The idea that the whole system works off of "user complaints" seems equally flawed to me as well. That just means the whiners get their way.
I feel that reports serve to bring to the attention of moderators posts that may violate rules or decency. We are neither compelled to nor do we act on every report we see. I think they work well in that regard; the only problem as of late is people NOT reporting things that should have been.
It's definitely either an impossible task or a task that requires some very new and different approach. I tend to think that it's not impossible but that's just me.
We should brainstorm. We meaning anyone, of course. Feedback section!
Or not reading, much less commenting, on an article that starts off with Samsung in the title.
Kind of like someone coming to the community gym you helped build for years and telling you it sucks and the gym up the street is better. Why not just go workout there instead of attacking us.
Function should always dictate form and in the case (quite literally) of Samsung's Galaxy series of devices, the use of Polycarbonate allows for devices that are lightweight, impact resistant, durable and more efficient to manufacture.
As for the overall design/shape of the devices, the smooth edges and surface contours are obviously the result of extensive ergonomic research and development, as when compared to nearly all competing devices, they tend to be far more comfortable to hold/use for extended periods of time (such as when reading/watching videos).
Anyway... All the moaning/naysaying regarding the design of the Galaxy S4 is just more of the same rhetoric that greeted the Galaxy S3... a device that went on the sell in the 10's of millions, just as the Galaxy S4 will do.
Kind of like someone coming to the community gym you helped build for years and telling you it sucks and the gym up the street is better. Why not just go workout there instead of attacking us.
Like the two old guy muppets in the balcony relishing in their complaints.
Can someone explain to me how an inanimate object can have a soul?
Right after you explain how an inorganic object can have a soul.
The first problem would be defining what is meant by having a soul. It's nothing tangible but is often used to describe the source of the effects by which we often measure human superiority - spontaneous intelligence, emotion, art, music, science and so on.
These characteristics are only as meaningful as the meaning we assign to them but when looked at objectively, they are little more than operations on information content, exactly the same as what happens in an inorganic and inanimate machine. A few differences include our requirement and drive for survival, which a machine can never have and our drive to reach a positive state of being, which exists because we have the possibility of a negative state of being (pain), which machines have no reason to have.
If you isolate the definition of a soul as interactions on information content, a machine with sufficiently complex hardware and software can absolutely have one. If it's extended to include the spontaneity, it will be limited in a machine unless it's provided with the same requirement for survival and drive to reach to best results but some of that could be developed artificially.
Computers have to take this step eventually or their usefulness will plateau and we will always need to rely on humans to get certain jobs done. Search engines are becoming more and more frustrating to work with to find meaningful information because they don't think like we do.
The problem with this is control and it can be seen with software like Siri. If you give it a level of complexity that allows it to develop sufficient understanding, it might decide it doesn't want to talk to you any more. There are certain human characteristics we simply don't want machines to have.
As I said, I gave up on that site years ago, but I would argue that the rules of most forums are invalid and anachronistic. The proof is that they basically don't work anymore, here or there.
I'm not saying I have the answer, but there definitely needs to be a complete re-think on how moderation is accomplished before it will ever start working again (if that's even possible).
I would argue that the emphasis on "swear words" for instance is ridiculous, and that the secondary emphasis on "personal attacks" as "a line that must not be crossed" is also. This is legislation against human nature and pretends we are all robots. The idea that the whole system works off of "user complaints" seems equally flawed to me as well. That just means the whiners get their way.
Also, noting personal, but the sheer arbitrariness of moderation is always a problem regardless of who's doing it. I've been a moderator myself on boards and forums going back to before the web even existed and it's really impossible to be 100% fair and even handed no matter how much you try.
It's definitely either an impossible task or a task that requires some very new and different approach. I tend to think that it's not impossible but that's just me.
It's not at all impossible to moderate a forum with strong fan-bases from two competing platforms. It's also possible to be fair as moderators. I've done it for several years as have other fellow moderators I work with. We don't all think alike nor support the same platforms, but we respect each other and encourage each moderator to communicate with the others regularly to make sure we play fair to both sides of the aisle. While an individual mod is sure to have his own personal preferences and bias, by working as a team we each keep the others in check. No moderator gets away with insulting, belittling or disrespecting another forum member without being called on the carpet for it by one of the others, and we're expected to do so by the site administration. It's not that hard to do if there's a commitment to it.
You also make fair rules that encourage every member to get involved without fear of ridicule and strictly enforce those without resorting to the same tactics you're trying to stop. Neither AI nor most of the other sites mentioned will do so regularly and that's at the root of it.
A good first step should be zero tolerance for egregious trolling no matter your OS, product or feature allegiance. If someone's primary contribution is as a serial abuser of other members why should forum leaders care if they continue to have posting privileges? A "fan" from any camp can be just as much a troll as anyone else and should not be allowed to act as one for the health and sanity of the forum.
Second, moderators should help move the conversations back on track when they stray, directing posters to the proper thread for their comments if necessary. If required for clarity move posts into a new or existing thread (with a proper redirect noted) if they've seriously distracted from the topic at hand.
Third, moderators should immediately step in at the first sign of personal attacks, false accusations or improper language. None of those activities benefit a forum in any way and cannot be allowed. Don't wait until 10 more posters have jumped in to do the same before trying wrest back control. By then it's too late and much of the damage done. As moderators we've turned many offensive new members into at least tolerable if not downright courteous contributors by simply advising them of the rules as needed and then seeing they were enforced fairly. The few that couldn't adapt moved on the other sites to infect them instead. Outside of spammers we've rarely had to resort to banning, and it's been as a last resort. Encouragement and direction from the mods is usually enough to sway members into at least respecting each other even if they may vehemently disagree.
Finally the site administrators should support their moderators efforts 100%, giving them the tools needed to efficiently police the forum with minimal demands on their time.
That's just a few suggestions. It's not impossible to maintain a forum where intelligent and courteous discourse is the rule.For various reasons too few tech-related sites choose to make the effort.
Function should always dictate form and in the case (quite literally) of Samsung's Galaxy series of devices, the use of Polycarbonate allows for devices that are lightweight, impact resistant, durable and more efficient to manufacture.
As for the overall design/shape of the devices, the smooth edges and surface contours are obviously the result of extensive ergonomic research and development, as when compared to nearly all competing devices, they tend to be far more comfortable to hold/use for extended periods of time (such as when reading/watching videos).
Anyway... All the moaning/naysaying regarding the design of the Galaxy S4 is just more of the same rhetoric that greeted the Galaxy S3... a device that went on the sell in the 10's of millions, just as the Galaxy S4 will do.
So, are you paid directly by Samsung? Or do you just choose to parrot their marketing department?
Devices with souls - really!? What a load of pretentious bulls..t! Just say improved AI you schmuck!!
It makes perfect sense to me. The entire history of human innovation is to create something that you don't have so Samsung wanting to create a machine with a soul seems like a perfect fit. Maybe then their AI will tell them stealing is wrong.
I'm ready to switch to some new MacRumors type website... Tired of all this Samsung promotional BS and Samsung trolls. Apple Insider has obviously been co-opted by our Korean enemies...
I feel life he could have saved a lot of time and reading by just saying "plastic is cheaper." I'm personally an apple fan all the way, but in the end there isn't anything wrong with using cheaper materials to bring down cost. It's a marketing choice... Apple goes in the other direction. No harm done either way, and we all win because we have that option.
If you ignore the "filler" comments that don't contribute much, I find the signal to noise ratio at Mac Rumours to be one intelligent adult (probably one of the few females), to roughly every 30 yahoos. I would put AppleInsider at more like a 1:5 ratio. My rule is that once this ratio goes past 1:10 or so I'm wasting my time and it's time to move on. Sadly there are few places to "move on" to nowadays.
I don't have any doubt that the case you cited is just the tip of the iceberg. I suspect that there are a lot of Samsung and Google shills among the more vocal Apple haters.
But these blokes were being paid.
Apple really needs to start spending some money on fighting fire with fire. I'm not saying they should start paying people to plant fake opinions (I'd hate them to stoop that low), but some kind of lobbying effort is needed right now. That's what Google and Samsung are doing and that's probably why Apple will lose out in the courts in the end.
Something called along the lines of green slime pie
Doesn't matter as this plastic fantastic won't see an update.
Of course. Answer the question without adding any real information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
If Apple came out with an ad that said iPhones are better because they have a "better personality" or a "deeper soul" or some such, they'd be ridiculed and everyone would accuse them of being facile and shallow. Here, the Samsung guy gets to say it and everyone nods their head sagely and rubs their chins as if he said something meaningful. The whole statement was a dodge to get away from having to comment on the less than stellar hardware, running old software.
The quotes in the article don't indicate any kind of positive response to such a statement. Where did you find it? I would probably agree with you if this was the case. It seems like you're just making things up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Can someone explain to me how an inanimate object can have a soul?
I can think of a lot of jokes for that one, but many of them are in questionable taste and the others further reveal my own memory of cheesy movies. When I read stuff like the headline quote, I figure either bad translation or out of context statement and move on.
I stopped hanging out on MacRumours for similar reasons about five years ago, but I would counter that in addition to the "anti-Apple" types you describe shitting all over the place, it was pretty much the same kind of content from the "pro-Apple" types as well. it's the type and quality of debate, not the presence of negative opinions that counts. You can be a pro-Apple troll just as easily as you can be a anti-Apple troll.
The point of a place of discussion or debate is not to only have one side arguing, for it to make any sense at all to even have a forum, you must have both pro and con contributing their points of view otherwise it's just a circle jerk.
The problem with MacRumours (and increasingly with this site) is the fact that they aren't effectively moderated because no one has actually sat down and tried to figure out how to fairly moderate a site full of aggressive teenage males, power trippers, and other hangers on.
If you ignore the "filler" comments that don't contribute much, I find the signal to noise ratio at Mac Rumours to be one intelligent adult (probably one of the few females), to roughly every 30 yahoos. I would put AppleInsider at more like a 1:5 ratio. My rule is that once this ratio goes past 1:10 or so I'm wasting my time and it's time to move on. Sadly there are few places to "move on" to nowadays.
That forum is awful! I like the short blog-lik articles and I like Arn Kim, but that forum is worthless. Yet it gets a huge number of posters and replies. I think it's where the people that posted on Digg moved to.
I've said it before, AI's forum is the best I've ever been on. Not just for Apple, computer, or tech related news, but in general.
Even sites like AnandTech fail to have the engaging conversations found here. Their main article forum simply doesn't lend to having a conversation and their proper forum, while very in-depth, is usually more focused on posters on pimping some setting or some specific knowledge-base with little to know interest in sharing for sake of educating -and- being educated.
i'm always amazed at the caliber of comments and range of topics found on this forum. I have to learned a lot over the years and like to think I've given something back to the community.
Comments
If the SG4 is my "life companion", kill me.
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
The idea that the whole system works off of "user complaints" seems equally flawed to me as well. That just means the whiners get their way.
I feel that reports serve to bring to the attention of moderators posts that may violate rules or decency. We are neither compelled to nor do we act on every report we see. I think they work well in that regard; the only problem as of late is people NOT reporting things that should have been.
It's definitely either an impossible task or a task that requires some very new and different approach. I tend to think that it's not impossible but that's just me.
We should brainstorm. We meaning anyone, of course. Feedback section!
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
Function should always dictate form and in the case (quite literally) of Samsung's Galaxy series of devices, the use of Polycarbonate allows for devices that are lightweight, impact resistant, durable and more efficient to manufacture.
As for the overall design/shape of the devices, the smooth edges and surface contours are obviously the result of extensive ergonomic research and development, as when compared to nearly all competing devices, they tend to be far more comfortable to hold/use for extended periods of time (such as when reading/watching videos).
Anyway... All the moaning/naysaying regarding the design of the Galaxy S4 is just more of the same rhetoric that greeted the Galaxy S3... a device that went on the sell in the 10's of millions, just as the Galaxy S4 will do.
Straight from your ass.
Like the two old guy muppets in the balcony relishing in their complaints.
The first problem would be defining what is meant by having a soul. It's nothing tangible but is often used to describe the source of the effects by which we often measure human superiority - spontaneous intelligence, emotion, art, music, science and so on.
These characteristics are only as meaningful as the meaning we assign to them but when looked at objectively, they are little more than operations on information content, exactly the same as what happens in an inorganic and inanimate machine. A few differences include our requirement and drive for survival, which a machine can never have and our drive to reach a positive state of being, which exists because we have the possibility of a negative state of being (pain), which machines have no reason to have.
If you isolate the definition of a soul as interactions on information content, a machine with sufficiently complex hardware and software can absolutely have one. If it's extended to include the spontaneity, it will be limited in a machine unless it's provided with the same requirement for survival and drive to reach to best results but some of that could be developed artificially.
Computers have to take this step eventually or their usefulness will plateau and we will always need to rely on humans to get certain jobs done. Search engines are becoming more and more frustrating to work with to find meaningful information because they don't think like we do.
The problem with this is control and it can be seen with software like Siri. If you give it a level of complexity that allows it to develop sufficient understanding, it might decide it doesn't want to talk to you any more. There are certain human characteristics we simply don't want machines to have.
[VIDEO]
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Like the two old guy muppets in the balcony relishing in their complaints.
"Hey, did you hear? Samsung's releasing new products with soul!"
"That doesn't sound like good advertising."
"What do you mean?"
"Well, the only soul these phones will ever see is the sole of my shoe!"
"DOH HO HO HO HO HO HO HO!"
"I was having trouble with my iPad, so I shipped it back to Samsung. They fixed it right up and sent it back."
"But the iPad is made by Apple!"
"Yeah, but they couldn't tell."
"DOH HO HO HO HO HO HO HO!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
As I said, I gave up on that site years ago, but I would argue that the rules of most forums are invalid and anachronistic. The proof is that they basically don't work anymore, here or there.
I'm not saying I have the answer, but there definitely needs to be a complete re-think on how moderation is accomplished before it will ever start working again (if that's even possible).
I would argue that the emphasis on "swear words" for instance is ridiculous, and that the secondary emphasis on "personal attacks" as "a line that must not be crossed" is also. This is legislation against human nature and pretends we are all robots. The idea that the whole system works off of "user complaints" seems equally flawed to me as well. That just means the whiners get their way.
Also, noting personal, but the sheer arbitrariness of moderation is always a problem regardless of who's doing it. I've been a moderator myself on boards and forums going back to before the web even existed and it's really impossible to be 100% fair and even handed no matter how much you try.
It's definitely either an impossible task or a task that requires some very new and different approach. I tend to think that it's not impossible but that's just me.
It's not at all impossible to moderate a forum with strong fan-bases from two competing platforms. It's also possible to be fair as moderators. I've done it for several years as have other fellow moderators I work with. We don't all think alike nor support the same platforms, but we respect each other and encourage each moderator to communicate with the others regularly to make sure we play fair to both sides of the aisle. While an individual mod is sure to have his own personal preferences and bias, by working as a team we each keep the others in check. No moderator gets away with insulting, belittling or disrespecting another forum member without being called on the carpet for it by one of the others, and we're expected to do so by the site administration. It's not that hard to do if there's a commitment to it.
You also make fair rules that encourage every member to get involved without fear of ridicule and strictly enforce those without resorting to the same tactics you're trying to stop. Neither AI nor most of the other sites mentioned will do so regularly and that's at the root of it.
A good first step should be zero tolerance for egregious trolling no matter your OS, product or feature allegiance. If someone's primary contribution is as a serial abuser of other members why should forum leaders care if they continue to have posting privileges? A "fan" from any camp can be just as much a troll as anyone else and should not be allowed to act as one for the health and sanity of the forum.
Second, moderators should help move the conversations back on track when they stray, directing posters to the proper thread for their comments if necessary. If required for clarity move posts into a new or existing thread (with a proper redirect noted) if they've seriously distracted from the topic at hand.
Third, moderators should immediately step in at the first sign of personal attacks, false accusations or improper language. None of those activities benefit a forum in any way and cannot be allowed. Don't wait until 10 more posters have jumped in to do the same before trying wrest back control. By then it's too late and much of the damage done. As moderators we've turned many offensive new members into at least tolerable if not downright courteous contributors by simply advising them of the rules as needed and then seeing they were enforced fairly. The few that couldn't adapt moved on the other sites to infect them instead. Outside of spammers we've rarely had to resort to banning, and it's been as a last resort. Encouragement and direction from the mods is usually enough to sway members into at least respecting each other even if they may vehemently disagree.
Finally the site administrators should support their moderators efforts 100%, giving them the tools needed to efficiently police the forum with minimal demands on their time.
That's just a few suggestions. It's not impossible to maintain a forum where intelligent and courteous discourse is the rule. For various reasons too few tech-related sites choose to make the effort.
Just my 2 cents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
Function should always dictate form and in the case (quite literally) of Samsung's Galaxy series of devices, the use of Polycarbonate allows for devices that are lightweight, impact resistant, durable and more efficient to manufacture.
As for the overall design/shape of the devices, the smooth edges and surface contours are obviously the result of extensive ergonomic research and development, as when compared to nearly all competing devices, they tend to be far more comfortable to hold/use for extended periods of time (such as when reading/watching videos).
Anyway... All the moaning/naysaying regarding the design of the Galaxy S4 is just more of the same rhetoric that greeted the Galaxy S3... a device that went on the sell in the 10's of millions, just as the Galaxy S4 will do.
So, are you paid directly by Samsung? Or do you just choose to parrot their marketing department?
It makes perfect sense to me. The entire history of human innovation is to create something that you don't have so Samsung wanting to create a machine with a soul seems like a perfect fit. Maybe then their AI will tell them stealing is wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bennettvista
I'm ready to switch to some new MacRumors type website... Tired of all this Samsung promotional BS and Samsung trolls. Apple Insider has obviously been co-opted by our Korean enemies...
Bye!
Why am I on your "banned" list?
Assuming he means his personal blocked list he won't be able to read your query.
Gazoobee, Pendergast would like to know why he is on your banned list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
I don't have any doubt that the case you cited is just the tip of the iceberg. I suspect that there are a lot of Samsung and Google shills among the more vocal Apple haters.
But these blokes were being paid.
Apple really needs to start spending some money on fighting fire with fire. I'm not saying they should start paying people to plant fake opinions (I'd hate them to stoop that low), but some kind of lobbying effort is needed right now. That's what Google and Samsung are doing and that's probably why Apple will lose out in the courts in the end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hfts
Something called along the lines of green slime pie
Doesn't matter as this plastic fantastic won't see an update.
Of course. Answer the question without adding any real information
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
If Apple came out with an ad that said iPhones are better because they have a "better personality" or a "deeper soul" or some such, they'd be ridiculed and everyone would accuse them of being facile and shallow. Here, the Samsung guy gets to say it and everyone nods their head sagely and rubs their chins as if he said something meaningful. The whole statement was a dodge to get away from having to comment on the less than stellar hardware, running old software.
The quotes in the article don't indicate any kind of positive response to such a statement. Where did you find it? I would probably agree with you if this was the case. It seems like you're just making things up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
Can someone explain to me how an inanimate object can have a soul?
I can think of a lot of jokes for that one, but many of them are in questionable taste and the others further reveal my own memory of cheesy movies. When I read stuff like the headline quote, I figure either bad translation or out of context statement and move on.
Thank you.
That forum is awful! I like the short blog-lik articles and I like Arn Kim, but that forum is worthless. Yet it gets a huge number of posters and replies. I think it's where the people that posted on Digg moved to.
I've said it before, AI's forum is the best I've ever been on. Not just for Apple, computer, or tech related news, but in general.
Even sites like AnandTech fail to have the engaging conversations found here. Their main article forum simply doesn't lend to having a conversation and their proper forum, while very in-depth, is usually more focused on posters on pimping some setting or some specific knowledge-base with little to know interest in sharing for sake of educating -and- being educated.
i'm always amazed at the caliber of comments and range of topics found on this forum. I have to learned a lot over the years and like to think I've given something back to the community.
Soulless Samsung, Absolutely Soulless!