"Sending information to Apple" implies that it's kept, tracked, logged, or aggregated somehow.
No. "Sending information to Apple" implies that information is sent to Apple. Whether that information is kept, logged, tracked or aggregated is an open question, although I tend to believe Apple's assertion that it is not.
But that information clearly could be logged and, oh I don't know - supplied to the RIAA - in theory. That's why there is a cause for at least interest, if not concern.
Think about it. If you don't buy music from the iTunes Music Store, Apple still knows what you're listening to and probably has a good idea about your listening habits.
Something to see here.... though I'm not exactly outrraged since the first thing I did was turn off the huge, ugly ministore since it took up so much room.
Secondly Apple already knows what song you download
You're confused. This is not monitoring (just) the music you bought from ITMS. It is looking at all the music you play in iTunes, irrespective of source.
Re:Extremely easy to disable, and more info
on
iTunes is Malware?
·
· Score: 1
Whoops, well that just about wraps it up for open source then. I've always thought that Linux was the absolute exemplar of slowly developed high quality low cost code.... Although I suppose The Hurd might be an even better exemplar one day.
No. You have missed the point - the poster wasn't complaining about a misuse of the phrase 'knock your socks off' - (s)he was complaining about the use of the word 'literally' when the OP meant 'metaphorically'.
At least, I hope the OP meant that. I suppose it is possible that the water cooling kit could explode extravagantly.... of course, I'm not a pedant in the true sense of the word.
I imagine also that this is also, at least partly, a political/public-opinion issue.
The BBC is fairly regularly attacked in the UK for spending so much on a Web presence that is heavily used by an international audience but which is paid for by a tax on TVs. It would get a right old kicking from the UK press and in particular the Murdoch press if it made content that "we have paid for" freely available overseas. For those who don't realise - the BBC's World Service is paid for directly by the foreign and commonwealth office, not from the TV licence fee.
The License fee is supposed to be spent entirely on the provision of services to the UK population. The BBC is watching its back here.
Bit of a bee in your bonnet there, no? The parent poster nowhere suggested that open source programs couldn't be commercial. Nor did he suggest that commercial programs could not be open source.
He just gave examples of two commercial desktop applications that run on Macs, but not on Linux distros... and which happen to be closed, proprietary apps.
That reminds me of a rather nifty science fiction story I read probably 30 years ago. An old bloke sitting at a bar who turns out to be god, but with his power's gradually diminishing as science proves what he can't do. At the start of the story he is wearing a rather splendid jacket that seems to contain shifting lights woven within its fabric. The lights go out about half way through the story.
"God did it" and "Random Chance did it" are both theological statements that are logically indistinguishable from one another.
As I sit and watch an antibiotic-resistant strain of bacteria make a little colony on my petri-dish, I am - according to you - faced with two identically probable causes. Either God manifested in the incubator and decided to save a particularly worthy bacterium and it's off-spring, Noah-like... or a random mutation conferring antibiotic resistance allowed the bacterium to thrive through a process of natural selection.
All the sophistry in the world isn't going hide the fact as to which is the most probable cause.
When an employee comes to talk about a project I will often search for terms related to the project or sometimes by the employeees name in spotlight while they sit around my screen.
It doesn't sound like a metadata related problem to me. It sounds more like a furniture placement issue.
But seriously, de-selecting 'Mail' in the Spotlight pref pane, should stop spotlight from displaying results in its window, while retaining the full indexing facilities within Mail.app itself.
It is far too late to stamp authority on the situation now - the original poster is in a rut at the company and staying there is just seeing his skill set degrade, together with his moral. There is only one thing he should do - tender his resignation.
It is just possible that this will lead to an instant renegotiating of his role, but frankly I doubt it. My guess is that the company knows it has itself a useful lackey that keeps things running, that's what they are interested in keeping.
The problem is that while Andrew Orlowski highlights the problems with Wikipedia he does so in such a consistently inflammatory way (wiki-fiddler, anyone) to make the word 'troll' appear to be fair enough. Many of his reports look like pure flamebait, or rather click-bait designed to increase El Reg's advertising revenue.
Wikipedia has its problems, indeed and it is good to see someone willing to go against the flow and point out the system's short-comings. Sadly Orlowski's invective (for me at least) got old rather quickly, with more than a hint of spittle-flecked vehemence in his writing.
A quick peek at iTunes shows that it is the U.S office. Getting the UK Office would require Apple to do a deal with the BBC. And wouldn't *that* be a great day.
Pop quiz. Can you come up with an IT equivalent of a typical slashdot psueudo-science headline? Let's have a go:
1. Intel claims infinite number of transisters available on new chip 2. Latest Linux release boots before PC is switched on 3. Researcher claims open source licensing causes random memory corruption.
Well it struck me that the management policy was actually self-referential to the extent that it counts as whining about whining. I'm not sure whether they could actually implement it without instantaneously disciplining/firing themselves.
I don't understand the urge to meet the particular people who have donated their genes to your parents.
You may not, but it doesn't seem that uncommon. I don't understand the urge to watch soccer games, but there you go.
If I did meet my genetic "parents," if they must so be called, they would be no different from any other random SOB off the street.
Well they would be different, in that they would be alike you in certain ways, at the very least I can understand a dispassionate semi-scientific interest in talking to them and finding out in what ways they differ or don't.
I think your point of view is entirely reasonable, but I think it is unreasonable for you to lay into this kid, just because he sees things differently.
Slashdot Mirror
"Sending information to Apple" implies that it's kept, tracked, logged, or aggregated somehow.
No. "Sending information to Apple" implies that information is sent to Apple. Whether that information is kept, logged, tracked or aggregated is an open question, although I tend to believe Apple's assertion that it is not.
But that information clearly could be logged and, oh I don't know - supplied to the RIAA - in theory. That's why there is a cause for at least interest, if not concern.
I'm an Apple fanboy. Do I want Apple grabbing a list of all the music I have in iTunes, without any understanding of what they do with that data? No.
As it happens I'm not too bothered by this since I find the explanation of how they discard the data pretty convincing.
But the fact remains, having corporation X gather a list of files from my machine without permission is not ideal.
It looks at any audio you play, yes including stuff you rip.
In that case you want Edit > Show Ministore
Think about it. If you don't buy music from the iTunes Music Store, Apple still knows what you're listening to and probably has a good idea about your listening habits.
... though I'm not exactly outrraged since the first thing I did was turn off the huge, ugly ministore since it took up so much room.
Something to see here.
Secondly Apple already knows what song you download
You're confused. This is not monitoring (just) the music you bought from ITMS. It is looking at all the music you play in iTunes, irrespective of source.
Crank up Software Update and grab iTunes 6.0.2
42 - Ghost Recon junky - on my old Mac using Gameranger.
Whoops, well that just about wraps it up for open source then. I've always thought that Linux was the absolute exemplar of slowly developed high quality low cost code. ... Although I suppose The Hurd might be an even better exemplar one day.
No. You have missed the point - the poster wasn't complaining about a misuse of the phrase 'knock your socks off' - (s)he was complaining about the use of the word 'literally' when the OP meant 'metaphorically'.
... of course, I'm not a pedant in the true sense of the word.
At least, I hope the OP meant that. I suppose it is possible that the water cooling kit could explode extravagantly.
I imagine also that this is also, at least partly, a political/public-opinion issue.
The BBC is fairly regularly attacked in the UK for spending so much on a Web presence that is heavily used by an international audience but which is paid for by a tax on TVs. It would get a right old kicking from the UK press and in particular the Murdoch press if it made content that "we have paid for" freely available overseas. For those who don't realise - the BBC's World Service is paid for directly by the foreign and commonwealth office, not from the TV licence fee.
The License fee is supposed to be spent entirely on the provision of services to the UK population. The BBC is watching its back here.
Bit of a bee in your bonnet there, no? The parent poster nowhere suggested that open source programs couldn't be commercial. Nor did he suggest that commercial programs could not be open source.
... and which happen to be closed, proprietary apps.
He just gave examples of two commercial desktop applications that run on Macs, but not on Linux distros
That reminds me of a rather nifty science fiction story I read probably 30 years ago. An old bloke sitting at a bar who turns out to be god, but with his power's gradually diminishing as science proves what he can't do. At the start of the story he is wearing a rather splendid jacket that seems to contain shifting lights woven within its fabric. The lights go out about half way through the story.
Anyone remember the name/author?
"God did it" and "Random Chance did it" are both theological statements that are logically indistinguishable from one another.
As I sit and watch an antibiotic-resistant strain of bacteria make a little colony on my petri-dish, I am - according to you - faced with two identically probable causes. Either God manifested in the incubator and decided to save a particularly worthy bacterium and it's off-spring, Noah-like... or a random mutation conferring antibiotic resistance allowed the bacterium to thrive through a process of natural selection.
All the sophistry in the world isn't going hide the fact as to which is the most probable cause.
When an employee comes to talk about a project I will often search for terms related to the project or sometimes by the employeees name in spotlight while they sit around my screen.
It doesn't sound like a metadata related problem to me. It sounds more like a furniture placement issue.
But seriously, de-selecting 'Mail' in the Spotlight pref pane, should stop spotlight from displaying results in its window, while retaining the full indexing facilities within Mail.app itself.
No. From the original posting:
"I joined 6 years ago"
It is far too late to stamp authority on the situation now - the original poster is in a rut at the company and staying there is just seeing his skill set degrade, together with his moral. There is only one thing he should do - tender his resignation.
It is just possible that this will lead to an instant renegotiating of his role, but frankly I doubt it. My guess is that the company knows it has itself a useful lackey that keeps things running, that's what they are interested in keeping.
I have not seen the lights, but if you had read the article, you would know better.
"practically as fast"
AKA "slower"
Precisely. I thought; they've floated? AGAIN?
The problem is that while Andrew Orlowski highlights the problems with Wikipedia he does so in such a consistently inflammatory way (wiki-fiddler, anyone) to make the word 'troll' appear to be fair enough. Many of his reports look like pure flamebait, or rather click-bait designed to increase El Reg's advertising revenue.
Wikipedia has its problems, indeed and it is good to see someone willing to go against the flow and point out the system's short-comings. Sadly Orlowski's invective (for me at least) got old rather quickly, with more than a hint of spittle-flecked vehemence in his writing.
To answer all of your questions, those would be "libel".
A quick peek at iTunes shows that it is the U.S office. Getting the UK Office would require Apple to do a deal with the BBC. And wouldn't *that* be a great day.
Seconded.
Pop quiz. Can you come up with an IT equivalent of a typical slashdot psueudo-science headline? Let's have a go:
1. Intel claims infinite number of transisters available on new chip
2. Latest Linux release boots before PC is switched on
3. Researcher claims open source licensing causes random memory corruption.
I mean, come on guys.
Well it struck me that the management policy was actually self-referential to the extent that it counts as whining about whining. I'm not sure whether they could actually implement it without instantaneously disciplining/firing themselves.
I don't understand the urge to meet the particular people who have donated their genes to your parents.
You may not, but it doesn't seem that uncommon. I don't understand the urge to watch soccer games, but there you go.
If I did meet my genetic "parents," if they must so be called, they would be no different from any other random SOB off the street.
Well they would be different, in that they would be alike you in certain ways, at the very least I can understand a dispassionate semi-scientific interest in talking to them and finding out in what ways they differ or don't.
I think your point of view is entirely reasonable, but I think it is unreasonable for you to lay into this kid, just because he sees things differently.