snberk103
Apr 15, 12:29 PM
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
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 when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
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. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
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.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
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.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. 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.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
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 when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
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. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
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.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
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.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. 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.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
Full of Win
Oct 23, 05:11 PM
i grew up in woodside, and it seems like this house would be very out of place. i'm not saying i have anything against his simple house or anything, just that it doesnt fit in with the area.
hope he enjoys getting no signal out there...everytime i go back there my iphone drains it's battery in about an hour searching for signal
That is what Microcells and Sat Phones are for. That, or a Verizon iPhone.
hope he enjoys getting no signal out there...everytime i go back there my iphone drains it's battery in about an hour searching for signal
That is what Microcells and Sat Phones are for. That, or a Verizon iPhone.
TallGuy1970
May 3, 02:17 PM
Exactly why do we care about the Android app market on macrumors.com?! :mad:
iJohnHenry
Apr 18, 07:36 PM
I find it highly unnecessary for the TSA to pat down kids, especially, kids younger than 8-9 yrs old.
Agree on point one.
TSA lady groped my sister's boobs one flight, as if, last time I checked there are no records of people hiding crap in their boobs.
C-4 can be hidden in breast implants.
Unless the TSA "lady" was butch, I would not concern yourself. ;)
Agree on point one.
TSA lady groped my sister's boobs one flight, as if, last time I checked there are no records of people hiding crap in their boobs.
C-4 can be hidden in breast implants.
Unless the TSA "lady" was butch, I would not concern yourself. ;)
Yamcha
Apr 30, 07:50 PM
I've been using OSX Lion for a day, so far its pretty great, except I don't understand why Apple didn't add an option for a mouse shortcut for Launchpad =/, it would make things so much easier..
zap2
Mar 7, 10:54 AM
Android OS has gone through many changes and many people are now starting to feel iOS is getting dated. Android was first with true multi-tasking (iOS still lacks it even though it doesn't kill batteries on Android phones), copy/paste, augmented reality apps and they've implemented a much better notification system than Apple's near useless "block everything you're doing to answer this question".
I suggest you check our Symbain if you think Android had it beat for multitasking. As far as "true multi-tasking", look if you're unhappy with iOS mutli-tasking solution, then it might be time to leave the OS, because it works just fine.
Look at the MacBook Air, Rev A. They launched it, then basically forgot about it until the Rev D model which is now one of their top sellers. Will they stagnate there too ? A lot of people thought that "the future of Macbooks!" would actually translate in a few changes to other Macbook lines. It didn't. Look at the Mac Mini.
Are sorry are you upset that Apple doesn't redo their laptop each time? Yes, sometimes all we are going to get spec updates, not the end of the world, it just makes sense from a business model. "Basically forgetting about it" is just code for only spec updates right?
I suggest you check our Symbain if you think Android had it beat for multitasking. As far as "true multi-tasking", look if you're unhappy with iOS mutli-tasking solution, then it might be time to leave the OS, because it works just fine.
Look at the MacBook Air, Rev A. They launched it, then basically forgot about it until the Rev D model which is now one of their top sellers. Will they stagnate there too ? A lot of people thought that "the future of Macbooks!" would actually translate in a few changes to other Macbook lines. It didn't. Look at the Mac Mini.
Are sorry are you upset that Apple doesn't redo their laptop each time? Yes, sometimes all we are going to get spec updates, not the end of the world, it just makes sense from a business model. "Basically forgetting about it" is just code for only spec updates right?
Zadillo
Oct 10, 09:19 PM
While I don't know about Engadget's "reliable" Apple sources, their reliable Microsoft sources gave em everything about the Zune, even a PICTURE.
So don't dismiss this, it's Page 1 worthy, but it's also not more than 50% likely, as it would be if this was AppleInsider we were talking about.
Well, the difference there is that Microsoft used Engadget and others as part of their marketing campaign - "leaking" product information and photos to them to try and drum up interest. They did the same thing before with their "leaks" of Origami to try and build up hype. Of course, Zune seems to have gained more traction than UMPC (perhaps because the Zune is basically using a model that has been proven successful by the iPod).
Apple on the other hand just doesn't seem to leak product information ahead of time any more, and they also don't seem to need to do that kind of thing to generate hype and excitement for their products.
-Zadillo
So don't dismiss this, it's Page 1 worthy, but it's also not more than 50% likely, as it would be if this was AppleInsider we were talking about.
Well, the difference there is that Microsoft used Engadget and others as part of their marketing campaign - "leaking" product information and photos to them to try and drum up interest. They did the same thing before with their "leaks" of Origami to try and build up hype. Of course, Zune seems to have gained more traction than UMPC (perhaps because the Zune is basically using a model that has been proven successful by the iPod).
Apple on the other hand just doesn't seem to leak product information ahead of time any more, and they also don't seem to need to do that kind of thing to generate hype and excitement for their products.
-Zadillo
abrown2
Nov 24, 01:00 AM
Any buy 1 get 1 free deals? They would make a killing!
bluewire
Mar 23, 05:26 PM
bump...TELL US WHAT HAPPENED! CSI: Mac Rumors! :confused:
infidel69
Apr 11, 12:22 PM
It'll be really cool if they release a free beta for a year or so like they did with W7. The W7 beta was very stable and knocked off a nice chunk of money from a new build (for a while anyway)
Rodimus Prime
Apr 22, 07:58 PM
What exactly (specifically) is your worry?
The fact that I can not opt out. That it tracking me no matter were I go and I do not get a choice in the matter.
On top of that the more services that do this the more likely that it will be stolen as it already been shown Apple way of doing it is craptature as it is not even encrypted compared to Googles which is.
This makes it very easy to steal. I know the cell phone company do it and when a hole was found in their system and it was reported to them they were very quick to plug it (got that little bit from NPR today) and I do not believe they are selling off the information to advertisers.
It more I want to know what info is collect and what is done with it and also the option to opt out. Now would I chances are no I would not opt out depending on what it is. I trust Google to be more honest and open than I trust Apple to do but not like I trust Google that much in that department biggest difference is Google will be more up front about it. Apple will not say a thing about it.
My guess Apple is collecting this information for iAd which seems to link up with when iAds was launched.
The fact that I can not opt out. That it tracking me no matter were I go and I do not get a choice in the matter.
On top of that the more services that do this the more likely that it will be stolen as it already been shown Apple way of doing it is craptature as it is not even encrypted compared to Googles which is.
This makes it very easy to steal. I know the cell phone company do it and when a hole was found in their system and it was reported to them they were very quick to plug it (got that little bit from NPR today) and I do not believe they are selling off the information to advertisers.
It more I want to know what info is collect and what is done with it and also the option to opt out. Now would I chances are no I would not opt out depending on what it is. I trust Google to be more honest and open than I trust Apple to do but not like I trust Google that much in that department biggest difference is Google will be more up front about it. Apple will not say a thing about it.
My guess Apple is collecting this information for iAd which seems to link up with when iAds was launched.
mandis
Aug 7, 07:29 PM
Woooohoooo! Now the 20" ACDs go for around �410.00 (with edu discount)!! ;)
I'm buying two in September!! :D
I'm buying two in September!! :D
JoeG4
Mar 11, 10:17 AM
Yeah, not to mention Sony's use of chicklet keyboa... err.. wait, Apple took that idea from them and not the other way around. ;)
Yea lol.
The click wheel iPod? Anyone remember the Jog Dial fad? Friggin FAX MACHINES were coming with the dang thing.
Yea lol.
The click wheel iPod? Anyone remember the Jog Dial fad? Friggin FAX MACHINES were coming with the dang thing.
_bnkr612
Jan 12, 07:56 PM
It could have been worse. What if they streamed content from the other part of CES (i.e., XXX).
That would be bad...
That would be bad...
machappymeal
Aug 23, 08:31 AM
thesheep
Do you not feel you should push for the latest spec one as it may well affect any possible re-sale value in the future?
Do you not feel you should push for the latest spec one as it may well affect any possible re-sale value in the future?
DoFoT9
May 12, 06:13 PM
well i wouldn't say that. it wouldn't be as big of a deal if i was at the machine everyday, then a quick change of a few settings and it's back up. but being away, this is not fun.
your very dedicated ;)
have you set up any sort of remote capabilities? so you can remote into each system etc just incase there is something wrong - or to check up on heat?
what are you guy's rigs!?
your very dedicated ;)
have you set up any sort of remote capabilities? so you can remote into each system etc just incase there is something wrong - or to check up on heat?
what are you guy's rigs!?
Jason S.
Apr 9, 12:13 PM
Well, to be fair I have no idea what happened but depending on what they did, it could be very unfair to say they just "hurt his feelings".
That being said, yeah, I think that poster is being a little delusional that they'd shut the whole store down over what he did.
At best Best Buy fires anyone involved that caused them to have to pay out some large fine and maybe any of the managers that were around at the time. But they aren't going to shut the store down over it. And that is how it should be, cause the whole store shouldn't suffer because of some really bad employees (but the bad employees should be gone).
So glad to know that there are still reasonable and rational thinkers in this world!
That being said, yeah, I think that poster is being a little delusional that they'd shut the whole store down over what he did.
At best Best Buy fires anyone involved that caused them to have to pay out some large fine and maybe any of the managers that were around at the time. But they aren't going to shut the store down over it. And that is how it should be, cause the whole store shouldn't suffer because of some really bad employees (but the bad employees should be gone).
So glad to know that there are still reasonable and rational thinkers in this world!
Lyra
Aug 2, 05:00 AM
Lyra, your tone is condescending. Calling Scandinavian laws "perverted" tells us that you're single minded to begin with and that your points can't be taken seriously.
I'll still address the point you make about the size of the Scandinavian market. The total population of the Scandinavian countries are 18.9 million. The total population of the USA is 296 million. The size of the Scandinavian market is only 6.4% of the size of the US market, but if Apple pulls out it's still lost income, potentially up to a couple of percent of what Apple makes in the US if you count loss of sales of music and the domino effect that will cause loss of sales of iPods and Macs.
Of course Apple can survive without the Scandinavian market, but why give up potential profit for nothing except stubbornness?
It is in your right to feel the word "PERVERTED" is condescending, however you seem to be missing the point. And furthermore, when your country gives Apple a bad rep, just cause you have a law that benefits your greedy idea of harming international companies and getting some money out of them, in this certain case, it happens to be Apple. Were you this engaged to do something when MS broke the law? The international law?
The fact of the matter is that Scandinavia simply isn't worth this...
You call it stubbornness when you talk about opening the DRM, which shows you, to be completely delusional when it comest to understanding this matter.
As one of the posters here mentioned, it would be like unifying the keys to everything you own and hoping no one breaks in, or steals anything from you.
Do you think ALL those companies would have joined iTunes, if Apple didn't have a good and pretty solid security to present them with? Ultimately it is all about making sure that the items you buy from them are safe and has a copy protection that insures the record labels that they can trust this format.
So who are you to go up against a phenomenon like iTunes, and these major companies? Do you honestly believe that Apple is the only one who is pushing DRM?
Try to do something productive instead and fight FOR and not against Apple... If you want iTunes, you have to adjust your selves to their format. It is idiotic to think that because I don't agree with certain companies and how they make their products, I can actually make a difference. Scandinavia doesn't have an impact on anything, you won't be able to change anything.
It is like someone disagreeing that the off button on SONY TVs remote is on the right side and not the left... If you can adjust and live with all the things other companies do, then why can't you with Apple? No one is forcing you to use iTunes... Better yet, if you don't like it buy the SONY, knock off of the iPods...
People whining about this simply don't see what is behind all of this. It is like moaning about DVD regional Codes, or copy protection on DVDs in general. Why don't you write to Panasonic or Pioneer and tell them, that you don't like and would fine them for not allowing you to switch regional codes on your DVD burner/player.
You can tolerate other companies, yet you cannot understand why iTunes HAS to work this way.
Your post indicates you have an issue with the size of your country. It indicates a certain insecurity, when you actually want to make justify your views on how many people live in Scandinavia and how many there are in New York alone. We are not talking about the 296 million in the entire USA. Canada is excluded in those numbers.
Why are you people so ungrateful? Why can't you just enjoy what Apple is giving you? Would you rather pirate songs?
Your laws ARE perverted (meaning they are not fair and serve only greed).
Just like our laws are perverted in many of our states, yours in your tiny country has a worse effect. After all, you still don't matter in the grand scheme of things...
And sooner or later, Apple will leave you, then you won't be able to buy anything from iTunes...
Is that what you want? Then why don't you just vote on it? If it matters so much to you?
Don't be so naive and think you have any influence over this... You are not just going up against Apple, but the entire band of companies who are backing Apple in this. Try do go up against them... It is as I said, you cannot change the power on/off buttons placement on the remote-control... Or any other silly thing people have a problem with...
Apart from the conclusion... what do you think is just "kidding"?
Oh I don't know, just about everything? It is this insecurity thing again isn't it?
The fewer the people in a nation, the easier it is to say they are the best or the worst in certain things. Get it?
10 people loved the new Godzilla movie (People loved this movie and this might be the next best thing to sliced bread)
1.000.000 people hated the new Godzilla movie (People hated this movie and is considered to be a major flop)
I'll still address the point you make about the size of the Scandinavian market. The total population of the Scandinavian countries are 18.9 million. The total population of the USA is 296 million. The size of the Scandinavian market is only 6.4% of the size of the US market, but if Apple pulls out it's still lost income, potentially up to a couple of percent of what Apple makes in the US if you count loss of sales of music and the domino effect that will cause loss of sales of iPods and Macs.
Of course Apple can survive without the Scandinavian market, but why give up potential profit for nothing except stubbornness?
It is in your right to feel the word "PERVERTED" is condescending, however you seem to be missing the point. And furthermore, when your country gives Apple a bad rep, just cause you have a law that benefits your greedy idea of harming international companies and getting some money out of them, in this certain case, it happens to be Apple. Were you this engaged to do something when MS broke the law? The international law?
The fact of the matter is that Scandinavia simply isn't worth this...
You call it stubbornness when you talk about opening the DRM, which shows you, to be completely delusional when it comest to understanding this matter.
As one of the posters here mentioned, it would be like unifying the keys to everything you own and hoping no one breaks in, or steals anything from you.
Do you think ALL those companies would have joined iTunes, if Apple didn't have a good and pretty solid security to present them with? Ultimately it is all about making sure that the items you buy from them are safe and has a copy protection that insures the record labels that they can trust this format.
So who are you to go up against a phenomenon like iTunes, and these major companies? Do you honestly believe that Apple is the only one who is pushing DRM?
Try to do something productive instead and fight FOR and not against Apple... If you want iTunes, you have to adjust your selves to their format. It is idiotic to think that because I don't agree with certain companies and how they make their products, I can actually make a difference. Scandinavia doesn't have an impact on anything, you won't be able to change anything.
It is like someone disagreeing that the off button on SONY TVs remote is on the right side and not the left... If you can adjust and live with all the things other companies do, then why can't you with Apple? No one is forcing you to use iTunes... Better yet, if you don't like it buy the SONY, knock off of the iPods...
People whining about this simply don't see what is behind all of this. It is like moaning about DVD regional Codes, or copy protection on DVDs in general. Why don't you write to Panasonic or Pioneer and tell them, that you don't like and would fine them for not allowing you to switch regional codes on your DVD burner/player.
You can tolerate other companies, yet you cannot understand why iTunes HAS to work this way.
Your post indicates you have an issue with the size of your country. It indicates a certain insecurity, when you actually want to make justify your views on how many people live in Scandinavia and how many there are in New York alone. We are not talking about the 296 million in the entire USA. Canada is excluded in those numbers.
Why are you people so ungrateful? Why can't you just enjoy what Apple is giving you? Would you rather pirate songs?
Your laws ARE perverted (meaning they are not fair and serve only greed).
Just like our laws are perverted in many of our states, yours in your tiny country has a worse effect. After all, you still don't matter in the grand scheme of things...
And sooner or later, Apple will leave you, then you won't be able to buy anything from iTunes...
Is that what you want? Then why don't you just vote on it? If it matters so much to you?
Don't be so naive and think you have any influence over this... You are not just going up against Apple, but the entire band of companies who are backing Apple in this. Try do go up against them... It is as I said, you cannot change the power on/off buttons placement on the remote-control... Or any other silly thing people have a problem with...
Apart from the conclusion... what do you think is just "kidding"?
Oh I don't know, just about everything? It is this insecurity thing again isn't it?
The fewer the people in a nation, the easier it is to say they are the best or the worst in certain things. Get it?
10 people loved the new Godzilla movie (People loved this movie and this might be the next best thing to sliced bread)
1.000.000 people hated the new Godzilla movie (People hated this movie and is considered to be a major flop)
Gugulino
Mar 28, 04:02 PM
Yeah, the more popular apps get even more popular and the little apps get lost on the Mac App Store. Apple should improve this. For example Apple could list all new updates in a separate category. For now you can update your app, but no one will notice it. I am not so satisfied with the MAS, but I hope it will get better in the future.
dalvin200
Sep 12, 04:42 AM
would be but were on BST (GMT+1) matey.
its a 5PM GMT start
so using your formula above 5PM + 1 = 6PM BST :)
its a 5PM GMT start
so using your formula above 5PM + 1 = 6PM BST :)
robbieduncan
Apr 21, 11:48 AM
Apathy would be not clicking anything.
True apathy would be not caring if you've clicked anything or not.
True apathy would be not caring if you've clicked anything or not.
*LTD*
Mar 28, 03:48 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Very, very smart move. Good for Apple, good for devs.
Very, very smart move. Good for Apple, good for devs.
jackc
Jan 11, 06:41 PM
Someone should have got their asses kicked
Warbrain
Sep 12, 07:51 AM
Isn't today the start of the Paris expo? So let's see...6 hours ahead of me here in Chicago...1 PM! They're updating it for the fact that the expo is up and running.
No comments:
Post a Comment