No, if he didn't want the app then clearly there are legitimate reasons to remove it worth discussing. A baseless claim that "they need to learn to [not block apps]" was met with "these boobie apps are unwanted spam to me". Didn't state any kind of absolutes here, just gave one argument in favour of Apple's decision.
There's other reasons to think Apple's decision is rational here as well. Apple doesn't want people to perceive their devices as being cluttered with crap. By not letting people clutter iPhones with crap in the first place, they avoid risking that aspect of their public perception.
The article says 5"-10" screen size is ideal for Chrome OS, then they go and show a video with what looks like what, a 30" screen? The reality distortion field has spread, and it stretches rulers now too!
It gains a reputation as a professional, efficient information source. Or at least it may, if PR disasters like every Slashdot discussion on the topic of deletion were contained there.
When I was about seven (1993ish) I was waiting in our pickup in the parking lot of KFC while my mother picked up dinner. Looking out the window, I saw a an object that looked very similar to the moon in the night sky, but somewhat larger, and with deeper yellow tones. It arced halfway across the horizon in a matter of perhaps 1.5 to 2 seconds, stopped and descended enough to appear 50% larger or so, then flew out of sight, going farther from view and continuing its arc across the horizon in no more than half a second.
I don't directly recall the experience of being there now though, I only recall the visual in my mind.
But I also recall watching Unsolved Mysteries perhaps a week earlier, where they depicted a couple people in a boat on a lake seeing the very same thing.
And our KFC has the worst service of any fast food restaurant I've ever seen. I probably waited half an hour in that car, dozed off, and dreamed it. But it's only through that objective logical perspective that I reach that conclusion, so I sympathize with you in having a very vivid memory of such a bizarre sight.
I once worked as a technician at a local electronics retail and service centre, in a town I'm sure is hundreds of kilometres away from any sort of industrial metal shredders. We had contracts to provide service for government-linked organizations, and it was policy then to physically drill holes clear through any decommissioned hard drives (often at the expense of voiding what would have been a warranty replacement), and sending photographs of the drive back to a supervisor to confirm the incident occurred.
Maybe I'm crazy here, but I think I'm going to have to agree with the grandparent on this one.
In your example, we've got an explosion within the gun that sends a bullet flying one way, and the rifle flying back at you, the other way. Hold it wrong, and you could end up with a significant bruise or something I'm sure, using a more powerful weapon, but even that won't be breaking any spines.
Meanwhile, the equal and opposite reaction is that bullet. Now, say that somehow you crammed this gun into a shirt pocket. Say even that yes, it's really really loose, and the bullet has some slowdown time. Unless this guy's wearing a bullet proof jacket, complete with bullet proof pockets that're stitched on with fishing line, I'm thinking that pocket's not going to fare so well. And the guy's back didn't even break!
Good call! That's one of the more difficult to argue pieces of evidence for an older universe, isn't it? So easy to explain to non-astronomers, fairly easy to show someone visually, and pushes far past the 6000-10000 year old argument estimates. There's still the "if God created man as a full adult, he can create stars fully developed and in motion too!" argument, but there's no real motive for that one. I'll ask some friends for a rebuttal there.
With an antenna diameter of 164 feet, the LMT dwarfs existing millimetre-wave telescopes and should be able to pick up signals from the faintest objects in outer space.See, it doesn't see anything fainter! Point out something this can't see! Can't? Well then, it must see the faintest objects now, right?
It would be the "what little they had left for him" part that was being addressed here. Something tells me that you wouldn't consider any number in the billions to be "little," not to mention myself, or God for that matter!
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.smbc-comics.com/
No, if he didn't want the app then clearly there are legitimate reasons to remove it worth discussing. A baseless claim that "they need to learn to [not block apps]" was met with "these boobie apps are unwanted spam to me". Didn't state any kind of absolutes here, just gave one argument in favour of Apple's decision. There's other reasons to think Apple's decision is rational here as well. Apple doesn't want people to perceive their devices as being cluttered with crap. By not letting people clutter iPhones with crap in the first place, they avoid risking that aspect of their public perception.
The article says 5"-10" screen size is ideal for Chrome OS, then they go and show a video with what looks like what, a 30" screen? The reality distortion field has spread, and it stretches rulers now too!
It gains a reputation as a professional, efficient information source. Or at least it may, if PR disasters like every Slashdot discussion on the topic of deletion were contained there.
When I was about seven (1993ish) I was waiting in our pickup in the parking lot of KFC while my mother picked up dinner. Looking out the window, I saw a an object that looked very similar to the moon in the night sky, but somewhat larger, and with deeper yellow tones. It arced halfway across the horizon in a matter of perhaps 1.5 to 2 seconds, stopped and descended enough to appear 50% larger or so, then flew out of sight, going farther from view and continuing its arc across the horizon in no more than half a second. I don't directly recall the experience of being there now though, I only recall the visual in my mind. But I also recall watching Unsolved Mysteries perhaps a week earlier, where they depicted a couple people in a boat on a lake seeing the very same thing. And our KFC has the worst service of any fast food restaurant I've ever seen. I probably waited half an hour in that car, dozed off, and dreamed it. But it's only through that objective logical perspective that I reach that conclusion, so I sympathize with you in having a very vivid memory of such a bizarre sight.
I once worked as a technician at a local electronics retail and service centre, in a town I'm sure is hundreds of kilometres away from any sort of industrial metal shredders. We had contracts to provide service for government-linked organizations, and it was policy then to physically drill holes clear through any decommissioned hard drives (often at the expense of voiding what would have been a warranty replacement), and sending photographs of the drive back to a supervisor to confirm the incident occurred.
Maybe I'm crazy here, but I think I'm going to have to agree with the grandparent on this one.
In your example, we've got an explosion within the gun that sends a bullet flying one way, and the rifle flying back at you, the other way. Hold it wrong, and you could end up with a significant bruise or something I'm sure, using a more powerful weapon, but even that won't be breaking any spines.
Meanwhile, the equal and opposite reaction is that bullet. Now, say that somehow you crammed this gun into a shirt pocket. Say even that yes, it's really really loose, and the bullet has some slowdown time. Unless this guy's wearing a bullet proof jacket, complete with bullet proof pockets that're stitched on with fishing line, I'm thinking that pocket's not going to fare so well. And the guy's back didn't even break!
Good call! That's one of the more difficult to argue pieces of evidence for an older universe, isn't it? So easy to explain to non-astronomers, fairly easy to show someone visually, and pushes far past the 6000-10000 year old argument estimates. There's still the "if God created man as a full adult, he can create stars fully developed and in motion too!" argument, but there's no real motive for that one. I'll ask some friends for a rebuttal there.
With an antenna diameter of 164 feet, the LMT dwarfs existing millimetre-wave telescopes and should be able to pick up signals from the faintest objects in outer space.See, it doesn't see anything fainter! Point out something this can't see! Can't? Well then, it must see the faintest objects now, right?
It would be the "what little they had left for him" part that was being addressed here. Something tells me that you wouldn't consider any number in the billions to be "little," not to mention myself, or God for that matter!
Looks like you gathered some inspiration from http://www.simplebits.com, am I correct?