Remember moral != Legal, so just because they were able to cheat, doesn't mean they should. Also, they were under no legal or moral obligation to play silly buggers in order to cheat the Austrailians out of tax.
and yes it's cheating because they get to use all of the resources that Aus provides to allow business to make money the pay for almost none of it. That makes them little more than freeloading scum.
This.
Australian media tycoon Kerry Packer once said "Of course I am minimising my tax. And if anybody in this country doesn't minimise their tax, they want their heads read" and I agree with Packer on this one. Whether or not you agree with how the govt is spending tax money, you've got to have rocks in your head for not trying to minimise your tax.
However there is a huge difference between tax minimisation (I.E. deductions, amortisations and re-investment) and tax evasion (I.E. moving profit overseas), Apple is doing the latter (and probably the former too, but its only the latter that concerns us).
And the ATO (Australian Tax Office) is picking on Apple because their a high profile target and a powerful target. If the ATO is successful against Apple it will scare other companies into not defying the ATO.
Why is perhaps why businesses should get taxed on income (aka revenue) like the rest of the tax payers.
Nothing would destroy the world economy faster than this staggeringly short sighted idea. A typical grocery store averages about 2% profit on sales. If, for example, a store pays $2.00 for a gallon of milk that it sells at $2.05 any tax that takes more than $0.05 make said grocer unable to restock his dairy case. How long exactly do you expect any store to remain in business under those terms?
Technically, wages are all profit anyway.
As much as I'd love to be able to offset my living expenses against my tax it would just lead to massive abuse as people and keep toys just to write them off on tax instead of investing money which would only drive up the prices of the toys I want. I can already offset some of my expenses on tax, but that's limited for good reason.
Also most places in the world have a sales tax, which is a flat tax on most if not all sales (I.E. Australia excepts essential items like milk from sale tax).
I realise that in the American legal system a corporation is allowed to do whatever it likes, but in England the device owner has some rights and protections.
Apple would be closer to violating the law here by not unlocking the device as the lock is controlled by Apple. But in the UK this is a civil matter not a criminal one so criminal laws do not apply however the owner can still take Apple to court and I'll bet Apples entire fortune that if it goes to court, the judge will order Apple to unlock the device.
So...Apple should unlock devices for anybody who calls them and says "grandma died!"?
Didn't read the summary huh, he presented Apple with the will, a legal document that transferred ownership. The only thing that has more power than that is a letter from the Executor accompanying the will.
Apple is right, your mother gave you the iPad, not the data on it.
The data does not belong to Apple.
The iPad does not belong to Apple.
Apple should have no skin in this game, they don't own any part of it.
Actually, the box says "Your Apple iPad" inferring that Apple still own it and you're just using it. Besides this, your soul is the minimum price for any apple product. The bequeathed couldn't inherit this agreement as the agreement was for his grandmothers soul, he'll need to bequeath his soul to Apple (signed in blood, in triplicate) before they can do anything.
Jokes aside here, Apple is just being a dick, which is really what we can expect from Apple. The inheritor is legally entitled to the data on that device (as they would to any other intellectual properties like writings, patents and works of art created by the deceased) and Apple have the capacity to unlock the device (which is scary enough on its own) but refuse to do so because, because, shut up, thats why.
Also this is in the UK, consumer protection will not be kind to Apple.
Wow. Adding a safety feature and cosmetic features changes the categories. This makes as much sense as taking a street-legal car, painting it red, adding a rear spoiler, roll bars, and suddenly it is a race car that is not legal for street use.
Erm, roll bars and spoilers (proper spoilers) change the performance characteristics of a car. So yes, they can turn an ordinary car into a race car that's legal for street use. In fact, if you're going rallying, an upgraded roll cage is a must (unless you're not to attached to this life) and spoilers create downforce (which is quite important at high speed).
In August 1996, Bill Clinton stated that abortion should be Safe, Legal and Rare.
Medically, it's about as safe as it can be. It's been legal for 41 years. The only way for us to be sure that it's rare is to keep full and accurate records.
LK
That wont make it rare, that will only ensure we have accurate accounting.
Even then, you'll still have people who'll want to avoid the clinics because their name will be taken down and recorded forever. So they end up doing it with a coat hanger in a back alley or travelling to countries where they can get an abortion without the stigma. So even then, whilst it appears abortions are rare, they're just outsourced and this happens a lot with young pregnant girls from countries where the government is run by some deeply religious retards... Like Ireland.
What makes abortions rare is proper sex education removing the stigma of contraception (also not throwing up political/medical/religious roadblocks between girls getting the pill). However to do this you need to get rid of the religion that is so perversive in your political system.
Prevention is far better than cure, better contraception education results in fewer unplanned pregnancies leading to fewer abortions.
How dull do you have to be to pay someone to do this for you?
Most corporations have entire departments of employees, who they pay just to install programs. And yes, the work is quite dull - but it is best to not annoy or insult your IT people like that.
Yes, this is the larval stage of a Sysadmin.
And yes, they will remember anyone who insults or annoys them.
I don't see how any other party would be harmed by the inaccuracy of the data beyond the buyer and seller of it.
The buyer and the seller will be the least harmed.
If the data is inaccurate and used to demonstrate the the surveilled did something wrong when they really didn't, the buyer and seller come out virtually unscathed.
People automatically think that the police will the primary audience for this data. Hell no, most of it will end up in the hands of private corporations and investigators. P.I's don't give a shit if the data's accurate as long as it gets them another payday, neither do corporations if it helps them sell something or even a perspective employer who makes a judgement on bad data.
Well, in this case it's some capitalists taking advantage of a business opportunity to spy on you. What bothers me is I don't recall signing any sort of release on this, when someone wants to look where I've been driving my car.
You don't have to sign a release to be recorded in public as you have no expectation of privacy. Unless a law is passed making it illegal use public images to track an individual or vehicle there is nothing to stop this sort of thing.
Recording, no.
Publishing, yes.
Selling, yes.
Australia solved this problem years ago, we cant stop people from recording in public so we give our implied consent to be recorded in public. However we can stop people from publishing or selling those images and any related data about me without my express consent, more over, it's easy to find and charge them when they sell data.
It's okay... 10% of geeks think STD is some kind of internet protocol...
Subscriber Trunk Dialling.
Not strictly an internet protocol but pretty damn close.
But seeing as we're getting all hot and geeky in here. STD (Sexually Transmitted Diseases) is a misnomer because not all STD's are actually diseases. The term Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) is more medically correct although then your average American would get it confused with Subaru Tecnica International.
It's already happening on PC and console. There are a crazy number of freemium PC games and they are increasingly popular with younger demographics. Free games on consoles (Xbox at least) exist and even the default for games we buy is that the retail price is subsidised by an endless stream of expansions.
This is not a new phenomena by any stretch of the imagination.
Subscription and DLC have been the norm for at least 5 years now. With MMO's like WoW or EVE you had to pay a fee for continued play. For years they've also been selling DLC which limits players without the DLC. So prevoiusly you'd outlay $50 for the game ($90 if you're in Australia) and then $15 per month or DLC. Now they're just removing the $50 barrier of entry and trying to sell more DLC.
But a race to the bottom wont happen with AAA games. They'll continue to sell those at high prices. Your next Call of 12 yr olds wont be free unless it comes with a hefty monthly fee.
The problem is "inventory is expensive". For a store to have a cabinet full of resistors and switches, they have to buy them from the manufacturer, put them in little plastic bags.
Bakeries solved this problem years ago.
You put all the rolls out onto a shelf and let customers pick and choose which ones they want... Customers will even bag it themselves.
Same with resistors and other small parts, just put them onto a display case (the ones I've seen have little draws) and the customer picks what they need. Most are charged at the same prices. The problem you have is that hobby electronics is a really small niche and idiot kids who don't know a resister from a syphilis will steal them because they can.
When you need That Part on a Sunday afternoon, you're not going to get it from Digi-Key or Mouser. Like the time a few years ago when I found out that my mom's new 55" TV had four HDMI ports but only two analog inputs.
Erm, OK.
Everyone and their dog now sells basic cables and home entertainment parts. I can go to K-Mart and buy a 4 way splitter. It would be shithouse quality, but I could get it within 10 minutes.
Also the fact that this happened several years ago demonstrates there isn't sufficient demand for it.
Beyond this, you couldn't wait a few days for a 4 way splitter? Cripes, would it have killed you to swap cables for a day or two?
Temporarily disabling cell towers is completely different from permanently disabling phones. In one case a phone will work the next day or in the next town or as a music player. In the other, you're out a couple hundred bucks and all the data you had on it.
Erm, if things get that bad, they're going to have to disable entire towers because disabling a few thousand phones is not going to cut it and identifying that many people is going to be expensive, time consuming and painful (it's like worrying about a leaky pipe compromising the wall when barbarians are battering the gate).
Further more, if they disable individual phones, they'll just have a few dozen burn phones so that communications can continue unabated. The govt knows targeting individual phones is pointless because it's that easy to get around it with minimal planning (and if there's a real uprising that doesn't consist of thousands, the conspirators will have planned for this as well as the shut down of the mobile networks).
The only people who don't seem to understand this are paranoid nutbars. This is a knee jerk reaction to a small problem, not an attempt to keep the people down (especially seeing as they already have that capability)
Yeah, I wondered about that. Wouldn't this be a double-edged sword, for theft? Either discourages theft, or encourages hiding the victim's body so nobody will disable the phone?
I'm not a robber, but if I was, I'm pretty sure that if I was going to rob someone, I'm going to take their phone regardless of whether it can be bricked or not simply to reduce the likelihood of them calling the cops.
In addition to this, 5 minutes after the technology is introduced, there will be a way to disable it before it kicks in. 5 minutes after that the information will be available to street thugs.
What people forget is that a lot of smart people are born and grow up in the "hood". Not all of them can leave due to them family, poverty or prejudice. So these people are more than capable of disabling a kill switch and they learn to survive in violent neighbourhoods by being useful to someone who's powerful enough to protect them (Classic Example, in a mob town, everyone ingratiates themselves to the Don). When a thug steals a phone, they'll learn pretty quick to turn it off immediately, after this they'll take it to one of the hood's geeks who'll disable the kill switch and wipe the device or straight to a pawn shop who'll do the same.
Some will even sell a broken phone, knowing that its useless, under false pretences.
A mandated kill switch wont affect phone thefts one iota.
We invaded. The "alliance" was a creature we created for our own purpose.
You can't impose a democracy on an invaded people; they get cranky about the invasion and will call anyone who cooperates with the invader a quisling, and justifiably so. They aren't angry because they are illiterate. They are angry because they are living in an occupied country. They have an excellent grasp of current events.
This is not strictly true.
There are thousands of documented cases where an invasion of a foreign power has been welcomed by the citizens of an oppressive government. From the Allied invasion of Nazi Germany to Vietnam invading Cambodia to dispose Pol Pot and the US invasion of Granada.
The key difference is how an invasion is perceived by the people. If people are dissatisfied with their government, a foreign power can gain a lot of good will by deposing it, of course after riding the initial wave of dissatisfaction the power must be very careful about how they act towards the local populace. The Romans and British made world spanning empires by bringing education and wealth to far off lands, the British made deals with local leaders where other European empires tried to oppress locals by force. The slow process of Anglicising the locals worked better than the largest armies.
But to use more modern examples, when the Allies took over Germany and Japan, all efforts were focused on ensuring that people had food and services started running again. Special care was taken not to insult or demean the defeated Germans and especially the Japanese.
In Afghanistan, there was a strong dissatisfaction with the Taliban, measured largely by the fact there was an open rebellion. The US was not as unwelcome as some would believe in toppling the Taliban, in fact it was quite the opposite. The US's failure was in what came after. Bush and his advisors had no idea how the Afghani's would react in reality and that they wouldn't neatly fit into a western democracy. They had no plans to deal with the local warlords that inevitably popped up in the power vacuum left by the Taliban (going back to the British example, force wouldn't have worked), I'd argue they never even thought the warlords would pop up but the worst thing the US did was invade Iraq. Here the mood that Arabs and Persians had of the Americans soured. You could no longer argue that the US weren't acting like imperialistic invaders and this naturally lead to the US's motivations in Afghanistan being questioned. In addition to this attitude shift, moving resources and material allowed a resurgence of the Taliban to form in Afghanistan.
Point in short, the US was fine invading Afghanistan because no-one supported the Taliban, not even their own people. The US dropped the ball in the Afghanistan by invading Iraq when it had no cause to. If not for the Iraq blunder, we'd be looking at a very different middle east.
I prefer to gamble, drink, smoke and screw, and die at 60 than not gamble, drink, smoke and screw, and die at 120:-)
If you omit the smoking, you'll probably make it to 80.
Seriously, giving up smoking is one of the best things you can do, not just for the health benefits. I'm an ex smoker (10 years now) and about 6 months after you stop smoking, your senses of smell and taste come back, things stop tasting like cardboard. People stop avoiding you because you stink, you can see your friends for a full hour without having to duck out for a ciggie and you can begin bringing your teeth back to a shade like white.
Hey but the rest of that, go crazy. Sometimes I'm concerned I do too much drinking...
Given that Android licensing costs are near zero and there aren't any other viable choices, why is Android a surprise at all? As for the sales volume, the low end of the market is big numbers. You can make Mercedes profit if you sell VW volume.
Interesting that you used the VW analogy. It's kind of fitting as VW is owned by VAG (Volkswagen Auto Group) and they also own Audi, Lamborghini, Bugatti and Skoda in their entirety as well as 49% of Porsche.
Much like Android, VAG services the entire market from high volume sales of VW and Skoda to mid range Audi's to high end Lamborghini supercars. It's easy for VAG to outsell someone like TVR who only offers one or two products. With Android you can find the tablet you want from a budget minded Skota Octavia to a full blown Lamborghini Gallardo and option them to your liking and much like the TVR Segaris, Apple's tablets are really limited in purpose and missing a lot of key features.
First off all, most of the people who hate Apple are right here on your favorite website.
Which site are you talking about, most of the people here are shameless Apple apologists.
Secondly, Volvo and Mercades aren't in the same class as Ferrari. Not by a long shot. Volvo and Mercedes produce relatively cheap cars like the Mercedes A and B clases, even the lower end C classes aren't that expensive and this makes up the lions share of the Mercedes sales.
When Apple announced they wanted to do this a year ago, they claimed to have all kinds of partners from Nissan-Renault and Honda to Lamborghini, notice that a lot of them have dropped off because the product is worse than their current offerings.
Apple wont succeed here because they are entering a market that has a lot of competition. Apple's got a history of releasing flawed products and telling the user it's their fault (I.E. you're holding it wrong), this will not fly with Mercedes and Ferrari customers one bit as well as trying to force everyone into their way of doing things. This worked with the Ipod because there weren't any serious competitors but this is not the case in car world.
Finally, automakers will reject this because they will be required to give too much control to Apple and they are too worried about losing their only identity. The world of 4 banger automatic buzzboxes, there is little to tell them apart. A Nissan Pulsar is interchangeable with a Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla and Mazda 3 (If you're less concerned about reliability you can get a Renault Megane, Pug 308 or Ford Focus... and if you want something shockingly unreliable a VW Golf or GM Cruze). the only thing that really differentiates a Corolla from a Civic is the interior, they are both highly reliable, relatively efficient and cheap small 4 cyl hatch/sedans, in the case of the GM Cruze, the only thing they have going for them is the horrifying MyLink system. Putting in the same entertainment system as everyone else is going to kill brand identity.
Downside : a normal coffee brew process generates 6-12 cups of Joe.
I guess we could all switch to a press... but that's a bit messy and requires a stand alone heating method (I've not the space to keep a proper tea kettle on my office desk)
Keurig provides a clean single-cup solution
Erm, no.
Just get an espresso machine (pump) and make cups as needed. Buy pre-ground beans if you're lazy, it'll still give you better quality control than pod machines.
Once you get the hang of it, making coffee in an espresso machine will be just as fast as using a pod machine and much better tasting.
I'm no coffee snob, but pod machine coffee is not real coffee. The kind of swill that gloops from those machines are no better than instant.
Slashdot Mirror
Remember moral != Legal, so just because they were able to cheat, doesn't mean they should. Also, they were under no legal or moral obligation to play silly buggers in order to cheat the Austrailians out of tax.
and yes it's cheating because they get to use all of the resources that Aus provides to allow business to make money the pay for almost none of it. That makes them little more than freeloading scum.
This.
Australian media tycoon Kerry Packer once said "Of course I am minimising my tax. And if anybody in this country doesn't minimise their tax, they want their heads read" and I agree with Packer on this one. Whether or not you agree with how the govt is spending tax money, you've got to have rocks in your head for not trying to minimise your tax.
However there is a huge difference between tax minimisation (I.E. deductions, amortisations and re-investment) and tax evasion (I.E. moving profit overseas), Apple is doing the latter (and probably the former too, but its only the latter that concerns us).
And the ATO (Australian Tax Office) is picking on Apple because their a high profile target and a powerful target. If the ATO is successful against Apple it will scare other companies into not defying the ATO.
Why is perhaps why businesses should get taxed on income (aka revenue) like the rest of the tax payers.
Nothing would destroy the world economy faster than this staggeringly short sighted idea. A typical grocery store averages about 2% profit on sales. If, for example, a store pays $2.00 for a gallon of milk that it sells at $2.05 any tax that takes more than $0.05 make said grocer unable to restock his dairy case. How long exactly do you expect any store to remain in business under those terms?
Technically, wages are all profit anyway.
As much as I'd love to be able to offset my living expenses against my tax it would just lead to massive abuse as people and keep toys just to write them off on tax instead of investing money which would only drive up the prices of the toys I want. I can already offset some of my expenses on tax, but that's limited for good reason.
Also most places in the world have a sales tax, which is a flat tax on most if not all sales (I.E. Australia excepts essential items like milk from sale tax).
Which law?
I realise that in the American legal system a corporation is allowed to do whatever it likes, but in England the device owner has some rights and protections.
Apple would be closer to violating the law here by not unlocking the device as the lock is controlled by Apple. But in the UK this is a civil matter not a criminal one so criminal laws do not apply however the owner can still take Apple to court and I'll bet Apples entire fortune that if it goes to court, the judge will order Apple to unlock the device.
So...Apple should unlock devices for anybody who calls them and says "grandma died!"?
Didn't read the summary huh, he presented Apple with the will, a legal document that transferred ownership. The only thing that has more power than that is a letter from the Executor accompanying the will.
Apple is right, your mother gave you the iPad, not the data on it.
The data does not belong to Apple.
The iPad does not belong to Apple.
Apple should have no skin in this game, they don't own any part of it.
Actually, the box says "Your Apple iPad" inferring that Apple still own it and you're just using it. Besides this, your soul is the minimum price for any apple product. The bequeathed couldn't inherit this agreement as the agreement was for his grandmothers soul, he'll need to bequeath his soul to Apple (signed in blood, in triplicate) before they can do anything.
Jokes aside here, Apple is just being a dick, which is really what we can expect from Apple. The inheritor is legally entitled to the data on that device (as they would to any other intellectual properties like writings, patents and works of art created by the deceased) and Apple have the capacity to unlock the device (which is scary enough on its own) but refuse to do so because, because, shut up, thats why.
Also this is in the UK, consumer protection will not be kind to Apple.
Wow. Adding a safety feature and cosmetic features changes the categories. This makes as much sense as taking a street-legal car, painting it red, adding a rear spoiler, roll bars, and suddenly it is a race car that is not legal for street use.
Erm, roll bars and spoilers (proper spoilers) change the performance characteristics of a car. So yes, they can turn an ordinary car into a race car that's legal for street use. In fact, if you're going rallying, an upgraded roll cage is a must (unless you're not to attached to this life) and spoilers create downforce (which is quite important at high speed).
I have a great reason.
To fulfill Bill Clinton's vision.
In August 1996, Bill Clinton stated that abortion should be Safe, Legal and Rare.
Medically, it's about as safe as it can be. It's been legal for 41 years. The only way for us to be sure that it's rare is to keep full and accurate records.
LK
That wont make it rare, that will only ensure we have accurate accounting.
Even then, you'll still have people who'll want to avoid the clinics because their name will be taken down and recorded forever. So they end up doing it with a coat hanger in a back alley or travelling to countries where they can get an abortion without the stigma. So even then, whilst it appears abortions are rare, they're just outsourced and this happens a lot with young pregnant girls from countries where the government is run by some deeply religious retards... Like Ireland.
What makes abortions rare is proper sex education removing the stigma of contraception (also not throwing up political/medical/religious roadblocks between girls getting the pill). However to do this you need to get rid of the religion that is so perversive in your political system.
Prevention is far better than cure, better contraception education results in fewer unplanned pregnancies leading to fewer abortions.
How dull do you have to be to pay someone to do this for you?
Most corporations have entire departments of employees, who they pay just to install programs. And yes, the work is quite dull - but it is best to not annoy or insult your IT people like that.
Yes, this is the larval stage of a Sysadmin.
And yes, they will remember anyone who insults or annoys them.
I don't see how any other party would be harmed by the inaccuracy of the data beyond the buyer and seller of it.
The buyer and the seller will be the least harmed.
If the data is inaccurate and used to demonstrate the the surveilled did something wrong when they really didn't, the buyer and seller come out virtually unscathed.
People automatically think that the police will the primary audience for this data. Hell no, most of it will end up in the hands of private corporations and investigators. P.I's don't give a shit if the data's accurate as long as it gets them another payday, neither do corporations if it helps them sell something or even a perspective employer who makes a judgement on bad data.
Well, in this case it's some capitalists taking advantage of a business opportunity to spy on you. What bothers me is I don't recall signing any sort of release on this, when someone wants to look where I've been driving my car.
You don't have to sign a release to be recorded in public as you have no expectation of privacy. Unless a law is passed making it illegal use public images to track an individual or vehicle there is nothing to stop this sort of thing.
Recording, no.
Publishing, yes.
Selling, yes.
Australia solved this problem years ago, we cant stop people from recording in public so we give our implied consent to be recorded in public. However we can stop people from publishing or selling those images and any related data about me without my express consent, more over, it's easy to find and charge them when they sell data.
It's okay... 10% of geeks think STD is some kind of internet protocol...
Subscriber Trunk Dialling.
Not strictly an internet protocol but pretty damn close.
But seeing as we're getting all hot and geeky in here. STD (Sexually Transmitted Diseases) is a misnomer because not all STD's are actually diseases. The term Sexually Transmitted Infection (STI) is more medically correct although then your average American would get it confused with Subaru Tecnica International.
This is not a new phenomena by any stretch of the imagination.
Subscription and DLC have been the norm for at least 5 years now. With MMO's like WoW or EVE you had to pay a fee for continued play. For years they've also been selling DLC which limits players without the DLC. So prevoiusly you'd outlay $50 for the game ($90 if you're in Australia) and then $15 per month or DLC. Now they're just removing the $50 barrier of entry and trying to sell more DLC.
But a race to the bottom wont happen with AAA games. They'll continue to sell those at high prices. Your next Call of 12 yr olds wont be free unless it comes with a hefty monthly fee.
Hawken & Path of Exile are pretty damn good too.
World of Tanks deserves a mention.
The problem is "inventory is expensive". For a store to have a cabinet full of resistors and switches, they have to buy them from the manufacturer, put them in little plastic bags.
Bakeries solved this problem years ago.
You put all the rolls out onto a shelf and let customers pick and choose which ones they want... Customers will even bag it themselves.
Same with resistors and other small parts, just put them onto a display case (the ones I've seen have little draws) and the customer picks what they need. Most are charged at the same prices. The problem you have is that hobby electronics is a really small niche and idiot kids who don't know a resister from a syphilis will steal them because they can.
When you need That Part on a Sunday afternoon, you're not going to get it from Digi-Key or Mouser. Like the time a few years ago when I found out that my mom's new 55" TV had four HDMI ports but only two analog inputs.
Erm, OK.
Everyone and their dog now sells basic cables and home entertainment parts. I can go to K-Mart and buy a 4 way splitter. It would be shithouse quality, but I could get it within 10 minutes.
Also the fact that this happened several years ago demonstrates there isn't sufficient demand for it.
Beyond this, you couldn't wait a few days for a 4 way splitter? Cripes, would it have killed you to swap cables for a day or two?
Temporarily disabling cell towers is completely different from permanently disabling phones. In one case a phone will work the next day or in the next town or as a music player. In the other, you're out a couple hundred bucks and all the data you had on it.
Erm, if things get that bad, they're going to have to disable entire towers because disabling a few thousand phones is not going to cut it and identifying that many people is going to be expensive, time consuming and painful (it's like worrying about a leaky pipe compromising the wall when barbarians are battering the gate).
Further more, if they disable individual phones, they'll just have a few dozen burn phones so that communications can continue unabated. The govt knows targeting individual phones is pointless because it's that easy to get around it with minimal planning (and if there's a real uprising that doesn't consist of thousands, the conspirators will have planned for this as well as the shut down of the mobile networks).
The only people who don't seem to understand this are paranoid nutbars. This is a knee jerk reaction to a small problem, not an attempt to keep the people down (especially seeing as they already have that capability)
Yeah, I wondered about that. Wouldn't this be a double-edged sword, for theft? Either discourages theft, or encourages hiding the victim's body so nobody will disable the phone?
I'm not a robber, but if I was, I'm pretty sure that if I was going to rob someone, I'm going to take their phone regardless of whether it can be bricked or not simply to reduce the likelihood of them calling the cops.
In addition to this, 5 minutes after the technology is introduced, there will be a way to disable it before it kicks in. 5 minutes after that the information will be available to street thugs.
What people forget is that a lot of smart people are born and grow up in the "hood". Not all of them can leave due to them family, poverty or prejudice. So these people are more than capable of disabling a kill switch and they learn to survive in violent neighbourhoods by being useful to someone who's powerful enough to protect them (Classic Example, in a mob town, everyone ingratiates themselves to the Don). When a thug steals a phone, they'll learn pretty quick to turn it off immediately, after this they'll take it to one of the hood's geeks who'll disable the kill switch and wipe the device or straight to a pawn shop who'll do the same.
Some will even sell a broken phone, knowing that its useless, under false pretences.
A mandated kill switch wont affect phone thefts one iota.
if Russia started pushing Finland around.
Last time Russia tried that, it didn't turn out too well for them.
This is not strictly true.
There are thousands of documented cases where an invasion of a foreign power has been welcomed by the citizens of an oppressive government. From the Allied invasion of Nazi Germany to Vietnam invading Cambodia to dispose Pol Pot and the US invasion of Granada.
The key difference is how an invasion is perceived by the people. If people are dissatisfied with their government, a foreign power can gain a lot of good will by deposing it, of course after riding the initial wave of dissatisfaction the power must be very careful about how they act towards the local populace. The Romans and British made world spanning empires by bringing education and wealth to far off lands, the British made deals with local leaders where other European empires tried to oppress locals by force. The slow process of Anglicising the locals worked better than the largest armies.
But to use more modern examples, when the Allies took over Germany and Japan, all efforts were focused on ensuring that people had food and services started running again. Special care was taken not to insult or demean the defeated Germans and especially the Japanese.
In Afghanistan, there was a strong dissatisfaction with the Taliban, measured largely by the fact there was an open rebellion. The US was not as unwelcome as some would believe in toppling the Taliban, in fact it was quite the opposite. The US's failure was in what came after. Bush and his advisors had no idea how the Afghani's would react in reality and that they wouldn't neatly fit into a western democracy. They had no plans to deal with the local warlords that inevitably popped up in the power vacuum left by the Taliban (going back to the British example, force wouldn't have worked), I'd argue they never even thought the warlords would pop up but the worst thing the US did was invade Iraq. Here the mood that Arabs and Persians had of the Americans soured. You could no longer argue that the US weren't acting like imperialistic invaders and this naturally lead to the US's motivations in Afghanistan being questioned. In addition to this attitude shift, moving resources and material allowed a resurgence of the Taliban to form in Afghanistan.
Point in short, the US was fine invading Afghanistan because no-one supported the Taliban, not even their own people. The US dropped the ball in the Afghanistan by invading Iraq when it had no cause to. If not for the Iraq blunder, we'd be looking at a very different middle east.
I prefer to gamble, drink, smoke and screw, and die at 60 than not gamble, drink, smoke and screw, and die at 120 :-)
If you omit the smoking, you'll probably make it to 80.
Seriously, giving up smoking is one of the best things you can do, not just for the health benefits. I'm an ex smoker (10 years now) and about 6 months after you stop smoking, your senses of smell and taste come back, things stop tasting like cardboard. People stop avoiding you because you stink, you can see your friends for a full hour without having to duck out for a ciggie and you can begin bringing your teeth back to a shade like white.
Hey but the rest of that, go crazy. Sometimes I'm concerned I do too much drinking...
And not enough gambling and womanising.
Tea is not an acronym.
As used, incorrect.
It stands for "Taxed Enough Already".
That's a backronym, not an acronym.
I could just as easily claim it stood for Tossers, Eejits and Arseholes... which would still be entirely accurate.
Well, if Moore got his own law, I'm going to go ahead and call it erroneus's law. "batteries will get better."
I made it more simple and easier not to fail in the future too. So is it me or are they creating batteries out of just about everything?
I'm going to counter this with the Grandpa Simpson principal which states "everything gets worse as you get older and you will complain about it".
Given that Android licensing costs are near zero and there aren't any other viable choices, why is Android a surprise at all? As for the sales volume, the low end of the market is big numbers. You can make Mercedes profit if you sell VW volume.
Interesting that you used the VW analogy. It's kind of fitting as VW is owned by VAG (Volkswagen Auto Group) and they also own Audi, Lamborghini, Bugatti and Skoda in their entirety as well as 49% of Porsche.
Much like Android, VAG services the entire market from high volume sales of VW and Skoda to mid range Audi's to high end Lamborghini supercars. It's easy for VAG to outsell someone like TVR who only offers one or two products. With Android you can find the tablet you want from a budget minded Skota Octavia to a full blown Lamborghini Gallardo and option them to your liking and much like the TVR Segaris, Apple's tablets are really limited in purpose and missing a lot of key features.
First off all, most of the people who hate Apple are right here on your favorite website.
Which site are you talking about, most of the people here are shameless Apple apologists.
Secondly, Volvo and Mercades aren't in the same class as Ferrari. Not by a long shot. Volvo and Mercedes produce relatively cheap cars like the Mercedes A and B clases, even the lower end C classes aren't that expensive and this makes up the lions share of the Mercedes sales.
When Apple announced they wanted to do this a year ago, they claimed to have all kinds of partners from Nissan-Renault and Honda to Lamborghini, notice that a lot of them have dropped off because the product is worse than their current offerings.
Apple wont succeed here because they are entering a market that has a lot of competition. Apple's got a history of releasing flawed products and telling the user it's their fault (I.E. you're holding it wrong), this will not fly with Mercedes and Ferrari customers one bit as well as trying to force everyone into their way of doing things. This worked with the Ipod because there weren't any serious competitors but this is not the case in car world.
Finally, automakers will reject this because they will be required to give too much control to Apple and they are too worried about losing their only identity. The world of 4 banger automatic buzzboxes, there is little to tell them apart. A Nissan Pulsar is interchangeable with a Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla and Mazda 3 (If you're less concerned about reliability you can get a Renault Megane, Pug 308 or Ford Focus... and if you want something shockingly unreliable a VW Golf or GM Cruze). the only thing that really differentiates a Corolla from a Civic is the interior, they are both highly reliable, relatively efficient and cheap small 4 cyl hatch/sedans, in the case of the GM Cruze, the only thing they have going for them is the horrifying MyLink system. Putting in the same entertainment system as everyone else is going to kill brand identity.
Downside : a normal coffee brew process generates 6-12 cups of Joe.
I guess we could all switch to a press ... but that's a bit messy and requires a stand alone heating method (I've not the space to keep a proper tea kettle on my office desk)
Keurig provides a clean single-cup solution
Erm, no.
Just get an espresso machine (pump) and make cups as needed. Buy pre-ground beans if you're lazy, it'll still give you better quality control than pod machines.
Once you get the hang of it, making coffee in an espresso machine will be just as fast as using a pod machine and much better tasting.
I'm no coffee snob, but pod machine coffee is not real coffee. The kind of swill that gloops from those machines are no better than instant.