rdowns
Apr 25, 02:24 PM
Already a thread and still in Current Events.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1141721
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1141721
mubo
Apr 16, 09:52 AM
Now that looks better. Where did you get these from? I'm assuming they are fake.
Speaker and mic on the back:rolleyes:
Speaker and mic on the back:rolleyes:
*LTD*
Apr 23, 07:43 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
RP:
All you have shown is a deep-seated fear of advertising. And it's been stated that Apple doesn't actually collect this data, so it isn't even being used for iAds.
How exactly, specifically, will this cell phone tower tracking info compromise your personal safety? What exactly is there to fear? There must be something more than targeted advertising, which is at best an annoyance you have to live with anyway.
Some people just don't like to be tracked. If the data fell into to hands of an untoward person, then there might be an issue.
Who is this "untoward person"?
What would the "issue" be?
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
RP:
All you have shown is a deep-seated fear of advertising. And it's been stated that Apple doesn't actually collect this data, so it isn't even being used for iAds.
How exactly, specifically, will this cell phone tower tracking info compromise your personal safety? What exactly is there to fear? There must be something more than targeted advertising, which is at best an annoyance you have to live with anyway.
Some people just don't like to be tracked. If the data fell into to hands of an untoward person, then there might be an issue.
Who is this "untoward person"?
What would the "issue" be?
AlBDamned
Nov 10, 03:11 PM
Overall I'm much happier with this game than I ever was with Modern Warfare 2 which I only ever played FFA on and people always used to cheat by using Tactical Insertion to sit next to each other and get free kills.
Free-for-all is fun, and I agree that the TI cheat was irritating, but FFA is really only scratching the surface of the multiplayer. Either way, there's no doubting for me that Black Ops is jerky, graphically and sonically inferior, and basically a poor cousin. Roll on MW3. I think I might sell Black Ops it's that bad.
Free-for-all is fun, and I agree that the TI cheat was irritating, but FFA is really only scratching the surface of the multiplayer. Either way, there's no doubting for me that Black Ops is jerky, graphically and sonically inferior, and basically a poor cousin. Roll on MW3. I think I might sell Black Ops it's that bad.
AussieScozza
Sep 12, 06:12 AM
With all due respect Sunfast. You are getting excited about a team I suspect will leave Australia with little more than suntans. The urn will not take much to reclaim my friend. Hardly an Apple upstager. Maybe in the near future you can watch each English loss on your new widescreen iPod.
Much Ado
Oct 29, 06:50 AM
"If they Hardware worked with any software, it would not be so easy to use"
"It would also not work so well"
Sorry, but that doesn't really make sense.
cute i love you quotes for
desktop wallpaper download
I Love You in 100 languages-
Templates to you i love miney
I Love You Funny Local New Hot
I+love+you+heart+gif
iphone 4 wallpaper size
I Love You middot; 2011 april 3D
I Love You Posters
I Love You Gif Myspace
I Love You Gif Myspace
Tags: Live wallpapers fantasy
love,3d,orange,shining
"It would also not work so well"
Sorry, but that doesn't really make sense.
pmz
Mar 25, 10:08 AM
Can't believe it's been 10 years. I had my iMac G3 running OS 9 and didn't evenknow about OS X until I visited a friends house, who had the same iMac running OS X. Ill never forget how blown away I was, and that first look was truly the first look at everything that still makes Macs great today.
logandzwon
May 2, 10:51 AM
I find it amusing that the G1 can run Android Gingerbread fairly well, but Apple makes it impossible to upgrade the original iPhone to the latest and greatest iOS.
except the last office firmware is 1.6 . You can get hacked firmwares for the original iPhone also. http://www.google.com/search?q=iphone+2g+ios4
except the last office firmware is 1.6 . You can get hacked firmwares for the original iPhone also. http://www.google.com/search?q=iphone+2g+ios4
Garvo
Oct 3, 07:18 PM
IDG World Expo announced on Tuesday that Apple CEO Steve Jobs would deliver the opening keynote address (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/10/03/jobs/index.php) at Macworld Expo San Francisco.
And this just in.....
Mickey Mouse will be leading the Parade at Disney World!:p
And this just in.....
Mickey Mouse will be leading the Parade at Disney World!:p
yoda13
Sep 12, 12:39 AM
I can't wait to see what they got up their sleeve, hope I am stoked...:D
SkyStudios
May 2, 12:41 PM
My only question is:
If there was a study that was conducted some time back [more than 2 months back] and got Apple to investigate the issue seriously, why did Apple wait for another study OR another media non-sense to acknowledge the bugs and report to the consumers?
Why did Apple not rectify the problem before? Did Apple already knew about these features or are they simply getting with this crap by calling them "bugs"?
To be honest, this is probably the first time I'm feeling that Apple was trying to play with the consumers privacy and trust. I think Apple just fooled us.
-deth a lawsuite was filed a year ago, apple refused to address the problem becuase it was not out in the public as it is now with Congress connecting trails to wall street and who knows why apple collected political views.
According to authorities, Apple uses trolls, some techs even to bury issues posted on forums so they can buy time if many people either give up or simply seem less in number, so if the ratio of complaints are kept low no one notices bugs,
Im not surprised that the FEDS are upset about this, if they had iphones people can track them and all sorts of info is out public or in the wrong hands, makes the wikileeks kids look like angels
If there was a study that was conducted some time back [more than 2 months back] and got Apple to investigate the issue seriously, why did Apple wait for another study OR another media non-sense to acknowledge the bugs and report to the consumers?
Why did Apple not rectify the problem before? Did Apple already knew about these features or are they simply getting with this crap by calling them "bugs"?
To be honest, this is probably the first time I'm feeling that Apple was trying to play with the consumers privacy and trust. I think Apple just fooled us.
-deth a lawsuite was filed a year ago, apple refused to address the problem becuase it was not out in the public as it is now with Congress connecting trails to wall street and who knows why apple collected political views.
According to authorities, Apple uses trolls, some techs even to bury issues posted on forums so they can buy time if many people either give up or simply seem less in number, so if the ratio of complaints are kept low no one notices bugs,
Im not surprised that the FEDS are upset about this, if they had iphones people can track them and all sorts of info is out public or in the wrong hands, makes the wikileeks kids look like angels
starstreak
Jul 21, 06:40 PM
Ok yeah,yeah whatevers Apple. You need to do a hardware fix. Quit pointing fingers. Because unless you can tell me, the other phones in question sold 3million AND told their users that their phone is awesome cuz they made the attenna better, you're not gonna get me to stop thinking Apple is da bomb.
flopticalcube
Apr 15, 02:40 PM
What is Gay History? History, while interesting, has always struck me as unimportant in educating Children for essential workforce skills. Leave history for Colleges or elective courses.
Absolutely not. History is just as essential in building a rational model of the world as math or science is. It just has to be taught properly, without the rote memorization of dates and people. More emphasis on the impact of events in the shaping of nations and civilization.
Absolutely not. History is just as essential in building a rational model of the world as math or science is. It just has to be taught properly, without the rote memorization of dates and people. More emphasis on the impact of events in the shaping of nations and civilization.
dalvin200
Sep 12, 07:40 AM
I might be getting confused here - but isn't the music store just a web thingy and not part of the software? i.e. store and media player distinct, though interlinked
yeah, but there is a link in your itunes software (client) which has "Music Store" - u know.. down the left side where your playlists are..
Wouldn't they need to change that to a generic "Store" or something..
yeah, but there is a link in your itunes software (client) which has "Music Store" - u know.. down the left side where your playlists are..
Wouldn't they need to change that to a generic "Store" or something..
PlipPlop
Apr 18, 06:19 AM
If they are uninstallable, how'd they get loaded in there?
Jesus did it.
Jesus did it.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 15, 04:43 PM
I am not surpised by that design. A lot of phones on the market are being released right now as single piece aluminum. Take for example the htc desire, legend and Motorola devior. All 3 are single piece aluminum phones so it is no surprised apple is coping that design as the style is becoming popular again.
peharri
Oct 4, 10:31 AM
You do realize that would only vindicate the rumor, and people would say he's only saying that because he doesn't want anyone leaking the info on the product Apple's developing...
The first few times, yes. But when three years rolls by, and Steve has announced each time "I've been looking at the rumours sites. There's some great ideas being suggested that I can honestly say we're not working on. But I'd like to single out the iPhone, the tablet, and the Powerbook G5, as we've looked at these and I can honestly tell you that, right now, we see no point in making them. Maybe things will change next year, but as of now, I'd like you to know that our engineers are working on much more interesting, exciting, original hardware." then people are going to start to take it seriously.
Especially if he also comes up with things like "Oh, and while obviously we're going to do what we can to keep our hardware up to date, I can assure you we're not planning the rumoured 64 bit upgrades for the MacBook Pro in the next quarter."
As time goes by, people will recognize that he's not lying. And that'll make it much harder to make stuff up in order to sell page hits.
Of course, I'm fairly convinced the "iPhone" nonsense is probably partly being exploited by Apple at the moment. They didn't invent it, but I suspect it's being used to try to find leakers at the moment. Does anyone seriously think Steve Jobs is running around talking openly about a super-secret product?
The first few times, yes. But when three years rolls by, and Steve has announced each time "I've been looking at the rumours sites. There's some great ideas being suggested that I can honestly say we're not working on. But I'd like to single out the iPhone, the tablet, and the Powerbook G5, as we've looked at these and I can honestly tell you that, right now, we see no point in making them. Maybe things will change next year, but as of now, I'd like you to know that our engineers are working on much more interesting, exciting, original hardware." then people are going to start to take it seriously.
Especially if he also comes up with things like "Oh, and while obviously we're going to do what we can to keep our hardware up to date, I can assure you we're not planning the rumoured 64 bit upgrades for the MacBook Pro in the next quarter."
As time goes by, people will recognize that he's not lying. And that'll make it much harder to make stuff up in order to sell page hits.
Of course, I'm fairly convinced the "iPhone" nonsense is probably partly being exploited by Apple at the moment. They didn't invent it, but I suspect it's being used to try to find leakers at the moment. Does anyone seriously think Steve Jobs is running around talking openly about a super-secret product?
skunk
Apr 21, 11:11 AM
I give it three phooeys.
louis Fashion
Apr 8, 03:44 PM
Best Buy does this all the time. I purchased a Samsung TV off their Web site for in-store sameday pickup last year, and took my receipt to my local store. They wouldn't give me the TV I already purchased because they were holding all of that model until Sunday because of their Sunday ad flyer. They had at least 10 of that model in stock on their store shelves.
They told me I could come back Sunday to pick it up. Naturally, I refused (this was like Tuesday), called Best Buy Online and had them refund my purchase. Then, purchased from Amazon.
I'll never purchase anything major from them again.
What a group of dolts. The local BBY told my friend that they did NOT take "reservations" I doubt if they will last much longer. Everyone is buying on line.
They told me I could come back Sunday to pick it up. Naturally, I refused (this was like Tuesday), called Best Buy Online and had them refund my purchase. Then, purchased from Amazon.
I'll never purchase anything major from them again.
What a group of dolts. The local BBY told my friend that they did NOT take "reservations" I doubt if they will last much longer. Everyone is buying on line.
Chrismcfall
Mar 30, 10:31 AM
Very interesting thread. It's a shame that you cant narrow it down to just one house. I'd be straight over, and the door would be kicked in. But...You dont really know whats on the other side of that door, so you should really take the police route. Then you can see the door be hoofed in. :D
dunk321
Mar 17, 01:24 AM
JohnnyQuest chill out man you sound worse then my Dad growing up as a kid. Just telling a story, and sorry for my grammar must be that UCF education I paid for. Go to the fridge and bust open a bottle of that hater-aid or better yet, go get laid. Since you obviously seem pretty stressed over the story. Who are you anyway? Judge Jury and Executioner? Please
jclardy
May 3, 09:30 PM
just getting started...iPad 3!
Or you know, the more obvious conclusion - iOS 5.
Or you know, the more obvious conclusion - iOS 5.
roadbloc
Apr 12, 06:23 PM
All the Windows 7 I use are campus installs, so since they're not configurable, I haven't really looked around the settings. Does Windows have virtual desktops yet?
No. Its coming in Windows 8.
No. Its coming in Windows 8.
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.
Reacent Post
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.
0 comments:
Post a Comment