rainman::|:|
Feb 13, 12:14 PM
Congrats to the new mods. They're all people I like, so I say it's good news. Perhaps long overdue.
hulugu
May 5, 01:11 PM
So, what do you call, and how do we handle the individual(s)who planned, and helped to plan the death of 3,000 + individuals on 9/11, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, the Bali nightclub bombings, and who knows how many more acts of terrorism?
Can you honestly sit there and tell me that when we have in custody a high profile leader such as K.S.M. who has intricate, first hand knowledge of a terrorist organization that we should not do all that we can to obtain as much information from this person as possible? I suppose your thinking (and those of many others here) is that he should have been given a trial by jury, sent to prison, and that we had no right to try and obtain information from him?
This is a false choice. We can interrogate someone, but we cannot torture them.
Think The Closer rather than 24.
To quote someone else in this thread "show me proof", in terms of actual statements given under duress and the results of that information. Until you or I see that we are both really just hand-waving.
As for the guy in the video, he's really the only one out there that I have seen that is so vocal about the ineffectiveness of E.I. I suspect that he is either someone that:
a) Is just out to make a quick buck off his book;
b) Has a grudge;
c) Has remorse about things that he has done and is trying to make amends.
So, you're going to dismiss the arguments of Matthew Alexander, but readily accept those of people who could be prosecuted for ordering acts of torture? I'd think that John Yoo, for example, would be much less trustworthy than Alexander in these cases.
BTW, if you guys haven't read Marc Thiessen's Courting Disaster, pick it up. He explains that waterboarding was not used to get answers to questions or confessions, but rather to break their will and spirit and get them to agree to start cooperating.
Theissen's attempt to draw this distinction is just a distortion of logic. A person who has been tortured and knows that a moment's hesitation will lead to more torture is physiologically and psychologically different than they were before
Torture changes (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/09/22/neuroscientist-says-torture-produces-false-memories-and-bad-intel/) the brain and damages memory and 'executive' faculties.
Can you honestly sit there and tell me that when we have in custody a high profile leader such as K.S.M. who has intricate, first hand knowledge of a terrorist organization that we should not do all that we can to obtain as much information from this person as possible? I suppose your thinking (and those of many others here) is that he should have been given a trial by jury, sent to prison, and that we had no right to try and obtain information from him?
This is a false choice. We can interrogate someone, but we cannot torture them.
Think The Closer rather than 24.
To quote someone else in this thread "show me proof", in terms of actual statements given under duress and the results of that information. Until you or I see that we are both really just hand-waving.
As for the guy in the video, he's really the only one out there that I have seen that is so vocal about the ineffectiveness of E.I. I suspect that he is either someone that:
a) Is just out to make a quick buck off his book;
b) Has a grudge;
c) Has remorse about things that he has done and is trying to make amends.
So, you're going to dismiss the arguments of Matthew Alexander, but readily accept those of people who could be prosecuted for ordering acts of torture? I'd think that John Yoo, for example, would be much less trustworthy than Alexander in these cases.
BTW, if you guys haven't read Marc Thiessen's Courting Disaster, pick it up. He explains that waterboarding was not used to get answers to questions or confessions, but rather to break their will and spirit and get them to agree to start cooperating.
Theissen's attempt to draw this distinction is just a distortion of logic. A person who has been tortured and knows that a moment's hesitation will lead to more torture is physiologically and psychologically different than they were before
Torture changes (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2009/09/22/neuroscientist-says-torture-produces-false-memories-and-bad-intel/) the brain and damages memory and 'executive' faculties.
nizmoz
Dec 28, 08:38 AM
Well said. I was going to start typing a similar post but glad you did. The person that replied to the OP above saying IT people are clueless is 100% wrong as you are the one that is clueless. I run a IT department and there is no way MACs would ever become the Computer of choice over any Windows machine that has way more software for the enterprise than a MAC will ever see. And using Bootcamp is a waste of funds as PCs are cheaper. It always takes someone who has no clue about how IT works to say something like that.
Yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for Windows run ah-so smoothly on Macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using Macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (There is a world beyond the Microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's OLD Java, and many Java apps require a very specific Oracle JVM to run. There's .NET. There's Sharepoint. There's an IBM mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no OS X drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with Windows.)
Enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a Mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, Time Machine is NOT an enterprise solution.
TCO? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (Apple)? HUGE fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out Fail. (Try getting support for OS X Leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for Tiger or Panther TODAY. Then compare it to Windows XP, an OS from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on Cupertino toys.)
It's MUCH easier to integrate Linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put Mac OS X boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like Oracle and IBM actually use, sell and support Linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the Mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large IT department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a CTO to bet the company's IT future on Nintendo Wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the World Health Organization of the United Nations, and it turned out to be IMPOSSIBLE to integrate Macs into their IT environment. I had the only Mac (a 20" Core Duo) in a world wide network because I was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then I quickly had to give up on OS X and instead run Windows on it in order to get my job as an IT admin done and be able to use the IT resources of the other WHO centers. OS X Tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but Windows Vista and XP got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a Mac that only runs Windows. That's what you get for being an Apple fanboy, which I admittedly was at that time.
Where I work now, two other people bought Macs, and one of them has ordered Windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out OS X from his hard disk and replace it with Windows. He's an engineer and not productive with OS X, rather the opposite: OS X slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in Apple land, I will now also move away from OS X. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the Apple hardware and their iTunes store. If the web browser and iTunes and maybe Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio or the Adobe Creative Suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then OS X probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When Apple brag about how cool it is to run Windows in "Boot Camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the Mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run Windows in VirtualBox on Linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support TWO operating systems to get ONE job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the Mac still is not a full computing platform without Microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case AGAINST migrating to Mac OS X.
Yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for Windows run ah-so smoothly on Macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using Macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (There is a world beyond the Microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's OLD Java, and many Java apps require a very specific Oracle JVM to run. There's .NET. There's Sharepoint. There's an IBM mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no OS X drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with Windows.)
Enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a Mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, Time Machine is NOT an enterprise solution.
TCO? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (Apple)? HUGE fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out Fail. (Try getting support for OS X Leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for Tiger or Panther TODAY. Then compare it to Windows XP, an OS from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on Cupertino toys.)
It's MUCH easier to integrate Linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put Mac OS X boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like Oracle and IBM actually use, sell and support Linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the Mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large IT department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a CTO to bet the company's IT future on Nintendo Wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the World Health Organization of the United Nations, and it turned out to be IMPOSSIBLE to integrate Macs into their IT environment. I had the only Mac (a 20" Core Duo) in a world wide network because I was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then I quickly had to give up on OS X and instead run Windows on it in order to get my job as an IT admin done and be able to use the IT resources of the other WHO centers. OS X Tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but Windows Vista and XP got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a Mac that only runs Windows. That's what you get for being an Apple fanboy, which I admittedly was at that time.
Where I work now, two other people bought Macs, and one of them has ordered Windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out OS X from his hard disk and replace it with Windows. He's an engineer and not productive with OS X, rather the opposite: OS X slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in Apple land, I will now also move away from OS X. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the Apple hardware and their iTunes store. If the web browser and iTunes and maybe Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio or the Adobe Creative Suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then OS X probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When Apple brag about how cool it is to run Windows in "Boot Camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the Mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run Windows in VirtualBox on Linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support TWO operating systems to get ONE job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the Mac still is not a full computing platform without Microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case AGAINST migrating to Mac OS X.
jrko
Apr 27, 12:17 AM
IMHO it's hard to believe that burnt GPU could be in working order, but I wish that I am wrong :)
yeah i agree. i'm not going to go any farther. i'll return the card and try again
yeah i agree. i'm not going to go any farther. i'll return the card and try again
more...
ThereGoesJB
May 2, 03:28 PM
i have an 80gb ipod classic, when i eject it from my computer it says "ok to disconnect" ... and then a meter goes across the screen and it goes into the normal (usable) screen.
so is it ok to disconnect when it says "ok to disconnect"
or do i have to wait for the meter thing to fill?
this isnt even a big issue its just sort of a pet peeve that i have, for the record i usually just wait the 5 seconds for the meter to fill. its just weird that it tells me its ok before the meter starts.
so is it ok to disconnect when it says "ok to disconnect"
or do i have to wait for the meter thing to fill?
this isnt even a big issue its just sort of a pet peeve that i have, for the record i usually just wait the 5 seconds for the meter to fill. its just weird that it tells me its ok before the meter starts.
MattInOz
May 1, 07:21 PM
this might be OT, but the castle thing made me think of a few other points too. Apologies in advance.
1. MobileMe should NOT be rebranded. They can "add cloud castle level security" whatever, but keep it simple. MobileMe has great recognition (if a subpar rep, but see AppleTV) attached to it.
2. MobileMe should be worth the money. It is currently a ripoff when so much else is free. Apple should give a small wifi dropbox style sync for free among apple products (like dropbox) under the MobileMe name, and a wifi sync for iphone (free). This is not "entitlement", this is a basic functionality in 2011.
Not that anyone from apple is going to read this but whatever
If "A mans Home is his castle" then maybe what they are talking about is a service that upgrades the users home folder to a "Castle" which would be stored and syncing to the Cloud and across all your devices.
In which case in would be better if it wasn't linked to MobileMe at all.
If MobileMe is your public face then iCloud is your private stuff.
Yes security relying on obscurity is no security at all, but that doesn't mean that obscurity isn't a valid early security measure. So keeping your iCloud user name separate is important.
After all your email address is out there in public, so you don't want that tied to your private storehouse do you.
Also If someone has a different public face ie. their own domain then the syncing service could still be useful to them.
I think this might add to MobileMe becoming free, but reduced in size. With a set of Paid upgrade that the user can select to suit. So if you just want live access to itunes library then you can have just that. Want to sync your home folder then that is a bit more. It allows for better targetting of the value.
IF this system is about Home folder syncing then I hope it allows for control of which info is in which home folder. So that I could have a User Profiles for various places like Work and Home. If I bookmark something at work i want to be able to see that at home but not the other way around.
1. MobileMe should NOT be rebranded. They can "add cloud castle level security" whatever, but keep it simple. MobileMe has great recognition (if a subpar rep, but see AppleTV) attached to it.
2. MobileMe should be worth the money. It is currently a ripoff when so much else is free. Apple should give a small wifi dropbox style sync for free among apple products (like dropbox) under the MobileMe name, and a wifi sync for iphone (free). This is not "entitlement", this is a basic functionality in 2011.
Not that anyone from apple is going to read this but whatever
If "A mans Home is his castle" then maybe what they are talking about is a service that upgrades the users home folder to a "Castle" which would be stored and syncing to the Cloud and across all your devices.
In which case in would be better if it wasn't linked to MobileMe at all.
If MobileMe is your public face then iCloud is your private stuff.
Yes security relying on obscurity is no security at all, but that doesn't mean that obscurity isn't a valid early security measure. So keeping your iCloud user name separate is important.
After all your email address is out there in public, so you don't want that tied to your private storehouse do you.
Also If someone has a different public face ie. their own domain then the syncing service could still be useful to them.
I think this might add to MobileMe becoming free, but reduced in size. With a set of Paid upgrade that the user can select to suit. So if you just want live access to itunes library then you can have just that. Want to sync your home folder then that is a bit more. It allows for better targetting of the value.
IF this system is about Home folder syncing then I hope it allows for control of which info is in which home folder. So that I could have a User Profiles for various places like Work and Home. If I bookmark something at work i want to be able to see that at home but not the other way around.
more...
thecoolone1
Oct 2, 10:24 PM
Here is my desktop this month!
heaven
Feb 16, 02:42 PM
Maybe a bit late, but:
Congrats!
Congratulations to all the new moderators and to edesignuk for becoming a mod mini (love your macros and keira) :p
Im sure this will help the amazing MR community.
Cheers
Congrats!
Congratulations to all the new moderators and to edesignuk for becoming a mod mini (love your macros and keira) :p
Im sure this will help the amazing MR community.
Cheers
more...
KnightWRX
Apr 28, 07:03 AM
You mean people aren't exactly rushing out to buy the iPhone 4, as apple preps the iPhone 5 - shocking.
Why would apple or verizon be surprised.
Then why is this guy saying the iPhone 4 could be sold well into 2012 at the current sales level ? :confused:
I guess this means end of the year introduction (if even that) for iPhone 4S/5 (or what ever they will call it). In all honesty I'm not surprised. With the current sales Apple could easily be pushing iPhone all the way to early 2012.
Seriously, the older the iPhone 4 gets, the further away the competition is. I doubt Apple can milk that cow for much longer.
Why would apple or verizon be surprised.
Then why is this guy saying the iPhone 4 could be sold well into 2012 at the current sales level ? :confused:
I guess this means end of the year introduction (if even that) for iPhone 4S/5 (or what ever they will call it). In all honesty I'm not surprised. With the current sales Apple could easily be pushing iPhone all the way to early 2012.
Seriously, the older the iPhone 4 gets, the further away the competition is. I doubt Apple can milk that cow for much longer.
xxRONNIExx
Feb 12, 12:29 PM
I dont use safari on my mac mini when Im using slingplayer. Fire fox is more stable..
more...
Vector
Aug 13, 04:31 PM
Last one for now...
njmac
Jan 10, 10:05 AM
I loved the keynote. Steve's excitement was palpable - he really believes this is the next big thing. Let's give him a little credit here.
I would be willing to bet the next month will be announcement after announcement of upgrades and updates.
Apple is getting stronger and stronger as a company and that is good for the mac and us.
I would be willing to bet the next month will be announcement after announcement of upgrades and updates.
Apple is getting stronger and stronger as a company and that is good for the mac and us.
more...
NewYorkRanger
Apr 7, 09:14 AM
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)
I had battery drain with 4.3.1 until I turned off Ping and restarted my phone. Since then, good battery life.
Same. Might just be a plecebo effect, but whatever...
I had battery drain with 4.3.1 until I turned off Ping and restarted my phone. Since then, good battery life.
Same. Might just be a plecebo effect, but whatever...
firewood
Apr 15, 03:57 AM
To answer my own question, I just updated my iPhone to iOS 4.3.2, and my previous installation of XCode3.2.6+SDK 4.3 downloaded symbols from the iPhone and was able to debug just fine.
So I didn't need to do huge .dmg download after updating yet again.
So I didn't need to do huge .dmg download after updating yet again.
more...
gibbz
Apr 28, 09:08 AM
Really? you read every 120 page document that came with every piece of software you install? And understood it without a lawyer?
First, the English portion (or any single language) is only 5 pages, not 120. Why would you need a lawyer to understand the agreement? See below.
From Apple's EULA (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf)
Apple and its partners and licensees may provide certain services through your iPhone that rely upon location information. To provide these services, where available, Apple and its partners and licensees may transmit, collect, maintain, process and use your location data, including the real-time geographic location of your iPhone. The location data collected by Apple is collected in a form that does not personally identify you and may be used by Apple and its partners and licensees to provide location-based products and services. By using any location-based services on your iPhone, you agree and consent to Apple’s and its partners' and licensees' transmission, collection, maintenance, processing and use of your location data to provide such products and services. You may withdraw this consent at any time by not using the location-based features or by turning off the Location Services setting on your iPhone. Not using these features will not impact the non location-based functionality of your iPhone. When using third party applications or services on the iPhone that use or provide location data, you are subject to and should review such third party's terms and privacy policy on use of location data by such third party applications or services.
Seems pretty straightforward.
Sure, Apple should have encrypted the file, not backed it up to your machine, and culled the database better. However, if you are worried about someone accessing this file from your phone or computer, you should be more worried about the fact someone has your phone or computer.
First, the English portion (or any single language) is only 5 pages, not 120. Why would you need a lawyer to understand the agreement? See below.
From Apple's EULA (http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf)
Apple and its partners and licensees may provide certain services through your iPhone that rely upon location information. To provide these services, where available, Apple and its partners and licensees may transmit, collect, maintain, process and use your location data, including the real-time geographic location of your iPhone. The location data collected by Apple is collected in a form that does not personally identify you and may be used by Apple and its partners and licensees to provide location-based products and services. By using any location-based services on your iPhone, you agree and consent to Apple’s and its partners' and licensees' transmission, collection, maintenance, processing and use of your location data to provide such products and services. You may withdraw this consent at any time by not using the location-based features or by turning off the Location Services setting on your iPhone. Not using these features will not impact the non location-based functionality of your iPhone. When using third party applications or services on the iPhone that use or provide location data, you are subject to and should review such third party's terms and privacy policy on use of location data by such third party applications or services.
Seems pretty straightforward.
Sure, Apple should have encrypted the file, not backed it up to your machine, and culled the database better. However, if you are worried about someone accessing this file from your phone or computer, you should be more worried about the fact someone has your phone or computer.
madbad01
Mar 23, 12:00 AM
Hi all,
I'm trying to connect to my work server (Windows Server 2008 R2) via Remote Desktop Connection for Mac on my iMac at home.
Until recently, the work server was running Windows Server 2002 but since the upgrade to 2008 I get an error when I try to connect to the work IP Address... Help!
Cheers.
I'm trying to connect to my work server (Windows Server 2008 R2) via Remote Desktop Connection for Mac on my iMac at home.
Until recently, the work server was running Windows Server 2002 but since the upgrade to 2008 I get an error when I try to connect to the work IP Address... Help!
Cheers.
more...
Doctor Q
Apr 18, 05:43 PM
Thanks for providing the information we need to get rid of the ad.
Uberglitch
Oct 19, 06:38 PM
http://att.macrumors.com/contest/AD5EC3.jpg
"Ipod-Flash"
"Ipod-Flash"
snberk103
Nov 22, 07:48 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
It goes to show you that they can still make a profit with $100 off. I guess the price gouging by Apple continues.
You're making an assumption, and an unsubstantiated accusation....
It goes to show you that they can still make a profit with $100 off. I guess the price gouging by Apple continues.
You're making an assumption, and an unsubstantiated accusation....
toddybody
Mar 25, 11:55 AM
That's a great idea! I'd love to see that for when I'm traveling and don't want to turn on international data roaming for the internet, but can still use cell towers for triangulation of my position.
+1
That would ROCK
+1
That would ROCK
greatdevourer
Sep 24, 12:10 PM
Does anyone know where I can get cheap 1GB sticks of RAM for an AlBook 15" in the UK?
Blakeasd
Mar 25, 03:17 PM
To me Serlet has more knowledge than Craig. He actually includes information about under the hood stuff and the nice new UI features. Craig just says "beautiful" "very natural". I will remember Serlet as the father of Leopard -- Apple's best release IMO and Craig with Lion, a release that really has nothing that exiting.
Again just my opinion.
Again just my opinion.
zodiac
May 10, 07:55 PM
get some forums. good job on the design though.
gnasher729
Mar 25, 11:04 AM
I think google has a lock on the map thing. I can't see apple employees driving around remapping the world to get their own data base
Why not? The USA for example has only 4 million miles of roads. A car with driver + passenger + some decent equipment should be able to map say 10 miles per hour, at a cost of $50 per hour. 200 cars for a year, that's 20 million dollars. And then you have a database that you can sell, and that you can use everywhere. Then write an iPhone app that lets users make corrections, lets businesses add their locations etc. and you are ready.
Why not? The USA for example has only 4 million miles of roads. A car with driver + passenger + some decent equipment should be able to map say 10 miles per hour, at a cost of $50 per hour. 200 cars for a year, that's 20 million dollars. And then you have a database that you can sell, and that you can use everywhere. Then write an iPhone app that lets users make corrections, lets businesses add their locations etc. and you are ready.
No comments:
Post a Comment