Then "scientists and technical people" need to butt out of their neighbors' lives and stop trying to take their neighbors' money. Mind your own business and respect your fellow man. It's what peace is made of.
And if you don't want corruption (or talk of corruption), then stop seeking power over people. Power corrupts. Power-seekers will always be suspected of being corrupt, usually with good cause.
No one "invoked the Holocaust". I only picked the "Jews" rather than some other group, like black folks, because your criticisms of corporations mapped a lot more closely to historic criticisms of Jews.
Prejudice is unjust. The Holocaust didn't make it unjust. It was always unjust.
Because a flip-flop from a politician usually means "I was lying before". Other times, it means "I'm lying now". Once in a while, it can be genuine. We play the odds.
Also "overwhelming evidence" is not fact. Someone can be innocent of a crime even if there appears to be "overwhelming evidence" of guilt. Often, "overwhelming evidence" means little more than "this is my opinion and there are some people who agree". Sometimes it doesn't even mean that much. Fabricating "overwhelming evidence" is trending up recently as opportunities to leverage government power over people have become more lucrative.
You're still suggesting Apple should do work and spend money to create new ways for people to stop paying Apple. And you seem to think you're entitled to have this done for you. Freedom for you, but none for Apple. Apple must obey.
It's software with the capability to track your every keystroke, and the point is if I don't trust it, I can't remove it, because the iPhone doesn't give me that capability.
The iPhone version had no such capability.
This isn't some "meme", it's the truth.
I'm not saying it didn't happen. It happened. It was then exaggerated and distorted for political gain so now people like you can say "warrantless wiretapping" without any context on what actually occurred. You even used the word "massive", but you don't know if it was 5 incidents, 500, 5000, or 5 Billion. Because specifics don't matter, only that it was "them".
Here's a thought experiment: replace "corporations" with "Jews" in that paragraph.
That's asinine. Corporations number one concern is profit, and there are countless examples of corporations abusing their positions to maximize that profit at the expense of consumers.
That's what they said about the Jews, almost verbatim. It's exactly the same mode of thinking, just with a different "them".
Your scheme would probably work, but it deprives Apple of the 30% revenue share from the App Store for most Apps. The revenue share subsidizes the low cost of the dev tools and all the rest of the work Apple puts in to maintain working APIs and documentation.
Also, it allows people to install malware. This will result in support calls and other costs to support people who installed malware. It also allows software to be installed to circumvent enforcement of contract restrictions on something like tethering.
But why should Apple rewrite their software, endure additional support costs, and invent new systems to satisfy your "needs"? Maybe they just don't want to. Maybe they would rather create a system that works good for them and the 99% of everyone else who wants to do something besides complain about App Store restrictions.
Meanwhile, people can make HTML5 Apps for porn and for Klan-rally scheduling.
I don't know where this comes from. It's the kind of software that I don't trust on any phone...
It's not a "kind of software". It's a specific piece of software that does specific things. The specific Carrier IQ for the iPhone didn't do the things people were correctly complaining about.
...especially given the way the telecommunications companies rolled over for the massive warrantless wiretapping.
Yet another buzzword Internet meme. Be against it. Condemn the guilty. Don't learn any specifics. Then follow up with guilt by association to condemn anyone or anything that reminds you of the guilty.
There are plenty of people sleepwalking along and not questioning where this technology is going. If anything, it's the prevailing attitude of most consumers. And your very questions of some "unseen world" where this might be a cause for concern, or needing evidence for how corporations abuse their power and put their own interests ahead of consumers -- it all seems pretty bizarre and blind to me.
Here's a thought experiment: replace "corporations" with "Jews" in that paragraph. Maybe that might help you understand. I try not to engage in prejudice and bigotry against people, including the people working for or directing corporations.
(I make an exception for people that want to use force against others. But commerce is voluntary; corporations don't have a police force.)
We is society here. The practical measure is user freedom, which is a very precious resource.
Lots of people used to live in the woods and sleep in caves or simple temporary structures. They were free. Most choose a tiny bit less freedom for all the benefits of civilization.
And why do you think you're entitled to benefit from Apple's efforts at no cost?
This statement is so backwards it has me dumbfounded. How do you see letting people do what they want with a device as benefiting from Apple's efforts, and how is it at no cost if you still have to pay Apple for the device?
And the development tools, and the APIs, and the hosting and publishing of apps. This is Apple's effort. The cost is $99 plus a percentage of the app price.
This isn't about what individuals like, but the principles of freedom.
Freedom to write viruses and malware then.
As I've said, I'm fine with them offering safe software, so if you want a safe and sterile environment, you can get that. But if someone else wants a porn app, then they should be able to get that easily too. In this proposed scenario, which would take very little work, you can get what you want, and I can get what I want. What is the problem with that?
To prevent malware, Apple publishes and hosts and installs all the apps. This is the method they use. It works. Apple chooses not to publish or host or install porn apps or hate apps. Shouldn't Apple be free to choose not to publish and host porn? Or should they have to do what you prefer instead?
Civilization is a tradeoff between absolute perfect freedom and the value of some rules and enforcement. There's a thin line where a few rules are better. You aren't free to use your phone when it has been hijacked by malware.
Do you have a policy and a mechanism that will be effective in preventing malware and that no one could ever criticize as "not free enough"?
Nothing I say is going to convince you, but for me it's already enough that Apple decides what software I can or cannot use, and I do not want to ask permission and pay extra for the privilege of using my device. And even if you get a developer account, it still isn't clear to me that you can install any software you want as if it was jailbroken, as there's some "provisioning profile" that adds a bunch of red tape.
So buy devices that fit your preferences then. It's a niche preference at this extreme, so you can look forward to niche devices unless you can convince more people to agree with you. Being able to state a reasonable case will help to convince them.
There's also the issue of potential spyware like Carrier IQ.
Carrier IQ wasn't a problem on iPhone. It was only a problem on the more "open" Android phones.
As for "making the best of the real world", that's what I'm trying to do without just blindly and quietly accepting the technological world as it appears to be slipping into a locked-down world.
I like how everyone who doesn't agree with you is blinded.
Who is "we"? And, by what practical measure would "we" be better off? What's the specific, tangible value that Apple is depriving you of? And why do you think you're entitled to benefit from Apple's efforts at no cost?
I like the fact that Apple keeps malware off my phone. Their other restrictions are not a problem for me because I don't write, nor do I want to use, hate-apps or porn-apps.
They may make a mistake when banning something sometimes. Human systems are imperfect, but these imperfections are better than viruses and malware in this case.
Please post a perfect policy that no one will ever argue with.
I'm not prejudiced against corporations, so that "reason" doesn't appeal to me without some specific supporting evidence that I'm likely to be harmed.
And freedom is a continuum. Absolute phone freedom requires you make you own phone and operate it on your own network. The real world includes tradeoffs. Perhaps the "unseen world" in this case is holding out for a utopian fantasy instead of making the best of the real world.
Is your point that we'd be better off with viruses and malware? Or is your point that Apple does an imperfect job? Or Apple's banning policy doesn't precisely map to your preferences? Or what?
You should post a perfect policy that no one will ever argue with.
Crime is not freedom. Learn to understand the difference.
Apple keeps viruses and malware and phishing apps off their phone platform. Viruses and malware and phishing apps aren't needed for "freedom" on the Internet any more than burglars and rapists are needed for freedom in your neighborhood.
Obsessive and irrational are terms that describe a particular unreasoning attitude. If the original comment is supposed to be a good point about something, then that ought to be able to be backed up with rational reasoning. If there's no rational reasoning, then he doesn't make a good point.
It got modded up to a 5 as insightful. That suggests simple followup questions. Is it insightful, or is it whimsical?
I don't like lying or other types of false-ness. We have democratically elected governments, so there's a huge incentive to lie to people and appeal to base emotions and prejudices to promote the use of government power against people. Appeals to reason are one of the few non-violent avenues of defense against this tactic.
This seems to be the process of civilization arriving. Apple imposes just enough rules to keep the criminals and a few other counter-civilizing influences out, making their platform safe and healthy. Alarmists and predators complain about there being any rules at all, while Apple tries to walk the thin line between an unappealing anarchy and an equally unappealing regimentation.
Other vendors will definitely follow Apple's example, because most paying customers prefer civilization.
No shit. I bought the device to do said purpose, and the device did said purpose.
Seriously? You got what you paid for?. No shit. Congrats on a successful, mutually beneficial transaction with a vendor. What are you complaining about then? And why should anyone listen?
And yet, I still don't have an answer to my question.
If this is all of the utmost importance because some people are obsessive and irrational about what's on their devices, then that's fine for obsessive and irrational people and their subcultures. But I can't sympathize with them.
On the other hand, if we're in the real world, then dismissing this as silly people being silly is harder. Hence the question.
And no, obsessive and irrational (and maybe paranoid) aren't strictly a matter of opinion. Either he "had to" get rid of it because it was a problem, or he "had to" get rid of it in spite of the fact that it wasn't a problem. The second one means something different than the first.
But for some reason you're going to make up stories about how it might be bad.
If he had to root his tablet because of some dark fantasy about Layar being sinister, then that surely answers my question on the side of irrational and obsessive. I was asking if there was a reason that's more rooted in reality. I still don't know.
Slashdot Mirror
Then "scientists and technical people" need to butt out of their neighbors' lives and stop trying to take their neighbors' money. Mind your own business and respect your fellow man. It's what peace is made of.
And if you don't want corruption (or talk of corruption), then stop seeking power over people. Power corrupts. Power-seekers will always be suspected of being corrupt, usually with good cause.
America needs to culturally value the geek.
Geeks need to culturally value America.
One way to help people to value you is to be on their side.
No one "invoked the Holocaust". I only picked the "Jews" rather than some other group, like black folks, because your criticisms of corporations mapped a lot more closely to historic criticisms of Jews.
Prejudice is unjust. The Holocaust didn't make it unjust. It was always unjust.
Because a flip-flop from a politician usually means "I was lying before". Other times, it means "I'm lying now". Once in a while, it can be genuine. We play the odds.
Also "overwhelming evidence" is not fact. Someone can be innocent of a crime even if there appears to be "overwhelming evidence" of guilt. Often, "overwhelming evidence" means little more than "this is my opinion and there are some people who agree". Sometimes it doesn't even mean that much. Fabricating "overwhelming evidence" is trending up recently as opportunities to leverage government power over people have become more lucrative.
You're still suggesting Apple should do work and spend money to create new ways for people to stop paying Apple. And you seem to think you're entitled to have this done for you. Freedom for you, but none for Apple. Apple must obey.
It's software with the capability to track your every keystroke, and the point is if I don't trust it, I can't remove it, because the iPhone doesn't give me that capability.
The iPhone version had no such capability.
This isn't some "meme", it's the truth.
I'm not saying it didn't happen. It happened. It was then exaggerated and distorted for political gain so now people like you can say "warrantless wiretapping" without any context on what actually occurred. You even used the word "massive", but you don't know if it was 5 incidents, 500, 5000, or 5 Billion. Because specifics don't matter, only that it was "them".
Here's a thought experiment: replace "corporations" with "Jews" in that paragraph.
That's asinine. Corporations number one concern is profit, and there are countless examples of corporations abusing their positions to maximize that profit at the expense of consumers.
That's what they said about the Jews, almost verbatim. It's exactly the same mode of thinking, just with a different "them".
Your scheme would probably work, but it deprives Apple of the 30% revenue share from the App Store for most Apps. The revenue share subsidizes the low cost of the dev tools and all the rest of the work Apple puts in to maintain working APIs and documentation.
Also, it allows people to install malware. This will result in support calls and other costs to support people who installed malware. It also allows software to be installed to circumvent enforcement of contract restrictions on something like tethering.
But why should Apple rewrite their software, endure additional support costs, and invent new systems to satisfy your "needs"? Maybe they just don't want to. Maybe they would rather create a system that works good for them and the 99% of everyone else who wants to do something besides complain about App Store restrictions.
Meanwhile, people can make HTML5 Apps for porn and for Klan-rally scheduling.
I don't know where this comes from. It's the kind of software that I don't trust on any phone...
It's not a "kind of software". It's a specific piece of software that does specific things. The specific Carrier IQ for the iPhone didn't do the things people were correctly complaining about.
...especially given the way the telecommunications companies rolled over for the massive warrantless wiretapping.
Yet another buzzword Internet meme. Be against it. Condemn the guilty. Don't learn any specifics. Then follow up with guilt by association to condemn anyone or anything that reminds you of the guilty.
There are plenty of people sleepwalking along and not questioning where this technology is going. If anything, it's the prevailing attitude of most consumers. And your very questions of some "unseen world" where this might be a cause for concern, or needing evidence for how corporations abuse their power and put their own interests ahead of consumers -- it all seems pretty bizarre and blind to me.
Here's a thought experiment: replace "corporations" with "Jews" in that paragraph. Maybe that might help you understand. I try not to engage in prejudice and bigotry against people, including the people working for or directing corporations.
(I make an exception for people that want to use force against others. But commerce is voluntary; corporations don't have a police force.)
We is society here. The practical measure is user freedom, which is a very precious resource.
Lots of people used to live in the woods and sleep in caves or simple temporary structures. They were free. Most choose a tiny bit less freedom for all the benefits of civilization.
This statement is so backwards it has me dumbfounded. How do you see letting people do what they want with a device as benefiting from Apple's efforts, and how is it at no cost if you still have to pay Apple for the device?
And the development tools, and the APIs, and the hosting and publishing of apps. This is Apple's effort. The cost is $99 plus a percentage of the app price.
This isn't about what individuals like, but the principles of freedom.
Freedom to write viruses and malware then.
As I've said, I'm fine with them offering safe software, so if you want a safe and sterile environment, you can get that. But if someone else wants a porn app, then they should be able to get that easily too. In this proposed scenario, which would take very little work, you can get what you want, and I can get what I want. What is the problem with that?
To prevent malware, Apple publishes and hosts and installs all the apps. This is the method they use. It works. Apple chooses not to publish or host or install porn apps or hate apps. Shouldn't Apple be free to choose not to publish and host porn? Or should they have to do what you prefer instead?
Civilization is a tradeoff between absolute perfect freedom and the value of some rules and enforcement. There's a thin line where a few rules are better. You aren't free to use your phone when it has been hijacked by malware.
Do you have a policy and a mechanism that will be effective in preventing malware and that no one could ever criticize as "not free enough"?
Nothing I say is going to convince you, but for me it's already enough that Apple decides what software I can or cannot use, and I do not want to ask permission and pay extra for the privilege of using my device. And even if you get a developer account, it still isn't clear to me that you can install any software you want as if it was jailbroken, as there's some "provisioning profile" that adds a bunch of red tape.
So buy devices that fit your preferences then. It's a niche preference at this extreme, so you can look forward to niche devices unless you can convince more people to agree with you. Being able to state a reasonable case will help to convince them.
There's also the issue of potential spyware like Carrier IQ.
Carrier IQ wasn't a problem on iPhone. It was only a problem on the more "open" Android phones.
As for "making the best of the real world", that's what I'm trying to do without just blindly and quietly accepting the technological world as it appears to be slipping into a locked-down world.
I like how everyone who doesn't agree with you is blinded.
Apple publishes plenty of apps that compete with Apple apps. The Kindle app is an example.
Please post a perfect app policy that no one will ever argue with.
Who is "we"? And, by what practical measure would "we" be better off? What's the specific, tangible value that Apple is depriving you of? And why do you think you're entitled to benefit from Apple's efforts at no cost?
I like the fact that Apple keeps malware off my phone. Their other restrictions are not a problem for me because I don't write, nor do I want to use, hate-apps or porn-apps.
They may make a mistake when banning something sometimes. Human systems are imperfect, but these imperfections are better than viruses and malware in this case.
Please post a perfect policy that no one will ever argue with.
I'm not prejudiced against corporations, so that "reason" doesn't appeal to me without some specific supporting evidence that I'm likely to be harmed.
And freedom is a continuum. Absolute phone freedom requires you make you own phone and operate it on your own network. The real world includes tradeoffs. Perhaps the "unseen world" in this case is holding out for a utopian fantasy instead of making the best of the real world.
Is your point that we'd be better off with viruses and malware? Or is your point that Apple does an imperfect job? Or Apple's banning policy doesn't precisely map to your preferences? Or what?
You should post a perfect policy that no one will ever argue with.
Really?
But that's not all Apple keeps off, and they don't always keep it clean anyway.
Hence my use of the phrase "...tries to walk the thin line...".
Your message suggests imperfections may exist in a human-devised system for dealing with human-caused problems.
For a reason? Or as part of some philosophy or religion or ethos requiring insight into some unseen world?
Crime is not freedom. Learn to understand the difference.
Apple keeps viruses and malware and phishing apps off their phone platform. Viruses and malware and phishing apps aren't needed for "freedom" on the Internet any more than burglars and rapists are needed for freedom in your neighborhood.
Obsessive and irrational are terms that describe a particular unreasoning attitude. If the original comment is supposed to be a good point about something, then that ought to be able to be backed up with rational reasoning. If there's no rational reasoning, then he doesn't make a good point.
It got modded up to a 5 as insightful. That suggests simple followup questions. Is it insightful, or is it whimsical?
I don't like lying or other types of false-ness. We have democratically elected governments, so there's a huge incentive to lie to people and appeal to base emotions and prejudices to promote the use of government power against people. Appeals to reason are one of the few non-violent avenues of defense against this tactic.
This seems to be the process of civilization arriving. Apple imposes just enough rules to keep the criminals and a few other counter-civilizing influences out, making their platform safe and healthy. Alarmists and predators complain about there being any rules at all, while Apple tries to walk the thin line between an unappealing anarchy and an equally unappealing regimentation.
Other vendors will definitely follow Apple's example, because most paying customers prefer civilization.
Of course it is. But so what?
Software is not a person.
Seriously? WTF?
No shit. I bought the device to do said purpose, and the device did said purpose.
Seriously? You got what you paid for?. No shit. Congrats on a successful, mutually beneficial transaction with a vendor. What are you complaining about then? And why should anyone listen?
And yet, I still don't have an answer to my question.
If this is all of the utmost importance because some people are obsessive and irrational about what's on their devices, then that's fine for obsessive and irrational people and their subcultures. But I can't sympathize with them.
On the other hand, if we're in the real world, then dismissing this as silly people being silly is harder. Hence the question.
And no, obsessive and irrational (and maybe paranoid) aren't strictly a matter of opinion. Either he "had to" get rid of it because it was a problem, or he "had to" get rid of it in spite of the fact that it wasn't a problem. The second one means something different than the first.
I've never heard of "Layar" before, but ....
But for some reason you're going to make up stories about how it might be bad.
If he had to root his tablet because of some dark fantasy about Layar being sinister, then that surely answers my question on the side of irrational and obsessive. I was asking if there was a reason that's more rooted in reality. I still don't know.