If you're a football fan, I'd compare Steve Jobs & Apple to Peyton Manning & the Indianapolis Colts.
The Colts were built around Manning, and when the team was all there, it worked perfectly. However, with Manning gone, they couldn't play the way they were designed to. Both the offense & defense were picked to complement Manning, and with any other quarterback, they are a poor team.
I'd say the same with Apple. I think Cook can be a great change for Apple, but the team that has been built has been built for another quarterback. Either Cook needs to act like Jobs (which I think is a bad idea) or Cook needs to change the mindset and likely many of the staff at Apple.
Either they keep going the same way or make a drastic shift, they can't work on a middle ground.
Better yet, have the government provide an open last mile without Internet access.
Let ISPs compete for the right to offer services to the customers.
Room for innovation, level playing field, and no wasted costs for the last mile.
Comcast & AT&T want to take us to a filtered version of the Internet with their services getting faster treatment? OK, fine. I'll buy my access from Google, or Joe-Blow's ISP that also has access to the same network.
I normally don't respond to AC, but this is too incorrect to let it go:
Network protocols and speeds and boundaries (as in routers vs switches, firewalls, etc) usually differentiate LAN's and WAN's.
So, one place I worked at had 30 locations across a state connected by 1gbit links, running ethernet. Are you really trying to say that such a network is a LAN simply because they are fast links & not talking HDLC?
Wikipedia:
A Wide Area Network (WAN) is a network that covers a broad area (i.e., any network that links across metropolitan, regional, or national boundaries)
Hmm..not mention of protocols or speed.
How about Webster's?
a network of computers (as the Internet) in a large area (as a country or the globe) for sharing resources or exchanging data
How about some fucking common sense: LOCAL vs WIDE = nothing do to with speed or protocol.
No, a big LAN is a big LAN. What makes a LAN, CAN, MAN, and WAN is just distance:
-LAN = Local area network. Usually, this is a single building, regardless how many networks are inside
-CAN = Campus area network. Multiple buildings on the same property connected together. These usually take a different set of hardware & may start using routing.
-MAN = Metro area network. Buildings on separate properties connected together in the same metro area. Usually done by radio or laser wireless or private leased fiber connections.
-WAN = Wide area network. Buildings in separate cities connected together.
You CAN run a single bridged network across a WAN, even though it is usually a VERY BAD IDEA. The number of networks is irrelevant, just the separation, as this determines what kind of hardware and layer 1 connections you're dealing with.
when in reality any software, hardware update should be shunned for at least six months
So, YOU are part of the reason I left AT&T. Had a Windows Phone. OS update that fixed both SECURITY and major OS bugs was released early in the year, but AT&T thought it was in my best interest to block the update. What assholes.
That would be like Dell or Microsoft releasing a driver update or a OS security fix, and Comcast deciding that the update "should be shunned for 6 months".
How about AT&T redirect their dickish behavior back to Apple, and demand a support number they can hot-transfer people into if Apple's update breaks Apple's phone. Same with Samsung, Google, Microsoft, etc...
"So, you updated your Apple phone with an Apple update & it broke? One moment, let me transfer you to an Apple Genus!"
Your escalation issues are solved with a click, and you can quit telling your customers how to use their own devices.
My thoughts exactly. I really don't care about a big evil corporation knowing where I've been, my religion, what I weigh, who I have sex with, etc. If anything, the more they know about me, the more likely that they will make products I want to buy.
However, the government knowing all of those things is actually something to be concerned about.
I think it is quite a marketing feat by the EU: Make it appear that they are strong defenders of privacy by being ruthless in protecting the privacy of consumers, while implementing far worse privacy breaches on their own citizens.
Calculating masks in your head will still be a more difficult task
Why would you do this, unless you work for a large ISP?
With IPv6, everyone uses/64 for each broadcast domain, cutting the address exactly in 1/2. It is easy.
Devices that need statics are DNS servers and routers, and neither should be changed fequently. Also, you're likely to use simple addresses for them, so it will be: NetworkPrefix::1, Network::2, Network::3, etc.
For me, I have 2601:d:881:b::1 for a default gateway, and 2601:d:881:b::101 for my DNS server #1, and 2601:d:881:b::102 for DNS server #2.
That isn't hard to remember, and it isn't hard to type. What exactly is the problem?
His point is that GoDaddy supported SOPA, which allowed companies to shut down websites on a whim.
If you continued to support GoDaddy after learning about this, then it is assumed you're fine with people's websites being shutdown for no good reason.
Therefore, why are you upset now?
You're the roofer on the Death Star. You knew the risks.
If you disagree, try asking someone on board the next time you take off why you have to have the window shades up, or the seats upright, or the tray table stowed, etc.
These are pretty obvious to me: -Shades up so other planes can see you better while you are on the ground at night -Seats upright so the seatbelt doesn't push your guts into your chest if you crash -Tray table stowed for the above reason as well
When your country name has "democratic" in it, you can usually count on that not actually being the case:
-Democratic Republic of the Congo (non-functioning government) -Democratic People's Republic of Korea (Communist) -People's Democratic Republic of Laos (Communist)
I don't know why we need to go through this every damn time
Because you are talking about something different.
Many (most?) people have no issue whatsoever with police being able use an array of cameras to read every plate near them, and alert the officer that the red Ford two lanes to the left is reported stolen. I know I don't.
Many (most?) people have BIG issues with a database that logs the location of every license plate to be later reported on when you want to track where a person was, or find all cars that were near X area at Y time.
If someone says "I don't see what why it is a privacy violation for a computer to read a plate" and you respond with "tracking and correlation", you're going to get tired of explaining your point to people that might actually agree with you.
TL;DR Automated reading of plates does not automatically mean logging and recording the location of them.
I feel sorry for the Iranian people, who by-and-large, are reasonably normal, but are stuck with a crap theocratic government through little fault of their own.
Not true. They have the ability to change their government, but they have decided it isn't worth the effort and lives it would take to do so.
The USA decided to change their government twice (Revolution worked, but the Civil War failed), and now has also decided apathy is much easier.
Neither group of citizens should get off pretending like they are helpless victims of their big old government. The government operates with the permission of the majority of the people in both cases.
For most things, I don't see why location should even be a data point.
I like the idea of police having an OCR to scan all plates near them and flag cars that are stolen or have warrants. However, there is no need to update any file with the location the plate was detected. A simple "Blue Ford at your 5-o'clock position is reported stolen" is enough.
I get that, and I wouldn't rule out that the app went to the same person each time. That seems a sensible way to prevent someone getting an issue past the censors by constantly re-applying until someone misses it.
This isn't extraordinary. Apple has shown (along with Microsoft's phone market and other app-store approval systems) that when you have many humans editing for content, you get sometimes stupid rejections like this one.
Because someone at Apple rejected this app doesn't mean Apple itself rejects it as formal policy, but it might. I'm sure in the coming days we'll find out one way or another.
However, this highlights the issue with getting approval from a centrally controlled application market where approvals are granted by many different humans with different understanding of what the rules are. Nothing is black and white.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're a football fan, I'd compare Steve Jobs & Apple to Peyton Manning & the Indianapolis Colts.
The Colts were built around Manning, and when the team was all there, it worked perfectly. However, with Manning gone, they couldn't play the way they were designed to. Both the offense & defense were picked to complement Manning, and with any other quarterback, they are a poor team.
I'd say the same with Apple. I think Cook can be a great change for Apple, but the team that has been built has been built for another quarterback. Either Cook needs to act like Jobs (which I think is a bad idea) or Cook needs to change the mindset and likely many of the staff at Apple.
Either they keep going the same way or make a drastic shift, they can't work on a middle ground.
Did you mean this forecast to sound neutral, damming, or hopeful?
I see it as hopeful. Driving a car on a public road isn't a right. If you want to drive with manual control, do it on a road you paid for yourself.
Better yet, have the government provide an open last mile without Internet access.
Let ISPs compete for the right to offer services to the customers.
Room for innovation, level playing field, and no wasted costs for the last mile.
Comcast & AT&T want to take us to a filtered version of the Internet with their services getting faster treatment? OK, fine. I'll buy my access from Google, or Joe-Blow's ISP that also has access to the same network.
I normally don't respond to AC, but this is too incorrect to let it go:
Network protocols and speeds and boundaries (as in routers vs switches, firewalls, etc) usually differentiate LAN's and WAN's.
So, one place I worked at had 30 locations across a state connected by 1gbit links, running ethernet. Are you really trying to say that such a network is a LAN simply because they are fast links & not talking HDLC?
Wikipedia:
A Wide Area Network (WAN) is a network that covers a broad area (i.e., any network that links across metropolitan, regional, or national boundaries)
Hmm..not mention of protocols or speed.
How about Webster's?
a network of computers (as the Internet) in a large area (as a country or the globe) for sharing resources or exchanging data
How about some fucking common sense:
LOCAL vs WIDE = nothing do to with speed or protocol.
A big LAN is a WAN
No, a big LAN is a big LAN. What makes a LAN, CAN, MAN, and WAN is just distance:
-LAN = Local area network. Usually, this is a single building, regardless how many networks are inside
-CAN = Campus area network. Multiple buildings on the same property connected together. These usually take a different set of hardware & may start using routing.
-MAN = Metro area network. Buildings on separate properties connected together in the same metro area. Usually done by radio or laser wireless or private leased fiber connections.
-WAN = Wide area network. Buildings in separate cities connected together.
You CAN run a single bridged network across a WAN, even though it is usually a VERY BAD IDEA. The number of networks is irrelevant, just the separation, as this determines what kind of hardware and layer 1 connections you're dealing with.
Because the people closest to the situation have decided to leave.
So, YOU are part of the reason I left AT&T. Had a Windows Phone. OS update that fixed both SECURITY and major OS bugs was released early in the year, but AT&T thought it was in my best interest to block the update. What assholes.
That would be like Dell or Microsoft releasing a driver update or a OS security fix, and Comcast deciding that the update "should be shunned for 6 months".
How about AT&T redirect their dickish behavior back to Apple, and demand a support number they can hot-transfer people into if Apple's update breaks Apple's phone. Same with Samsung, Google, Microsoft, etc...
"So, you updated your Apple phone with an Apple update & it broke? One moment, let me transfer you to an Apple Genus!"
Your escalation issues are solved with a click, and you can quit telling your customers how to use their own devices.
Doing, not planning:
http://www.justfuckinggoogleit.com/search.pl?query=european+citizen+surveillance
My thoughts exactly. I really don't care about a big evil corporation knowing where I've been, my religion, what I weigh, who I have sex with, etc. If anything, the more they know about me, the more likely that they will make products I want to buy.
However, the government knowing all of those things is actually something to be concerned about.
I think it is quite a marketing feat by the EU: Make it appear that they are strong defenders of privacy by being ruthless in protecting the privacy of consumers, while implementing far worse privacy breaches on their own citizens.
Calculating masks in your head will still be a more difficult task
Why would you do this, unless you work for a large ISP?
With IPv6, everyone uses /64 for each broadcast domain, cutting the address exactly in 1/2. It is easy.
Devices that need statics are DNS servers and routers, and neither should be changed fequently. Also, you're likely to use simple addresses for them, so it will be:
NetworkPrefix::1, Network::2, Network::3, etc.
For me, I have 2601:d:881:b::1 for a default gateway, and 2601:d:881:b::101 for my DNS server #1, and 2601:d:881:b::102 for DNS server #2.
That isn't hard to remember, and it isn't hard to type. What exactly is the problem?
The spoils of war from a world war with Germany doesn't quite compare to espionage from a country that you supposedly have peaceful relations with.
Such is the nature of espionage, though. Both sides do it, and react in "outrage" when they catch it happening.
Preach on, brother.
And after 2 years, the battery in my iPhone 4 is fairly hopeless.
You make that sound like bug instead of a feature. Your contract is also up after two years. This is not a coincidence.
:)
Thanks, I actually LOL'd at your comment.
So, you thought giving your domain name to a bunch of clowns that support laws that they don't understand was a good plan?
Doesn't seem to be working out good.
His point is that GoDaddy supported SOPA, which allowed companies to shut down websites on a whim.
If you continued to support GoDaddy after learning about this, then it is assumed you're fine with people's websites being shutdown for no good reason.
Therefore, why are you upset now?
You're the roofer on the Death Star. You knew the risks.
These are pretty obvious to me:
-Shades up so other planes can see you better while you are on the ground at night
-Seats upright so the seatbelt doesn't push your guts into your chest if you crash
-Tray table stowed for the above reason as well
When your country name has "democratic" in it, you can usually count on that not actually being the case:
-Democratic Republic of the Congo (non-functioning government)
-Democratic People's Republic of Korea (Communist)
-People's Democratic Republic of Laos (Communist)
I don't know why we need to go through this every damn time
Because you are talking about something different.
Many (most?) people have no issue whatsoever with police being able use an array of cameras to read every plate near them, and alert the officer that the red Ford two lanes to the left is reported stolen. I know I don't.
Many (most?) people have BIG issues with a database that logs the location of every license plate to be later reported on when you want to track where a person was, or find all cars that were near X area at Y time.
If someone says "I don't see what why it is a privacy violation for a computer to read a plate" and you respond with "tracking and correlation", you're going to get tired of explaining your point to people that might actually agree with you.
TL;DR
Automated reading of plates does not automatically mean logging and recording the location of them.
I feel sorry for the Iranian people, who by-and-large, are reasonably normal, but are stuck with a crap theocratic government through little fault of their own.
Not true. They have the ability to change their government, but they have decided it isn't worth the effort and lives it would take to do so.
The USA decided to change their government twice (Revolution worked, but the Civil War failed), and now has also decided apathy is much easier.
Neither group of citizens should get off pretending like they are helpless victims of their big old government. The government operates with the permission of the majority of the people in both cases.
For most things, I don't see why location should even be a data point.
I like the idea of police having an OCR to scan all plates near them and flag cars that are stolen or have warrants. However, there is no need to update any file with the location the plate was detected. A simple "Blue Ford at your 5-o'clock position is reported stolen" is enough.
I get that, and I wouldn't rule out that the app went to the same person each time. That seems a sensible way to prevent someone getting an issue past the censors by constantly re-applying until someone misses it.
This isn't extraordinary. Apple has shown (along with Microsoft's phone market and other app-store approval systems) that when you have many humans editing for content, you get sometimes stupid rejections like this one.
Because someone at Apple rejected this app doesn't mean Apple itself rejects it as formal policy, but it might. I'm sure in the coming days we'll find out one way or another.
However, this highlights the issue with getting approval from a centrally controlled application market where approvals are granted by many different humans with different understanding of what the rules are. Nothing is black and white.
I thought the idea was to not feed the trolls. Giving an answer for an irrelevant question like that is like serving troll snacks.
I've had a boss who used to joke about my bust size (generous)
Why is the size of your bust relevant to the story?