Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Apple is like Whole Foods (Score 1) 422

by captainboogerhead (#32594164) Attached to: Apple Reverses Rejection of Ulysses Comic

I won't bow down to Apple, but thanks for asking me to.

It's not their fault that the carrier business is what it is. It's not my fault that the only way to afford an iPhone is through a carrier subsidy on the cheapest possible plan.

It is Apple's fault that they are banning content. As a consequence of this, millions of people on contracts have no recourse aside from taking on onerous fees to extricate themselves. Given this reality, Apple should give up trying to regulate morality. They're not like a grocer, sorry. I'm not locked into a contract with my grocer. I can walk accross the street to another grocer and I didn't have to pay $800 for an unlocked shopping cart for the privilege. There's no friction in (most) normal retail that makes this kind of thing an issue (most of the time). In the handset/carrier arena it's a different matter.

The only option for locked in customers is to bitch each and every time Apple does this until the stink forces them to change their idiot policies. Yay. Success. Now onto the next ban scandal.

Comment: Re:And this is different to Walmart.... (Score 1) 333

by captainboogerhead (#32564668) Attached to: Apple Censors <em>Ulysses</em> App In Time For Bloomsday
Good point. And when my 3 year contract is up, I'll definitely factor whether Apple has changed their tune and choose a different platform if they haven't. In the meantime, the only response is pressure, heat, and mockery. Lying down and saying "Oh well, they have the right to do whatever they want" is idiotic.

Comment: Re:And this is different to Walmart.... (Score 1, Troll) 333

by captainboogerhead (#32564610) Attached to: Apple Censors <em>Ulysses</em> App In Time For Bloomsday

Great. In the meantime, Apple customers are stuck in 3 year contracts with an Apple iPhone, feeding Apple and their carriers thousands of dollars.

They can spend the time contemplating the virtues of the Free Market System, while they are locked out of purchasing perfectly legal software, music, books and videos. Or, they can drop their $300 phone and pay a $600 penalty and switch to another platform. Mind you, there's no telling how capricious that vendor/carrier will be with their policies.

Sorry, but they need to get burned every time they pull one of these maneuvers. It's the only way to make Apple stop. They're control freaks. They need to be taught controlling hardware and OS software is one thing. Controlling content and morals is not their job.

Geez. It's like people are afraid of hurting Job's feelings or something.

Comment: Re:And this is different to Walmart.... (Score 1) 333

by captainboogerhead (#32564306) Attached to: Apple Censors <em>Ulysses</em> App In Time For Bloomsday

Neither can Apple. If you don't like their policies: Jailbreak your iPhone or craigslist it and get a more open handset.

Oi. Here's an easier solution: Complain loudly about their fool policies so that they change them. That way you don't have to throw away your $300 phone and pay a $600 penalty for switching carriers or void your warranty.

The mobile phone industry isn't like a physical store. You can't walk across the street to a competing store.

Comment: Re:And this is different to Walmart.... (Score 5, Insightful) 333

by captainboogerhead (#32563566) Attached to: Apple Censors <em>Ulysses</em> App In Time For Bloomsday

This is different to Walmart deciding not to carry content its store owners find objectionable, how?

Apple can say "no penises on the store, even comic ones" just like network TV can say "no swearing before 9pm" or a store can say "we'll carry all of your products except that flavoured lube you make, it just doesn't fit with our image".

Sure. They have the right. And we have both the right and the duty to mock them when they do. If we don't, all publishers will turn into Disneylands. That would be a bad thing, BTW.

Just cause they're a corp and they have the right doesn't mean they should--and it sure as fuck doesn't mean we should shrug and let them get away with it. If they're gonna be moral gatekeepers for millions and millions of people they need to be accountable. Not to their idiot pandering gormless shareholders, but to their audience.

Comment: Nope. (Score 1) 369

by captainboogerhead (#27115557) Attached to: Wolfram Promises Computing That Answers Questions

Ask Jeeves fails if you simply substitute one word:

How many bones are in the parrot's body

The reason? It doesn't actually know anything.

If you RTFA, you'll see that something entirely different is being discussed here. Alpha is supposed to actually answer the question because it knows a lot of facts, not because it's been programmed to look for certain phrases and respond with certain strings of text.

It's not a search engine, it's a calculator.

Businesses

Tech Firms Oppose Union Organizing 715

Posted by kdawson
from the fears-of-a-40-hour-week dept.
cedarhillbilly passes along a piece from TheHill.com on the chilly reception that tech firms and lobbying groups are giving to a bill promoting union formation, which has a chance of passing in a more strongly Democratic congress and with a Democratic president. "Up to now, large tech groups have been on the sidelines in what is likely to be one of the roughest fights in Congress next year. A few, however, are preparing to weigh in. That makes other tech lobbyists nervous that, by doing so, the industry could sacrifice relatively good relationships with Democrats and, therefore, jeopardize some of their other legislative priorities."

E Pluribus Unix

Working...