It'll probably involve a minimal contactless reader and token-transfer like Apple Pay. Don't need to transfer all phone data. (really? you think cops are going to sit around to transfer 16-128GB? lol)

A lot of the buyers really are buying them for art's sake. Wealthy people already know that they gain no additional entertainment value from it. They just want to spend their money on something that just looks cool, and their rich so why not.

It's like buying a painting - it does absolutely nothing except sit around and look interesting. Wealthy people might even show off the cables themselves with custom display kits just for the cables. It's less about it's audio quality and more about it's appearance. A lot of people find art and beauty in non-traditional areas as well - think the Nine Inch Nails "Head like a Hole" video where they're just wrapping themselves up in cables.

Also, most regular people appreciate the art of industrial design as well and incorporate it into their lives. You're not going to buy a bright pink and green cable for your home stereo if you don't want your wife to kick you out, but you'll probably buy a black one.

perhaps a binary data format, representing data in a database. This should be the next step.

And then we replace Javascript with Swift.

None of the positive measurements are because of home-schooling itself. It's largely because of parental care and feedback on a child's education that homeschoolers provide.

In other words, if you made the REST of the public homeschool their kids, you'll find that scores, GPAs, etc.. also drop, because now you have all parents homeschool their kids, including parents that don't give a shit about their child's education.

And once you normalize the experiment, you'll find that public/private schools are much more effective than homeschooling.

This is why the top-end leaders of society are never home-schooled.

Uh. They most certainly did NOT create the smartphone sector.

There was NO smartphones before the iPhone. Speaking as a guy that used them all, everything else was utter garbage compared to the iPhone. They were garbagephones, not smartphones.

And they sure as fuck didn't do it out of "nothing".

Are you fucking kidding? Things like momentum scroll and pinch-to-zoom were made out of thin air by Apple. There was nothing like it. The audience literally gasped when Steve Jobs first demoed those things in the iPhone introduction.

Apple defined the new device, and created this market.. from scratch. They threw out every other smartphone idea, because they were incorrect and complete garbage.

THIS is the REAL mobile market that Apple created from scratch. There was absolutely nothing like it, no matter how hard the Android/MS fangirls try to rewrite history to claim that Apple didn't invent the modern smartphone industry.

If you don't believe me, then explain why Google had to REDESIGN Android after seeing the iPhone introduction? Because they knew they had a terrible design, sorta like how Google Glass is a terrible design, and how MS HoloLens is going to lose as well.

Sorry, but you are, right now, living in the world created by Apple. You AREN'T living in the world created by Google or Microsoft.

Also, you're going to REALLY hate it when I let you know that the PC itself was defined and created by Steve Jobs. Nobody but Steve Jobs thought PCs were anything more than Industrial Appliances. He was the only one that thought they would be usable by normal people - kids, grandmas, etc.. And so he defined that market to cater to kids and grandmas, and built the product to match it. Other PC vendors were strictly thinking about PCs in terms of industrial/office products. Even a company like Xerox, who should have figured it out, didn't. Steve Jobs was the ONE guy that thought you should be able to use a PC at home by untrained people, instead of at the office by experts.

So, not only did he create the modern smartphone, but he created the entire PC industry itself.

Perhaps in the next life, you nerds would have been born with a better sense of taste that would allow you to create interesting and useful products for society, But, alas, you were stuck without any talent, and so you have to live in a computing defined by Steve Jobs.

Just saw this incomplete wording. It should along the lines of: "Why do the poor think they matter to the market?"

In general, the market isn't defined by low price: people don't buy bad products, no matter how cheap they are. If you can't afford a quality product, the market just ignores you and doesn't sell to you. The price doesn't go down if you can't afford it.

This should be obvious.

> They just recorded the largest public corprorate profit... in history.

Indeed, and creating a high-quality product is the reason.

The poor (as well as many in the middle-class) generally do not understand that demand comes from the intrinsic desire to be rich and powerful. A high quality is associated with that.

You don't sell a product by saying it's for the poor. You sell it by saying it's for the rich, and this causes draws in the rest of the classes.

There is no advantage to marketing yourself as being towards the poor. The poor generally cannot create demand, because absolutely no one desires to be poor. Marketing yourself as for the poor is more likely to hurt a brand than to help it.

maintain this luxury image will kill them.

Why do poor people think they matter?

that's a star shade to improve contrast.

This focuses based on diffraction, an entirely different concept.

meanwhile, something like thermal expansion would probably ruin it. most diffraction lenses need to be mechanically accurate to within a wavelength of light.

You really need a use case for it for it to catch on. All the demos MS was showing were unnecessary sugar. There's no real use case that a monitor with a 3-D graphics card can't already do. People do 3-D modeling just fine on a computer.

And then you have the problem of being required to actually wear it. That already limits your market. No one is going to want to wear a headset all day, because fashion supersedes everything in life, so that makes things like Skype out of the question. Besides, Skype works just fine on your mobile phone.

This is going to go the way of the Kinect. Nice technology and concept, but very little use. And nothing necessary. Kinect has had many years of development behind it already, but really no new concepts for it.

I'd like to see something that shows you NEED this.

> In case the incumbants haven't noticed by now, the millenial generation of moviegoers is perfectly willing to watch a new-release movie on a damn 3" cell phone screen with earbuds

No, they DON'T watch movies on their cell phones. That's why movies are enjoying record revenue numbers over the last few years.

Only the nerdiest of nerds watch movies on their phones, and they aren't a market that matters.

You don't cater your business model around these dorks.

Theater owners want exclusivity in releases. They don't want to show a movie that can be seen elsewhere in the same local market.

This is how the businesses work.

The idiots at TechDirt have no idea what they're talking about. None of that is illegal. They're talking about campaign contributions (which they have a legal right to do) or buying legal services from their client to support the Attorney General's cases. They're not saying "Let's pay bribe money to the Attorney Generals hurrrr-durrr".

These companies are very wary of what's legal and what's not, and they tread carefully.

Meanwhile, Sony, as a private entity, has every right to interact with government officials privately, perhaps with legal support for their pet causes. Just because they're interacting with government officials doesn't mean it should be public. Your social security # comes from interaction with government, do you want that public too? How about your tax returns?

Sorry, but if you want privacy rights, and if you're against the NSA, you better make sure that EVERYONE gets their privacy rights, including people you don't like.

Privacy rights isn't just for nice people.

What about the 'wrong' things that Sony has done that the documents show?

So what? Who cares? None of those are actually illegal (the VFX salary wasn't a "collusion", but based on an industry survey), and had no public interests. The public doesn't have the right to know these things. They were all legitimate private discussions that any private entity has the right to have. Some of these discussions are with government officials, but you are allowed to have private interactions with government. (Your SS# comes from government, should that be published? How about your tax returns?)

Privacy rights aren't only for nice people.

If you want privacy rights, and if you're against the NSA, you better make sure that mean people also get their privacy rights, too. Honestly, this is worse than the NSA, because the NSA only keeps their data to themselves, whereas these hackers publish the data for everyone to see. This will only encourage more hackers to violate people's privacy, and anyone defending these guys are saying they don't believe people should be allowed privacy rights, which is horrible.

Be vigilant about privacy rights. Don't be lazy about it.

So they better have already been working on their next-gen chips by now.

A11 chips should already be on HDL level by now.