I have a choice as a consumer, and I've made one.
Good for you. So why do you keep commenting on every Apple story about the 'walled garden' and your problems with it? Is it because you are unhappy with your current choice and you would like to go with Apple if only they played according to your rules? or do you really think the readers here (on
This is not a personal attack on you, I wholly understand your point but I'm curious to know why the insistence - I can see a legitimate complaint when you are torn between choices - but why after you have made your choice? In fact, let's make this twitter-blunt: can you give the reason in 140 characters?
If you heard the story in the media - chances are that Apple will be reversing the rejection. the only stories where Apple does not reverse a rejection are those that you never hear.
Seems like we hear this with every Ubuntu release...
that's probably because only the ones with problems after an upgrade speak up to air their grievances. the ones for which the upgrade went smoothly (i'm one of them, i upgraded with the beta in fact) are invisible because they don't have much to say. i'd give more weight to a percentage number of users who have had upgrade issues.
and i agree with you, GP ditching the distro entirely does sound like a knee-jerk reaction - although i realize the button placement issue did cause much heartburn in the community (i switch between linux and mac so that change was godsend for me).
but will the cloaks still work when shaped like small* spheres?
*small where you are almost looking radial from any direction
Given the number of comments here that seem to take it as a given this is an Apple leak for publicity (one funny commenter went as far as to bid adieu to journalism), it looks like an idea that couldn't possibly fail. On the other hand, maybe Apple did it and timed it to kill the HTC Incredible buzz...
I am not a fanboi of Apple, just a fanboi of tech conspiracy theories. aren't we all?
as to the purpose of patents - there's a subtlety that many are failing to grasp: you don't patent something just because you invented it; you patent it if you think someone else will use it. That is how you make money off patents. in this case, if you find a simple solution to a common problem that is affecting many, it is a no-brainer to patent it asap because if you know a time will come when others need it - and also not any less important, if you won't, someone else will (if Apple didn't, HTC would've). novelty of invention is inconsequential (and so is prior art if it is not legally filed/valid) - if it is an unused solution to a problem, then you file it. as someone else remarked in this thread, patent is not for protection anymore - it is a marketing weapon (but when you think about it, what is 'protection' if not a euphemism for market security?). It does not make Apple noble to do it, and as self-respecting engineers we have every right to revile Apple, but hey they had the sense to realize what they are patenting could potentially be used by others - this awareness is often understated but extremely critical in IP issues.
on a side note, wow - what unanimous animosity! didn't know Apple has already become the new Microsoft for the Slashdot crowd. IANAAF, but some objectivity please!!
Disclaimer: I'm an Indian.
When I think of alien intelligence, I am really thinking of the 'intelligence' part. Finding a race that is more intelligent than us is, in a way, like finding ourselves at a point in the future. We may be able to realize several notions that if left to ourselves would take us too much time, effort and irreconcilable damage due to our experimentations - like we are doing with our planet now. It is an inevitable trapping of knowledge that is largely heuristic.
Filed under: Cellphones
Motorola CLIQ runs Android, headed to T-Mobile originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 10 Sep 2009 13:19:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
Permalink|Email this|CommentsI foresee this as being a step further to understanding the root of human evil.
It all depends on how well the AI captures evil behavior. Bringsjord does have some interesting points as to what constitutes an evil person:
Why do we need to understand human evil, you ask? the same reason we need to understand the cause of a disease - it helps in devising a treatment. For instance, if a set of questions elicits the same (or if scored, close enough) responses from a terrorist suspect as from E, that would be a very useful interrogating tactic.
"Conversion, fastidious Goddess, loves blood better than brick, and feasts most subtly on the human will." -- Virginia Woolf, "Mrs. Dalloway"