I don't think you're wrong, I just don't think they share your sensibilities regarding the potential benefits. It's cheaper and easier to just let it do whatever.
Bruce Willis is currently not available to deal with your space-threat as he's too busy hating on Die Hard fans. Fortunately Willis was cloned some time ago at a secret lab in England, and Jason Statham (codename Willis mk2) is ready to step up.
99.999% of apps are pure unadulterated shit that nobody needs. Most people find everything they need in the first month and only enthusiast level people can be bothered to sift through any app store to try to find stuff worth using. It's so plugged up with garbage that it really is a wasted effort.
The reality is that people will try new apps, but often they have to be recommended by someone.
Think about the number of things you'd use the word "huge" with in terms of searching. For most things, we'd probably denote some unit of measure or use the word "large". Google search returned mostly SFW stuff, but did include this rather hilarious porn image: http://media.boingboing.net/wp... (NSFW)
Beats is also the worst value for your dollar. They're ridiculously overpriced, and not that good. The only people who buy this stuff are people with more money than sense.
Who in their right mind would insure a satellite of that cost for flight on an experimental vehicle? I can't see any insurance company betting on something that high risk.
This is exactly right. And even if it is found to be bunk, that's still useful information because we will have learned a new way to test such claims. So whether it is what it claims, or it isn't what it claims, it still has a measure of scientific value if you can properly test it.
Tizen is going to wind up like Windows phone. Virtually nobody will develop for it so the ecosystem will never reach the critical mass required to become a serious player.
Companies don't seem to get it. Developers have to love your platform, or the only thing you'll attract is crickets.
My prediction is that they're going to come out with a new line that is even less repairable than before, and they'll make sure you need plenty of expensive adapters to use all your old peripherals!
I don't know why people continue to buy these machines. They're often inferior spec-wise unless you go to the top of the line models that are generally overpriced and all you're really getting is OSX which isn't that great.
Oh yeah? Well I know the sister's bother's second cousin who was friends to the guy that drove the bus that the father of the original laptop rode to work!
It doesn't take 50 hours to figure that out in NMS. Granted, it will take longer than the average game to figure out how misrepresented it is, but 50 hours? Not even close. I would have refunded at 5 hours, except I knew it was against Steam's official policy so I didn't bother to try until reports started to come out that Steam might be bending the rules.
Honestly I don't care too much about the money - I never spend money on games that I can't afford to write off. It's the principle of it.
I know siding with big business is not the popular motif around here, but I would tend to agree with Sony on the 50 hours of play bit. If you got 50 hours of game time out of something you don't deserve a refund.
Additionally: HAVE ANY OF YOU ACTUALLY ASKED FOR A FUCKING STATEMENT FROM STEAM REGARDING THEIR REFUND POLICY ON NMS? IS REAL JOURNALISM DEAD? ARE WE DOOMED TO REPEAT RANDOM NOBODIES WITH ZERO VERIFICATION?
I have 12 hours of playtime on NMS, and my steam refund was rejected. Reddit is full of attention whores looking to get their 15 seconds of fame.
You understand they were sued for something like 150 million right? Gawker has debts, and after all the legal fees and the judgement amount is paid he's going to be lucky if he has enough for a decent lunch. Filing for bankruptcy does not absolve you of debt. It just means that how you pay it all back gets adjudicated by the court. In this case, it's getting paid back by the liquification of his entire company.
IANAL, I'm just saying if imprisonment is found to be wrongful, there are a ton of cases showing that you can sometimes successfully sue the state.
As for whether or not this proposed law violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that's for the courts to decide. If I were to hazard an uneducated guess, I'd say the part of the Charter that deals with you giving testimony that incriminates you is probably relevant.
You're correct to say that Tim is not Apple - he's just the very public face of Apple. it's also true that the board could act in conflict with his own personal interests and he'd be forced to comply with them. However since he's the public face distinguishing between Tim and Apple serves no purpose. In this context they're the same thing. Tim could at any time quit Apple if he believes they're acting against his personal views. He doesn't require Apple to continue to survive as he's independently wealthy enough to live more comfortably than most of us given his current finances. It'd be very different if he couldn't just leave due to financial dependence. He hasn't quit which means he at least finds Apple's behaviors acceptable enough to keep collecting a paycheck. Given this, I don't think I'm wrong about Tim. He likes the power, or the money, or both enough to not care that Apple's practices are at best anti-consumer.
The short of it is that Tim is scum, just like Jobs.
If it's altruism, it's very selective altruism. Apple has a long and sorted history of distorting things to suit their bottom line. Generally speaking if someone is dishonest most of the time it isn't unreasonable to believe they're probably being dishonest when there is some doubt.
This is not about the ethics of doing something. This is about the negative press that would surround it. Never forget that Tim Cook and Apple are not your friends. The evidence of this can be found in the things they sell where they're purposefully made difficult or impossible to repair and you can't get proper schematics to self-repair. Where they sell computers as "new" for premium prices but use 6 year old hardware. Tim doesn't give two shits about ethics.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think you're wrong, I just don't think they share your sensibilities regarding the potential benefits. It's cheaper and easier to just let it do whatever.
KHAAAAAAaaaaaaaan!
I bet they won't, because $$$.
Bruce Willis is currently not available to deal with your space-threat as he's too busy hating on Die Hard fans. Fortunately Willis was cloned some time ago at a secret lab in England, and Jason Statham (codename Willis mk2) is ready to step up.
99.999% of apps are pure unadulterated shit that nobody needs. Most people find everything they need in the first month and only enthusiast level people can be bothered to sift through any app store to try to find stuff worth using. It's so plugged up with garbage that it really is a wasted effort.
The reality is that people will try new apps, but often they have to be recommended by someone.
Think about the number of things you'd use the word "huge" with in terms of searching. For most things, we'd probably denote some unit of measure or use the word "large". Google search returned mostly SFW stuff, but did include this rather hilarious porn image: http://media.boingboing.net/wp... (NSFW)
butt butt butt....
No it's not!
...and most of us wouldn't have it any other way...
Beats is also the worst value for your dollar. They're ridiculously overpriced, and not that good. The only people who buy this stuff are people with more money than sense.
Who in their right mind would insure a satellite of that cost for flight on an experimental vehicle? I can't see any insurance company betting on something that high risk.
This is exactly right. And even if it is found to be bunk, that's still useful information because we will have learned a new way to test such claims. So whether it is what it claims, or it isn't what it claims, it still has a measure of scientific value if you can properly test it.
Tizen is going to wind up like Windows phone. Virtually nobody will develop for it so the ecosystem will never reach the critical mass required to become a serious player.
Companies don't seem to get it. Developers have to love your platform, or the only thing you'll attract is crickets.
Yes, but clearly you haven't.
So a buzzing drone scares cows but a shotgun blast doesn't?
My prediction is that they're going to come out with a new line that is even less repairable than before, and they'll make sure you need plenty of expensive adapters to use all your old peripherals!
I don't know why people continue to buy these machines. They're often inferior spec-wise unless you go to the top of the line models that are generally overpriced and all you're really getting is OSX which isn't that great.
Oh yeah? Well I know the sister's bother's second cousin who was friends to the guy that drove the bus that the father of the original laptop rode to work!
It doesn't take 50 hours to figure that out in NMS. Granted, it will take longer than the average game to figure out how misrepresented it is, but 50 hours? Not even close. I would have refunded at 5 hours, except I knew it was against Steam's official policy so I didn't bother to try until reports started to come out that Steam might be bending the rules.
Honestly I don't care too much about the money - I never spend money on games that I can't afford to write off. It's the principle of it.
I know siding with big business is not the popular motif around here, but I would tend to agree with Sony on the 50 hours of play bit. If you got 50 hours of game time out of something you don't deserve a refund.
Additionally: HAVE ANY OF YOU ACTUALLY ASKED FOR A FUCKING STATEMENT FROM STEAM REGARDING THEIR REFUND POLICY ON NMS? IS REAL JOURNALISM DEAD? ARE WE DOOMED TO REPEAT RANDOM NOBODIES WITH ZERO VERIFICATION?
I have 12 hours of playtime on NMS, and my steam refund was rejected. Reddit is full of attention whores looking to get their 15 seconds of fame.
Nails are rarely hit so squarely on the head. Slashdot is like buzzfeed for nerds these days.
You understand they were sued for something like 150 million right? Gawker has debts, and after all the legal fees and the judgement amount is paid he's going to be lucky if he has enough for a decent lunch. Filing for bankruptcy does not absolve you of debt. It just means that how you pay it all back gets adjudicated by the court. In this case, it's getting paid back by the liquification of his entire company.
IANAL, I'm just saying if imprisonment is found to be wrongful, there are a ton of cases showing that you can sometimes successfully sue the state. As for whether or not this proposed law violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that's for the courts to decide. If I were to hazard an uneducated guess, I'd say the part of the Charter that deals with you giving testimony that incriminates you is probably relevant.
That's not true. In cases of wrongful imprisonment there are plenty of cases of people suing and winning.
Ivan Henry won 8m in 2010: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...
Réjean Hinse won 13.1m in 1997: http://www.ctvnews.ca/feds-que...
Ron and Linda Sterling won 925k in 2004: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/...
I could go on, there are plenty of other cases where victims of wrongful imprisonment were compensated.
You're correct to say that Tim is not Apple - he's just the very public face of Apple. it's also true that the board could act in conflict with his own personal interests and he'd be forced to comply with them. However since he's the public face distinguishing between Tim and Apple serves no purpose. In this context they're the same thing. Tim could at any time quit Apple if he believes they're acting against his personal views. He doesn't require Apple to continue to survive as he's independently wealthy enough to live more comfortably than most of us given his current finances. It'd be very different if he couldn't just leave due to financial dependence. He hasn't quit which means he at least finds Apple's behaviors acceptable enough to keep collecting a paycheck. Given this, I don't think I'm wrong about Tim. He likes the power, or the money, or both enough to not care that Apple's practices are at best anti-consumer. The short of it is that Tim is scum, just like Jobs.
If it's altruism, it's very selective altruism. Apple has a long and sorted history of distorting things to suit their bottom line. Generally speaking if someone is dishonest most of the time it isn't unreasonable to believe they're probably being dishonest when there is some doubt.
This is not about the ethics of doing something. This is about the negative press that would surround it. Never forget that Tim Cook and Apple are not your friends. The evidence of this can be found in the things they sell where they're purposefully made difficult or impossible to repair and you can't get proper schematics to self-repair. Where they sell computers as "new" for premium prices but use 6 year old hardware. Tim doesn't give two shits about ethics.