iPad has reached that point that Kleenex (facial tissue) or Scotch tape (clear adhesive tape). People can say "I want an iPad but not one of those expensive Apple ones" and mean they want a tablet type device.
I'd say this is nowhere near. The generic name is "tablet" and not "iPad". And the generic name for a music player is "MP3 player", not iPod, even when a so-called MP3 player might be used to play mostly AAC or other non-MP3 formats.
While I hate people that drive and text, I don't see the solution proposed by the article as effective. Phones are cheap enough and portable enough that there is no way to enforce such "interlock" if the user does not want to comply.
Having your phone changed so it can't text while you are driving would be one thing. Being caught again with a different phone will probably get you into one hell of trouble.
MOST Apple products are a little overpriced and underspecced upon release. Look at the original iPod -- it was indeed expensive, had no wireless, and "less space than a Nomad."
Just saying: You paid about the same amount for the original iPod that Toshiba charged you for the hard drive in that iPod. And since the Toshiba hard drives were hard to drive but could be used nicely to upgrade certain high end cameras, I heard that quite a few iPods were purchased just to take them apart and extract the hard drive and put it into a camera.
Only an idiot or egomaniac would think that Amazon could compete with that product...that phone...it had too many dumb bells and whistles (3D screen! ooh shiny!) but all the important details were wrong.
Everyone other than Apple and Android phones has to convince potential customers that their phone is better or cheaper than an iPhone or both, and at the same time better or cheaper than each of a wide range of Android phones.
Making something that some people would prefer to an iPhone is doable. Making something that some people would prefer to an Android phone is doable. Making something that does both at the same time is very, very hard.
Is it wrong to cite the bad choices that a rape victim may have made, in a specific circumstance, like getting blackout-drunk in a semi-private party while surrounded by people that the victim might not know very well, when the nature gathering itself has helped whip up those in attendance into a higher state of sexual interest?
A rapist is a rapist. A rapist might make a decision which victim to choose and the actual victim acting differently might have made the rapist choose a different victim, but it was the rapist's decision to rape. And what kind of sicko wants sex with a "blackout-drunk" woman? If that's what you want, why not invest in a blow-up doll?
With compilers, what counts is the speed of compiled code rather than compilation speed, and here clang loses by quite a bit.
Says who? For the first statement, I haven't seen any code in the last few years where the difference between compiler optimisations would have made any difference. I haven't actually seen any code that needed any cleverness. I have seen code that needed stupidity removed, but nothing else.
For the second statement, there is a benchmark that shows gcc to be better, and goes what, the gcc developers try their best to optimise for it, while everyone else ignores it. The results are predictable.
I can back this up. I've had the exact same experience. Induction/ketosis is probably the greatest single body hack ever invented. I lose a pound a day so long as I stay on it, though I have fallen off multiple times and it takes me a few days to get back on.
Atkins believed in all kind of weird effects that his diet would create to help you lose weight. The last I heard is that people on the Atkins diet actually have a lower calorie intake. You eat a lot of fat, and then your body says "I've had enough food now, not hungry anymore". While people eating low-fat carb rich tend to stay hungry and end up eating more.
The corporation famous for its slave labor and environmentally damaging manufacturing policies?
What company would that be? I heard of Samsung whose employees keep dying from leukaemia, but I didn't know they used slave labor. They should have a look at Apple, who is usually years ahead of others with their environmental policies, who have forced agencies to pay back millions of dollars to employees in China, and how force their contractors to send everyone caught employing underage person to send them back to finish school _and pay them a full salary while they are at school_.
The corporation that works with the NSA to cripple your phone and provides whatever is asked of it to the security forces.
What company would that be? I don't know of any company that isn't doing everything to fight the NSA.
Apple who can't even secure their own cloud and thus keep nude celeb photos safe.
Apple cannot even prevent some idiots from spreading stupid rumours.
The users are winning, because they're not being roped into a monoculture.
In the non-Apple PC market, users are losing. The only distinguishing feature between different PCs is the price, so we have a race to the lowest price. This may be helpful to some degree to people without money, but most people end up with a rubbish PC, even if they could afford something much better, because they just can't buy it.
Apple is now making more than 50% of all profits from computer hardware sales. Because nobody else manages to create and sell a product that people would be willing to pay good money for. When people buy a MacBook Air to run Windows on it, you see how pathetic the PC hardware market has become.
But of course while Apple's share keeps going down year after year, there is always a justification in the iCommunity
I'll tell you what you are missing. You are looking at the share in the "smartphone" market, while I would look at the share in the "phone" market. Apple's share of the phone market has been growing year after year after year without fail. At the same time, more and more phones have been converted from non-smart phones to smartphones, but that doesn't affect Apple's business whatsoever.
There are people comparing Apple's and Samsung's sales, but if you compare Apple and Nokia, Apple now sells more phones, and that's while counting the cheap £10 or £20 phones that Nokia makes. (Well, they are all Microsoft phones now, but who cares).
No wonder all the young men are all killing each other in the middle east: they have to live with ASCII porn.
Seriously, I was told that the fact that muslims are allowed to take more than one wife, with the obvious side effect that there are no wives available for many muslims, helps getting volunteers for all kinds of dangerous missions. Much harder to convince a happily married man with two kids to go on some suicide mission.
An individual in the United States must abide by US law even when abroad, in addition to abiding by the rules of the foreign country.
Citation? Obviously anything that is a crime according to the US laws is a crime, wherever it happens. However, things that are crimes according to US laws but happen outside the USA will not be prosecuted in the USA. It's relevant to extradition - if you do something say in Germany against German law, you will only be extradited from the USA if it is also illegal according to US law.
Consider this scenario: I am a US citizen who owns a house in Ireland. I commit a crime (in the US), say selling drugs. Can a US judge issue a warrant to search my house in Ireland? Let's say I am convicted. Part of the ruling is to have all of my property connected to the crime seized (by the US DOJ). Can they seize my house in Ireland?
Answer A: Yes, the judge can issue a warrant. On the other hand, the Irish guardia will tell any US police officer turning up at the house in Ireland with that warrant to piss off, possibly arresting them for trespassing or burglary.
Answer B: In my opinion, yes. It will be difficult if the person has debtors in Ireland. Mortgage, unpaid bills etc. will likely come first.
European servers owned and managed by a US company. While there may be local employees in the EU, they are ultimately answerable to more senior US based employees within their own company and therefore to US law.
Data stored in Europe. Which may only be surrendered if someone gets a warrant that is valid in the European country. It doesn't matter who owns the company. If Ireland issued a warrant for the data, then Microsoft couldn't say "we are a US company", they would have to obey an Irish warrant for data in Ireland. If the USA issues a warrant for data in Ireland, then Microsoft has no right to surrender the data. Again, doesn't matter whether Microsoft is a US country or not.
A death threat isn't credible until an actual attempt has been made.
Someone making death threats is a fucking deranged idiotic imbecile. You have to be a fucking deranged idiotic imbecile to do that. You also have to be a fucking deranged idiotic imbecile to kill someone. So how is someone being threatened, or a police officer trying to help, distinguish between the one fucking deranged idiotic imbecile and the other? You can't.
No biggie, I contacted Amazon and received a full refund, and the dealer was soon after banned from Amazon, apparently I wasn't the only one being scammed.
Meanwhile, not everybody found out in time, not everybody bothered complaining, and the fraudster pocketed a lot of money. After being banned from Amazon he started a new company under a different name and does it again.
The only way to prevent this is someone pressing criminal charges and someone going to jail.
As long as I'm getting a ride and paying for it, I'm imagine I'm also free to try to proselytise.
But you are not paying for a ride, right? You are just giving a donation to the nice guy who gives you a lift when they went into the same direction, right? If I'm the nice guy giving you a lift, and you behave like an ass, you wouldn't mind getting thrown out of my car, right? I mean it's not a regulated taxi, it's private people. Or so they say.
What happens when the car runs out of gas/charge and you need to push it to the side of the road out of traffic.
What about the car driving to the side of the road out of traffic with the last bit of kinetic energy available? People might be stupid enough to drive until the tank is absolutely empty and be stuck, a driverless car wouldn't. And then there are driverless Diesel cars which most definitely won't run until the tank is empty, because that kind of thing is _expensive_.
While it's easy for me to see this as a bad design, it's also not much of a stretch to believe that this was a conscious choice. After all, if it were trivially easy to pair a wireless device with the prosthetic, it would be trivially easy to take control of the guy's hand (think "Stop hitting yourself!").
All you need to do is to not pair the arm with the specific iPhone, but to pair it with the AppleID of the user of the iPhone. Which is from a software development point of view ten times easier and absolutely safe. It is much easier to steal an iPhone than an AppleID.
It was intentionally coupled to a specific device for legal/liability reasons related to medical devices.
Pairing to a specific device is stupid. For example, Apple gives you a one year warranty, but they don't guarantee that you ever get your device back, repaired. So if through Apple's fault your phone breaks one week after you spent $70K, then Apple will happily provide you with a brand new, _different_ phone. And that's common sense and what everyone else does, and nobody complains about it - because pairing with a specific device is stupid.
Out of phone warranty, an iPhone doesn't last forever. Quite possibly not as long as a $70K prosthesis. And people want to buy new phones, sometimes they drop their phones in the toilet, and so on.
The correct thing to do is to pair the arm with the user's AppleID. It's simple, a standard method, and it avoids all these problems very easily. Worst case you buy a new phone and download a backup.
Apple doesn't allow access to UDIDs (universal device identifiers) anymore, so unless the software is quite old, or requires a jailbroken device, the prosthesis cannot be paired to the device. (That's one of the reason why you can't access the UDID anymore, because pairing information with a device is stupid; the bigger reason is privacy).
The prosthesis can easily be paired to an AppleID plus an application specific ID. However, all information about this would be stored on the device, backed up to iTunes, and could be restored by just buying a new phone, entering the AppleID and password, and downloading the last backup.
If that doesn't work, then these guys must have some really strange and stupid software design + implementation.
If the police catches a car thief, they will likely visit anyone buying a car from him. They can't know that you bought his car that he purchased before he started his thieving career, or the car which he purchased himself with money he made from thieving (which would then be legally yours, unlike a stolen car that you bought off the thief), until they ask you.
That's the purpose of interviewing that man - to figure out if he had anything to do with illegal activities or not. Apparently he didn't. So what's the problem?
Slashdot Mirror
iPad has reached that point that Kleenex (facial tissue) or Scotch tape (clear adhesive tape). People can say "I want an iPad but not one of those expensive Apple ones" and mean they want a tablet type device.
I'd say this is nowhere near. The generic name is "tablet" and not "iPad". And the generic name for a music player is "MP3 player", not iPod, even when a so-called MP3 player might be used to play mostly AAC or other non-MP3 formats.
While I hate people that drive and text, I don't see the solution proposed by the article as effective. Phones are cheap enough and portable enough that there is no way to enforce such "interlock" if the user does not want to comply.
Having your phone changed so it can't text while you are driving would be one thing. Being caught again with a different phone will probably get you into one hell of trouble.
MOST Apple products are a little overpriced and underspecced upon release. Look at the original iPod -- it was indeed expensive, had no wireless, and "less space than a Nomad."
Just saying: You paid about the same amount for the original iPod that Toshiba charged you for the hard drive in that iPod. And since the Toshiba hard drives were hard to drive but could be used nicely to upgrade certain high end cameras, I heard that quite a few iPods were purchased just to take them apart and extract the hard drive and put it into a camera.
Only an idiot or egomaniac would think that Amazon could compete with that product...that phone...it had too many dumb bells and whistles (3D screen! ooh shiny!) but all the important details were wrong.
Everyone other than Apple and Android phones has to convince potential customers that their phone is better or cheaper than an iPhone or both, and at the same time better or cheaper than each of a wide range of Android phones.
Making something that some people would prefer to an iPhone is doable. Making something that some people would prefer to an Android phone is doable. Making something that does both at the same time is very, very hard.
Is it wrong to cite the bad choices that a rape victim may have made, in a specific circumstance, like getting blackout-drunk in a semi-private party while surrounded by people that the victim might not know very well, when the nature gathering itself has helped whip up those in attendance into a higher state of sexual interest?
A rapist is a rapist. A rapist might make a decision which victim to choose and the actual victim acting differently might have made the rapist choose a different victim, but it was the rapist's decision to rape. And what kind of sicko wants sex with a "blackout-drunk" woman? If that's what you want, why not invest in a blow-up doll?
With compilers, what counts is the speed of compiled code rather than compilation speed, and here clang loses by quite a bit.
Says who? For the first statement, I haven't seen any code in the last few years where the difference between compiler optimisations would have made any difference. I haven't actually seen any code that needed any cleverness. I have seen code that needed stupidity removed, but nothing else.
For the second statement, there is a benchmark that shows gcc to be better, and goes what, the gcc developers try their best to optimise for it, while everyone else ignores it. The results are predictable.
I can back this up. I've had the exact same experience. Induction/ketosis is probably the greatest single body hack ever invented. I lose a pound a day so long as I stay on it, though I have fallen off multiple times and it takes me a few days to get back on.
Atkins believed in all kind of weird effects that his diet would create to help you lose weight. The last I heard is that people on the Atkins diet actually have a lower calorie intake. You eat a lot of fat, and then your body says "I've had enough food now, not hungry anymore". While people eating low-fat carb rich tend to stay hungry and end up eating more.
The corporation famous for its slave labor and environmentally damaging manufacturing policies?
What company would that be? I heard of Samsung whose employees keep dying from leukaemia, but I didn't know they used slave labor. They should have a look at Apple, who is usually years ahead of others with their environmental policies, who have forced agencies to pay back millions of dollars to employees in China, and how force their contractors to send everyone caught employing underage person to send them back to finish school _and pay them a full salary while they are at school_.
The corporation that works with the NSA to cripple your phone and provides whatever is asked of it to the security forces.
What company would that be? I don't know of any company that isn't doing everything to fight the NSA.
Apple who can't even secure their own cloud and thus keep nude celeb photos safe.
Apple cannot even prevent some idiots from spreading stupid rumours.
The users are winning, because they're not being roped into a monoculture.
In the non-Apple PC market, users are losing. The only distinguishing feature between different PCs is the price, so we have a race to the lowest price. This may be helpful to some degree to people without money, but most people end up with a rubbish PC, even if they could afford something much better, because they just can't buy it.
Apple is now making more than 50% of all profits from computer hardware sales. Because nobody else manages to create and sell a product that people would be willing to pay good money for. When people buy a MacBook Air to run Windows on it, you see how pathetic the PC hardware market has become.
But of course while Apple's share keeps going down year after year, there is always a justification in the iCommunity
I'll tell you what you are missing. You are looking at the share in the "smartphone" market, while I would look at the share in the "phone" market. Apple's share of the phone market has been growing year after year after year without fail. At the same time, more and more phones have been converted from non-smart phones to smartphones, but that doesn't affect Apple's business whatsoever.
There are people comparing Apple's and Samsung's sales, but if you compare Apple and Nokia, Apple now sells more phones, and that's while counting the cheap £10 or £20 phones that Nokia makes. (Well, they are all Microsoft phones now, but who cares).
No wonder all the young men are all killing each other in the middle east: they have to live with ASCII porn.
Seriously, I was told that the fact that muslims are allowed to take more than one wife, with the obvious side effect that there are no wives available for many muslims, helps getting volunteers for all kinds of dangerous missions. Much harder to convince a happily married man with two kids to go on some suicide mission.
easily lost stolen hacked phone equipped with a radio broadcasting your CC info 24/7
Easily hacked? How would you go about hacking an iPhone?
An individual in the United States must abide by US law even when abroad, in addition to abiding by the rules of the foreign country.
Citation? Obviously anything that is a crime according to the US laws is a crime, wherever it happens. However, things that are crimes according to US laws but happen outside the USA will not be prosecuted in the USA. It's relevant to extradition - if you do something say in Germany against German law, you will only be extradited from the USA if it is also illegal according to US law.
Consider this scenario: I am a US citizen who owns a house in Ireland. I commit a crime (in the US), say selling drugs. Can a US judge issue a warrant to search my house in Ireland? Let's say I am convicted. Part of the ruling is to have all of my property connected to the crime seized (by the US DOJ). Can they seize my house in Ireland?
Answer A: Yes, the judge can issue a warrant. On the other hand, the Irish guardia will tell any US police officer turning up at the house in Ireland with that warrant to piss off, possibly arresting them for trespassing or burglary.
Answer B: In my opinion, yes. It will be difficult if the person has debtors in Ireland. Mortgage, unpaid bills etc. will likely come first.
European servers owned and managed by a US company. While there may be local employees in the EU, they are ultimately answerable to more senior US based employees within their own company and therefore to US law.
Data stored in Europe. Which may only be surrendered if someone gets a warrant that is valid in the European country. It doesn't matter who owns the company. If Ireland issued a warrant for the data, then Microsoft couldn't say "we are a US company", they would have to obey an Irish warrant for data in Ireland. If the USA issues a warrant for data in Ireland, then Microsoft has no right to surrender the data. Again, doesn't matter whether Microsoft is a US country or not.
Well its not just MS, ANY company. Google, Apple, etc would be effected by this as well.
The technical solution would be to design their storage in such a way that it is _impossible_ for the company to read a customer's data.
A death threat isn't credible until an actual attempt has been made.
Someone making death threats is a fucking deranged idiotic imbecile. You have to be a fucking deranged idiotic imbecile to do that. You also have to be a fucking deranged idiotic imbecile to kill someone. So how is someone being threatened, or a police officer trying to help, distinguish between the one fucking deranged idiotic imbecile and the other? You can't.
Every death threat is credible.
No biggie, I contacted Amazon and received a full refund, and the dealer was soon after banned from Amazon, apparently I wasn't the only one being scammed.
Meanwhile, not everybody found out in time, not everybody bothered complaining, and the fraudster pocketed a lot of money. After being banned from Amazon he started a new company under a different name and does it again.
The only way to prevent this is someone pressing criminal charges and someone going to jail.
As long as I'm getting a ride and paying for it, I'm imagine I'm also free to try to proselytise.
But you are not paying for a ride, right? You are just giving a donation to the nice guy who gives you a lift when they went into the same direction, right? If I'm the nice guy giving you a lift, and you behave like an ass, you wouldn't mind getting thrown out of my car, right? I mean it's not a regulated taxi, it's private people. Or so they say.
If a driverless car has no manual means of steering, and if it broke down and you had to push it, how could you control it?
If a car with automatic gear box breaks down, how do you push it?
What happens when the car runs out of gas/charge and you need to push it to the side of the road out of traffic.
What about the car driving to the side of the road out of traffic with the last bit of kinetic energy available? People might be stupid enough to drive until the tank is absolutely empty and be stuck, a driverless car wouldn't. And then there are driverless Diesel cars which most definitely won't run until the tank is empty, because that kind of thing is _expensive_.
While it's easy for me to see this as a bad design, it's also not much of a stretch to believe that this was a conscious choice. After all, if it were trivially easy to pair a wireless device with the prosthetic, it would be trivially easy to take control of the guy's hand (think "Stop hitting yourself!").
All you need to do is to not pair the arm with the specific iPhone, but to pair it with the AppleID of the user of the iPhone. Which is from a software development point of view ten times easier and absolutely safe. It is much easier to steal an iPhone than an AppleID.
It was intentionally coupled to a specific device for legal/liability reasons related to medical devices.
Pairing to a specific device is stupid. For example, Apple gives you a one year warranty, but they don't guarantee that you ever get your device back, repaired. So if through Apple's fault your phone breaks one week after you spent $70K, then Apple will happily provide you with a brand new, _different_ phone. And that's common sense and what everyone else does, and nobody complains about it - because pairing with a specific device is stupid.
Out of phone warranty, an iPhone doesn't last forever. Quite possibly not as long as a $70K prosthesis. And people want to buy new phones, sometimes they drop their phones in the toilet, and so on.
The correct thing to do is to pair the arm with the user's AppleID. It's simple, a standard method, and it avoids all these problems very easily. Worst case you buy a new phone and download a backup.
Apple doesn't allow access to UDIDs (universal device identifiers) anymore, so unless the software is quite old, or requires a jailbroken device, the prosthesis cannot be paired to the device. (That's one of the reason why you can't access the UDID anymore, because pairing information with a device is stupid; the bigger reason is privacy).
The prosthesis can easily be paired to an AppleID plus an application specific ID. However, all information about this would be stored on the device, backed up to iTunes, and could be restored by just buying a new phone, entering the AppleID and password, and downloading the last backup.
If that doesn't work, then these guys must have some really strange and stupid software design + implementation.
If the police catches a car thief, they will likely visit anyone buying a car from him. They can't know that you bought his car that he purchased before he started his thieving career, or the car which he purchased himself with money he made from thieving (which would then be legally yours, unlike a stolen car that you bought off the thief), until they ask you.
That's the purpose of interviewing that man - to figure out if he had anything to do with illegal activities or not. Apparently he didn't. So what's the problem?