skunk
Apr 22, 12:27 PM
To me, the whole idea is completely redundant.
MyDesktopBroke
Apr 11, 03:59 PM
Anyone who says that is taking the mickey. As a mac user of over a decade I can say I'm quite happy that I can run Windows 7 on my mac.
People on both sides of the OS war (or the console war, or Pepsi/Coke war, or the Marvel/DC war, etc.) are either trolls or severely lacking in the "life" department.
People on both sides of the OS war (or the console war, or Pepsi/Coke war, or the Marvel/DC war, etc.) are either trolls or severely lacking in the "life" department.
buckers
Apr 29, 02:18 PM
Steve really likes magic. Is he a magician?
Define magician ;)
Define magician ;)
John Purple
Jan 15, 03:40 PM
Not overly excited about the keynote.
Yes, which is why the $20 iPod touch apps update is �12.99 over here, instead of �10.20 which is what the exchange rate demands. Even with some made up tax, it's another example of "rip-off Britain".
It's even worse on the continent: EUR 2,268 excl. VAT in Germany which equals $ 3,356 for a standard MBP 17" (US store: $ 2,799)
BTW $ 2,112 excl. VAT for MBA in Europe !!! Ridiculous.
Yes, which is why the $20 iPod touch apps update is �12.99 over here, instead of �10.20 which is what the exchange rate demands. Even with some made up tax, it's another example of "rip-off Britain".
It's even worse on the continent: EUR 2,268 excl. VAT in Germany which equals $ 3,356 for a standard MBP 17" (US store: $ 2,799)
BTW $ 2,112 excl. VAT for MBA in Europe !!! Ridiculous.
more...
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
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.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
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. 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.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
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.
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'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
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. 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.
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.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. 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. 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.
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.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
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. 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.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
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.
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'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
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. 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.
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.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. 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. 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.
croasmun
Oct 2, 03:11 PM
Since when is Apple not a litigious company?
more...
grmatt
Sep 28, 12:52 PM
It looks so long and narrow...
TWSS
TWSS
davepoint
Aug 14, 06:28 PM
capitalism is hardly ideal, but given human nature what can you do.
It's a pity we can't live in a utopian society, and even more of a pity that we seem so very capable of a dystopian one
It's a pity we can't live in a utopian society, and even more of a pity that we seem so very capable of a dystopian one
more...
r.j.s
Jan 13, 04:09 PM
As someone who acts as a media liaison, if a media outlet did something along those lines at one of my functions, and bragged about it, they would be banned for a very, very long time from coming back to any of our events.
arn
Oct 2, 04:52 PM
Maybe they should just work with Rockbox and make a third party firmware that opens up the iPod to a new open DRM and forget Fairplay compatibility...
But what's the point of that? So a few geeks can hack their iPod to play whatever?
Opening Fairplay to other companies opens the iPod to other services. The biggest risk to Apple is the opening of Fairplay to other MP3 manufacturers.
Besides... the more I think about it, the more I don't see why iTunes wouldn't play the compatible Fairplay songs. Apple can't make any major changes to the existing DRM in files to break compatible Fairplay files.... since they would have then have to reencode all of those files sitting on people's hard drives.
arn
But what's the point of that? So a few geeks can hack their iPod to play whatever?
Opening Fairplay to other companies opens the iPod to other services. The biggest risk to Apple is the opening of Fairplay to other MP3 manufacturers.
Besides... the more I think about it, the more I don't see why iTunes wouldn't play the compatible Fairplay songs. Apple can't make any major changes to the existing DRM in files to break compatible Fairplay files.... since they would have then have to reencode all of those files sitting on people's hard drives.
arn
more...
abrown2
Nov 24, 01:00 AM
Any buy 1 get 1 free deals? They would make a killing!
MacRumors
Apr 8, 12:38 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/08/best-buy-not-in-trouble-with-apple-holding-ipad-2-stock-for-upcoming-promotion/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/08/133528-bbyhold.jpg
more...
The Insanity ride on top of
X-Scream ride at Las Vegas
more...
Las Vegas Stratosphere
My Trip to Las Vegas
more...
view large. Top O#39;
Mind blowing thrill rides
Rides on Top of Stratosphere
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/08/133528-bbyhold.jpg
more...
maclaptop
Apr 10, 12:00 AM
I believe Windows 8 will actually be Windows 6.2.
As an Apple user, I'm thrilled that I'm not afflicted with the need to put down Windows in order to boost my ego.
As an Apple user, I'm thrilled that I'm not afflicted with the need to put down Windows in order to boost my ego.
iShater
Jul 27, 03:18 PM
The Nissan Leaf list for about $25k to $26k and is an ALL electric vehicle. GM better get their head out of the sand.
Does it have the same options? or looks?
Does it have the same options? or looks?
more...
NC MacGuy
Jan 11, 08:15 AM
Redesigned MBP's, MB's and introduction of 12"PB replacement. IMHO last years MW was a bust unless you wanted an iphone. Stuck with Verizon so it did nothing for me....
AndyR
Apr 11, 02:41 AM
meet my new desk mascot.
http://twitpic.com/show/thumb/4hmpd9.jpg
it even makes angry bird sounds!!!
want want want want arrrrrrgggghhhhh!!! :d
http://twitpic.com/show/thumb/4hmpd9.jpg
it even makes angry bird sounds!!!
want want want want arrrrrrgggghhhhh!!! :d
more...
AndrewR23
Mar 17, 01:40 AM
lol.
twoodcc
Apr 1, 10:53 PM
Thanks. I should be there tomorrow night. Looking forward to it!
slb
Oct 3, 11:50 PM
They might get laughed at but apple will be the ones laughing when their the first to debut santa rosa with 800mhz fsb and nand flash. Hopefully this is whats going to happen
This is what I'm waiting for before considering a Core 2 Mac purchase. However, the current version of the Merom is drop-in replaceable with the Core Duo, so it's strange for Apple to not have something ready for the holidays. I believe they'll quietly update the MacBooks and MacBook Pros sometime in November with Core 2s.
This is what I'm waiting for before considering a Core 2 Mac purchase. However, the current version of the Merom is drop-in replaceable with the Core Duo, so it's strange for Apple to not have something ready for the holidays. I believe they'll quietly update the MacBooks and MacBook Pros sometime in November with Core 2s.
WeegieMac
Mar 18, 02:55 AM
But people actually seem to hate Apple because they can't afford their products. Most of them admitted that had the iPhone been cheaper they'd buy one, hence they can't afford it so they are bitter.
Nail. Hit. On. The. Head.
In personal experience, most of the Apple "haters" I've known have fallen into the category if they could afford an Apple product, then they wouldn't hate.
Hating something is easier than openly admitting "I want that but cannot afford it", so by creating a hate figure out of the company/products, it makes it easier for the person to "accept" that they will never own the product they secretly lust after.
Nail. Hit. On. The. Head.
In personal experience, most of the Apple "haters" I've known have fallen into the category if they could afford an Apple product, then they wouldn't hate.
Hating something is easier than openly admitting "I want that but cannot afford it", so by creating a hate figure out of the company/products, it makes it easier for the person to "accept" that they will never own the product they secretly lust after.
tvguru
Sep 12, 08:40 AM
I just came here to post this info. I'll include the image in my post. Too bad it doesn't list a price. Looks like the rumors of it ONLY including Disney movies are wrong.
http://static.flickr.com/95/241496992_e86c8584c0_d.jpg
Huh fancy that!
It's just a vicious circle. :eek:
http://static.flickr.com/95/241496992_e86c8584c0_d.jpg
Huh fancy that!
It's just a vicious circle. :eek:
*LTD*
Mar 28, 09:49 PM
1) Do you want to make things that are "insanely great".
or
2) Do you want to make the most amount of money?
One follows the other. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Apple's current products *are* insanely great. Just ask the people standing in line.
Game developers. World of Warcraft. Adobe. Microsoft. All of these developers not only do not distribute on the App Store but can not due to the App Store's TOS. I like the App Store but the control/terms keep a lot of great programs (like World of Warcraft, which one the Apple Design Award multiple times I think) out.
It'll be their loss, especially since competitors like MS will follow suit and introduce a similar distribution model. Eventually everyone will be in the game, for the the simple reason that they'd like to duplicate Apple's success.
or
2) Do you want to make the most amount of money?
One follows the other. The two aren't mutually exclusive. Apple's current products *are* insanely great. Just ask the people standing in line.
Game developers. World of Warcraft. Adobe. Microsoft. All of these developers not only do not distribute on the App Store but can not due to the App Store's TOS. I like the App Store but the control/terms keep a lot of great programs (like World of Warcraft, which one the Apple Design Award multiple times I think) out.
It'll be their loss, especially since competitors like MS will follow suit and introduce a similar distribution model. Eventually everyone will be in the game, for the the simple reason that they'd like to duplicate Apple's success.
aardwolf
Sep 28, 02:25 PM
This house can be yours too for the low price of 399,999.99 (or 349,999.99 with a 10-year contract.). Of course, version 2.0 will be out in 12 months that makes this house obsolete.
glocke12
May 4, 06:03 PM
Is asking if the gun is locked up and out of the kids reach really crossing the line?
I don't get why people would get so worked up over that. Is it weird for a pediatrician to ask if the gun is locked up? Sure, but I don't think it crosses any boundaries.
I don't see how people condone other people asking intrusive questions.
Now provide information on gun safety as part of a package of being information that helps people become responsible parents, but to be perfectly honest, what I own or do not own (as long as it is legal) is no ones business but my own and my families.
I don't get why people would get so worked up over that. Is it weird for a pediatrician to ask if the gun is locked up? Sure, but I don't think it crosses any boundaries.
I don't see how people condone other people asking intrusive questions.
Now provide information on gun safety as part of a package of being information that helps people become responsible parents, but to be perfectly honest, what I own or do not own (as long as it is legal) is no ones business but my own and my families.
No comments:
Post a Comment