Which is funny since I left the iOS world this because things stopped "just working."
There's noting innovative or interesting about this kind of 3D scanning technology. It has no purpose, and will only be part of some "spec war" that goes on in the android phone circles. People just don't need - or want - 3D scanners in their phones.
Until 2019, when Apple includes the most revolutionary thing to ever occur in a phone - and it's the one thing you can't live without. The i3D module will be what turns the mobile device market on it's head.
(Sorry for the troll. Sooo many Apple fanbois on my FB feed these last few days. NFC payments, big screens, and optical image stabilization are the second coming, apparently. I just had to lash out.)
Is this the online equivalent to getting tickets to the symphony? If so, it's no wonder they're all going under.
If a symphony director thinks having all his buddies sign up for $9000 websites is a good idea, maybe we're paying symphony players too much.
or, perhaps better
Symphony conductor wants to keep all of the instrumentalists off his new site, so he sets the entry fee to be more than what they make in a year.
Came here just to ask if there was a discount, or if the membership would offer/reinstate a free I Am Rich app. for the first x users!
California law will require that handsets be able to be remotely disabled by the user. This is one of the easiest ways to do that - to encrypt the phone so that there is no way to operate it without entering the passcode. No resets, no workarounds. Both Google and Apple know that this is the chance to get it into the only x.0 release before that deadline.
It's not high and mighty, it's just getting into compliance. IMHO, it's a good thing, but it's not some special high road either one is taking.
Are you kidding, it's much easier to say "we cannot do that" than have to go through verifying and unlocking a device every time someone forgets their passcode. It may piss off those customers, but there's nothing they can do.
I think the iPhone 6s should have a user-writable strip on the back so you can write down your passcode in case you forget it. Maybe a little sticky strip to cover it up so people can't see it normally.
The backups are not encrypted with keys that Apple doesn't have, so they can turn over all of your backed up data - they just can't remotely unlock the physical phone device. All that's required is to make sure the phone is in range when it backs up and Apple can provide (nearly) all the data police require.
This is security on the device, but not of the backups. They should be doing client side encryption and zero-knowledge storage in the cloud.
So remember, kids - if you're going to go all jihad or spaceman with your iPhone, just make sure you set it not to save any backups!
Or "enhanced interrogation techniques"
So it's nearly identical to all other secure payment systems on the market. You still have the payment processor is the bank - who is a VISA/MC/AMEX 3rd party vendor who tracks and sells your information - instead of a non-bank corporate VISA/MC/AMEX 3rd party vendor who tracks and sells your information. No other secure system uses your CC, expiration date, or CVV code as part of a transaction either - not your smart-chip credit card, not google wallet, not the wireless providers.
The only difference here is that there is that Apple isn't privy to your transaction data at the register - though the merchant, the bank, and VISA/MC/AMEX still are. That and they have you transmit a photo of your credit card (and photos are unhackable, just ask the stars who took nude selfies) instead putting the onerous task of entering twenty two digits *all by yourself* into another payment processor's web/app form. I mean, that's 15 seconds you'll never get back.
Shhh...you're going to muck up the distortion field. They're better off not knowing. It's not like they have any useful information, they're apple users.
Everything has a price, and if the buyer and seller come to an agreement then it's worth it. If you're a lawyer making $350/hr and you decide that it's worth $20 to have someone hand deliver your lunch instead of you going out and getting it, is that okay? If you're a driver getting 5 of those orders and hour and are grossing $100/hr, is that okay? What if you're just having a shitty day and $20 means getting a meal you *really* want without having to go out in the rain. You don't have to be rich to be lazy every once in a while.
To be fair, both Uber and Amazon don't *want* to have people working for them in absolutely horrible conditions for little pay. On the contrary, they'd like to eliminate those positions entirely and automate everything. Which really doesn't bode any better for local service people.
OTOH, this shouldn't be a surprise. The computer geeks have already put many, many typists, calculators (people, not boxes), secretaries, drafters, and similar people out of business just as the industrial revolution put many laborers out of a job. Do you really think that self-checkouts and ATMs have increased the number of employees in checkers/teller positions?
Taxi drivers are not going to be happy about self-driving cars, and though it's not possible now, it will be in the future. The bar on what can and can't be done automatically raises each year. Those close to the line need to see the writing. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who have already been passed by the line and will never / can never catch up to it. It's going to make for a very bumpy ride over the next half a century.
Prodigy tried pop-up and in-line ads and died, too. Sometimes it's neither the product nor the delivery, but simply market timing.
You say that, but how many analog VHS tapes have we been able to read from ancient Babylon?