But it was reported just the same. Forgive me if I don't believe everything I hear. We've been lied to before, and once is enough to create skepticism.
But it was reported just the same. Forgive me if I don't believe everything I hear. We've been lied to before, and once is enough to create skepticism.
1) The circumstances are completely different. I'm sure, in time, you see that your skepticism was misplaced.
2) Are you really suggesting I do believe everything I hear?
there is definitly a possibility where in future an app can serve as a doctor if the right aparatus would be provided such as hearth rate monitoring or blood sampling.
1) The circumstances are completely different. I'm sure, in time, you see that your skepticism was misplaced.
2) Are you really suggesting I do believe everything I hear?
1) I don't believe skepticism is ever misplaced regardless of circumstances. Why would Apple allow the benefit of Researchkit to be used on competing devices? They don't do anything that doesn't help them sell hardware.
1) I don't believe skepticism is ever misplaced regardless of circumstances.
That's just ridiculous. You can't imagine even a single scenario where someone is going too far off the deep end with an irrational fear that something will or won't happen? Try watching one of those shows about doomsday peppers.
Why would Apple allow the benefit of Researchkit to be used on competing devices? They don't do anything that doesn't help them sell hardware
1) The ability for all devices by all HW vendors and SW developers being able to advance medical research is very different from making FaceTime open source.
2) If you think supporting open source SW will negatively impact Apple's bottom line then you need to explain why Apple hasn't supported open source SW for decades. Remember Darwin?
2) I know you're much more intelligent than that.
The implication of your statement is that I must since I believe that 1) The CEO of Apple stated it, 2) t's on their website, 3) they have contact info today for those wanting to get involved, and 4) it involves medical research. The FaceTime mention only had 1 out of 3.
So what do you want to bet that Apple will release ResearchKit as open source?
That's just ridiculous. You can't imagine even a single scenario where someone is going too far off the deep end with an irrational fear that something will or won't happen? Try watching one of those shows about doomsday peppers.
1) The ability for all devices by all HW vendors and SW developers being able to advance medical research is very different from making FaceTime open source.
2) If you think supporting open source SW will negatively impact Apple's bottom line then you need to explain why Apple hasn't supported open source SW for decades. Remember Darwin?
The implication of your statement is that I must since I believe that 1) The CEO of Apple stated it, 2) t's on their website, 3) they have contact info today for those wanting to get involved, and 4) it involves medical research. The FaceTime mention only had 1 out of 3.
So what do you want to bet that Apple will release ResearchKit as open source?
Skepticism, and paranoia are 2 very different things.
Apple's bottom line is always the excuse given whenever someone suggests a service be made cross platform, so why is it different now? Medical research? I don't buy it. Other devices are sold in laughable numbers. Why help them at all?
As far as Facetime goes, it's impossible to find a screen shot from Apple’s site from the time it was introduced to know if it was there or not, and absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
Skepticism, and paranoia are 2 very different things.
They are, but it's ridiculous to say that all those that have a skeptical attitude or doubt something as truth have a mental condition.
Apple's bottom line is always the excuse given whenever someone suggests a service be made cross platform, so why is it different now.?
Again, then why all the open source stuff in the first place? Why ignore the mDP port interface they created and then offered to VESA as a standard?
Medical research? I don't buy it
1) It's good thing you don't have to buy it for it to be true.
2) If you "don't buy it" then tell me why Tim Cook stated that in the first place if the notion of a company giving something away is so counter-intuitive in your mind?
Other devices are sold in laughable numbers.
What's laughable that you think the world's device numbers from CE to medical equipment across all HW vendors and SW developers amounts to a "laughable number."
Why help them at all?
This is about helping Apple, which you would see if you increased the scope of your view.
As far as Facetime goes, it's impossible to find a screen shot from Apple’s site from the time it was introduced to know if it was there or not, and absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
It wasn't there! Look up articles on AI. Apple never once showed any effort to making FaceTime protocols open source, even though it does use all standard protocols.
PS: I'll sweeten the deal for you, even though you're so convinced that Apple will never make ResearchKit open source, while I'm just saying there is no reason to bait-and-switch as the most likely scenario. I clearly don't know what Apple will do in the future. I'll make the best 2:1, in your favour.
2) If you "don't buy it" then tell me why Tim Cook stated that in the first place if the notion of a company giving something away is so counter-intuitive in your mind?
PS: I'll sweeten the deal for you, even though you're so convinced that Apple will never make ResearchKit open source, while I'm just saying there is no reason to bait-and-switch as the most likely scenario. I clearly don't know what Apple will do in the future. I'll make the best 2:1, in your favour.
It's counter Apple is all I'm saying. They only help themselves.
I didn't say that they weren't going to do it, but we've heard this before, and I'll believe it when I see it. I wouldn't be surprised if, just like FaceTime, it's mostly open standards except for the part that really matters.
Btw the laughable numbers was in reference to other wearables.
It's counter Apple is all I'm saying. They only help themselves.
Of course it's to help themselves. Do you think that "going green" is completely altruistic on Apple's part and not simply how they wish to position themselves in the market?
2) You keep avoiding my questions that tear your paranoia skepticism against Apple apart.
I didn't say that they weren't going to do it, but we've heard this before, and I'll believe it when I see it.
So you're not going to take my bet?
I wouldn't be surprised if, just like FaceTime, it's mostly open standards except for the part that really matters.
I would, because it's not the same fucking thing! You know what this is similar to? Accessibility.
"When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind I don’t consider the bloody ROI.” It was the same thing for environmental issues, worker safety, and other areas that don’t have an immediate profit. The company does “a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive. We want to leave the world better than we found it. If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock.” Tim Cook told shareholders that he wanted to “leave the world better than we found it”.
Btw the laughable numbers was in reference to other wearables.
I didn't mention wearables. You didn't mention wearables in your comment. And what the hell does wearable CE today have to do with the ability to make people happier and healthier (which, by the way, does help get Apple more sales).
Of course it's to help themselves. Do you think that "going green" is completely altruistic on Apple's part and not simply how they wish to position themselves in the market?
2) You keep avoiding my questions that tear your paranoia skepticism against Apple apart.
So you're not going to take my bet?
I would, because it's not the same fucking thing! You know what this is similar to? Accessibility.
"When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind I don’t consider the bloody ROI.” It was the same thing for environmental issues, worker safety, and other areas that don’t have an immediate profit. The company does “a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive. We want to leave the world better than we found it. If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock.” Tim Cook told shareholders that he wanted to “leave the world better than we found it”.
I didn't mention wearables. You didn't mention wearables in your comment. And what the hell does wearable CE today have to do with the ability to make people happier and healthier (which, by the way, does help get Apple more sales).
They always consider the ROI, don't kid yourself. They put accessibility features in because it means that many more people will buy their products.
Going green also saves them a lot of money in the long run, and yes you make valid points about other things being open source, but one lie is all that's needed to get a lifetime worth of skepticism.
No, I'm not taking the bet. I'm not a betting man.
Yes, in the same way I say the sun will rise in the East tomorrow morning against your argument that an giant asteroid will destroy the earth, some anomaly blow up the sun, or some other ridiculous notion that can be proven to absolutely not exist, but I'll take my chances the sun will rise tomorrow.
Yes, in the same way I say the sun will rise in the East tomorrow morning against your argument that an giant asteroid will destroy the earth, some anomaly blow up the sun, or some other ridiculous notion that can be proven to absolutely not exist, but I'll take my chances the sun will rise tomorrow.
Exaggerate much? I don't think my argument is all doom, and gloom.
As a general rule, no, but hyperbole can be both an excellent mechanism for humor as well as getting a point across when subtly, context and minutiae are stumbling blocks for comprehension.
I don't think my argument is all doom, and gloom.
It's still pointlessly skeptical and needlessly ridiculous.
Even your "burn me once" evidence doesn't even fit, and you still have ignored all the evidence that contradict's your belief system, not to mention you contradicted yourself with your mention your comment of Apple doing what's in its best interest as a company. You could have least stated something along the lines of, "If Apple releases ResearchKit as open source — like they have with countless other things they've created — it will be because they feel this will help them in some way, perhaps even as a way to make the company appear more altruistic, which we both know doesn't exist within for-profit companies."
As a general rule, no, but hyperbole can be both an excellent mechanism for humor as well as getting a point across when subtly, context and minutiae are stumbling blocks for comprehension.
It's still pointlessly skeptical and needlessly ridiculous.
Even your "burn me once" evidence doesn't even fit, and you still have ignored all the evidence that contradict's your belief system, not to mention you contradicted yourself with your mention your comment of Apple doing what's in its best interest as a company. You could have least stated something along the lines of, "If Apple releases ResearchKit as open source — like they have with countless other things they've created — it will be because they feel this will help them in some way, perhaps even as a way to make the company appear more altruistic, which we both know doesn't exist within for-profit companies."
Fair enough.
Btw here's how AI reported the announcement of Facetime.
Comments
In what time frame? How long before we conclude that nobody else is using it?
The bet has no bearing on anyone else using it. It's purely based on whether Apple is going to make it open source or not.
The proof is in the pudding. How will we know it's actually open source unless someone else starts using it?
:???:
We'll know because Apple will publish it as such, which will be picked up media outlets throughout the world, which we'll inevitably read.
edit: There was never any wording like this for FaceTime. It was a singular mention by Steve Jobs, that apparently no one knew anything about.
But it was reported just the same. Forgive me if I don't believe everything I hear. We've been lied to before, and once is enough to create skepticism.
1) The circumstances are completely different. I'm sure, in time, you see that your skepticism was misplaced.
2) Are you really suggesting I do believe everything I hear?
there is definitly a possibility where in future an app can serve as a doctor if the right aparatus would be provided such as hearth rate monitoring or blood sampling.
1) I don't believe skepticism is ever misplaced regardless of circumstances. Why would Apple allow the benefit of Researchkit to be used on competing devices? They don't do anything that doesn't help them sell hardware.
2) I know you're much more intelligent than that.
That's just ridiculous. You can't imagine even a single scenario where someone is going too far off the deep end with an irrational fear that something will or won't happen? Try watching one of those shows about doomsday peppers.
1) The ability for all devices by all HW vendors and SW developers being able to advance medical research is very different from making FaceTime open source.
2) If you think supporting open source SW will negatively impact Apple's bottom line then you need to explain why Apple hasn't supported open source SW for decades. Remember Darwin?
The implication of your statement is that I must since I believe that 1) The CEO of Apple stated it, 2) t's on their website, 3) they have contact info today for those wanting to get involved, and 4) it involves medical research. The FaceTime mention only had 1 out of 3.
So what do you want to bet that Apple will release ResearchKit as open source?
Skepticism, and paranoia are 2 very different things.
Apple's bottom line is always the excuse given whenever someone suggests a service be made cross platform, so why is it different now? Medical research? I don't buy it. Other devices are sold in laughable numbers. Why help them at all?
As far as Facetime goes, it's impossible to find a screen shot from Apple’s site from the time it was introduced to know if it was there or not, and absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
They are, but it's ridiculous to say that all those that have a skeptical attitude or doubt something as truth have a mental condition.
Again, then why all the open source stuff in the first place? Why ignore the mDP port interface they created and then offered to VESA as a standard?
1) It's good thing you don't have to buy it for it to be true.
2) If you "don't buy it" then tell me why Tim Cook stated that in the first place if the notion of a company giving something away is so counter-intuitive in your mind?
What's laughable that you think the world's device numbers from CE to medical equipment across all HW vendors and SW developers amounts to a "laughable number."
This is about helping Apple, which you would see if you increased the scope of your view.
It wasn't there! Look up articles on AI. Apple never once showed any effort to making FaceTime protocols open source, even though it does use all standard protocols.
PS: I'll sweeten the deal for you, even though you're so convinced that Apple will never make ResearchKit open source, while I'm just saying there is no reason to bait-and-switch as the most likely scenario. I clearly don't know what Apple will do in the future. I'll make the best 2:1, in your favour.
It's counter Apple is all I'm saying. They only help themselves.
I didn't say that they weren't going to do it, but we've heard this before, and I'll believe it when I see it. I wouldn't be surprised if, just like FaceTime, it's mostly open standards except for the part that really matters.
Btw the laughable numbers was in reference to other wearables.
Of course it's to help themselves. Do you think that "going green" is completely altruistic on Apple's part and not simply how they wish to position themselves in the market?
2) You keep avoiding my questions that tear your
paranoiaskepticism against Apple apart.So you're not going to take my bet?
I would, because it's not the same fucking thing! You know what this is similar to? Accessibility.
"When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind I don’t consider the bloody ROI.” It was the same thing for environmental issues, worker safety, and other areas that don’t have an immediate profit. The company does “a lot of things for reasons besides profit motive. We want to leave the world better than we found it. If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock.” Tim Cook told shareholders that he wanted to “leave the world better than we found it”.
I didn't mention wearables. You didn't mention wearables in your comment. And what the hell does wearable CE today have to do with the ability to make people happier and healthier (which, by the way, does help get Apple more sales).
They always consider the ROI, don't kid yourself. They put accessibility features in because it means that many more people will buy their products.
Going green also saves them a lot of money in the long run, and yes you make valid points about other things being open source, but one lie is all that's needed to get a lifetime worth of skepticism.
No, I'm not taking the bet. I'm not a betting man.
If you believe this then you should be able to understand why making ResearchKit open source will be a benefit to Apple's bottom line in the longterm.
We'll just have to wait, and see.
Yes, in the same way I say the sun will rise in the East tomorrow morning against your argument that an giant asteroid will destroy the earth, some anomaly blow up the sun, or some other ridiculous notion that can be proven to absolutely not exist, but I'll take my chances the sun will rise tomorrow.
Exaggerate much? I don't think my argument is all doom, and gloom.
As a general rule, no, but hyperbole can be both an excellent mechanism for humor as well as getting a point across when subtly, context and minutiae are stumbling blocks for comprehension.
It's still pointlessly skeptical and needlessly ridiculous.
Even your "burn me once" evidence doesn't even fit, and you still have ignored all the evidence that contradict's your belief system, not to mention you contradicted yourself with your mention your comment of Apple doing what's in its best interest as a company. You could have least stated something along the lines of, "If Apple releases ResearchKit as open source — like they have with countless other things they've created — it will be because they feel this will help them in some way, perhaps even as a way to make the company appear more altruistic, which we both know doesn't exist within for-profit companies."
Fair enough.
Btw here's how AI reported the announcement of Facetime.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/110194/apple-announces-open-standard-facetime-video-chat-for-iphone-4
Just in case you miss this.