Comment Oh puh-leeze (Score 1) 165
Somehow I picture the executives at Google, and US State Department officials having a good laugh over this one.
Nobody outside of China believes the type of propaganda crap spewed by Chinese newspapers.
Somehow I picture the executives at Google, and US State Department officials having a good laugh over this one.
Nobody outside of China believes the type of propaganda crap spewed by Chinese newspapers.
it's all irrelevant, as long as those loss leaders bring costumers to revenue/profit generating products.
I bet they also appreciate the customers who work outside of the theatrical clothing field.
Steve Jobs said it at the WWDC keynoe when it was announced in June of last year: "We're going to the standards bodies starting tomorrow and we're going to make FaceTime an open industry standard."
All that means is that FaceTime's protocols will be open - so anyone could build their own implementation of a FaceTime client or a FaceTime server (presumably it needs one).
It does not necessarily mean that Apple's FaceTime system will accept connections from non-Apple FaceTime clients, or that Apple's FaceTime clients (the FaceTime app on OS X, or FaceTime on iOS devices) will connect to non-Apple FaceTime servers.
Which is too bad, really. I hope they do fully open it up to outside use, but I doubt it.
I am disturbed by this as well. Unless Ted Kacynkski signed a waiver to allow the government to auction off what can be considered private records, I don't see how the government should be allowed to do this. Selling off other property to pay restitution to his victims, I don't have a problem with.
As long as you're not a criminal, you don't have to worry about it too much. The government can't take your stuff away and sell it unless you cause them to by, for example, mailing bombs to innocent victims.
None of the items mentioned can be considered private records. Driver's licenses, birth certificates, deeds, and academic transcripts are publicly accessible anyway, even before they become evidence in a criminal trial.
The other items became public information or government property once they were entered into evidence in the court proceedings against him, unless Kaczynski's attorney won a court order to have the evidence sealed or to have the items returned to him - which he didn't.
Pretty typical logic, Occupational Exposure limits are very tight in the US, but diagnostic exposure limits are very loose. It's kind of schizophrenic for us working in dental offices where we're limited to an exposure of about 1/10 on the job of what we get as a patient from the same machines.
Not really, unless you believe that individual patients should really really be x-rayed every year*.
*which seems like in most cases it might just be a way to pad their bill.
The show being projected is: Gerry Anderson's UFO (TV series 1970–1971) Episode 12 The Psychobombs http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0735638/
Was there ever an episode of UFO where something actually happens?
I've watched a bunch of them and it's always just one or two things happening, never a complete story. So unsatisfying given the work that went into the visual look of 1969's version of 1980.
I wonder why the shirts made of string never caught on.
The picture quality is often poor too.
Because you don't have a 100ft wide screen with more than 7 channels (movie theaters have many more channels than 7).
I bet you also listen to your iPod rather than going to see a musician live...
Since your technical arguments aren't valid you throw in an ad hominem attack. I guess you're not going for any positive moderations, and that's ok.
Turns out you don't need a 100ft screen if you sit closer to it - like you can in your own home. We have a 108" picture from our projector and it is a better picture than I've seen in a number of the local theaters.
The number of channels is irrelevant if they are not set up properly. Even as recently as a couple of months ago I've sat through muddy sound in a theater. It's not like I live out in the middle of nowhere either, there are a lot of theaters in the area so you'd think they'd want to stay on top of their game to compete with each other.
Pretty much all decent modern surround sound receivers will do automatic calibration - if the theaters did this too, we'd probably be much happier theatergoers. My receiver supports 11.2, which is in fact more than 7 channels, and it wasn't expensive. Our low frequency setup is the envy of our audiophile friend, and it wasn't expensive either.
As it is now, we only go the theaters as a social occasion with friends.
2. Sealed batteries, smaller sim cards and the like are critical paths to Apple's future product plans.
So what sort of future product would cause a problem with current products having replaceable batteries?
It's not a single product that would be hurt by those things - it's that they are anathema to Apple's design principles.
The guiding set of principles at Apple are a constant movement towards Dieter Rams' ideals of "good design".
Good design means eliminating parts that the user interacts with (the battery cover, physical controls, etc).
Good design requires reducing parts count where practical - the battery cover, the battery connectors, the casing a replaceable battery must have, for example. I have a first generation iPhone in my pocket which is still on its original battery, so I'm not too worried about the difficulty of replacing it. I'd rather have a physically smaller phone or a better camera in the same-size phone than a replaceable battery.
Any time a designer adds yet another button, or another removable part, they're moving away from that ideal of "good design".
Now, wether you agree with that philosophy or not is up to you and there are a wide range of products on the market if you don't - you aren't required to buy Apple products to fulfill your needs or wants. The idea that Apple can lock down the entire market is a fallacy often professed by anti-Apple trolls in these discussions.
Of course, Jonathan Ives is just copying the old Braun products
, but that's not such a bad set of products to copy.
Can someone remind me how can a government say "no" to someone operating a legal service again?
When it looks like you're operating it in a way that does not comply with all of the laws.
You can read into that the Japanese government believes that PSN is not a legal service in Japan if PSN does not protect the privacy of the users.
The equipment vendors are aware that "deep packet inspection" has negative connotations, and at least some of them are now using the term "traffic and policy management" or TPM.
Doesn't that sound nice and innocuous?
Great. Nobody would ever confuse it with the other TPM.
You'd hope these acronym buffoons would eventually try Googling their three-letter combinations to see if they've already been used in the computing field.
"If I do not want others to quote me, I do not speak." -- Phil Wayne