It merely means they can't ship GPL3 things on the iPhone. Elsewhere they can.
But neither they, nor a growing number of people want to. Deal with it.
Re:Does El Capitan Fix Major Problems?
on
WWDC 2015 Roundup
·
· Score: 1
yes, the os is free, but you can only download it by buying a computer or having owned a computer. then there's lock in because anything you do in el capitan also needs to be done on a computer
And here's to a completely unnecessary shifting of goalposts. Cheers.
So because version 5 of HTML took so long we should abandon all open standards in favor of everyone doing their own implementations of everything?
That's funny, because if people like Apple hadn't made their own implementations of HTML 5, that would still be years away, with the W3C still trying to push XHTML.
Yeah, we've heard that they are going to open source stuff before, and we're still waiting. Where's my open FaceTime standard that Steve Jobs promised when he introduced FaceTime?
That has been blocked by patents from somebody else.
April 28, 2003 12:16 PM PDT
Apple unveils music store ...
The songs cost 99 cents each to download, with no subscription fee, and include the most liberal copying rights of any online service to date. Jobs has been an outspoken opponent of so-called digital rights management (DRM) in the past, arguing that limitations on digital music will undermine the market for legitimate content.
Citation needed. IOW nope. Not to mention that unlike the claim of "vineyards in Medieval times prove it was warmer than now" narrative suggests, there were actually vineyards in England further north during the Little Ice Age than during the Medieval Warming Period.
Finally, the northern-most commercial vineyard in the world is in Gvarv, Telemark, Norway, about the same latitude as Orkney - but not warmed directly by the Gulf Stream.
Not me? Come to think of it, wasn't the exportation of encryption restricted under munitions export rules? The government may have inadvertently defined it in a way that places it under the 2nd amendment.
What makes you think the 2nd covers exporting arms? "The right to be an international arms dealer"?
And you don't understand that "innocent until proven guilty" means that the government has no right to initiate force against any of its citizens without evidence or probable cause. Owning a penis does not a rapist make. Owning a gun does not a murderer make.
But drawing a gun on a cop does make you a criminal. And gun nuts don't wait to draw their guns to shoot cops until they "come to take their guns". They just assume that the cops coming because he's drunk and waking up the whole neighbourhood with his noise are there to "come to take his guns". They aren't called "gun nuts" because they love their guns...
As one cop told me in a moment of frankness; "I ain't dodging gunfire for no $70k a year and a pension!"
The number of cops that EVER discharge their weapon intentionally in the line of duty is miniscule. It's significantly less than one percent.
So? According to this list at Wikipedia 45 police officers were killed by (non-accidental) gunfire last year in the US - most never got a chance to return fire. It does not mention how many were injured, nor how many weren't hit. Getting shot at as a police officer is an all too real possibility.
Of course, somebody willing to shoot a cop will not hesitate to shoot a granny carrying a gun. Or anyone else packing heat. So much for the claims of the GP. Not to mention cops getting caught in the cross-fire between criminals and people "just defending themselves" and shooting at anything that moves.
Oh, and cops don't just get shot by people with illegal guns: according to concealedcarrykillers.org at least 17 law enforcement officers were shot dead by owners of concealed carry permit since May 2007.
I can only assume you are intentionally misdirecting the conversation. The U.S. has never declared war upon an entire nation or people, and then proceeded to target everyone including all civilians, women and children first if they can have it.
Yeah, they only kill them "by accident". Try not to be such an American next time.
When someone starts bombing civilians we have passed pretty clearly by the "ideological" into the "corporeal". I can guarantee you if ISIS / Al Queda were sitting in their corner of the world spouting their ideology at the top of their lungs we really wouldn't care. They are fair game not because of their ideology but because they go beyond having a belief, to trying to force it upon others with violence. It is the latter, and not the former, that absolutely makes it OK to wipe them out entirely. They have literally exclaimed that they will kill us if we don't kill them first, and then acted upon it. See the difference?
Gee, are you trying to force your beliefs on me here? I see what you are doing there, problem is you don't.
Yes, how the hell would a FIFA executive be expected to know about the FIFA World Cup? He literally worked for the most direct source of information. He doesn't have to know that The Onion is satire to ask some of his ex-colleagues to know if a a World Cup is actually happening or not.
And again you expect from foreigners what you don't expect from Amercuns. Pure hypocrisy.
I was talking about FIFA "waving enough money" under US Soccer's nose. In particular, there had been some noise last year about just giving the US Qatar's World Cup hosting gig, and lately FIFA has been practically begging the US to submit another bid for one of the later cups.
Errm, yeah, that makes sense. Are you already building up a defense? "If we wanted bribes from people who want to host the World Cup, why would we give the US money to host it?"
I think the bigger issue is that a high ranking executive from a multinational sports organization should do more fact-checking than a stay-at-home mom on facebook when making a public statement.
As opposed to some US Congresscritter or a Fox News Website or the fucking police? Who actually should know something that is virtually unknown outside the US? Hello?
Slashdot Mirror
It merely means they can't ship GPL3 things on the iPhone. Elsewhere they can.
But neither they, nor a growing number of people want to. Deal with it.
yes, the os is free, but you can only download it by buying a computer or having owned a computer. then there's lock in because anything you do in el capitan also needs to be done on a computer
And here's to a completely unnecessary shifting of goalposts. Cheers.
So because version 5 of HTML took so long we should abandon all open standards in favor of everyone doing their own implementations of everything?
That's funny, because if people like Apple hadn't made their own implementations of HTML 5, that would still be years away, with the W3C still trying to push XHTML.
Yeah, we've heard that they are going to open source stuff before, and we're still waiting. Where's my open FaceTime standard that Steve Jobs promised when he introduced FaceTime?
That has been blocked by patents from somebody else.
And if someone can port Swift to Android, we'll finally have peace on Earth and the IPU will win the holy war against the infidels of the FSM.
Well, Apple Music is coming to Android - and I don't think they wrote the App in Java ,,,
moving the goalposts???
He asked for equivalents for an add-free service. You replied with add-riddled ones. Who again moved the goal posts?
Indeed. Apple didn't really turn "anti-DRM" until they got into trouble with market regulators...
Errm http://news.cnet.com/2100-1027-998590.html:
April 28, 2003 12:16 PM PDT
...
Apple unveils music store
The songs cost 99 cents each to download, with no subscription fee, and include the most liberal copying rights of any online service to date. Jobs has been an outspoken opponent of so-called digital rights management (DRM) in the past, arguing that limitations on digital music will undermine the market for legitimate content.
It's not just about facts. It's about spirit and essence. Nobody fucks the customer as hard as Apple. No one.
Right, no ONE. Only Microsoft, Google, Amazon...
The republican party loves candidates like you.
And the Democrat party contains anti vaxxers.
As does the Republican Party. I don't see any party having a seizable amount of them, nor any having more.
There are multiple wineries in Alaska (and they all seem to be new).
You can make bad wine anywhere.
And during the Mediaeval Warming Period, you could make bad wine in southern England - which is supposed to prove something.
they were exporting wine only 1200 years ago.
Citation needed. IOW nope. Not to mention that unlike the claim of "vineyards in Medieval times prove it was warmer than now" narrative suggests, there were actually vineyards in England further north during the Little Ice Age than during the Medieval Warming Period.
Finally, the northern-most commercial vineyard in the world is in Gvarv, Telemark, Norway, about the same latitude as Orkney - but not warmed directly by the Gulf Stream.
Not me? Come to think of it, wasn't the exportation of encryption restricted under munitions export rules? The government may have inadvertently defined it in a way that places it under the 2nd amendment.
What makes you think the 2nd covers exporting arms? "The right to be an international arms dealer"?
And you don't understand that "innocent until proven guilty" means that the government has no right to initiate force against any of its citizens without evidence or probable cause. Owning a penis does not a rapist make. Owning a gun does not a murderer make.
But drawing a gun on a cop does make you a criminal. And gun nuts don't wait to draw their guns to shoot cops until they "come to take their guns". They just assume that the cops coming because he's drunk and waking up the whole neighbourhood with his noise are there to "come to take his guns". They aren't called "gun nuts" because they love their guns ...
Must of the gun toting morons you refer to are already criminals. The rest, and the majority,
Spot the obvious mistake (no, the one besides the spelling mistake).
As one cop told me in a moment of frankness; "I ain't dodging gunfire for no $70k a year and a pension!"
The number of cops that EVER discharge their weapon intentionally in the line of duty is miniscule. It's significantly less than one percent.
So? According to this list at Wikipedia 45 police officers were killed by (non-accidental) gunfire last year in the US - most never got a chance to return fire. It does not mention how many were injured, nor how many weren't hit. Getting shot at as a police officer is an all too real possibility.
Of course, somebody willing to shoot a cop will not hesitate to shoot a granny carrying a gun. Or anyone else packing heat. So much for the claims of the GP. Not to mention cops getting caught in the cross-fire between criminals and people "just defending themselves" and shooting at anything that moves.
Oh, and cops don't just get shot by people with illegal guns: according to concealedcarrykillers.org at least 17 law enforcement officers were shot dead by owners of concealed carry permit since May 2007.
Continental drift. When Wegener proposed it in 1912 he was laughed at.
Funny you mention the example where a climatologist revolutionized geology, the reason why so many geologists want to do the same with climatology.
Are you fucking serious? For one, you don't have to reinstall the app.
iOS had it too http://arstechnica.com/securit...
No matter how many times you repost that - not even remotely the same fucking thing. And that's ignoring the false claim of crashing the phone.
You are a complete idiot.
You are a complete Murkan. Fuck off and die painfully like all the innocent victims of American aggression. IOW HAND
I can only assume you are intentionally misdirecting the conversation. The U.S. has never declared war upon an entire nation or people, and then proceeded to target everyone including all civilians, women and children first if they can have it.
Yeah, they only kill them "by accident". Try not to be such an American next time.
When someone starts bombing civilians we have passed pretty clearly by the "ideological" into the "corporeal". I can guarantee you if ISIS / Al Queda were sitting in their corner of the world spouting their ideology at the top of their lungs we really wouldn't care. They are fair game not because of their ideology but because they go beyond having a belief, to trying to force it upon others with violence. It is the latter, and not the former, that absolutely makes it OK to wipe them out entirely. They have literally exclaimed that they will kill us if we don't kill them first, and then acted upon it. See the difference?
Gee, are you trying to force your beliefs on me here? I see what you are doing there, problem is you don't.
Yes, how the hell would a FIFA executive be expected to know about the FIFA World Cup? He literally worked for the most direct source of information. He doesn't have to know that The Onion is satire to ask some of his ex-colleagues to know if a a World Cup is actually happening or not.
And again you expect from foreigners what you don't expect from Amercuns. Pure hypocrisy.
I was talking about FIFA "waving enough money" under US Soccer's nose. In particular, there had been some noise last year about just giving the US Qatar's World Cup hosting gig, and lately FIFA has been practically begging the US to submit another bid for one of the later cups.
Errm, yeah, that makes sense. Are you already building up a defense? "If we wanted bribes from people who want to host the World Cup, why would we give the US money to host it?"
I think the bigger issue is that a high ranking executive from a multinational sports organization should do more fact-checking than a stay-at-home mom on facebook when making a public statement.
As opposed to some US Congresscritter or a Fox News Website or the fucking police? Who actually should know something that is virtually unknown outside the US? Hello?
Scenario: Yellowstone erupts, dimming sunlight all over the world and continually dumping dust onto solar panels and into wind turbine gears.
And the earthquakes destroy all nuclear plants. The End.