Well, they bought Quattro, a mobile advertising platform that specialized in analytics and used to create iAd. Think they started from scratch or just pitched one of the valuable parts of the Quattro platform? Additionally, Jobs own statements show that they are now withholding but will be willing to discuss allowing the third parties to collect and pass some data for analytics, as long as device identifying data is prevented from being shared.
You can dispute it all you like, but it is pretty clear.
My gawd you try hard not to read, or to at least to intentionally inflame by willfully misreading/misrepresenting.
I said iAd does analytics, but that there is no need for iAd to ever have to do the specific flavor of analytics that Apple has banned from all platforms because of privacy issues. And because of that your arguments fall apart on the point that Apple is potentially holding back some sort of special advantage in what data is collected. Specifically because Apple already holds that class of data from purchases and registration info.
Yes, Apple became angry because their privacy was violated. That's not a bad thing though, because it made them think about privacy in the large where they might have ignored it previously. And the result of that examination was a set of terms of service which are designed to more effectively allow the social enforcement of user privacy issues. Who cares (other than Engadget & Gizmodo) that Apple campus prototypes also get more privacy?
My gawd you try hard not to read, or to at least to intentionally inflame by willfully misreading/misrepresenting.
I said iAd does analytics, but that there is no need for iAd to ever have to do the specific flavor of analytics that Apple has banned from all platforms because of privacy issues. And because of that your arguments fall apart on the point that Apple is potentially holding back some sort of special advantage in what data is collected. Specifically because Apple already holds that class of data from purchases and registration info.
Yes, Apple became angry because their privacy was violated. That's not a bad thing though, because it made them think about privacy in the large where they might have ignored it previously. And the result of that examination was a set of terms of service which are designed to more effectively allow the social enforcement of user privacy issues. Who cares (other than Engadget & Gizmodo) that Apple campus prototypes also get more privacy?
The only type of data that is specifically mentioned as banned completely is data that is device specific. This type of data, from an privacy point of view, is the least compromising for end users. Who cares if they know you are using an iPad 3G vs an iPod. The advertisers would like to know, but it is not exactly a privacy crisis. So, really who, besides Apple, gives two soft shits about my model identifying data being shared? I don't. So, then yes, you are right, that specific flavor won't be shared (Apple will obviously still have access to it, as it is part of the platform they are deploying, but I trust that they will not ingest for analysis).
The rest of the data, well Jobs own words state that Apple will be willing to offer it up to third parties, once he settles down. As in, it is there, it is just a matter of Apple negotiating access to it. They won't have to negotiate with themselves for it, obviously, so until they do allow it for others, it is an advantage.
So you can argue against and dispute that Apple is keeping the device identifying data to themselves. In which case, you are disputing with thin air as I never claimed they were. Or you can argue against and dispute they are, for now, keeping the rest of the analytics data for themselves (not out of greed or to purposely give themselves an edge but for a calming period), but that would be incredibly difficult to argue.
You did try to make the point that Apple has access to their own sales and product registration info and so ad derived analytics would have no value to them. That is incredibly naive about exactly what ad/app analytics can provide. Sales and registration data is great. But it is static and quickly stale information. Live analytics from ads and apps gives immediate data regarding actual usage. How often are user loading an app, how long are they running them, in what locations, on what network types, etc. Apple does already have the ability to correlate end users to their devices, so that type of analytics data is redundant for them, but would be useful for advertisers. There are many bits of information that Apple doesn't have access to from the sales info which iAd will be able to provide...sort of a key reason for the ad platform to begin with.
The only type of data that is specifically mentioned as banned completely is data that is device specific. This type of data, from an privacy point of view, is the least compromising for end users. Who cares if they know you are using an iPad 3G vs an iPod. The advertisers would like to know, but it is not exactly a privacy crisis. So, really who, besides Apple, gives two soft shits about my model identifying data being shared? I don't. So, then yes, you are right, that specific flavor won't be shared (Apple will obviously still have access to it, as it is part of the platform they are deploying, but I trust that they will not ingest for analysis).
You are scarily ignorant. Device data is the Golden Currency, the Holy Grail of data. If I have the device data, which includes several identifying network hardware identifiers, and if I have a geographic map of fixed routing points, I can locate you worst case within a couple hundred feet at all times the device is on and you aren't out of range of EVERY radio the device could possibly communicate with.
I can cross reference that with other demographic information and even plot direction of movement. I can integrate all those things over time and further cross reference against credit data and know when to expect you where. I can target localized advertisements at times I know you are hungry because I know you haven't followed your pattern of paying where you eat yet and that won't be for another hour and 45 minutes, but it will be 4 and a half hours after lunch and your gym visit. I can cue business touters to engage you personally with very tailored messages. In short I could all but own anyone but the most strong-willed cynical personalities.
THAT is why TODAY device specifics are so dangerous to put in the analytics companies hands. It isn't future Minority Report science fiction, it is doable today with current technology. With it somebody gets to cross reference EVERYTHING about your life in amazingly accurate, real-time, geo-located detail. Those databases already exist, Google even knows where most of the home wifi's are geo-located. All somebody needs is a startup budget and a background app running an analytics library.
Nothing else you say after the device data comments matter, that's why I didn't quote the rest. It is utterly irrelevant to the real danger you haven't opened your eyes to. Well that and you don't seem to have any idea about the difference between application data and device data, but why quibble about the small stuff.
You are scarily ignorant. Device data is the Golden Currency, the Holy Grail of data. If I have the device data, which includes several identifying network hardware identifiers, and if I have a geographic map of fixed routing points, I can locate you worst case within a couple hundred feet at all times the device is on and you aren't out of range of EVERY radio the device could possibly communicate with.
I can cross reference that with other demographic information and even plot direction of movement. I can integrate all those things over time and further cross reference against credit data and know when to expect you where. I can target localized advertisements at times I know you are hungry because I know you haven't followed your pattern of paying where you eat yet and that won't be for another hour and 45 minutes, but it will be 4 and a half hours after lunch and your gym visit. I can cue business touters to engage you personally with very tailored messages. In short I could all but own anyone but the most strong-willed cynical personalities.
THAT is why TODAY device specifics are so dangerous to put in the analytics companies hands. It isn't future Minority Report science fiction, it is doable today with current technology. With it somebody gets to cross reference EVERYTHING about your life in amazingly accurate, real-time, geo-located detail. Those databases already exist, Google even knows where most of the home wifi's are geo-located. All somebody needs is a startup budget and a background app running an analytics library.
Nothing else you say after the device data comments matter, that's why I didn't quote the rest. It is utterly irrelevant to the real danger you haven't opened your eyes to. Well that and you don't seem to have any idea about the difference between application data and device data, but why quibble about the small stuff.
When you open a post with an ad hom, it really shows your level of ability.
Now to correct you, again.
I tried, but you obviously missed it, to distinguish for you the device data in question from the more 'personal' information. The 'device' data that Jobs references and then states will be barred was information used to identify models. Every other bit of data that you referenced was 'personal' information. I would also think you knew this and were being intentionally obtuse or misleading otherwise it was just over your head. You own words "EVERYTHING about your life in amazingly accurate real-time, geo-located detail" shows you are aware it is 'personal' and not device specific data. Unless you meant it was data collected from the device, in which case , well, duh, since all the data from the device is, you know, from the device. You couldn't really have meant that, could you?
Nope, on second reading you did mean that. Just to clarify for you again, before you make more shit up: when job referred to 'device data' he meant model identifying information. So, again, how does someone knowing I am on an iPad hurt my privacy? It hurts Apple. It benefits the advertiser, but it doesn't hurt me. If they collect the rest of my info, like location, network (you know, like I wrote but you had to leave out-honestly works better than omitting things that are inconvenient to your argument), yes, that is a major privacy concern. That I am using a new model? Not so much.
I would drop to your level and start lobbing personal insults about you, but your own posts are so insulting to yourself, I will let them speak for me.
When you open a post with an ad hom, it really shows your level of ability.
Now to correct you, again.
I tried, but you obviously missed it, to distinguish for you the device data in question from the more 'personal' information. The 'device' data that Jobs references and then states will be barred was information used to identify models. Every other bit of data that you referenced was 'personal' information. I would also think you knew this and were being intentionally obtuse or misleading otherwise it was just over your head. You own words "EVERYTHING about your life in amazingly accurate real-time, geo-located detail" shows you are aware it is 'personal' and not device specific data. Unless you meant it was data collected from the device, in which case , well, duh, since all the data from the device is, you know, from the device. You couldn't really have meant that, could you?
Nope, on second reading you did mean that. Just to clarify for you again, before you make more shit up: when job referred to 'device data' he meant model identifying information. So, again, how does someone knowing I am on an iPad hurt my privacy? It hurts Apple. It benefits the advertiser, but it doesn't hurt me. If they collect the rest of my info, like location, network (you know, like I wrote but you had to leave out-honestly works better than omitting things that are inconvenient to your argument), yes, that is a major privacy concern. That I am using a new model? Not so much.
I would drop to your level and start lobbing personal insults about you, but your own posts are so insulting to yourself, I will let them speak for me.
Have a good nght
You display you don't even know what the correct definition of an ad hom is!
You are also quite good at botching the attempt to move the goalposts. Personal information is about the person, device information is about the device. If you would actually read, the danger is in allowing the cross referencing the two. All that personal information I cited I also said wasn't even gleaned from using the device or it's software. It was gleaned from existing databases. You don't even need ad analytics to do any of that. It only gets easier with it.
We all know it is hopeless to cross posts with you, you always make up some new, but actually bogus out. I put up with it just enough to make sure a well founded set of facts is placed before the jury of our peers. Everyone else knows how that works out.
You display you don't even know what the correct definition of an ad hom is!
Actually, as it was explained to me once by a senior mod here, calling someone sad is enough to qualify as an ad hom. You really have been around here long enough to know, but not everyone learns at the same rate. I suppose if I walked up to your mom and called her ignorant, you wouldn't think I was insulting her? Like I said, I don't even have to insult you, your owns posts do it for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro
You are also quite good at botching the attempt to move the goalposts. Personal information is about the person, device information is about the device. If you would actually read, the danger is in allowing the cross referencing the two. All that personal information I cited I also said wasn't even gleaned from using the device or it's software. It was gleaned from existing databases. You don't even need ad analytics to do any of that. It only gets easier with it.
Actually, Hiro, I haven't moved the goalposts. Through multiple posts I have been trying in vain to keep you from shifting them, intentionally or otherwise. You keep trying to bring in unrelated information. Let's try to summarize it for you again. I am not sure you will get it this time, but it is worth a shot, no?
Fact 1: The only information Jobs explicitly singles out as pissing him off and that he will bar from collection for analytics is the device identifying information, specifically that identifies the model.
"No, we're not going to allow this. It's violating our privacy policies and its pissing us off that they're publishing data about our new products. "
"we are only going to allow these analytics that don't give device information"
"they can't send data out to an analytics firm who is going to sell it to make money and publish it to tell everybody that we have devices on our campus that we don't want people to know about"
Fact 2: Jobs also states they are willing to allow access to other data (you know from the device, unless you think the are going to share the stale, static info from POS or 'existing databases'-but that would be idiotic) with the analytics firms. This doesn't mean all other personal info from the device, but it only explicitly excludes model identifying device info.
You can try, as you have repeatedly, to change the meaning of his statements to mean Apple won't allow access to any information collected from the device. Of course, that would make no sense at all. Information collected through a web or application based advertising platform isn't collected from existing databases (though it is surely correlated with these). It is only useful if it is live information. You may not like that thought, but that doesn't allow you to change facts when then don't fit your limited view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro
We all know it is hopeless to cross posts with you, you always make up some new, but actually bogus out. I put up with it just enough to make sure a well founded set of facts is placed before the jury of our peers. Everyone else knows how that works out.
Again, I have strived to keep the conversation on topic, to what Jobs actually said. You keep trying to muddle it. It could be confusion on your part or refusing to read the text. I think you have shown it is more of an intentional pattern, as when you wanted to make a point and had to edit out my post that already stated what you wanted to state. That was somewhat dishonest, but par for the course it seems.
The problem with your 'facts', is that they seem very fluid and change to fit when needed.
You are a gem, you know that? Well of course you do.
My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted." An observation of mine since then, It's amazing how few dumb people there actually are in the world.
Congratulations, I haven't ever used the ignore posts functionality, but I'm sure nobody needs reminding of how logically and factually vacant your posts are despite their volume and rapid fire appearance. So you have made the inaugural member of my Hall of Shame ignore list.
You are a gem, you know that? Well of course you do.
My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted." An observation of mine since then, It's amazing how few dumb people there actually are in the world.
Congratulations, I haven't ever used the ignore posts functionality, but I'm sure nobody needs reminding of how logically and factually vacant your posts are despite their volume and rapid fire appearance. So you have made the inaugural member of my Hall of Shame ignore list.
I have no doubt in the world that your teacher felt it necessary to have that conversation with you. Things don't seem to have changed much for you since.
I am honoured to be your first ignore list entry. I won't add you to mine yet, you are simply too amusing and wouldn't want to miss your gems.
Stay classy, Hiro and continue to never let bothersome things like facts get in the ways of your posts(oh wait, you can't read this can you?)
Comments
Well, they bought Quattro, a mobile advertising platform that specialized in analytics and used to create iAd. Think they started from scratch or just pitched one of the valuable parts of the Quattro platform? Additionally, Jobs own statements show that they are now withholding but will be willing to discuss allowing the third parties to collect and pass some data for analytics, as long as device identifying data is prevented from being shared.
You can dispute it all you like, but it is pretty clear.
My gawd you try hard not to read, or to at least to intentionally inflame by willfully misreading/misrepresenting.
I said iAd does analytics, but that there is no need for iAd to ever have to do the specific flavor of analytics that Apple has banned from all platforms because of privacy issues. And because of that your arguments fall apart on the point that Apple is potentially holding back some sort of special advantage in what data is collected. Specifically because Apple already holds that class of data from purchases and registration info.
Yes, Apple became angry because their privacy was violated. That's not a bad thing though, because it made them think about privacy in the large where they might have ignored it previously. And the result of that examination was a set of terms of service which are designed to more effectively allow the social enforcement of user privacy issues. Who cares (other than Engadget & Gizmodo) that Apple campus prototypes also get more privacy?
My gawd you try hard not to read, or to at least to intentionally inflame by willfully misreading/misrepresenting.
I said iAd does analytics, but that there is no need for iAd to ever have to do the specific flavor of analytics that Apple has banned from all platforms because of privacy issues. And because of that your arguments fall apart on the point that Apple is potentially holding back some sort of special advantage in what data is collected. Specifically because Apple already holds that class of data from purchases and registration info.
Yes, Apple became angry because their privacy was violated. That's not a bad thing though, because it made them think about privacy in the large where they might have ignored it previously. And the result of that examination was a set of terms of service which are designed to more effectively allow the social enforcement of user privacy issues. Who cares (other than Engadget & Gizmodo) that Apple campus prototypes also get more privacy?
The only type of data that is specifically mentioned as banned completely is data that is device specific. This type of data, from an privacy point of view, is the least compromising for end users. Who cares if they know you are using an iPad 3G vs an iPod. The advertisers would like to know, but it is not exactly a privacy crisis. So, really who, besides Apple, gives two soft shits about my model identifying data being shared? I don't. So, then yes, you are right, that specific flavor won't be shared (Apple will obviously still have access to it, as it is part of the platform they are deploying, but I trust that they will not ingest for analysis).
The rest of the data, well Jobs own words state that Apple will be willing to offer it up to third parties, once he settles down. As in, it is there, it is just a matter of Apple negotiating access to it. They won't have to negotiate with themselves for it, obviously, so until they do allow it for others, it is an advantage.
So you can argue against and dispute that Apple is keeping the device identifying data to themselves. In which case, you are disputing with thin air as I never claimed they were. Or you can argue against and dispute they are, for now, keeping the rest of the analytics data for themselves (not out of greed or to purposely give themselves an edge but for a calming period), but that would be incredibly difficult to argue.
You did try to make the point that Apple has access to their own sales and product registration info and so ad derived analytics would have no value to them. That is incredibly naive about exactly what ad/app analytics can provide. Sales and registration data is great. But it is static and quickly stale information. Live analytics from ads and apps gives immediate data regarding actual usage. How often are user loading an app, how long are they running them, in what locations, on what network types, etc. Apple does already have the ability to correlate end users to their devices, so that type of analytics data is redundant for them, but would be useful for advertisers. There are many bits of information that Apple doesn't have access to from the sales info which iAd will be able to provide...sort of a key reason for the ad platform to begin with.
The only type of data that is specifically mentioned as banned completely is data that is device specific. This type of data, from an privacy point of view, is the least compromising for end users. Who cares if they know you are using an iPad 3G vs an iPod. The advertisers would like to know, but it is not exactly a privacy crisis. So, really who, besides Apple, gives two soft shits about my model identifying data being shared? I don't. So, then yes, you are right, that specific flavor won't be shared (Apple will obviously still have access to it, as it is part of the platform they are deploying, but I trust that they will not ingest for analysis).
You are scarily ignorant. Device data is the Golden Currency, the Holy Grail of data. If I have the device data, which includes several identifying network hardware identifiers, and if I have a geographic map of fixed routing points, I can locate you worst case within a couple hundred feet at all times the device is on and you aren't out of range of EVERY radio the device could possibly communicate with.
I can cross reference that with other demographic information and even plot direction of movement. I can integrate all those things over time and further cross reference against credit data and know when to expect you where. I can target localized advertisements at times I know you are hungry because I know you haven't followed your pattern of paying where you eat yet and that won't be for another hour and 45 minutes, but it will be 4 and a half hours after lunch and your gym visit. I can cue business touters to engage you personally with very tailored messages. In short I could all but own anyone but the most strong-willed cynical personalities.
THAT is why TODAY device specifics are so dangerous to put in the analytics companies hands. It isn't future Minority Report science fiction, it is doable today with current technology. With it somebody gets to cross reference EVERYTHING about your life in amazingly accurate, real-time, geo-located detail. Those databases already exist, Google even knows where most of the home wifi's are geo-located. All somebody needs is a startup budget and a background app running an analytics library.
Nothing else you say after the device data comments matter, that's why I didn't quote the rest. It is utterly irrelevant to the real danger you haven't opened your eyes to. Well that and you don't seem to have any idea about the difference between application data and device data, but why quibble about the small stuff.
You are scarily ignorant. Device data is the Golden Currency, the Holy Grail of data. If I have the device data, which includes several identifying network hardware identifiers, and if I have a geographic map of fixed routing points, I can locate you worst case within a couple hundred feet at all times the device is on and you aren't out of range of EVERY radio the device could possibly communicate with.
I can cross reference that with other demographic information and even plot direction of movement. I can integrate all those things over time and further cross reference against credit data and know when to expect you where. I can target localized advertisements at times I know you are hungry because I know you haven't followed your pattern of paying where you eat yet and that won't be for another hour and 45 minutes, but it will be 4 and a half hours after lunch and your gym visit. I can cue business touters to engage you personally with very tailored messages. In short I could all but own anyone but the most strong-willed cynical personalities.
THAT is why TODAY device specifics are so dangerous to put in the analytics companies hands. It isn't future Minority Report science fiction, it is doable today with current technology. With it somebody gets to cross reference EVERYTHING about your life in amazingly accurate, real-time, geo-located detail. Those databases already exist, Google even knows where most of the home wifi's are geo-located. All somebody needs is a startup budget and a background app running an analytics library.
Nothing else you say after the device data comments matter, that's why I didn't quote the rest. It is utterly irrelevant to the real danger you haven't opened your eyes to. Well that and you don't seem to have any idea about the difference between application data and device data, but why quibble about the small stuff.
When you open a post with an ad hom, it really shows your level of ability.
Now to correct you, again.
I tried, but you obviously missed it, to distinguish for you the device data in question from the more 'personal' information. The 'device' data that Jobs references and then states will be barred was information used to identify models. Every other bit of data that you referenced was 'personal' information. I would also think you knew this and were being intentionally obtuse or misleading otherwise it was just over your head. You own words "EVERYTHING about your life in amazingly accurate real-time, geo-located detail" shows you are aware it is 'personal' and not device specific data. Unless you meant it was data collected from the device, in which case , well, duh, since all the data from the device is, you know, from the device. You couldn't really have meant that, could you?
Nope, on second reading you did mean that. Just to clarify for you again, before you make more shit up: when job referred to 'device data' he meant model identifying information. So, again, how does someone knowing I am on an iPad hurt my privacy? It hurts Apple. It benefits the advertiser, but it doesn't hurt me. If they collect the rest of my info, like location, network (you know, like I wrote but you had to leave out-honestly works better than omitting things that are inconvenient to your argument), yes, that is a major privacy concern. That I am using a new model? Not so much.
I would drop to your level and start lobbing personal insults about you, but your own posts are so insulting to yourself, I will let them speak for me.
Have a good nght
When you open a post with an ad hom, it really shows your level of ability.
Now to correct you, again.
I tried, but you obviously missed it, to distinguish for you the device data in question from the more 'personal' information. The 'device' data that Jobs references and then states will be barred was information used to identify models. Every other bit of data that you referenced was 'personal' information. I would also think you knew this and were being intentionally obtuse or misleading otherwise it was just over your head. You own words "EVERYTHING about your life in amazingly accurate real-time, geo-located detail" shows you are aware it is 'personal' and not device specific data. Unless you meant it was data collected from the device, in which case , well, duh, since all the data from the device is, you know, from the device. You couldn't really have meant that, could you?
Nope, on second reading you did mean that. Just to clarify for you again, before you make more shit up: when job referred to 'device data' he meant model identifying information. So, again, how does someone knowing I am on an iPad hurt my privacy? It hurts Apple. It benefits the advertiser, but it doesn't hurt me. If they collect the rest of my info, like location, network (you know, like I wrote but you had to leave out-honestly works better than omitting things that are inconvenient to your argument), yes, that is a major privacy concern. That I am using a new model? Not so much.
I would drop to your level and start lobbing personal insults about you, but your own posts are so insulting to yourself, I will let them speak for me.
Have a good nght
You display you don't even know what the correct definition of an ad hom is!
You are also quite good at botching the attempt to move the goalposts. Personal information is about the person, device information is about the device. If you would actually read, the danger is in allowing the cross referencing the two. All that personal information I cited I also said wasn't even gleaned from using the device or it's software. It was gleaned from existing databases. You don't even need ad analytics to do any of that. It only gets easier with it.
We all know it is hopeless to cross posts with you, you always make up some new, but actually bogus out. I put up with it just enough to make sure a well founded set of facts is placed before the jury of our peers. Everyone else knows how that works out.
You display you don't even know what the correct definition of an ad hom is!
Actually, as it was explained to me once by a senior mod here, calling someone sad is enough to qualify as an ad hom. You really have been around here long enough to know, but not everyone learns at the same rate. I suppose if I walked up to your mom and called her ignorant, you wouldn't think I was insulting her? Like I said, I don't even have to insult you, your owns posts do it for me.
You are also quite good at botching the attempt to move the goalposts. Personal information is about the person, device information is about the device. If you would actually read, the danger is in allowing the cross referencing the two. All that personal information I cited I also said wasn't even gleaned from using the device or it's software. It was gleaned from existing databases. You don't even need ad analytics to do any of that. It only gets easier with it.
Actually, Hiro, I haven't moved the goalposts. Through multiple posts I have been trying in vain to keep you from shifting them, intentionally or otherwise. You keep trying to bring in unrelated information. Let's try to summarize it for you again. I am not sure you will get it this time, but it is worth a shot, no?
Fact 1: The only information Jobs explicitly singles out as pissing him off and that he will bar from collection for analytics is the device identifying information, specifically that identifies the model.
"No, we're not going to allow this. It's violating our privacy policies and its pissing us off that they're publishing data about our new products. "
"we are only going to allow these analytics that don't give device information"
"they can't send data out to an analytics firm who is going to sell it to make money and publish it to tell everybody that we have devices on our campus that we don't want people to know about"
Fact 2: Jobs also states they are willing to allow access to other data (you know from the device, unless you think the are going to share the stale, static info from POS or 'existing databases'-but that would be idiotic) with the analytics firms. This doesn't mean all other personal info from the device, but it only explicitly excludes model identifying device info.
You can try, as you have repeatedly, to change the meaning of his statements to mean Apple won't allow access to any information collected from the device. Of course, that would make no sense at all. Information collected through a web or application based advertising platform isn't collected from existing databases (though it is surely correlated with these). It is only useful if it is live information. You may not like that thought, but that doesn't allow you to change facts when then don't fit your limited view.
We all know it is hopeless to cross posts with you, you always make up some new, but actually bogus out. I put up with it just enough to make sure a well founded set of facts is placed before the jury of our peers. Everyone else knows how that works out.
Again, I have strived to keep the conversation on topic, to what Jobs actually said. You keep trying to muddle it. It could be confusion on your part or refusing to read the text. I think you have shown it is more of an intentional pattern, as when you wanted to make a point and had to edit out my post that already stated what you wanted to state. That was somewhat dishonest, but par for the course it seems.
The problem with your 'facts', is that they seem very fluid and change to fit when needed.
You are a gem, you know that? Well of course you do.
My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted." An observation of mine since then, It's amazing how few dumb people there actually are in the world.
Congratulations, I haven't ever used the ignore posts functionality, but I'm sure nobody needs reminding of how logically and factually vacant your posts are despite their volume and rapid fire appearance. So you have made the inaugural member of my Hall of Shame ignore list.
You are a gem, you know that? Well of course you do.
My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted." An observation of mine since then, It's amazing how few dumb people there actually are in the world.
Congratulations, I haven't ever used the ignore posts functionality, but I'm sure nobody needs reminding of how logically and factually vacant your posts are despite their volume and rapid fire appearance. So you have made the inaugural member of my Hall of Shame ignore list.
I have no doubt in the world that your teacher felt it necessary to have that conversation with you. Things don't seem to have changed much for you since.
I am honoured to be your first ignore list entry. I won't add you to mine yet, you are simply too amusing and wouldn't want to miss your gems.
Stay classy, Hiro and continue to never let bothersome things like facts get in the ways of your posts(oh wait, you can't read this can you?