Yes, just deal with a trillion take down notices whenever the Man doesn't like it.

Why does iOS and mobile need annual release cycles? Most other mobile manufacturers have phone releases randomly - sometimes 3 in a month, sometimes one in 3 months. Having a low frequency release cycle has helped Apple cut out customer confusion - but strictly an annual release cycle may not have anything to do with it. A inter-release time of 9 months to 30 months would do as much good as a strictly annual release. Anyway the agenda of Apple events is "strictly confidential".

The other mobile manufacturers have also kind of hopped on to annual release bandwagon - e.g. the Samsung Note , or Samsung Galaxy S series. But not Samsung as a whole, and it is not clear strictly annual cycle is helping these series either. A Galaxy S user would as easily switch to Galaxy Grand - as he would switch to next Galaxy S phone. Even switching to some HTC phone is not a big deal.

Yet you need to misinterpret indefinite future to mean immediate future to understand the "obvious" problem and solution.

So you need explaining what you yourself say is "obvious to everyone". Nice excuse, but it is not going to hide your idiocy.

Your idiotic comment which missed that very point necessitated this obvious statement of mine. Though later I realized you were even more idiotic and conflated immediate future with indefinite future.

Explained here (http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=6589027&cid=48722561). At which point you changed the topic.

Conclusively proving your idiocy should be interesting enough, even though you might have heard it from many people, no?

Idiot, this post is about present and future tense - the present is not controversial and future is without a timeframe. To which you replied to with statements about today and the immediate future.

I neither said now nor suddenly, so why would I mean that? Your statements are only true until a certain time - which you admit by saying "Nothing is guaranteed to last forever". But you try to use these statements to oppose statements without timeframe, like "xyz will be automated".

So you're an idiot.

I see your hobby is extrapolation. Unfortunately something that has happened earlier is not guaranteed to keep happening.

But it will happen. Lacking a proof to the contrary, the null hypothesis is that everything is possible, including a robot more capable and less costly than all humans. Hence the following sentence of yours is false :

So you want the phone to be "one" with your body - because if it is removable, how would you make sure you, the untrustworthy fellow, take the correct phone? Highly inconvenient.

Meanwhile, there are other people in the world who can manage things better. They pick up the correct phone, and do not swap SD cards if it can cause trouble. It would come as a shock to you - but some can even copy data from one SD card to another !!!

Some people have the ability to not buy SD cards which do this.

Even a cat which has never hunted knows exactly how to deliver the neck bite so that no human next room will hear a thing.

In this case it was either a nuclear strike by one arm of North Korea government (allegedly capable) on Japan, or Sony US headquarters, or Sony hack by another. We are all better off with the Sony hack.

Yes, a curated system beats Google. It turns out to be expensive, and tech history shows that cheap+worse beats better+slightly expensive, as long as convenience of payment is similar. Our web is in an awful situation where the cheapest (advertisement supported) is the most convenient in payment. Once that problem is solved, yes curated search engines should take over.

The human expert IS a curated search engine - the right part of human brain is the best search engine ever made. It is too expensive to be of any use for casual use, like Google is used.