jonnysods
Apr 6, 02:24 PM
Man alive, if that's the nearest competitor investors must be feeling pretty good with Apple right now.
I certainly love my iPad.
I certainly love my iPad.
JAT
Apr 6, 04:55 PM
LOL WUT? You're honestly going to count emulated games (pirated in almost all cases) as Android games?
Besides, you can play them on iOS too, if rooted.
Besides, you can play them on iOS too, if rooted.
fivepoint
Mar 22, 06:48 AM
The hypocrisy coming from the left in the media on this issue is palpable... all the talk about Obama's great coalition and how its a justifiable war. Here are a few of my favorite quotes from Brhawk Obama:
�I�m gonna read this and then tell you who said it. �The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.� Now that was Barack Obama who said that on December the 20, 2007. We�ve got to be very sure here that we follow the Constitution, and president Obama didn�t do that.�
�Well, look, if that�s the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now � where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife � which we haven�t done,�
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
[Source: US State Department]
Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003
Afghanistan,
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Hungary
Italy
Japan
South Korea
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan
Coalition - Libya - 2011
United States
France
United Kingdom
Italy
Canada
Belgium
Denmark
Norway
Qatar
Spain
Greece
Germany
Poland
Jordan
Morocco
United Arab Emirate
Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/barack-obama/2011/03/21/fact-bush-had-2-times-more-coalition-partners-iraq-obama-has-libya#ixzz1HKPFLjvX
�I�m gonna read this and then tell you who said it. �The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.� Now that was Barack Obama who said that on December the 20, 2007. We�ve got to be very sure here that we follow the Constitution, and president Obama didn�t do that.�
�Well, look, if that�s the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now � where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife � which we haven�t done,�
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
[Source: US State Department]
Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003
Afghanistan,
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Hungary
Italy
Japan
South Korea
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan
Coalition - Libya - 2011
United States
France
United Kingdom
Italy
Canada
Belgium
Denmark
Norway
Qatar
Spain
Greece
Germany
Poland
Jordan
Morocco
United Arab Emirate
Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/barack-obama/2011/03/21/fact-bush-had-2-times-more-coalition-partners-iraq-obama-has-libya#ixzz1HKPFLjvX
MacBoobsPro
Jul 20, 09:40 AM
Well next time say what you mean. It makes more sense. ;)
I did but instead of saying core at the end I said processor :D Which is the same thing so i didnt think it would matter. :p
I did but instead of saying core at the end I said processor :D Which is the same thing so i didnt think it would matter. :p
Dr Kevorkian94
Apr 25, 01:48 PM
i love my country we sue everybody! some people are just idiots, they odiously think they can win or they wouldn't spend the legal fees. like others have said android does the same thing but then sends the info to google. and from what i heard its not your actual location just the coordinates of the cell tower you are connected to. i wonder if you turn location services off it will still do that, because there might be some terms and condition someone didn't read lol. but this is a little out of control the situation is generalized to the point where it is being betray like they are tracking you by GPS at every second. cant wait to see how this turns out.
parapup
Apr 11, 12:03 PM
< >
joemama
Aug 12, 07:03 AM
Who says Apple has to piggy-back off of another carrier? Let's not forget the large distribution center Apple bought some time back. Maybe the delay in the phone has more to to with that.
Steve holds grudges. While I think the Rokr was more of a market test, he won't go back with Cingular. We all know if Apple is going to do anything they are going to do it right - with Steve calling the shots.
Steve holds grudges. While I think the Rokr was more of a market test, he won't go back with Cingular. We all know if Apple is going to do anything they are going to do it right - with Steve calling the shots.
Ladybug
Aug 7, 06:59 PM
Yeah, I recommended GoBack to a number of users back in the day (I think it was Adaptec that owned it at one point). No-one seemed to like it at the time.
As I and others reminisce it's a feature that has been around for well over 20 years in VMS. It's only relatively new to personal computers.
B
Great info Balamw, your memory is much better than mine :D
I also used GoBack for a short period. The problem with it that I had, was how slow it actually made my computer. I haven't used it in recent years so I really can't say how well it progressed after version 2 I think it was.
As I and others reminisce it's a feature that has been around for well over 20 years in VMS. It's only relatively new to personal computers.
B
Great info Balamw, your memory is much better than mine :D
I also used GoBack for a short period. The problem with it that I had, was how slow it actually made my computer. I haven't used it in recent years so I really can't say how well it progressed after version 2 I think it was.
Huntn
Mar 19, 04:31 PM
When will you people realize that Obama is not in charge? You're not in charge either. Corporate interest rules the USA, Libya has 2% of the world's oil supply and a lot of companies have interests there. No one intervened militarily in Rwanda or East Timor. You guys can continue to have your little left vs right, conservative vs. liberal distraction of a debate, meanwhile the real people running the show don't give a rat's ass about any of it.
It's a known fact the Obama Administration monitors MacRumors forums for a populist read on issues... ;) Yes I agree business is in charge colored by perceived economic end-results.
It's a known fact the Obama Administration monitors MacRumors forums for a populist read on issues... ;) Yes I agree business is in charge colored by perceived economic end-results.
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 12:53 AM
Can't believe it's anywhere near GM time. Way too many bugs and inconsistencies in behavior. New networking tools in Server have to be implemented now that SMB is being canned - that's not a minor addition. Calling it a release candidate is a stretch, but calling it GM is just plain crazy.
Keep in mind that the developer build was probably already a month or two old when it was released. Wait and see what the next version is like.
Keep in mind that the developer build was probably already a month or two old when it was released. Wait and see what the next version is like.
ChazUK
Apr 6, 01:29 PM
It'll be 100,001 when it comes out in the UK when mine gets delivered..... Roll on Saturday!:D
skunk
Mar 23, 05:34 PM
I keep seeing these pointless ad hominems popping up in your posts. It really is getting tiresome.Isn't that an ad feminam?
CavemanUK
Aug 6, 05:16 PM
So, you're comparing a mature product (Tiger) to one that's still in beta and which by all accounts has plenty of outstanding issues before it's ever released (Vista)?
Not the fairest of comparisons, is it? Perhaps we should compare the latest of the Leopard builds with the latest Vista build for a more valid comparison of the relative position of the two OSs?
"Beige, boring box". Have you seen some of the hideous case designs that PC companies come out with? Not beige and far from boring (in a bad way). Apple's industrial design and grasp of asthetics and ergonomics is light years ahead.
Its perfectly valid to compare Tiger to Vista. especially since vista (or longhorn) was announced way before tiger was even previewed. If we want to compare the final vista product with a product thats on a similar timeline we would probably have to wait till 10.6 ;)
Not the fairest of comparisons, is it? Perhaps we should compare the latest of the Leopard builds with the latest Vista build for a more valid comparison of the relative position of the two OSs?
"Beige, boring box". Have you seen some of the hideous case designs that PC companies come out with? Not beige and far from boring (in a bad way). Apple's industrial design and grasp of asthetics and ergonomics is light years ahead.
Its perfectly valid to compare Tiger to Vista. especially since vista (or longhorn) was announced way before tiger was even previewed. If we want to compare the final vista product with a product thats on a similar timeline we would probably have to wait till 10.6 ;)
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
hayesk
Mar 26, 02:26 PM
I agree entirely.
I also think 10.4.11 is the best OS ever.
I don't want "wow." I want them to fix the broken things, like IMAP subscriptions in Mail, and sync code for Address book, for example.
I also think 10.4.11 is the best OS ever.
I don't want "wow." I want them to fix the broken things, like IMAP subscriptions in Mail, and sync code for Address book, for example.
Richardthe4th
Apr 10, 02:28 PM
reading this tread is so much fun. this actually is like film, all about emotions; dripping out of it. the next version of fcp will be a disappointment compared to this. waiting... :D
Benjamins
Mar 31, 02:43 PM
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
If Apple FAD goes away, where will Google copy from next?
You are delusional if you think Google is not building upon the Apple FAD.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
If Apple FAD goes away, where will Google copy from next?
You are delusional if you think Google is not building upon the Apple FAD.
Ahheck01
Apr 12, 10:27 AM
The SuperMeet stage show aka FCP (or if **** hits the fan then iMovie Pro) preview begins at 7 pm.
7pm Vegas Time? If so, for others scheduling your availability like me :cool::
Pacific Time: 7:00pm
Mountain Time: 8:00pm
Central Time: 9:00pm
Eastern Time: 10:00pm
7pm Vegas Time? If so, for others scheduling your availability like me :cool::
Pacific Time: 7:00pm
Mountain Time: 8:00pm
Central Time: 9:00pm
Eastern Time: 10:00pm
puggles
Jun 13, 12:37 AM
Will radio shack be selling the bumpers?
dornoforpyros
Aug 27, 08:41 PM
you know what? I like the g5 powerbook next tuesday joke enough that I think MR should print it on a t-shirt! :)
Reach
Sep 19, 08:04 AM
Its all pointless as the same people will start up again with the next technology advances as soon as the Macbook range is updated with Merom.
Don't you get that it's special with a Rev.B, at least that's how I view a Merom version, of Macbook Pro.
When using machines for professional reasons it's no good jumping on the first machines, and seeing what happened I'm glad I didn't buy the first Macbook Pro's. And there are a lot of people that have thought this way I believe, so this is a special update that a lot of professional users have been waiting for. By all means, they may have fixed the current Macbook Pro's a long time ago, but when I'm finally going to upgrade form my Powerbook G4 now, I'd be stupid to buy something that would be old in 1 week.
And now I won't be bitching about anything in 2-3 years time, as I got what I need when I buy a Merom Macbook Pro. I've had Macs for 16 years now, and never been nagging on an update like I am now, so it's not all the same every time something new comes. At least not for a lot of us.
Don't you get that it's special with a Rev.B, at least that's how I view a Merom version, of Macbook Pro.
When using machines for professional reasons it's no good jumping on the first machines, and seeing what happened I'm glad I didn't buy the first Macbook Pro's. And there are a lot of people that have thought this way I believe, so this is a special update that a lot of professional users have been waiting for. By all means, they may have fixed the current Macbook Pro's a long time ago, but when I'm finally going to upgrade form my Powerbook G4 now, I'd be stupid to buy something that would be old in 1 week.
And now I won't be bitching about anything in 2-3 years time, as I got what I need when I buy a Merom Macbook Pro. I've had Macs for 16 years now, and never been nagging on an update like I am now, so it's not all the same every time something new comes. At least not for a lot of us.
dgree03
Apr 6, 03:48 PM
But hey, haven't you heard, Honeycomb is a real tablet OS. (Whatever the heck that means.)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
What you and every other non-informed are missing is the Xoom lack of apps is a not really a con for 2 reason.
1. Unlike iOS, ALL APPS, in the android market scale to fit the 1280x800 screen. No x1 or x2 crap. So I can still ENJOY my facebooke app on a larger screen. Nothing is lost. "optimized for tablets" gives me the same information just with a different interface. So long has my twitter app or facebooke or squeezebox app scale so i can see all. I am a happy camper.
2. Unlike iOS i would argue that the xoom needs LESS apps to do functions that take iOS 3 or 4 apps to do. I dont need goodreader or the like because I have a native file system. I dont need skyfire because i have flash. I dont need to open in here, open in there. Every app can have access to each other...
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:15 AM
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
I think ALL the gooses should be cooked. No one should get the free pass.. so I don't think it's wrong to call Apple out on this.
I thought looking at my location histories was interesting. I, too, have no delusions that I cannot be tracked (cell phone, credit card purchases, etc.) I wonder if all the paranoids realize that any GPS camera encodes that information in the image. Share that photo online and anyone can get the metadata with location of photograph.
You wanna be connected, you can't be truly anonymous.
You wanna be anonymous, sell you computer, smart phone, cut up credit cards, and move to an undocumented shack in the middle of nowhere with no utilities.
Sharing a photo is actively giving out a location. Just like foursquare, tweeting and updating facebook. This issue is about giving out data which is involuntary, non encrypted and not being able to turn it off.
And as for the latter half of your statement - it's a dangerous/slippery slope to start being apathetic about your right to privacy. Once it's all out there - it's that much harder to get it back.
And again - there's a difference between voluntarily and involuntarily releasing of private information.
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
I think ALL the gooses should be cooked. No one should get the free pass.. so I don't think it's wrong to call Apple out on this.
I thought looking at my location histories was interesting. I, too, have no delusions that I cannot be tracked (cell phone, credit card purchases, etc.) I wonder if all the paranoids realize that any GPS camera encodes that information in the image. Share that photo online and anyone can get the metadata with location of photograph.
You wanna be connected, you can't be truly anonymous.
You wanna be anonymous, sell you computer, smart phone, cut up credit cards, and move to an undocumented shack in the middle of nowhere with no utilities.
Sharing a photo is actively giving out a location. Just like foursquare, tweeting and updating facebook. This issue is about giving out data which is involuntary, non encrypted and not being able to turn it off.
And as for the latter half of your statement - it's a dangerous/slippery slope to start being apathetic about your right to privacy. Once it's all out there - it's that much harder to get it back.
And again - there's a difference between voluntarily and involuntarily releasing of private information.
geiger167
Aug 25, 04:05 PM
I had a problem with my .mac account recently (failure to update Idisc and Iweb) and reported the fault on the apple support forum for some help. The service was down for a day and a half when I received a phone call from Apple in America. As I live in the UK I was certainly not expecting a phone call from anyone. The Apple representive went through my propblem with me on the phone and made sure my .mac account was working perfectly before he rang off. The problem with service faults are only complaints are ever heard, no one ever mentions the good service when it occurs, and the company was certainly under no obligation to me to make a transatlantic phone call to help me out and is the first time in my many years as a computer user when any manufacturer has ever made this kind of effort to solve a complaint :)
0 comments:
Post a Comment