Kind of like Fight Club

Police Officer: You said that if anyone ever interferes with Project Mayhem, even you, we gotta get his balls.

Do you have any idea how much it costs to pave a road? ;)

Slightly more seriously, there is a lot of benefit you can derive from those around you (that do use government services) not being pushed to the brink of poverty and desperation.

"Sure you're free to take this phone to another carrier, just don't circumvent the DRM to do it"

I think the Great Lake Swimmers were on to this a long time ago with their song See You On the Moon.

The difference is consumers think they understand the benefit of those features. They're still seeking a benefit, whether they have it right nor not. Android is doing great, but as "the phone to beat" I think iPhone is still at the top of the heap in popular opinion.

Just because phone tech specs aren't a person's field of expertise, doesn't mean they shouldn't be helped to understand why they should care about something. There are plenty of things you don't understand the technical details about, but that doesn't mean someone shouldn't try to put it in terms you understand before expecting you to make an informed decision.

When you hear "over 300ppi" you understand the benefit without having it put into more simple terms. Why not give someone, who might enjoy the product as much (or more) than you, the same chance to understand what they're buying without doing hours of research?

Specs might speak to the slashdot crowd, but I think Apple owes a lot of its success to a realizing that most consumers buy benefits, not features. The endless list of would-be iPod/iPhone killers that touted better features but failed to have an impact in the market are evidence of this.

My work here is done, then.

I'll totally mod up the first person who makes a joke about a guy named Wang heading up military underwear research. Doh!

Right. The point is these groups can often server themselves by writing their own apps that use government data, freeing government to focus on the other areas of the problem.

I understand that government needs to concern itself with building things that help the most people, but opening up interaction with government so that user groups can define how they want to interact is a good thing. It's sort of like the long tail.

If you create conditions where someone makes an app for smartphones (open government data), and it only gets used by people with smartphones, this is a net gain for the society. It didn't cost government what it would cost to develop from scratch, including the cost of coming up with the idea. The smartphone people interact with government in a way they couldn't before: the way they want to. This potentially lessens visits to brick and mortar offices and calls to support centres. It might cost something to maintain the app, but in the end it might be saving you money and serving more people.

Let every small interest groups create their own way to interact with government, and you end up serving more people than you would have if you had just focused on a solution that helped the majority.

All he had to say was "I choose not to sell that stuff in my store" and no one could argue with that position. This "moral responsibility" statement sets him up for all kinds of criticism.

I can't believe Slashdot is having a serious conversation comparing iPad's OS to Windows CE. Touch screens have been around forever. That's now what happened here. Have you even used Windows CE?

Couldn't have said it better myself.

You're half right. This is DRM working, not DRM broken.