying them that right.
Ah, you're one of those "unlimited inalienable rights" people who think that _everything_ is a "right" that must be a personal choice and that laws "denying them" that choice are unnatural. - People should have the "right" to drive on whichever side of the street they choose - People should have the "right" to buy/sell/consume heroin/fentanyl and most importantly: - People should have the "right" to put illegal software on their phone
You need to go live in isolation somewhere like a hermit on an island or a mountaintop because the social & legal strictures of living among others are "denying your rights".
Apple didn't attempt to "halt progress", they sued Samsung because Samsung took the easy way out and cloned the iPhone instead of coming up with their own minimally self inspired designs. Samsung even baldly admitted that they cloned the iPhone as closely as possible during discovery!
Now that Samsung & others have moved on to designs that aren't mere clones of iPhones (and 'inspiration" is a 2-way street), wow, hey, no more suits - except for the occasional Chinese clone that once again copies blindly.
I had MP3 players but never owned an iPod - Used (and still use) MediaMonkey to manage my music on my phones (pre & post iPhone) because iTunes is still a turd of a GUI to update IDV3 fields, though I now use iTunes to sync to my iPhone to avoid sync problems.
I knew somebody was going use their own prejudices to turn Russia's making VPN's illegal into it being apple's fault. Thanks for being _that_ person...
Russia didn't just pass a law making the sale of VPN software on an App Store illegal, they passed a law making their use on phones in Russia illegal.
Given how jackbooted Russia's enforcement is turning, spot checks on people's phones to check for the presence of VPN software is beyond likely. So, mr Android zealot, how will the absence of a walled garden make it any better when android phone owners get told to hand over their devices and unlock codes so that an intensive scan can be performed to make sure that no illegal software is present? Are you naive enough to think that the attempts that some will make to hide their use of VPN software will _NOT_ be noted and used to condemn the people attempting to do so?
Ah, but you quite visibly think that you're smarter than everyone else, it's Apple's walled garden that's the problem, not Putin's repressive regime...
How long they can go from success to success is indeed Apple's biggest challenge and nobody knows how long it can continue. Yet their % of repeat customers is still by far the highest in the industry (absent some irrelevant niche players) & it isn't because they're a "visionary product" but because people prefer how they work/how they're supported.
I've got both an iPhone & an Android phone & justify the iPhone through it's better integrated design & security features & longer lasting lifetime due to better support. Others, among them previous iPhone owners do not share my judgement. Time will tell.
Apple sees your teeny tiny titters and laughs and laughs and laughs on their way to selling to people who do indeed care about design in 10s of millions of devices. But of course, for you that's just a sign of how deluded _they_ must be given that _they_ do not agree with _you_.
Those prefacing the iPhone 8's arrival with "X already done here, Y already done there" are once again missing the point.
People don't buy Apple products because they're the first to market with an insignificant number of less than excellently integrated features.
People buy Apple products because when it's implemented in an iPhone/Mac/other it's done _well_ and can be bought in the tens of millions.
The original iPod was mocked upon it's release for not having the "essential features" some geeks considered essential yet sold in the hundreds of millions.
Hey AC, what have _YOU_ done to defend the downtrodden? You can't even screw up the courage to login to post so clearly you _are_ a coward. _That_ is the difference between people like you and that of your grandparents: All mouth, no action.
You"re seriously proposing that the U.S. should have laws that force a U.S. company to sell software to citizens of another country that has been deemed illegal by their government?!?! You _do_ know that that doing so would be reciprocal with other countries being able to impose upon U.S. citizens, right?
If you're proposing that the U.S. be able to impose their laws unilaterally upon foreign countries, by what right?
As you're the one proposing to upset the current status of international relations, _you_ are going to have to explain how that'll work, not just play fake innocent and ask "why shouldn't we".
Using the "Every country in the world" bit is a ridiculous argument given that the context is explicitly the U.S. delisting a vendor from a country that has been shown to meddle in our election process. The USG delisting kaspersky has absolutely _no_ impact on other countries.
Sorry, you have that backwards. The authors need to prove their thesis as well as justify the assumptions they used to interpret them, not everyone else. Scientists don't get to define by fiat that the assumptions they make in narrowing down the parameters are the only viable ones. Scientists once generally assumed that because Dinosaurs were related to reptiles that they were all cold blooded. That didn't change when someone dissented and said that Dinos were closer to birds/mammals than to lizards/snakes but because of a web of detail coming from different methodologies that concorded with warm blooded Dinosaurs.
It is this web of detail that is missing at present in this research.
Strawman. The USG delisting Kaspersky as an approved vendor in no way impacts what other countries can/will do. The impact of the delisting is limited to USG purchases.
I agree 100% with what you just said & indeed said something very similar in the post you replied to: Their work is of some interest and may indeed help to determine T-Rex's top speed -- if it is corroborated with other sources that do not use the same assumptions.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple != Microsoft
As Apple has never bothered the 3rd party implementations of HFS+ (Free or not) it is unlikely that they'll change for APFS. Please post proof if you have it but keep badmouthing unsupported conjecture to yourself.
APFS is a new _File_System_ not a new driver. Use of Apple or 3rd party hardware changes nothing.
Oh _I_ am being selective in my reading, am I? The big WOOOOSH that flew above your head is that his point wasn't that women are slightly more neurotic than men (even though there are studies that support that view, just as there are studies that show them to be more empathic than men) it is that people are _different_, and that not _EVERYTHING_ is due to discrimination. Gender binding every single occupation to force parity _because_discrimination_ is nonsense.
Should women and men have the same chance and means to to enter the profession? _Absolutely_!
Should we use the tools of discrimination to right perceived injustices? No. Quota hiring is illegal in California.
Should you need to consult with a rambling fool, use the nearest mirror.
That Damore was _fired_, not for making overtly controversial remarks but for saying "Hey, maybe we should implement policies that have some scientific validity behind them" shows that discourse on the subject has reached Johnathan Swift big endian/small endian levels of ridiculousness.
How would you know? Damore made both controversial remarks and a call for better kinds of discourse. Both arguments happen to have been made in a very sloppy way. It is not obvious (to me) what Google's precise reasoning was here. They do not have to tell us, unless forced to under the bright lights of a courtroom.
I was being charitable. Google firing him for uttering (legally protected political positions) is _NOT_ better.
Besides which, Damore's "controversial" remarks were systematically bookmarked with "I don't claim to be an expert so this is just my opinion but it seems to me that" and "here are the references to what made me believe that". That's far far away from the "rant" that the misinformed who never even read what he wrote are pretending it is.
One line does not a rant make.
Those calling it a rant are IMO missing his point, made over and over in the memo which is that by suppressing all opinions from those not in complete agreement on the means for sexual equality and racial diversity, Google is making its claimed objectives of diversity & sexual equality more difficult to achieve.
This you _HAVE_ to agree with me 100% or you're my enemy is in large part why consensus is dying and we get the extremes like Trump/Bernie. That Damore was _fired_, not for making overtly controversial remarks but for saying "Hey, maybe we should implement policies that have some scientific validity behind them" shows that discourse on the subject has reached Johnathan Swift big endian/small endian levels of ridiculousness.
So, I'm just supposed to accept that your opinion that Damore's references did not support his conclusions -- because you say so?
Note that I criticised Tranzistors for commenting without even _reading_ the memo. I haven't been steeped in the controversy for days & just read the memo today.
It'll take some time for me to get through all the references. References to sites that have analysed them (both for and against to avoid bias) would be helpful.
Then that should be the subject of the criticism.
can you tolerate someone against diversity and hostile towards women
You, like so many others appear to have based your options on what others have said about what Damore wrote and not by what he actually wrote.
Damore's memo was not anti diversity. Nor was he hostile in it against women.
He _did_ call into question the means being used within Google to promote diversify as being potentially illegal (affirmative action _is_ illegal in the state of California), and that all sexual diversity in the workplace is not automatically because of repression and that the means being used to combat sexism were counter-productive and/or scientifically inconclusive.
Should you disagree, give quotations of the sections of his memo that say explicitly that he is against diversity and hostile to women.
What Damore wrote is easily available online and anyone discussing "what he wrote" should already have read it.
Why are you asking if the citations were any good and if they support his points? Must others spoon feed you all "your" opinions?
The revisionists claiming that those who designed the Internet were at fault for not predicting future deficiencies should return to using the OSI networks like X25 that were indeed conceived with every imaginable contributor's input -- but that were so unwieldily that they lost out to IP even with the weight of national every national telecom operator behind them. The AT&Ts the France Telecoms, the BTs, etc, all told us that IP was badly adapted to real world and that it would be quickly replaced with "proper" and "secure" OSI networks.
Not encumbering IP with "solutions" to every future possible problem is in large part why we are using IP today, & not X25.
Android will not be a refuge from Putin's laws as I pointed out - and you ignored.
It should be the user's choice whether to take that risk, and Apple is denying them that right.
Ah, you're one of those "unlimited inalienable rights" people who think that _everything_ is a "right" that must be a personal choice and that laws "denying them" that choice are unnatural.
- People should have the "right" to drive on whichever side of the street they choose
- People should have the "right" to buy/sell/consume heroin/fentanyl
and most importantly:
- People should have the "right" to put illegal software on their phone
You need to go live in isolation somewhere like a hermit on an island or a mountaintop because the social & legal strictures of living among others are "denying your rights".
"I would suspect" != proof, just more hyperbole.
Apple didn't attempt to "halt progress", they sued Samsung because Samsung took the easy way out and cloned the iPhone instead of coming up with their own minimally self inspired designs. Samsung even baldly admitted that they cloned the iPhone as closely as possible during discovery!
Now that Samsung & others have moved on to designs that aren't mere clones of iPhones (and 'inspiration" is a 2-way street), wow, hey, no more suits - except for the occasional Chinese clone that once again copies blindly.
I had MP3 players but never owned an iPod - Used (and still use) MediaMonkey to manage my music on my phones (pre & post iPhone) because iTunes is still a turd of a GUI to update IDV3 fields, though I now use iTunes to sync to my iPhone to avoid sync problems.
Have any proof to back up that hyperbole? Naah, didn't think so.
I knew somebody was going use their own prejudices to turn Russia's making VPN's illegal into it being apple's fault. Thanks for being _that_ person...
Russia didn't just pass a law making the sale of VPN software on an App Store illegal, they passed a law making their use on phones in Russia illegal.
Given how jackbooted Russia's enforcement is turning, spot checks on people's phones to check for the presence of VPN software is beyond likely. So, mr Android zealot, how will the absence of a walled garden make it any better when android phone owners get told to hand over their devices and unlock codes so that an intensive scan can be performed to make sure that no illegal software is present? Are you naive enough to think that the attempts that some will make to hide their use of VPN software will _NOT_ be noted and used to condemn the people attempting to do so?
Ah, but you quite visibly think that you're smarter than everyone else, it's Apple's walled garden that's the problem, not Putin's repressive regime...
How long they can go from success to success is indeed Apple's biggest challenge and nobody knows how long it can continue. Yet their % of repeat customers is still by far the highest in the industry (absent some irrelevant niche players) & it isn't because they're a "visionary product" but because people prefer how they work/how they're supported.
I've got both an iPhone & an Android phone & justify the iPhone through it's better integrated design & security features & longer lasting lifetime due to better support. Others, among them previous iPhone owners do not share my judgement. Time will tell.
Apple sees your teeny tiny titters and laughs and laughs and laughs on their way to selling to people who do indeed care about design in 10s of millions of devices. But of course, for you that's just a sign of how deluded _they_ must be given that _they_ do not agree with _you_.
Those prefacing the iPhone 8's arrival with "X already done here, Y already done there" are once again missing the point.
People don't buy Apple products because they're the first to market with an insignificant number of less than excellently integrated features.
People buy Apple products because when it's implemented in an iPhone/Mac/other it's done _well_ and can be bought in the tens of millions.
The original iPod was mocked upon it's release for not having the "essential features" some geeks considered essential yet sold in the hundreds of millions.
Same with the iPhone.
Hey AC, what have _YOU_ done to defend the downtrodden? You can't even screw up the courage to login to post so clearly you _are_ a coward. _That_ is the difference between people like you and that of your grandparents: All mouth, no action.
You"re seriously proposing that the U.S. should have laws that force a U.S. company to sell software to citizens of another country that has been deemed illegal by their government?!?! You _do_ know that that doing so would be reciprocal with other countries being able to impose upon U.S. citizens, right?
If you're proposing that the U.S. be able to impose their laws unilaterally upon foreign countries, by what right?
As you're the one proposing to upset the current status of international relations, _you_ are going to have to explain how that'll work, not just play fake innocent and ask "why shouldn't we".
Forticlient is also free and comes with web filtering
Using the "Every country in the world" bit is a ridiculous argument given that the context is explicitly the U.S. delisting a vendor from a country that has been shown to meddle in our election process. The USG delisting kaspersky has absolutely _no_ impact on other countries.
So, yeah, it _is_ a strawman.
Sorry, you have that backwards. The authors need to prove their thesis as well as justify the assumptions they used to interpret them, not everyone else. Scientists don't get to define by fiat that the assumptions they make in narrowing down the parameters are the only viable ones. Scientists once generally assumed that because Dinosaurs were related to reptiles that they were all cold blooded. That didn't change when someone dissented and said that Dinos were closer to birds/mammals than to lizards/snakes but because of a web of detail coming from different methodologies that concorded with warm blooded Dinosaurs.
It is this web of detail that is missing at present in this research.
Strawman. The USG delisting Kaspersky as an approved vendor in no way impacts what other countries can/will do. The impact of the delisting is limited to USG purchases.
I agree 100% with what you just said & indeed said something very similar in the post you replied to:
Their work is of some interest and may indeed help to determine T-Rex's top speed -- if it is corroborated with other sources that do not use the same assumptions.