YouTuber Mark Rober has been developing VR tech for Apple's self-driving car project

Posted:
in General Discussion
According to a report on Tuesday, popular YouTube personality Mark Rober has been working with Apple's special projects group since 2015 on the development of virtual reality technology for self-driving cars.

Mark Rober Patent


Without citing sources, Variety reports Rober is working as an engineer in Apple's highly secretive special projects group. The YouTube star, whose science and technology channel boasts some 3.4 million followers, is currently focusing on VR systems and applications.

Backing up those claims, Rober is named as lead inventor on at least two patent applications assigned to Apple, both of which cover VR technology for integration in passenger vehicles.

The YouTuber's LinkedIn profile notes he changed jobs in 2015 from VP of New Product Design at Morph Costumes to a product design engineer position at an unnamed company. Rober revealed a bit more in a Reddit AmA last year, saying he was working at "a large tech company" in the San Francisco Bay Area.

As for the patents, filings with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office show a pair of novel use cases for VR as it applies to self-driving cars.

The first, Augmented Virtual Display, was filed in September 2016 and describes a method of minimizing motion sickness when viewing VR content in a moving vehicle.

In particular, the IP details a technique by which content is projected at a fixed point, through a head-mounted display or similar equipment, and is synchronized with car acceleration input gathered by onboard sensors. Some embodiments enlist the support of "active seats," HVAC systems and other mechanical apparatus to help negate the effects of motion sickness sometimes experienced by passengers who operate digital devices or focus on stationary objects while a car is moving.

The system might be used for entertainment or productivity. For example, users can participate in a remote conference call while on the way to the office, or watch a movie. In a more outlandish -- and fun -- embodiment, the patent describes a method of directly controlling vehicle propulsion and steering systems, allowing a passenger to participate in a VR race with real-world motion effects.

Rober's second patent application for an "Immersive Virtual Display" describes another method of reducing motion sickness in a self-driving car by displaying a replacing real-world views with a rich virtual environment. Again, the technology incorporates acceleration input from onboard sensors to present a synchronized sensory experience.

Whether Apple is working to build Rober's IP into a shipping consumer product is unknown.

Apple started work on its self-driving car initiative, dubbed "Project Titan," in 2014. At its peak, the effort counted well over 1,000 employees among its ranks, with specialists in automotive hardware to software focusing on a rethinking of the automobile.

Initially, Apple planned to build a complete car solution from the ground up, but the strategy quickly shifted first to establishing manufacturing partnerships with existing carmakers, then to requests for integral parts like chassis and wheels. Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated.

The ambitious undertaking began to unravel as disagreements between team leaders like former project lead Steve Zadesky and top executives took root, AppleInsider sources said.

Longtime executive Bob Mansfield assumed control of "Titan" last year, whittling the team down to necessary personnel as the project refocused on software and supporting solutions. The company is now fielding a test fleet of autonomous vehicles to evaluate its in-house developed driving systems, reportedly in hopes of porting the technology to a self-driving shuttle for employees called.

Most recently, a report last month claimed Apple inked a deal with Volkswagen to convert an unknown number of T6 Transporter vans for the PAIL, or Palo Alto to Infinite Loop initiative.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 21
    SendMcjakSendMcjak Posts: 66unconfirmed, member
    PAIL could be epic ...
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 21
    SendMcjak said:
    PAIL could be epic ...
    It will be.
    I hope they use the new S3 solid state LiDAR from Quanergy.
    First vehicle to fully integrate Electrification, Autonomous driving and Car sharing based on Apple's Car OS.
    Tme will tell.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 21
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,024member
    SendMcjak said:
    PAIL could be epic ...
    It will be.
    I hope they use the new S3 solid state LiDAR from Quanergy.
    First vehicle to fully integrate Electrification, Autonomous driving and Car sharing based on Apple's Car OS.
    Tme will tell.
    I think I remember reading that Mercedes/Daimler is already using it for their autonomous vehicle. Oddly Samsung is another tester I believe? Still Quanergy is currently targeting industrial uses more than automotive altho no doubt they see the potential dollars from car manufacturers as perhaps the bigger market. In addition I see a potential lawsuit down the line with the co-founder of Quanergy leaving and forming his own automotive-specific LiDAR manufacturing company, Ouster. Lawsuits can get messy and delay projects.

    But there's no shortage of other LiDAR manufacturers either. Besides the behemoth Velodyne there's Oryx Vision, Ibeo, LeddarTech, AEye, Strobe, Luminar, Innoviz, Princeton Lightwave and probably a dozen others all hoping to be "the one".
    edited June 27
  • Reply 4 of 21
    irelandireland Posts: 17,380member
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    edited June 27 SpamSandwichStrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 21
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,009member
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 21
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    SpamSandwichlkruppStrangeDayscornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 21
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,024member
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    edited June 27 jony0
  • Reply 8 of 21
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,139member
    Is "YouTube personality" the best way to refer to Rober? For me, it was kind of turn off for the article and a head-scratcher when it then says he's an engineer for Apple's VR for a their coveted Project Titan. Seems like it buries the lede of his true assets when he's put into the category of a PewDiePie.
    edited June 27
  • Reply 9 of 21
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 5,333member
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Yeah this article is BS in that it’s presenting unverified rumors as if they were facts. WTF?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 21
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 5,333member

    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    Indeed we do, but we’re also capable of discerning such rumors from facts, and judging by these comments many of us are annoyed when rumors are bogusly presented as if they were facts. They’re two different types of content. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 21
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,732member
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Yeah this article is BS in that it’s presenting unverified rumors as if they were facts. WTF?
    It's using rumors to build on a whole chain of other rumors to create a whole alternative reality, to create a narrative.
    Most media, especially those click starved online ones, these days seemingly are bored with reality. It moves too slow, it can't feed the 24h news beast and thus they need to spin tenuous barely existing cobwebs and whiffs of rumors into potemkin villages where straw men lives much more interesting fantasy lives.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 21
    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    In view of what Rayz2016 wrote and how I responded, your response to my comment is stupid. My suggesting AI actually qualifying rumors as rumors instead of as facts doesn't warrant your defending sloppiness. I enjoy visiting this site as much as others. Maybe you should take some to time relax before responding again. 
    watto_cobraRayz2016
  • Reply 13 of 21
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,009member

    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    Indeed we do, but we’re also capable of discerning such rumors from facts, and judging by these comments many of us are annoyed when rumors are bogusly presented as if they were facts. They’re two different types of content. 
    Yes, exactly. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 21
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,009member

    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    Your comment might actually carry some weight if you hadn’t, on two occasions, stated that you have to unlock an iPhone to answer a phone call. 

    The fact that your inaccuracies appear on a rumour site makes no difference. If they are shown to be incorrect then they should be highlighted. 

    You were presenting something you know nothing about as fact. So you were corrected. 
    AI is presenting rumour as fact. So they were corrected. 

    The notion that a site should be allowed to post whatever they want without challenge because they’re a rumour site is both stupid and dangerous. 

    edited June 28 watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 21
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,024member
    Rayz2016 said:

    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    Your comment might actually carry some weight if you hadn’t, on two occasions, stated that you have to unlock an iPhone to answer a phone call. 

    The fact that your inaccuracies appear on a rumour site makes no difference. If they are shown to be incorrect then they should be highlighted. 

    You were presenting something you know nothing about as fact. So you were corrected. 
    AI is presenting rumour as fact. So they were corrected. 

    The notion that a site should be allowed to post whatever they want without challenge because they’re a rumour site is both stupid and dangerous. 

    LOL...Yes you are correct about the unlock comment last year. Gotta have a special nugget for you to keep in your pocket out of several thousand posts, tho two out of 18K+ isn't all that bad a record is it?  :)

    So yeah I think each of our posts carry equal weight. 
    edited June 28
  • Reply 16 of 21
    nhtnht Posts: 4,190member
    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    Your comment might actually carry some weight if you hadn’t, on two occasions, stated that you have to unlock an iPhone to answer a phone call. 

    The fact that your inaccuracies appear on a rumour site makes no difference. If they are shown to be incorrect then they should be highlighted. 

    You were presenting something you know nothing about as fact. So you were corrected. 
    AI is presenting rumour as fact. So they were corrected. 

    The notion that a site should be allowed to post whatever they want without challenge because they’re a rumour site is both stupid and dangerous. 

    LOL...Yes you are correct about the unlock comment last year. Gotta have a special nugget for you to keep in your pocket out of several thousand posts, tho two out of 18K+ isn't all that bad a record is it?  :)

    So yeah I think each of our posts carry equal weight. 
    Your troll posts carry as much weight as a turd sinking to the bottom of the toilet. 
    Rayz2016
  • Reply 17 of 21
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,024member
    nht said:
    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    Your comment might actually carry some weight if you hadn’t, on two occasions, stated that you have to unlock an iPhone to answer a phone call. 

    The fact that your inaccuracies appear on a rumour site makes no difference. If they are shown to be incorrect then they should be highlighted. 

    You were presenting something you know nothing about as fact. So you were corrected. 
    AI is presenting rumour as fact. So they were corrected. 

    The notion that a site should be allowed to post whatever they want without challenge because they’re a rumour site is both stupid and dangerous. 

    LOL...Yes you are correct about the unlock comment last year. Gotta have a special nugget for you to keep in your pocket out of several thousand posts, tho two out of 18K+ isn't all that bad a record is it?  :)

    So yeah I think each of our posts carry equal weight. 
    Your troll posts carry as much weight as a turd sinking to the bottom of the toilet. 
    Agreed that any troll post would, such as the one you aimed this way? Don't start being silly and join in with making things personal that shouldn't be. And yes I realize in hindsight my initial post to @leavingthebigg had more "personal" involved that it needed to so I'll take some responsibility as well.

    Plainly AI is a rumor site. Always has been. Disagreeing doesn't change that fact. But this isn't the "old AI" either. 

    Seems to me it's more like there's a very few members who want the "old AI" back, the one perceived by many outsiders as rude, unwelcoming, intolerant, far too prone to FUD, and generally way overboard hardcore ruled by a handful of very loud voices. Thankfully IMHO that ship sailed off. Too much of it didn't leave the best impression of what being a fan of Apple products was.

    In the last couple of years the Admin's have taken the wheelhouse back and steered the forum to where now members conduct themselves more respectfully, more typically employ thoughtful discourse rather than a stream of playground insults, and don't feel as threatened by non-Apple-specific stuff and willing to show some of it has interest to them. 
    edited June 28
  • Reply 18 of 21
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,009member
    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    Your comment might actually carry some weight if you hadn’t, on two occasions, stated that you have to unlock an iPhone to answer a phone call. 

    The fact that your inaccuracies appear on a rumour site makes no difference. If they are shown to be incorrect then they should be highlighted. 

    You were presenting something you know nothing about as fact. So you were corrected. 
    AI is presenting rumour as fact. So they were corrected. 

    The notion that a site should be allowed to post whatever they want without challenge because they’re a rumour site is both stupid and dangerous. 

    LOL...Yes you are correct about the unlock comment last year. Gotta have a special nugget for you to keep in your pocket out of several thousand posts, tho two out of 18K+ isn't all that bad a record is it?  :)

    So yeah I think each of our posts carry equal weight. 

    Actually, it wasn't that the comment was incorrect, it was that after several people pointed it out to you, you posted it again a few months later.  That one was especially sneaky because you usually add 'IMO' or 'as far as I know' to your posts that are inaccurate. That iPhone comments didn't have the usual warning signs, so I think its fair to bring them up once in a while, just to keep you in check. :-)


  • Reply 19 of 21
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,024member
    Rayz2016 said:
    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    Your comment might actually carry some weight if you hadn’t, on two occasions, stated that you have to unlock an iPhone to answer a phone call. 

    The fact that your inaccuracies appear on a rumour site makes no difference. If they are shown to be incorrect then they should be highlighted. 

    You were presenting something you know nothing about as fact. So you were corrected. 
    AI is presenting rumour as fact. So they were corrected. 

    The notion that a site should be allowed to post whatever they want without challenge because they’re a rumour site is both stupid and dangerous. 

    LOL...Yes you are correct about the unlock comment last year. Gotta have a special nugget for you to keep in your pocket out of several thousand posts, tho two out of 18K+ isn't all that bad a record is it?  :)

    So yeah I think each of our posts carry equal weight. 

    Actually, it wasn't that the comment was incorrect, it was that after several people pointed it out to you, you posted it again a few months later.  That one was especially sneaky because you usually add 'IMO' or 'as far as I know' to your posts that are inaccurate.you're not completely certain are factual. That iPhone comments didn't have the usual warning signs, so I think its fair to bring them up once in a while, just to keep you in check. :-)


    Agreed. So you figured out you were qualified to cast the first stone?
    edited June 28
  • Reply 20 of 21
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,009member
    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    gatorguy said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    ireland said:
    “Apple soon realized that stepping into the established automotive market was much more onerous than originally anticipated”.

    This hasn’t been proved, and I highly doubt it, too.
    Indeed, everything we’ve heard this project so far has been based on conjecture and rumour. 
    Disappointingly, AppleInsider has a very bad habit of writing conjecture and rumor about Apple as fact. Even after being called out about the bad habit, it continues to do so. 
    Appleinsider has always published rumors about Apple and Apple-related stuff. It's not a tech-support site dealing strictly in Apple-vetted facts and announcements. Geesh....
    If that's your only interest doesn't Apple have company-owned blog sites devoid of rumor? Sounds like those may be more appropriate for your personal reading pleasure as you have been regularly complaining about the way AI does things haven't you?

    Pretty sure we all come here in part to learn about things that Apple might not announce officially. That's part of the attraction. 
    Your comment might actually carry some weight if you hadn’t, on two occasions, stated that you have to unlock an iPhone to answer a phone call. 

    The fact that your inaccuracies appear on a rumour site makes no difference. If they are shown to be incorrect then they should be highlighted. 

    You were presenting something you know nothing about as fact. So you were corrected. 
    AI is presenting rumour as fact. So they were corrected. 

    The notion that a site should be allowed to post whatever they want without challenge because they’re a rumour site is both stupid and dangerous. 

    LOL...Yes you are correct about the unlock comment last year. Gotta have a special nugget for you to keep in your pocket out of several thousand posts, tho two out of 18K+ isn't all that bad a record is it?  :)

    So yeah I think each of our posts carry equal weight. 

    Actually, it wasn't that the comment was incorrect, it was that after several people pointed it out to you, you posted it again a few months later.  That one was especially sneaky because you usually add 'IMO' or 'as far as I know' to your posts that are inaccurate.you're not completely certain of. That iPhone comments didn't have the usual warning signs, so I think its fair to bring them up once in a while, just to keep you in check. :-)


    Agreed. So you figured out you were qualified to cast the first stone?

    Gosh, according to you it's just a rumour site, so I don't have to be qualified to do anything. 

    It's rather like feeling qualified to comment on how an iPhone works without actually having answered a call on one.

    edited June 28
Sign In or Register to comment.