citizenzen
May 4, 08:16 PM
Are you truly anti-gun or have you just not been exposed to them so that you understand how fun it is ...
I'm certainly not worried about the people shooting at clay pigeons or paper cups.
I'm concerned about the large number of deaths and injuries caused each year by firearms.
31,224 deaths [2007 WISQARS (http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html)]
66,769 non-fatal injuries [2009 WISQARS (http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates2001.html)]
I'm certainly not worried about the people shooting at clay pigeons or paper cups.
I'm concerned about the large number of deaths and injuries caused each year by firearms.
31,224 deaths [2007 WISQARS (http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html)]
66,769 non-fatal injuries [2009 WISQARS (http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates2001.html)]
SimonTheSoundMa
Sep 25, 04:03 PM
I suppose there could be a bit of news here for non-photographers.
As I understand it, Aperture uses OS X's built-in RAW image processing. If I remember rightly, the last Aperture update accompanied an OS X update. So it's possible 10.4.8 could be just around the corner (i.e. sometime this week?)
It still is pretty poor with compatibility when it comes to RAW. For example, it still can't read white balance from the meta data on RAW files off Canon cameras. Great!
Aperture's development also is going slow. Apple pulling out the software?
Perhaps all the developers are spending too much time on Leopard and Logic 8 at the moment.
As I understand it, Aperture uses OS X's built-in RAW image processing. If I remember rightly, the last Aperture update accompanied an OS X update. So it's possible 10.4.8 could be just around the corner (i.e. sometime this week?)
It still is pretty poor with compatibility when it comes to RAW. For example, it still can't read white balance from the meta data on RAW files off Canon cameras. Great!
Aperture's development also is going slow. Apple pulling out the software?
Perhaps all the developers are spending too much time on Leopard and Logic 8 at the moment.
MrTwinkles
Sep 28, 12:31 PM
If I touch it on the southwest corner will it not work? ;)
Many other houses lose their primary function when held in a certain way. Jobs will have to issue free tarps to cover each side of the house to cover up the problem. :p
Many other houses lose their primary function when held in a certain way. Jobs will have to issue free tarps to cover each side of the house to cover up the problem. :p
Kiwi Jones
Jul 21, 12:07 PM
Count me into the group who is sick and tired of hearing about this crap.
I too love my iPhone 4, it being the best phone I have ever owned, and without a doubt having less dropped calls than my 3GS had. I had a handful of drops on the 3GS fairly often and on the 4 I've only had two since launch day. I'm also in a long distance relationship and we stay on the phone all night every night. I'm not kidding. :o
I can demo this "issue" but realistically it is not a problem for me. This phone is the best and I'm only slightly bummed that some people may miss out on a fantastic device due to this media hoopla.
Amen
I too love my iPhone 4, it being the best phone I have ever owned, and without a doubt having less dropped calls than my 3GS had. I had a handful of drops on the 3GS fairly often and on the 4 I've only had two since launch day. I'm also in a long distance relationship and we stay on the phone all night every night. I'm not kidding. :o
I can demo this "issue" but realistically it is not a problem for me. This phone is the best and I'm only slightly bummed that some people may miss out on a fantastic device due to this media hoopla.
Amen
more...
SciFrog
Apr 1, 12:31 PM
Congrats!
rjwill246
Oct 28, 04:03 PM
The thin veneer is off the vast majority of people that clamor for OSS.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
Even when you talk to these people they eventually get around to saying that everything "digital" should be free. I assume they don't really work for a living and think that welfare should be universal and include them de novo, probably play/sing " The Internationale" at sunrise and bedtime and have never paid taxes or at least intend not to.
I would NEVER hire anyone like this since they obviously have NO problem with stealing others' hard work.
Whenever I hear the OSS crowd scream "Software should be FREE!" I translate that to mean "I refuse to pay someone for their work, thus I will STEAL it"!
Even when you talk to these people they eventually get around to saying that everything "digital" should be free. I assume they don't really work for a living and think that welfare should be universal and include them de novo, probably play/sing " The Internationale" at sunrise and bedtime and have never paid taxes or at least intend not to.
I would NEVER hire anyone like this since they obviously have NO problem with stealing others' hard work.
more...
Mad Mac Maniac
Apr 26, 10:58 AM
What box? Not seeing one here (Firefox 4 on Windows Vista at work)
sorry for shoddy editing
Edit: and the worst thing is how they appear when a page is loading. Which on my slow connection here at work definitely is an issue...
sorry for shoddy editing
Edit: and the worst thing is how they appear when a page is loading. Which on my slow connection here at work definitely is an issue...
iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 03:52 PM
It's sad to say, but it happens a lot.
Well, if it's that lawless down there, I would be looking to acquire a concealed carry permit.
Well, if it's that lawless down there, I would be looking to acquire a concealed carry permit.
more...
darh
Sep 12, 08:14 AM
and...i've found this http://www.apple.com/movies
old news:p
old news:p
chris975d
Dec 13, 10:34 PM
<-----Takes one
Why on earth would they create such a manufacturing and delivery nightmare??? OF COURSE they would put Verizon and AT&T on 2 separate refresh dates, it only makes sense. The situation you describe is perfectly normal and happens all the time. It's only practical for Apple to do the same.
I was acutally going to say this same thing. It makes more sense for Apple to put a Verizon/CDMA/LTE...whatever phone on a different release cycle than the GSM phone, as they typically can't even handle the logistical nightmare of releasing the current phone with adequate supply. How long is the thing backordered now when an iPhone is released? How nightmarish is it for them to produce and keep adequate supply of only a GSM iPhone? Now imagine if those production numbers were divided between a Verizon AND the GSM iPhone....you'd never be able to get one! A 6 month split would be almost perfect for releases...it'd give the production lines ample time to get decent numbers of both phones built up. The dual release (unless Apple can get a single chip LTE/CDMA/GSM solution) would be a potential nightmare for FoxConn's assembly plant.
Why on earth would they create such a manufacturing and delivery nightmare??? OF COURSE they would put Verizon and AT&T on 2 separate refresh dates, it only makes sense. The situation you describe is perfectly normal and happens all the time. It's only practical for Apple to do the same.
I was acutally going to say this same thing. It makes more sense for Apple to put a Verizon/CDMA/LTE...whatever phone on a different release cycle than the GSM phone, as they typically can't even handle the logistical nightmare of releasing the current phone with adequate supply. How long is the thing backordered now when an iPhone is released? How nightmarish is it for them to produce and keep adequate supply of only a GSM iPhone? Now imagine if those production numbers were divided between a Verizon AND the GSM iPhone....you'd never be able to get one! A 6 month split would be almost perfect for releases...it'd give the production lines ample time to get decent numbers of both phones built up. The dual release (unless Apple can get a single chip LTE/CDMA/GSM solution) would be a potential nightmare for FoxConn's assembly plant.
more...
kopite19
Mar 17, 06:53 PM
I have to agree with OP. I paid �500 for my iPhone (i work for a UK mobile network so wanted to use my staff sim rather than get on a 18/24m contract) on launch and every day I have to deal with snide remarks from people I work with. One with a WP7 and one with a Palm Pre. They usually revert to the antenna or flash argument which have never been an issue for me.
It's always unprovoked and usually occurs when comparing an app with another iPhone user, to which they'll bulldoze in and start wittering on about Steve Jobs or calling me a "fanboy"...heh
Nothing you can do but accept this will always be the case when purchasing an Apple product as I got exactly the same kinds of retorts when using my MBP or even the little Magic Mouse...
It's always unprovoked and usually occurs when comparing an app with another iPhone user, to which they'll bulldoze in and start wittering on about Steve Jobs or calling me a "fanboy"...heh
Nothing you can do but accept this will always be the case when purchasing an Apple product as I got exactly the same kinds of retorts when using my MBP or even the little Magic Mouse...
ZbHRP
Mar 25, 06:26 AM
I would like to say thanks to Vista for making me switch to OS X! :)
In all serious-ness I did fell in love to OS X back in just didn't have the money for it.
In all serious-ness I did fell in love to OS X back in just didn't have the money for it.
more...
tremendous
Oct 8, 08:28 AM
i say ban them from life
nothin' but the chair for these practical jokers.
nothin' but the chair for these practical jokers.
mlovergaard
Apr 14, 02:58 AM
http://www.camera.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Canon-60D.jpg
Can't wait to play around with it.
Can't wait to play around with it.
more...
fivepoint
May 4, 05:55 PM
Dude, you're clueless.
I have a severe congenital hearing loss and it's really amazing how parents don't really understand the long term consequences of poor hearing protection.
Just as in almost all other health matters, the more exposure to loud noises when young, the more likely a child is to end up with a hearing loss as he ages. Some parents do insist on hearing protection when using firearms, but I'm sure there are a lot that don't. Shooting guns without hearing protection is like taking a five year old to a Nascar race. Very, very irresponsible simply based on the noise level.
I'm sure Dr Choi was speaking of the danger of firearms being discharged by and around children with a lack of supervision, but your tunnel vision when it comes to the health and safety of children is appalling.
I think it's you who's clueless. You make it seem as if it's the role of government and physicians to eliminate risk in our lives. What's more risky, taking your kid to a NASCAR event without hearing protection, or raising them in a large city with lots of traffic and crime? What's more risky, raising your kids in a home with un-locked guns, or raising them with an ultra-protective disregard for a child's need to learn life lessons and experience the value of trust/responsibility first hand?
My dad had a rifle hanging on a gun-rack above his computer in his office for my entire life. The ammunition was directly below the gun in a drawer as part of the gun-rack. I was raised to respect the weapon and to never touch it unless I was given permission. I earned my parents' trust, and learned responsibility as a consequence. Was that wrong of my parents? Absolutely not, but I guess I'm just 'clueless.'
Where do you live? Cedar Rapids, where the nearest next physician is five or ten minutes away, at most? What if you were in Guttenberg, where the next physician is half an hour or more? Open-ended liberty to refuse to provide treatment at a whim is just plain irresponsible.
An unpopular physician creates the market demand for an alternative. Supply, unencumbered by any sort of rationing by the gov't subsidized higher-education system, would produce the complimentary supply.
In any event, do you seriously contend that this is a situation solveable by by big intrusive government controlling physicians and eliminating their ability to render services as they see fit?
I have a severe congenital hearing loss and it's really amazing how parents don't really understand the long term consequences of poor hearing protection.
Just as in almost all other health matters, the more exposure to loud noises when young, the more likely a child is to end up with a hearing loss as he ages. Some parents do insist on hearing protection when using firearms, but I'm sure there are a lot that don't. Shooting guns without hearing protection is like taking a five year old to a Nascar race. Very, very irresponsible simply based on the noise level.
I'm sure Dr Choi was speaking of the danger of firearms being discharged by and around children with a lack of supervision, but your tunnel vision when it comes to the health and safety of children is appalling.
I think it's you who's clueless. You make it seem as if it's the role of government and physicians to eliminate risk in our lives. What's more risky, taking your kid to a NASCAR event without hearing protection, or raising them in a large city with lots of traffic and crime? What's more risky, raising your kids in a home with un-locked guns, or raising them with an ultra-protective disregard for a child's need to learn life lessons and experience the value of trust/responsibility first hand?
My dad had a rifle hanging on a gun-rack above his computer in his office for my entire life. The ammunition was directly below the gun in a drawer as part of the gun-rack. I was raised to respect the weapon and to never touch it unless I was given permission. I earned my parents' trust, and learned responsibility as a consequence. Was that wrong of my parents? Absolutely not, but I guess I'm just 'clueless.'
Where do you live? Cedar Rapids, where the nearest next physician is five or ten minutes away, at most? What if you were in Guttenberg, where the next physician is half an hour or more? Open-ended liberty to refuse to provide treatment at a whim is just plain irresponsible.
An unpopular physician creates the market demand for an alternative. Supply, unencumbered by any sort of rationing by the gov't subsidized higher-education system, would produce the complimentary supply.
In any event, do you seriously contend that this is a situation solveable by by big intrusive government controlling physicians and eliminating their ability to render services as they see fit?
Rodimus Prime
Oct 6, 02:22 PM
It was a good message until they stated "Before you pick a phone, pick a network." That would be valid in an iPhone-less world. They would still be selling us phones based on a spinning CGI rendering of a phone's outer shell. "Look! A plastic candy bar! You like candy, don't you? Then you'll love our rectangular phone! Brand new features like rounded edges and three colors!"
Apple changed the game. The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
No the add is right. To many people drool over apple so they go with ATT. If you picked AT&T for the iPhone and knew the service was spotty in your area you loose all right to complain about it.
The smart people out there first pick a network that offers them the price they want and the coverage. Then your worry about what phone to get. The iPhone is not game changing and it sure as hell is not THAT much better any more with all the other phones hitting the market.
As for the add that was the exact reason why I left them. Verizon had crappy service out in Lubbock Texas and lied about them moving there network out there. They told us 6 months and that 6 months claim turn was not filled 4 years later of course I left at the end of the first year when my contract was up. I switch to AT&T because service was great there and in Houston so I choose them. I choose a network that works were I lived and spend my time.
They are correct choose a network then worry about your phone. Apple Fan seem to not understand that.
I have lived in 4 different rural markets and regularly travel between them. Currently, in NC, Verizon is everywhere since they bought out a couple providers like Rural Cellular and I forget the other one.
When I left Verizon, they had full bar 3G coverage at my house. They had just upgraded about 3 months before I went with an iPhone. With AT&T, I need to drive almost 20 miles to even find 3G coverage.
With Verizon, I had a Palm Treo 700 and it was very rare to see even the analog signal at all.
If Apple would make the iPhone for Verizon, i'd switch back in a blink, even if I had to pay early termination, it's that bad. I typically lose between 20-40% of my calls. There is several dead zones too, that I can't even drive down without losing it.
Well sorry you have no right to complain your dropped calls. You CHOOSE to go with AT&T for the iPhone knowing these problems are in your area. You ACCEPTED that as part of the problem. I recommend you go back to Verizon as soon as your contract is up.
The iPhone is NOT that great. Good phone but not some super phone that is poor local network.
Apple changed the game. The device should now be the focus. The service should be an afterthought in the background.
No the add is right. To many people drool over apple so they go with ATT. If you picked AT&T for the iPhone and knew the service was spotty in your area you loose all right to complain about it.
The smart people out there first pick a network that offers them the price they want and the coverage. Then your worry about what phone to get. The iPhone is not game changing and it sure as hell is not THAT much better any more with all the other phones hitting the market.
As for the add that was the exact reason why I left them. Verizon had crappy service out in Lubbock Texas and lied about them moving there network out there. They told us 6 months and that 6 months claim turn was not filled 4 years later of course I left at the end of the first year when my contract was up. I switch to AT&T because service was great there and in Houston so I choose them. I choose a network that works were I lived and spend my time.
They are correct choose a network then worry about your phone. Apple Fan seem to not understand that.
I have lived in 4 different rural markets and regularly travel between them. Currently, in NC, Verizon is everywhere since they bought out a couple providers like Rural Cellular and I forget the other one.
When I left Verizon, they had full bar 3G coverage at my house. They had just upgraded about 3 months before I went with an iPhone. With AT&T, I need to drive almost 20 miles to even find 3G coverage.
With Verizon, I had a Palm Treo 700 and it was very rare to see even the analog signal at all.
If Apple would make the iPhone for Verizon, i'd switch back in a blink, even if I had to pay early termination, it's that bad. I typically lose between 20-40% of my calls. There is several dead zones too, that I can't even drive down without losing it.
Well sorry you have no right to complain your dropped calls. You CHOOSE to go with AT&T for the iPhone knowing these problems are in your area. You ACCEPTED that as part of the problem. I recommend you go back to Verizon as soon as your contract is up.
The iPhone is NOT that great. Good phone but not some super phone that is poor local network.
more...
Small White Car
Oct 17, 08:59 AM
I'm not sure about what you're saying here, because content producers will still be having to supply the same film in two different formats.
They'll likely drop the less popular format, and thus, we'll have a winner.
Roller Coaster Tycoon 3: Wild!
rollercoaster tycoon,
They'll likely drop the less popular format, and thus, we'll have a winner.
ianray
Dec 13, 02:08 PM
The report also claims that the Verizon iPhone is already shipping to Verizon warehouses, and the carrier will maintain control over all stock until launch in order to control information leaks.
The idea of Verizon (or any operator) controlling information leaks seems a little implausible to me -- BoyGeniusReport often publishes leaked screenshots from operators, for example.
That said, there seems to be growing consensus that the Verizon iPhone is coming -- and coming soon!
The idea of Verizon (or any operator) controlling information leaks seems a little implausible to me -- BoyGeniusReport often publishes leaked screenshots from operators, for example.
That said, there seems to be growing consensus that the Verizon iPhone is coming -- and coming soon!
CalBoy
Apr 15, 04:21 PM
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
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.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
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.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
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.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
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.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
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.
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.
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.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds.
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.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
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.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
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.
I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
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.
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.
puckhead193
Jan 9, 10:36 PM
i think final cut server will get released finally. link (http://www.apple.com/finalcutserver/)
roadbloc
Apr 24, 05:13 AM
STOP RESPONDING TO, AND QUOTING, THE TROLLS!!!
What trolls? If you're on about *LTD* here, he is entitled to his opinion, and whereas our opinions differ, it does not mean he is a troll.
What I don't like in this case, is that *LTD* appears to have altered his opinion to suit Apple. He has, on several cases, accuse Google of being a company that cares more about the personal data of users, rather than the user experience. And now that Apple are also seen to be possibly collecting user data, it's a non-issue.
I also disagree with his thought that the 'average person' wouldn't care about the safety and security of their children on cyberspace. Utter rubbish. The 'average person' wants re-assuring that cyberspace is totally safe before they let their kids use it. The 'average person' wants full control over what their kids can and can't do on cyberspace. The 'average person' also doesn't really know the difference between a conversation with a pedo over messenger, and a conversation with an actual friend.
Let me give an example:
Lizzie: Hey.
Amy: Hi. :p
Lizzie: Check out this cool song.
<Lizzie offers Amy track01.mp3.exe>
<Transfer complete.>
Amy: Clicked on it. Doesn't work :(
Lizzie: :/ I'll look for it on YouTube.
Amy: k :)
Lizzie: Here you go :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2LRROpph0
And before you know it, the pedo has access to everything on "Amy's" computer. If our pedo knows how to get a malicious program like that, they certainly know which file contains their iPhone locations.
Slim chance, I know. But there is a risk that it may happen. And I find that unacceptable.
What trolls? If you're on about *LTD* here, he is entitled to his opinion, and whereas our opinions differ, it does not mean he is a troll.
What I don't like in this case, is that *LTD* appears to have altered his opinion to suit Apple. He has, on several cases, accuse Google of being a company that cares more about the personal data of users, rather than the user experience. And now that Apple are also seen to be possibly collecting user data, it's a non-issue.
I also disagree with his thought that the 'average person' wouldn't care about the safety and security of their children on cyberspace. Utter rubbish. The 'average person' wants re-assuring that cyberspace is totally safe before they let their kids use it. The 'average person' wants full control over what their kids can and can't do on cyberspace. The 'average person' also doesn't really know the difference between a conversation with a pedo over messenger, and a conversation with an actual friend.
Let me give an example:
Lizzie: Hey.
Amy: Hi. :p
Lizzie: Check out this cool song.
<Lizzie offers Amy track01.mp3.exe>
<Transfer complete.>
Amy: Clicked on it. Doesn't work :(
Lizzie: :/ I'll look for it on YouTube.
Amy: k :)
Lizzie: Here you go :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD2LRROpph0
And before you know it, the pedo has access to everything on "Amy's" computer. If our pedo knows how to get a malicious program like that, they certainly know which file contains their iPhone locations.
Slim chance, I know. But there is a risk that it may happen. And I find that unacceptable.
ArtOfWarfare
Jul 21, 09:19 AM
Oh my god...
did Apple seriously just make pointing fingers apart of their campaign?
I thought they were above that!
I understand that it's unfair that the other companies do that and all, but Apple really doesn't need to stoop to their level, do they?
did Apple seriously just make pointing fingers apart of their campaign?
I thought they were above that!
I understand that it's unfair that the other companies do that and all, but Apple really doesn't need to stoop to their level, do they?
SPEEDwithJJ
Apr 7, 11:21 PM
Photo of approx. 48 packets of Red Bull.
Oddly enough, just looking at the photo of the approximately 48 packets of Red Bull energy drinks is giving me a crazy thought.... :o I can't help but wonder what would happen if a person drank every packet of those Red Bull energy drinks in that photo in one go! :confused: :eek: :p :D
Oddly enough, just looking at the photo of the approximately 48 packets of Red Bull energy drinks is giving me a crazy thought.... :o I can't help but wonder what would happen if a person drank every packet of those Red Bull energy drinks in that photo in one go! :confused: :eek: :p :D
LightSpeed1
Apr 25, 01:38 PM
Is it just me or did Apple keep a tighter lid on this stuff in the past?