glocke12
May 4, 06:37 PM
Have you had much experience with doctors? I'm guessing that you haven't because medicine is all about asking intrusive questions.
Doctors can't diagnose a problem unless they are able to ask questions. I'm just absolutely astounded at the amount of paranoia when it comes to gun ownership. If it's such a good thing, why can't a doctor ask about it?
I am really, really stunned that there is such a disconnect from reality when it comes to guns. The NRA has done this country an enormous disservice.
Please explain to me what my guns and my doctor have in common.
People, please embrace personal responsibility before you embrace the nanny state while you still have freedoms left.
Substitute guns for something else, porn, your driving habits, etc...and see if your thinking stays the same.
The NRA. I am a member, have been a member for over 20 years and am proud that there is an organization that exists to fight for my right to own firearms. I don't agree with them 100% of the time, and at times have been disappointed in them, but am glad they exist.
Also, 99.9% of the doctors I have been to ask questions that are pertinent ONLY to the reason I am there for a visit.
Doctors can't diagnose a problem unless they are able to ask questions. I'm just absolutely astounded at the amount of paranoia when it comes to gun ownership. If it's such a good thing, why can't a doctor ask about it?
I am really, really stunned that there is such a disconnect from reality when it comes to guns. The NRA has done this country an enormous disservice.
Please explain to me what my guns and my doctor have in common.
People, please embrace personal responsibility before you embrace the nanny state while you still have freedoms left.
Substitute guns for something else, porn, your driving habits, etc...and see if your thinking stays the same.
The NRA. I am a member, have been a member for over 20 years and am proud that there is an organization that exists to fight for my right to own firearms. I don't agree with them 100% of the time, and at times have been disappointed in them, but am glad they exist.
Also, 99.9% of the doctors I have been to ask questions that are pertinent ONLY to the reason I am there for a visit.
twoodcc
Apr 26, 10:38 AM
Oh sounds very exciting! Can't wait, hoping it word fine :D
thanks. i hope it works also. if not, i know what i'll be working on this weekend. but it looks like the gpus are still going i think
thanks. i hope it works also. if not, i know what i'll be working on this weekend. but it looks like the gpus are still going i think
lOUDsCREAMEr
Nov 16, 05:16 PM
blatantly inaccurate.
Bistroengine
Apr 5, 04:38 PM
Maybe I'm being harsh, maybe what the world really needs is a 3 hour Zoomba infomercial app. Or an app extolling the benefits of the snuggie. And the excuse 'hey dude, I work in advertising' is not a good reason to criticise people who see this app for what it is, a pile of s***. If you work in advertising, the best thing you could do is make a note of the fact that everyone who DOESN'T work in advertising thinks this is a pile of s*** and modify your advertising strategy accordingly.
It's like people at burger king reacting to the fact that everyone hates burger king by saying 'these burgers are useful to me, because I work at burger king'
But clearly, anyone who claims they may find the iAd Gallery App useful is instantly labeled a 'Moron', tarred, feathered and burned at the stake. Apparently you seem to have extensive knowledge of what everyone else thinks. Have you taken a survey of EVERYONE who DOESN'T work in advertising to confirm your assessment that the iAd App is a 'Pile of ****'? Add to that, your Burger King analogy is invalid because you can't possibly claim that EVERYONE hates Burger King. The only claim you could possibly make from any of this is that the majority of MacRumors forum members commenting on this post are grossly mis-informed and incredibly immature.
It's like people at burger king reacting to the fact that everyone hates burger king by saying 'these burgers are useful to me, because I work at burger king'
But clearly, anyone who claims they may find the iAd Gallery App useful is instantly labeled a 'Moron', tarred, feathered and burned at the stake. Apparently you seem to have extensive knowledge of what everyone else thinks. Have you taken a survey of EVERYONE who DOESN'T work in advertising to confirm your assessment that the iAd App is a 'Pile of ****'? Add to that, your Burger King analogy is invalid because you can't possibly claim that EVERYONE hates Burger King. The only claim you could possibly make from any of this is that the majority of MacRumors forum members commenting on this post are grossly mis-informed and incredibly immature.
more...
JAT
Apr 8, 01:20 PM
I bet it is simply..."We have the iPad 2 in stock and no one else does. Come get one."
Maybe they'll hire some drunk to stand on the corner in an iPad costume like all the tax preparation places do for March-April 15.
Maybe they'll hire some drunk to stand on the corner in an iPad costume like all the tax preparation places do for March-April 15.
ClimbingTheLog
Oct 2, 03:40 PM
You'd expect Jobs would have some sympathy for the guy, what with his phreaking days before Apple.
ATM, Apple is making its money on the hardware device, so this really shouldn't hurt their profits too much, even if it does hurt the Store. Would it really be so bad if there were dozens of stores that sold content for (effectively) only the iPod? When Apple will freak out is when the Zune plays Fairplay content. With Microsoft flooding the market with billions of dollars of losses to kill its competition, don't expect this to take too long.
Apple is still committed to DRM. When they offer Apple Lossless files for download with CD-writing still enabled then I'll accept that Apple is DRM-ambivalent. Right now they aren't. And with $2 TV shows the bandwidth argument no longer holds water.
ATM, Apple is making its money on the hardware device, so this really shouldn't hurt their profits too much, even if it does hurt the Store. Would it really be so bad if there were dozens of stores that sold content for (effectively) only the iPod? When Apple will freak out is when the Zune plays Fairplay content. With Microsoft flooding the market with billions of dollars of losses to kill its competition, don't expect this to take too long.
Apple is still committed to DRM. When they offer Apple Lossless files for download with CD-writing still enabled then I'll accept that Apple is DRM-ambivalent. Right now they aren't. And with $2 TV shows the bandwidth argument no longer holds water.
more...
coder12
Mar 24, 04:39 PM
:) And in one year, OS XI will be released, on OS X's 11th birthday? One can dream.
I still remember using my iBook g3 with 10.1... those were the days!
I still remember using my iBook g3 with 10.1... those were the days!
JForestZ34
Mar 17, 04:23 PM
I feel bad for the kid who's not going to have a job because a costumer was too American to be honest and tell him that he did not pay the correct amount.
What is American coming to? I think I'll move to Japan.
If the kid didn't make sure he had all the money than it's all on him.. He's the one working the register.. He's supposed to make sure it's paid for..
I don't feel sorry for him.. This is how you learn....
James
What is American coming to? I think I'll move to Japan.
If the kid didn't make sure he had all the money than it's all on him.. He's the one working the register.. He's supposed to make sure it's paid for..
I don't feel sorry for him.. This is how you learn....
James
more...
NDA74
Jan 12, 07:14 PM
Credentialed people are held to a higher standard. They are trusted to cover the event, not affect the outcome of it. Any blogger or press member should be embarrassed by this kind of behavior. As a writer and an event planner, I'm pissed in every way imaginable.
Agreed. People have argued that bloggers should not be credentialed for trade shows and sporting events because they might disrupt the event. Gizmodo's stunt adds credibility to those arguments.
I used to read Gizmodo regularly, but I deleted the RSS feed from NetNewsWire Friday.
Agreed. People have argued that bloggers should not be credentialed for trade shows and sporting events because they might disrupt the event. Gizmodo's stunt adds credibility to those arguments.
I used to read Gizmodo regularly, but I deleted the RSS feed from NetNewsWire Friday.
R94N
May 2, 03:26 PM
People have the cojones to neg you anonymously, but if their name was attached to the negative rep/karma, whatever you wish to call it, it would be a vastly different story.
I disagree. I still think people would vote down posts anyway. I don't think a lot of users are that bothered about the ratings system or even use it anyway.
Otherwise I'm for the removal of this seemingly annoying feature, faceless jerks can team up to negative rep your posts, and before you know it its war to neg' each other.
I haven't seen that happening at all, it might be happening a little more in the support areas of the forums where there are perhaps more newbies and trolls but at least in the places where I frequent (i.e. community discussion mostly) I haven't seen any votes made at all, never mind ' vote wars'. That said, I have seen it on other sites, but that's different altogether.
I disagree. I still think people would vote down posts anyway. I don't think a lot of users are that bothered about the ratings system or even use it anyway.
Otherwise I'm for the removal of this seemingly annoying feature, faceless jerks can team up to negative rep your posts, and before you know it its war to neg' each other.
I haven't seen that happening at all, it might be happening a little more in the support areas of the forums where there are perhaps more newbies and trolls but at least in the places where I frequent (i.e. community discussion mostly) I haven't seen any votes made at all, never mind ' vote wars'. That said, I have seen it on other sites, but that's different altogether.
more...
kudukudu
Jan 15, 03:32 PM
i agree. I think it would have made sense to drop them in price in line with the mac pro update...and they didnt
I agree with you. The specifications of, say, the Dell 3008WFP really blow the 30" ACD out of the water: newer panel, every connection technology you could ever think of, etc.
I agree with you. The specifications of, say, the Dell 3008WFP really blow the 30" ACD out of the water: newer panel, every connection technology you could ever think of, etc.
slh06
Sep 12, 08:04 AM
I think their going to change the name iTunes Music Store to Showtime. Makes sense?:cool:
more...
zMacintoshz
Apr 10, 05:12 PM
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=cat13506&type=page&h=387&skuId=1000917&productId=1218207307591&viewtype=angleView&count=0
24" dynex 1080p hd tv for $200 at best buy.
24" dynex 1080p hd tv for $200 at best buy.
ravenvii
Apr 24, 01:11 PM
I am looking forward to installing Windows 8 on my MBA via Parallels. From what I'm seeing, it's looking good, very good!
Here's a few pictures of the Windows App Store.
http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-app-store-images-surface-from-build-7955
I am looking forward to the demise of the optical drive.
Here's a few pictures of the Windows App Store.
http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-app-store-images-surface-from-build-7955
I am looking forward to the demise of the optical drive.
more...
Abstract
Apr 9, 06:57 AM
Other than keeping applications in self-contained folders, I don't see any of this as copying. Even so, having applications run as self-contained folders isn't even an Apple idea.
Different Microsoft IE versions for mobile phones, and computers? OH NOES!! :eek:
Built-in PDF reader?! OMG!! What next, will Windows let you resize windows from all 4 corners rather than.......oh wait, it already does.
Different Microsoft IE versions for mobile phones, and computers? OH NOES!! :eek:
Built-in PDF reader?! OMG!! What next, will Windows let you resize windows from all 4 corners rather than.......oh wait, it already does.
jp102235
Dec 13, 05:07 PM
If this rumor is true (I am leaning towards its truth) - what implications does it have for the ipad LTE ? Does the recent adoption of ipad in the verizon stores mean there will be a double whammy LTE introduction of ipad/iphone LTE editions - that could really wollup the competition - should be interesting.
jp
jp
more...
stevehp
Oct 10, 04:34 PM
Wireless would work well with iTV too. Stream songs right from your iPod through your entertainment system, controlled through your TV with no cables...Heck, the iPod could stay in your pocket! I'm not holding my breath though...Maybe they are trying to get this out before/at the same time as the Zune?
dontmatter
Oct 22, 01:19 PM
Of course the point is, they aren't doing these or any or things with the money. It's been accumulating steadily for nearly ten years, and is really building up quickly now. I don't think any of us "grumpy" stockholders would be complaining if Apple was doing something worthwhile with it. Dividends, BTW, are a message from a company to stockholders that they don't have to sell to realize a benefit from owning shares. They are good for improving the long term stability of the stock.
I would love for apple to use 10 billion to innovate fantastically, enter new markets, go green, and more. I don't think it's going to happen- the purpose of 10 billion in the bank for apple is having 10 billion in the bank. Apple's expertise is in taking big risks (at least large for a compnay of their size), a good number of which pay off very, very well. But people- investors, CEOs, are risk adverse, and a huge pile of cash to operate on, so big they can operate and continue to invest in risky and exciting products, mitigates their risks. For apple, a pile of money might actually be worth more than investing that money at a high rate of return.
I would love for apple to use 10 billion to innovate fantastically, enter new markets, go green, and more. I don't think it's going to happen- the purpose of 10 billion in the bank for apple is having 10 billion in the bank. Apple's expertise is in taking big risks (at least large for a compnay of their size), a good number of which pay off very, very well. But people- investors, CEOs, are risk adverse, and a huge pile of cash to operate on, so big they can operate and continue to invest in risky and exciting products, mitigates their risks. For apple, a pile of money might actually be worth more than investing that money at a high rate of return.
snberk103
Apr 15, 08:03 PM
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
D4F
May 4, 09:04 AM
US is really going backwards. Here in Europe I have a HTC desire and iP4 both natively having tethering option... and it works :p
bj3949
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
Probably not real. I really hope the next iPhone has a camera flash, and I think the camera flash should be the Apple logo on the back. Wouldn't that be sick????
ariel
Sep 25, 11:15 AM
I need something more with more power than iPhoto, and would love to be able to batch edit, and Watermark (can Aperture even do this ? )
Yes Aperture can apply your watermark on export. You can do all sorts of bulk edits as well with the lift/stamp tool etc.
Yes Aperture can apply your watermark on export. You can do all sorts of bulk edits as well with the lift/stamp tool etc.
acslater017
Apr 15, 06:01 PM
Dear Google:
Apple *already* revolutionized the music industry.
Try copying something of theirs that's a little less established.
(and then just leave it in beta like you do with everything else.)
Cheers.
In fairness to Google, no one said that they were out to destroy iTunes or anything like that. They've got a growing mobile business, and it makes sense that they want to make some cohesive media store.
Likewise, Apple is trying to grow its online/cloud services (Google's strength)! Funny, they are kind of moving towards each other in that sense...
Apple *already* revolutionized the music industry.
Try copying something of theirs that's a little less established.
(and then just leave it in beta like you do with everything else.)
Cheers.
In fairness to Google, no one said that they were out to destroy iTunes or anything like that. They've got a growing mobile business, and it makes sense that they want to make some cohesive media store.
Likewise, Apple is trying to grow its online/cloud services (Google's strength)! Funny, they are kind of moving towards each other in that sense...
dethmaShine
Apr 29, 01:59 PM
283485
No comments:
Post a Comment