nsshah85
Apr 27, 04:15 PM
Maybe the reason they didn't bring it up was because they are working on a new feature (ie new maps or turn by turn gps built into the next iOS; they did mention it was to collect data for something like that), but now that the media has blown it out of proportion, they had to come out and address it. At least, that's what I'm assuming Apple's point of view was.
alent1234
Apr 6, 12:16 PM
Agreed. I just spent 55k on 9.6TB of raw fibre channel storage for our 3PAR. That's 16 600GB drives if you were wondering.
and i bet they all have western digital or seagate labels on them just like our EMC ones
and i bet they all have western digital or seagate labels on them just like our EMC ones
quantum003
Jun 7, 06:49 PM
Who.. does... Arn work for?! :D Very cool, I like it. I actually feel like the image of Steve Jobs as Dr. Evil is good enough to stand on it's own without any of the other animation necessary at all.
techfreak85
Aug 3, 12:41 PM
Don't have my second monitor hooked up right now, otherwise my contacts list would be over there.
http://grab.by/5IPq
http://grab.by/5IPq
more...
WillEH
Mar 19, 10:56 PM
Don't include me. Your reasoning is as confused as your conclusion. There is absolutely no logic in maintaining that killing is wrong and then appealing to that principle to justify more killing.
I think someone shouldn't play god, but at the same time I agree that if you take a life, your life should be taken ( I know I'm contradicting myself, but that's just HOW I feel ) But I'd also rather someone rot in prison for 50 years. But then again, it's like a holiday camp in prisons here. Playstations, internet, TV. The UK is a complete and utter joke. We're the laughing stock of the world. We're so scared of human rights, we bend over backwords for any prisoner. I'm SO happy that common sense what introduced for prisoner votes.
Justify more killing, I could use the same old line, "I bet their victim didn't want to die", all that crap, but I won't. All I'm going to say is that countries need to show that if you kill, you're not going to get away with it lightly.
When I say "we", I don't speak for everyone, I maybe misworderd it a little..
Republic of Ukistan, if that were a real place (which I have a feeling it is...) I'm sure they would have capital punishement! :p
P.s, I tend to stay away from political threads, but I just couldn't help myself! I always end up getting seriously bashed in them! meh.. :(
I think someone shouldn't play god, but at the same time I agree that if you take a life, your life should be taken ( I know I'm contradicting myself, but that's just HOW I feel ) But I'd also rather someone rot in prison for 50 years. But then again, it's like a holiday camp in prisons here. Playstations, internet, TV. The UK is a complete and utter joke. We're the laughing stock of the world. We're so scared of human rights, we bend over backwords for any prisoner. I'm SO happy that common sense what introduced for prisoner votes.
Justify more killing, I could use the same old line, "I bet their victim didn't want to die", all that crap, but I won't. All I'm going to say is that countries need to show that if you kill, you're not going to get away with it lightly.
When I say "we", I don't speak for everyone, I maybe misworderd it a little..
Republic of Ukistan, if that were a real place (which I have a feeling it is...) I'm sure they would have capital punishement! :p
P.s, I tend to stay away from political threads, but I just couldn't help myself! I always end up getting seriously bashed in them! meh.. :(
iphonegeek786
Feb 9, 09:16 PM
Work for Gimp. And if they do, at what extent. I know it can't replace it guys, but I'm not too big on graphic design and wanted to delve a little in it first.
more...
jrko
Mar 30, 01:42 PM
mmmm doesn't like streaming from tvcatchup.com
new frame twice a second but sound is ok. Vid card is Radeon 9000 with 64MB.
Is that the issue or the paltry 512MB ram?
new frame twice a second but sound is ok. Vid card is Radeon 9000 with 64MB.
Is that the issue or the paltry 512MB ram?
jrko
Mar 31, 08:53 AM
mmm - Geekbench score 732. woohoo
temp is sitting at around 46-47 degrees C or 117 degrees F at idle. A bit better than before the MX-2 paste.
Lets see what 2Gb of ram does
temp is sitting at around 46-47 degrees C or 117 degrees F at idle. A bit better than before the MX-2 paste.
Lets see what 2Gb of ram does
more...
mscriv
Apr 6, 12:49 PM
Worth quoting, given the back-and-forth that's gone on since this was originally posted.
Thank you sir. I'm glad you enjoyed the post and appreciate the compliment. :)
No woman was ever raped because of the kind of clothes she was wearing. Women are raped because people (almost exclusively men) choose to rape them.
While it is true that people can put themselves at a higher risk through certain activities, for a politician to blame a young girl for her own rape is absolutely disgusting. It's also nauseating and ignorant for politicians to suggest modest dress as a way to prevent rape. Such thinking is completely backward.
I agree with the notion that people should try to take steps to avoid risk, and that people can greatly reduce personal risk by making safer choices.
But this nugget of wisdom does not really touch on the substance of the issue arising in the OP, to wit - how much responsiblity does a rape victim carry? Or, to turn the question around, how much of the rape is not the rapist's fault?
Here's the thing. A woman's choice in dress or action does not mean she is to "blame" for being victimized, but we can not deny that her choice in dress or behavior can be a factor in her chances of being targeted.
As far as the politician's comments, let's not forget that multiple articles have been written about her quote and she claims to have been misquoted. Regardless of our own personal political views, we must admit that people do get misquoted. Additionally, none of us are above making a error in judgement with our words. Sometimes things don't come out as we intend them or they sound different when they come out of our mouths as opposed to how it sounded in our heads.
She responded to an email written to her by a blogger (http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20110318/tanja-cilia/unjust-justice)with this:
Thank you for your e-mail. You may want to read the article that appeared in the New York Times. When I read the article my heart went out to the little girl and I was angry that she was brutally assaulted. I was angry that nobody protected her and that she was even allowed to leave with an older boy. In my opinion an 11 year old girl is still a child and as such shouldn't be expected to understand that certain actions or attire are not appropriate for her. I did not indicate that she was raped because she was wearing inappropriate attire. What I did say (which was not reported) was that if her parents don't protect her then all that's left is the school.
Additionally, the writer who wrote the story quoted by the OP has written two follow up stories on the matter. In the most recent one he states (http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/juice/2011/03/11_year_olds_dressed_like_pros.php#):
But, look -- no matter where Kathleen Passidomo exists on the feminist spectrum, whether she's a closet burqa-wearer or the secret owner of a lucrative chain of abortion clinics -- the fact is, Kathleen Passidomo probably doesn't think this 11-year-old deserved to be gang-raped. How do we know? Because Kathleen Passidomo is a human being, and human beings do not generally feel that justice has been served when children are tortured and brutalized. However regrettable her phrasing, what Passidomo was trying to express is an obvious if unpopular truth: that although a child has every right to safety in any environment she chooses to enter, that right will not be equally protected by all individuals in all environments.
* bold emphasis mine
It's also, by the way, fallacious to assume that only young, attractive and/or scantily-clad women are raped.
Great point. My post was intended to speak on the connection between personal responsibility and possible victimization. There is often a correlation between these variables. My comments in that post and in this one are not directed solely at this one sad case, but towards all types of victimization. If we focus on the topic of rape specifically there are a variety of types of rapes each carrying their own specific factors.
If your interested my thoughts on post 50 is that it fundamentally misses the point.
Everyone understands that we live in a world which contains certain dangers which can be mitigated by changing our behaviors.
That isn't the point of this conversation, were all talking about BLAMING the victim in this case. Just because a victim makes a bad decision does not remove their reasonable expectation of safety.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your view is very short sighted and continues to be rooted in a morality vacuum as opposed to reality. Sure, we can all agree that the ideal is every person, everywhere, regardless of circumstances should be safe, but the fact of the matter is that we aren't.
No one is arguing that victims deserve what happens to them or that perpetrators should be any less to blame for the actions they take. However, we must learn to accept that a variety of factors are involved and that even victims can bear a measure of responsibility in putting themselves in situations where they are more likely to be victimized.
Like I said above there are a variety of types of rape. Let's take the broad category of date rape as an example. The female that chooses to dress and carry herself in a suggestive manner might be sending signals that she does not intend to send and in doing so is making herself more of a target. Add alcohol to the mix and risks go way up. Does this mean the predator who chooses to take advantage in this situation is any less culpable, of course not, but to ignore the risk factors is like burying your head in the sand. Young women need to be taught about risk factors and learn how certain choices can either increase or minimize risk.
As I have suggested, we cannot really know the answers to these questions without first interviewing (or obtaining transcripts of interviews of) rapists. Most of us on this forum are not rapists (I hope), so making broad inferences on what goes through such a monster's mind is rather pointless.
Another great point. Guess what, in my experience as a therapist I've worked with rapists and abusers directly. I've done the interviews and talked with these indivduals about "what goes through [their] mind".
Continuing the line of reasoning I started in my answer to AP_piano295, one young man who had "date raped" more than one female explained to me that at college parties he would target the girls who dressed and acted provocatively in addition to drinking heavily. In his words, "you know, the party girls" His reasoning was that these girls were easy marks and in most cases were less likely to report anything because they would rationalize the experience, if they remembered it, as "having gotten a little out of control or having drank too much" as opposed to having been victimized or raped.
You see, rape is not always about power. Sometimes it is, but at other times it's about abuse, pain, fear, rage, or just plain sexual desire/conquest.
One young male offender I worked with was in the system for sexually molesting his younger brother. He was a victim of abuse himself and his motivation for abusing his brother was jealously and anger. He felt his parents loved the younger brother more because he wasn't "damaged" and thus he acted out so his brother would be "just like him".
I agree, but there's a vast difference between trying to 'minimize risk' and the post below:
...If a man sees a woman with a low top, lots of cleavage showing, high skirts and heels, then he will view her as trash.....
Which acts as a kind of justification.
Yes and no. While based on my own personal morals/ethics I agree with you that such a line of thinking is ridiculous, I must keep in mind that there are people that do think this way. And, they will use whatever rationalization it takes to both motivate and justify their judgements or actions. In the case of a predator the kind of thinking above could be the initial thought that starts a chain of events which ultimately results in an attack of some kind.
In this specific gang rape case the victim is a child and thus there is limited capacity for personal responsibility. However, there are a variety of potential factors that ultimately contributed to what occurred: lack of parental supervision, negative peer involvement, possible previous sexually inappropriate behavior, socioeconomic conditions, etc. etc. I don't know the specifics and thus these are just generalizations, but regardless, the perpetrators are solely responsible for their actions and should be held responsible to the fullest extent of the law.
Please understand, I'm not talking about morals, ideals, and values here (what I've previously referred to as the morality vacuum). I'm talking about understanding the link between personal responsibility and potential victimization. Simply put, while our choices do not make us responsible for any victimization that may befall us, we must recognize that our actions can contribute to the chances of us being targeted for victimization.
I apologize for the long post, but I wanted to touch on the many comments that had been made and attempt to better explain my position. :)
Thank you sir. I'm glad you enjoyed the post and appreciate the compliment. :)
No woman was ever raped because of the kind of clothes she was wearing. Women are raped because people (almost exclusively men) choose to rape them.
While it is true that people can put themselves at a higher risk through certain activities, for a politician to blame a young girl for her own rape is absolutely disgusting. It's also nauseating and ignorant for politicians to suggest modest dress as a way to prevent rape. Such thinking is completely backward.
I agree with the notion that people should try to take steps to avoid risk, and that people can greatly reduce personal risk by making safer choices.
But this nugget of wisdom does not really touch on the substance of the issue arising in the OP, to wit - how much responsiblity does a rape victim carry? Or, to turn the question around, how much of the rape is not the rapist's fault?
Here's the thing. A woman's choice in dress or action does not mean she is to "blame" for being victimized, but we can not deny that her choice in dress or behavior can be a factor in her chances of being targeted.
As far as the politician's comments, let's not forget that multiple articles have been written about her quote and she claims to have been misquoted. Regardless of our own personal political views, we must admit that people do get misquoted. Additionally, none of us are above making a error in judgement with our words. Sometimes things don't come out as we intend them or they sound different when they come out of our mouths as opposed to how it sounded in our heads.
She responded to an email written to her by a blogger (http://www.timesofmalta.com/blogs/view/20110318/tanja-cilia/unjust-justice)with this:
Thank you for your e-mail. You may want to read the article that appeared in the New York Times. When I read the article my heart went out to the little girl and I was angry that she was brutally assaulted. I was angry that nobody protected her and that she was even allowed to leave with an older boy. In my opinion an 11 year old girl is still a child and as such shouldn't be expected to understand that certain actions or attire are not appropriate for her. I did not indicate that she was raped because she was wearing inappropriate attire. What I did say (which was not reported) was that if her parents don't protect her then all that's left is the school.
Additionally, the writer who wrote the story quoted by the OP has written two follow up stories on the matter. In the most recent one he states (http://blogs.browardpalmbeach.com/juice/2011/03/11_year_olds_dressed_like_pros.php#):
But, look -- no matter where Kathleen Passidomo exists on the feminist spectrum, whether she's a closet burqa-wearer or the secret owner of a lucrative chain of abortion clinics -- the fact is, Kathleen Passidomo probably doesn't think this 11-year-old deserved to be gang-raped. How do we know? Because Kathleen Passidomo is a human being, and human beings do not generally feel that justice has been served when children are tortured and brutalized. However regrettable her phrasing, what Passidomo was trying to express is an obvious if unpopular truth: that although a child has every right to safety in any environment she chooses to enter, that right will not be equally protected by all individuals in all environments.
* bold emphasis mine
It's also, by the way, fallacious to assume that only young, attractive and/or scantily-clad women are raped.
Great point. My post was intended to speak on the connection between personal responsibility and possible victimization. There is often a correlation between these variables. My comments in that post and in this one are not directed solely at this one sad case, but towards all types of victimization. If we focus on the topic of rape specifically there are a variety of types of rapes each carrying their own specific factors.
If your interested my thoughts on post 50 is that it fundamentally misses the point.
Everyone understands that we live in a world which contains certain dangers which can be mitigated by changing our behaviors.
That isn't the point of this conversation, were all talking about BLAMING the victim in this case. Just because a victim makes a bad decision does not remove their reasonable expectation of safety.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think your view is very short sighted and continues to be rooted in a morality vacuum as opposed to reality. Sure, we can all agree that the ideal is every person, everywhere, regardless of circumstances should be safe, but the fact of the matter is that we aren't.
No one is arguing that victims deserve what happens to them or that perpetrators should be any less to blame for the actions they take. However, we must learn to accept that a variety of factors are involved and that even victims can bear a measure of responsibility in putting themselves in situations where they are more likely to be victimized.
Like I said above there are a variety of types of rape. Let's take the broad category of date rape as an example. The female that chooses to dress and carry herself in a suggestive manner might be sending signals that she does not intend to send and in doing so is making herself more of a target. Add alcohol to the mix and risks go way up. Does this mean the predator who chooses to take advantage in this situation is any less culpable, of course not, but to ignore the risk factors is like burying your head in the sand. Young women need to be taught about risk factors and learn how certain choices can either increase or minimize risk.
As I have suggested, we cannot really know the answers to these questions without first interviewing (or obtaining transcripts of interviews of) rapists. Most of us on this forum are not rapists (I hope), so making broad inferences on what goes through such a monster's mind is rather pointless.
Another great point. Guess what, in my experience as a therapist I've worked with rapists and abusers directly. I've done the interviews and talked with these indivduals about "what goes through [their] mind".
Continuing the line of reasoning I started in my answer to AP_piano295, one young man who had "date raped" more than one female explained to me that at college parties he would target the girls who dressed and acted provocatively in addition to drinking heavily. In his words, "you know, the party girls" His reasoning was that these girls were easy marks and in most cases were less likely to report anything because they would rationalize the experience, if they remembered it, as "having gotten a little out of control or having drank too much" as opposed to having been victimized or raped.
You see, rape is not always about power. Sometimes it is, but at other times it's about abuse, pain, fear, rage, or just plain sexual desire/conquest.
One young male offender I worked with was in the system for sexually molesting his younger brother. He was a victim of abuse himself and his motivation for abusing his brother was jealously and anger. He felt his parents loved the younger brother more because he wasn't "damaged" and thus he acted out so his brother would be "just like him".
I agree, but there's a vast difference between trying to 'minimize risk' and the post below:
...If a man sees a woman with a low top, lots of cleavage showing, high skirts and heels, then he will view her as trash.....
Which acts as a kind of justification.
Yes and no. While based on my own personal morals/ethics I agree with you that such a line of thinking is ridiculous, I must keep in mind that there are people that do think this way. And, they will use whatever rationalization it takes to both motivate and justify their judgements or actions. In the case of a predator the kind of thinking above could be the initial thought that starts a chain of events which ultimately results in an attack of some kind.
In this specific gang rape case the victim is a child and thus there is limited capacity for personal responsibility. However, there are a variety of potential factors that ultimately contributed to what occurred: lack of parental supervision, negative peer involvement, possible previous sexually inappropriate behavior, socioeconomic conditions, etc. etc. I don't know the specifics and thus these are just generalizations, but regardless, the perpetrators are solely responsible for their actions and should be held responsible to the fullest extent of the law.
Please understand, I'm not talking about morals, ideals, and values here (what I've previously referred to as the morality vacuum). I'm talking about understanding the link between personal responsibility and potential victimization. Simply put, while our choices do not make us responsible for any victimization that may befall us, we must recognize that our actions can contribute to the chances of us being targeted for victimization.
I apologize for the long post, but I wanted to touch on the many comments that had been made and attempt to better explain my position. :)
CaoCao
Apr 16, 01:33 AM
I think you either read the statistical trend wrong or perhaps read a twisted version of it from some "Christian blog" of some sort.
What's really happening is that the birth rate is "diminishing"...not "reversing". The trend throughout ALL 1st world and emerging economies is that the birth rate per person reduces. There are several factors for this including the fact that modernized civilizations do not need to have that many babies in hopes that a few will survive disease, famine, hardship, etc. And the few babies that do get born are brought up to be "more powerful humans" so to speak...in a sense that they are nurtured more and given more attention and education, etc. What happens is that the average "modernized person" can supply like multiple X more economic productivity than your average 3rd worlder. In addition, many more of those 3rd worlders will die before they have "fulfilled their usefulness" to society ... or perhaps even reproduce.
Think of it this way. If a person with a degree in industrial engineering can make a machine that spits out 10,000 donuts per day...how many "villagers" will it take to make an equivalent amount of food?
Red is screwed, yellow is sucky, green is above replacement... You don't want birth rate to drop below 2.1, Turkey the only country above replacement is 2.14...
http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/9463/europepopulation.png (http://img826.imageshack.us/i/europepopulation.png/)
Even if I assume this unsourced soundbite is true, there is a missing phrase: "without intervention."
If it really came down to it, the EU (or any other country/countries with a declining birth rate) could enact any number of policies or incentives to bolster the population, including making it easier for gay couples to adopt. So what?
The intervention should not be forbidding or discriminating against a group because of their sexual behavior. If it's all about the birthin' then they better start taking a hard look at those hetero scofflaws who don't want to have kids, too. *Gasp*
http://www.economist.com/node/5494593
The only meaningful way to save the red countries from depopulation is to eliminate access to birth control and abortions. Places have tried to boost birth rates, it hasn't succeeded.
What's really happening is that the birth rate is "diminishing"...not "reversing". The trend throughout ALL 1st world and emerging economies is that the birth rate per person reduces. There are several factors for this including the fact that modernized civilizations do not need to have that many babies in hopes that a few will survive disease, famine, hardship, etc. And the few babies that do get born are brought up to be "more powerful humans" so to speak...in a sense that they are nurtured more and given more attention and education, etc. What happens is that the average "modernized person" can supply like multiple X more economic productivity than your average 3rd worlder. In addition, many more of those 3rd worlders will die before they have "fulfilled their usefulness" to society ... or perhaps even reproduce.
Think of it this way. If a person with a degree in industrial engineering can make a machine that spits out 10,000 donuts per day...how many "villagers" will it take to make an equivalent amount of food?
Red is screwed, yellow is sucky, green is above replacement... You don't want birth rate to drop below 2.1, Turkey the only country above replacement is 2.14...
http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/9463/europepopulation.png (http://img826.imageshack.us/i/europepopulation.png/)
Even if I assume this unsourced soundbite is true, there is a missing phrase: "without intervention."
If it really came down to it, the EU (or any other country/countries with a declining birth rate) could enact any number of policies or incentives to bolster the population, including making it easier for gay couples to adopt. So what?
The intervention should not be forbidding or discriminating against a group because of their sexual behavior. If it's all about the birthin' then they better start taking a hard look at those hetero scofflaws who don't want to have kids, too. *Gasp*
http://www.economist.com/node/5494593
The only meaningful way to save the red countries from depopulation is to eliminate access to birth control and abortions. Places have tried to boost birth rates, it hasn't succeeded.
more...
srob030869
Feb 12, 07:46 AM
This is Hong Kong.
Judging from this picture, looks like a fancy restaurant in a hotel in the Tsim Tsa Tsui district.
Maybe from The Inter-Continental or the Renaissance Hotels, beside the Avenue of Stars, going from the direction of the image. Mine are not so good, cheap digicam :mad: on a rainy + cloudy November night
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5095/5438734856_d8924d4065_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/5438736864_dd2173f392_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5211/5438735950_6011fb8625_b.jpg
Judging from this picture, looks like a fancy restaurant in a hotel in the Tsim Tsa Tsui district.
Maybe from The Inter-Continental or the Renaissance Hotels, beside the Avenue of Stars, going from the direction of the image. Mine are not so good, cheap digicam :mad: on a rainy + cloudy November night
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5095/5438734856_d8924d4065_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4098/5438736864_dd2173f392_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5211/5438735950_6011fb8625_b.jpg
kbfr08
Apr 24, 02:43 PM
Was browsing techforless' non-functional apple section, since most products they have are repairable. Anyway, I came across this iMac with 2 stickers. One's a red apple sticker, which I have never seen before, the other is a white sticker.
The unit has mostly been stripped, so I'm not going to but it even if it is a prototype.
http://www.techforless.com/cgi-bin/salvage.pl?sku=MA710LL/A
I'm just wondering as to what the red sticker might have been for.
The unit has mostly been stripped, so I'm not going to but it even if it is a prototype.
http://www.techforless.com/cgi-bin/salvage.pl?sku=MA710LL/A
I'm just wondering as to what the red sticker might have been for.
more...
Joshwawilson
May 4, 09:24 PM
What color iPad 2's are people getting?? I got the white because I though it would be unique but now I feel that everybody is getting white :p
What color did you get?
:apple:
What color did you get?
:apple:
iSKW
Sep 6, 09:17 AM
249509
where can i get this.. do u have the original?
where can i get this.. do u have the original?
more...
daneoni
Mar 5, 06:10 AM
Are you in the UK or US?
CaoCao
Apr 27, 09:32 AM
So cliche.
I guarantee those are the straight women, who actually have to spend time with men. ;)
Us lesbians don't have to deal with that crap. The man-hating lesbian was created by egotistical straight men who couldn't believe that a woman would choose another woman over a man.
I've actually met that kind of lesbian, at first I thought I was being trolled. The sane lesbians probably don't get seen because they are too busy being normal.
Something I like, times two.
Next question please.
Yes sir, you in the balcony, with your pants around your ankles.
Bruised egos? How quaint.
They aren't interested in you
I guarantee those are the straight women, who actually have to spend time with men. ;)
Us lesbians don't have to deal with that crap. The man-hating lesbian was created by egotistical straight men who couldn't believe that a woman would choose another woman over a man.
I've actually met that kind of lesbian, at first I thought I was being trolled. The sane lesbians probably don't get seen because they are too busy being normal.
Something I like, times two.
Next question please.
Yes sir, you in the balcony, with your pants around your ankles.
Bruised egos? How quaint.
They aren't interested in you
more...
zelet
Sep 26, 09:40 PM
Now all they need to do is lower the price to $75, or include dotMac with iLife, or give discounts on Apple software with the purchase of .Mac.
Oh, and they need to increase speed and storage. And they need to add support for smartphones by enabling "push" IMAP.
And they in general need to stop depending on their tie-ins to the OS to make it worth it for the service... thats something MS would do. Make it worth it because it is a better product.
Oh, and they need to increase speed and storage. And they need to add support for smartphones by enabling "push" IMAP.
And they in general need to stop depending on their tie-ins to the OS to make it worth it for the service... thats something MS would do. Make it worth it because it is a better product.
Vegasman
Apr 4, 02:05 PM
Apple does allow opt-in, just not opt-out. So the problem lies with the FT.
Not really.
The terms with FT are that if you want to use their service you must provide them with the information. Then you can choose what you allow them to do with this information.
If Apple does not want to allow FT to work that way they are effectively saying they don't want to do business with FT. And this is why FT is "holding out."
Apple doesn't like the T&C's of FT.
FT does not like the T&C's of Apple.
So they are choosing not to do business with each other. Happens all the time.
Apple users are the only ones that lose here.
Not really.
The terms with FT are that if you want to use their service you must provide them with the information. Then you can choose what you allow them to do with this information.
If Apple does not want to allow FT to work that way they are effectively saying they don't want to do business with FT. And this is why FT is "holding out."
Apple doesn't like the T&C's of FT.
FT does not like the T&C's of Apple.
So they are choosing not to do business with each other. Happens all the time.
Apple users are the only ones that lose here.
alphaone
Mar 4, 01:10 PM
I'll have my new i7-2600k computer coming online sometime next week after I complete its construction and thorough testing (ahem.. overclocking..). All of the parts for it are arriving today (including the new revised SB motherboard finally!), but except for unfortunately the ram is coming via USPS and is currently in Ontario, CA bound for northern CA so it may be here on saturday but I'm not optimistic. I'm pretty excited for this actually, this will be (relatively speaking) the fastest computer I've ever had.
AP_piano295
May 6, 11:20 AM
LOL, so it's both ok either way and wrong either way? No offense but I think you've reduced your position to one that doesn't really mean anything
No offence but I think your failing to see the disconnect between my personal position and my historical/political observations.
No offence but I think your failing to see the disconnect between my personal position and my historical/political observations.
Kieranic
Dec 7, 03:41 PM
Please share this wallpaper.
Here you go :)
Here you go :)
nevcrabbe
Oct 18, 10:59 PM
... but in Northampton MA in body, and awaiting 10.5.1 (1?) from Amazon for $109 (=�3 at today's rates).
Time Machine will always be Tardis to me.....
Go England (Sarth Efrica indeed....)
Nev.
Time Machine will always be Tardis to me.....
Go England (Sarth Efrica indeed....)
Nev.
Zeke
Dec 1, 01:54 PM
I have this brand new black rebel xt with kit lens that I'm selling (I ended up buying a used 20d). I will also throw in an extra battery for it. I'm looking to get $800 for it. I removed the UPC for the rebate. PM or email me if you're interested.
jrob
Apr 7, 09:22 AM
I wonder how many of these posts are trolls? I haven't had any issues whatsoever with 4.3.1. I also didn't have any problems with 4.3; battery life has been absolutely stellar and call performance actually improved in 4.3.1.
The timing of all these "bitching" posts just seems suspicious.
I can confirm that I am a genuine iPhone 4 user who loves it. Loved the 3GS and the original iPhone before it. But for the first time, I'm affected by a problem that I see others complaining about: battery life is quite noticeably down since 4.3. 4.3.1 doesn't seem to have had much of an effect (not that it ever publicly purported to address that issue).
The timing of all these "bitching" posts just seems suspicious.
I can confirm that I am a genuine iPhone 4 user who loves it. Loved the 3GS and the original iPhone before it. But for the first time, I'm affected by a problem that I see others complaining about: battery life is quite noticeably down since 4.3. 4.3.1 doesn't seem to have had much of an effect (not that it ever publicly purported to address that issue).
0 comments:
Post a Comment