How is it an ad hominem attack to call people who threaten to rape her to make her shut up, or call anyone who talks her about the media in anything but an oppressively critical light 'sacrificing integrity' anything but "immature young boys"? That's exactly what they are.

Put it this way, if they don't want to be called misogynistic, immature boys who are whining like bratty children when someone they don't like says something they disagree with then they should probably stop acting like it.

Whether she lies or not (what lies exactly - or are you just talking about disagreeing with her stance or her talking points?), the response to her is not to threaten to rape her, or doxx her, or call anyone who does a piece that is not critical of her "sacrificing integrity".

She has some extreme leaps of logic among some actual points, but the reaction to her has been nothing but immature whining and outright obscene and unacceptable behaviour towards her and anyone else who brings up the topic. You're essentially making her point for her better than she ever could. It's a self fulfilling prophecy at this point.

You clearly don't understand how Apple Pay works.

The combination of the phone's ID, your fingerprint hash and some other tokens generate a unique hash that is sent to the bank via the merchant terminal to authorise a payment. This check comes back as pass/fail, and if passed, the merchant terminal charges the card/account etc. At no point during this transaction does the phone (or Apple) know what the amount is, what the store is, or any of that information. All the Phone is doing is providing a key hash to the merchant who then talks to the bank.

This is why you need a participating bank/card issuer to use Apple Pay - the bank needs to be able to verify that hash came from you, and thus allow the charge to go through.

You should probably read the summary before thinking "off the top of your head".

It is amazing how threatened you young boys are by that woman. I guess it shows just how effective she is at what she does.

Holy shit.

Go to Target and buy some tin foil and make it into a hat. Put it on then make sure all of the gaps in your doors and windows are also stuffed with foil. You'll feel better.

I'm curious - where's the "pure science" in your post? I must be missing it.

It's a mirror of a master database. It's a design that has existed in computing times since backups have existed. People just don't read the dialog boxes before clicking ok.

Of course, if you put that third party music in iTunes then it will sync just fine, or you simply put the iPod in manual mode.

Since the release of the iPhone (so, 2007), iTunes now features the ability to copy back changes on the iDevice to the master library during a sync, but the original form of the software did not do this when it was in "auto" mode.

Ah, then I know what happened because that happened to me too, except it was during the change over to non-DRM tracks. I had purchased an album and it was showing as such, but I couldn't download the non-DRM versions of the songs for just that particular album because the album had a new ID/had a minor change or had some reason that it was no longer linked with the version for sale on the store.

Apple customer support simply gave me a copy of the "new" album despite it being the same and I carried on as before.

That you could turn it off, just like you can with Apple.

If you didn't want it to work this way, you could turn it off and sync manually. How do you think the people concerned got the tracks on there in the first place? The problem came if they subsequently used an automatic sync (without reading the message - it does tell you it will delete anything not in the main library [how very "vague"]) without adding those tracks to the main library on the computer.

Assuming it was a two way sync when in auto mode was the problem, but it's not a Machiavellian design, it's simply a database set up to mirror a master database *that was optional*.

You were not forced to use it in this mode.

Sheesh.

Also, the "opinions that disagree with me must be paid shills" stuff is getting old. It just makes you look silly. You think that anyone with a contrary opinion to yours, or one that is supportive of a company that you personally dislike is being paid? Just listen to yourself.

No, it's what happens if you leave the sync settings on auto and ignore the "there are files on this device that are not in your library, these will be deleted? Continue? [Cancel Sync] [Continue Sync]" dialog box.

Set the iPod to manual (or don't factory reset it without a backup) and the click bait goes away.

This entire thing boiled down to "I factory reset something and didn't have a backup. Wah! Apple deleted my stuff!"

What would you say to someone who formatted their device without a backup, expecting everything to still be on it afterwards?

Songs from where? Songs that were on your iPod but not your computer? Or songs that were on your computer?

If it is the latter than I would be *very* interested to hear about what happened there.

You just put it in manual mode. Problem solved.

When it was in auto sync mode it was a mirror of the iTunes library, but putting it in manual control mode allowed you to selectively sync from multiple different libraries and computers. It always worked this way.

It also warned you if it was going to delete anything, but most people (based on this lawsuit) seem to be incapable of reading dialog boxes.

Not true.

A sync that involved deleting anything on the iPod that wouldn't stay after the sync was always accompanied by a warning message.

Whether you read or understood this message is entirely an exercise in the IQ of the user.

The iPod sync doesn't work that way. The library on the iPod is a mirror of the one on the computer. The computer is the master device, and if you make changes to the library on the iPod, they will not be kept unless they are also made on the master library.

When the iPod is synced, the master library is what is used to determine what is on there - it's purely a mirror of the computer, not a two way sync/merge. After the release of the iPhone (and other touchscreen iDevices) the option to consolidate tracks you had downloaded elsewhere was added as part of the sync process, but in the early days when it was designed to be used with a single master library when in full auto mode, it did not do this - it simply told you that it would delete the tracks if you selected "yes, delete the tracks and sync".

Where this would trip people up is if they would load music onto their iPod manually (manual control was always an option) on one computer, then later connected it up to a computer that had automatic sync set up (iTunes warns you if it will delete files, but who reads dialog boxes, eh?), and thus any changes made to the iPod are then lost.

Adding those "third party" tracks to iTunes and syncing them to the iPod worked as it always did, or if you wanted to run with multiple different iTunes libraries you just turned off the automatic sync and just manually controlled what iTunes would copy to your iPod.

Of course, that doesn't make for very click-baity headlines or nonsense lawsuits.