Kentfromohio

About

Banned
Username
Kentfromohio
Joined
Visits
11
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
64
Badges
0
Posts
25
  • Editorial: Can Apple News+ kill 'fake news' and save journalism?

    Apple saved music with iTunes because the ripping of music was a known illegal activity.  And the price worked out by Steve Jobs was a good price.  Ninety nine cents per song made sense versus being forced to buy full albums.  Win/win for customers and artists.

    Magazines are so lame these days they can't be given away.  And that is when they do it legally online.  Most are political and their politics is very unattractive.  So who wants lame politics dressed up in a fancy graphical cover or with the NYT logo?  And Apple is likely to exclude political opinions it finds unacceptable, which means it will exclude what half the population wants.   I don't think Apple will exhibit a hearty appreciation of the wide open expression of ideas from across the spectrum. More likely it will be like Facebook and Twitter which censor voices that don't fit the liberal template.  If Apple does that with Apple News it will not be a big success or even a good product.
    designrberndoglkruppfrantisekredraider11williamhtoysandmebakedbananas
  • Apple confirms HomePod audio sources limited to Apple Music, iTunes purchases, podcasts & ...

    Would it be too much to ask of a $350 mono speaker that it at least have an AUX audio input? Then it could play whatever the customer wants to play.
    aylkjahbladebonobobMplsPcroprstevenoz
  • Editorial: Can Apple News+ kill 'fake news' and save journalism?

    Apple saved music with iTunes because the ripping of music was a known illegal activity.  And the price worked out by Steve Jobs was a good price.  Ninety nine cents per song made sense versus being forced to buy full albums.  Win/win for customers and artists.

    Magazines are so lame these days they can't be given away.  And that is when they do it legally online.  Most are political and their politics is very unattractive.  So who wants lame politics dressed up in a fancy graphical cover or with the NYT logo?  And Apple is likely to exclude political opinions it finds unacceptable, which means it will exclude what half the population wants.   I don't think Apple will exhibit a hearty appreciation of the wide open expression of ideas from across the spectrum. More likely it will be like Facebook and Twitter which censor voices that don't fit the liberal template.  If Apple does that with Apple News it will not be a big success or even a good product.
    Wrong: File sharing wasn’t initially regarded as illegal. Also, when iTunes opened the labels were already trying to sell their songs on new forms of physical media and digital through stores from a Microsoft, Sony and on their own. 

    Also, lots of magazines have great content that many people don’t see because they spend their free time scrolling through the Facebook feed of radical trash and outrage mongering. 

    Apple doesn’t exclude political opinions. Voices espousing hatred and violence are not open expressions from across the spectrum. The are terrorism and deserve to be silenced. 

    And if Facebook and Twitter actually used any sort of “liberal template” it wouldn’t be largely recruiting old people into right wing hate and rage, with funding from Russia seeking to destabilize the west by funding right wing nationalism. 
    "File sharing was initially regarded as illegal."   Tell that to this Minnesota woman who is the subject of this 2006 report from The Guardian,

    "A Minnesota woman, one of the last people to be individually prosecuted in the US for illegal downloading and file-sharing, faces a $220,000 bill after a federal court ruling on Tuesday.

    The federal appeals court reversed a district court's decision to reduce Jammie Thomas-Rasset's owed damages to $54,000 from $1.5m. Tuesday's ruling (pdf) sets the damages at $220,000 and forbids Thomas-Rasset from making sound recordings available for distribution."

    "Apple doesn’t exclude political opinions. Voices espousing hatred and violence are not open expressions from across the spectrum. The are terrorism and deserve to be silenced."  Tell that to The Human Coalition, "a pro-life group tells LifeNews that Apple approved and subsequently removed its app from the App Store after criticism from abortion activists and liberal media outlets. As Human Coalition informs LifeNews, it released a mobile app allowing pro-life individuals and church groups to pray for Human Coalition’s abortion-seeking clients, who remain anonymous, in real time. The app, “Human Coalition,” was available for android devices in the Google Play Store, and in the Apple App Store for iOS."   This is exactly what I stated - Apple censoring conservative views. Not hateful.   Just people who are advocating that unborn babies not be killed.  Where is the hate in that controversy?

    "And if Facebook and Twitter actually used any sort of “liberal template” it wouldn’t be largely recruiting old people into right wing hate and rage, with funding from Russia seeking to destabilize the west by funding right wing nationalism."   This sentence is so incoherent it is not able to be refuted because it contains no intelligence.   Now of course regarding Russia, the Mueller report did not find any basis of Russian collusion but we are soon to learn that the Democrat candidate did fund Russian created fake news that tried to subvert the election.  I will note that this quoted statement includes the strange intolerance that was the very point of my comment.  It is this sort of hate filled attitude that Apple may fall prey to and which would harm its business.  Steve Jobs never engaged in this sort of hatred of the customer base.  We will see if Apple is a beacon of free speech or if it exhibits the same aggressive censorship that Facebook and Twitter employ to silence conservative opinion.


    SpamSandwich
  • Editorial: Can Apple News+ kill 'fake news' and save journalism?

    clemynx said:
    Oddly I never had fake news problems on Apple News but since News+ came out I have seen at least 3 articles denying human responsibility on climate change. That kind of nonsense has no place on any serious service. 
    Your comment has no place on any serious service.   Science is about argument and seeking truth.  It is never about silencing debate.  Except when it has been hijacked by fake scientists.  If you are too weak to read articles with different viewpoints, then that is your problem.  Maybe you should develop a thicker skin.  
    jeffythequickSpamSandwichdesignrcgWerks
  • Editorial: Can Apple News+ kill 'fake news' and save journalism?

    clemynx said:
    apple ][ said:
    corrections said:Now it’s a religio-fascist republic where votes don’t matter and white supremacists are indoctrinated by state TV to unthinkingly march to  nationalist socialism—with a planned economy laid out by a flamboyant figurehead who seized power and wants to scuttle all checks and balances of the legislative branch and fill the courts with one political party while refuting science because he has a “good brain.” 
    It sounds like you've been watching too much of the Handmaid's Tale and not realizing that it's just a fictional series.

    Trump won fair and square, he didn't seize power, what a ridiculous thing to claim. It's the sorelosers who still can't accept reality and get over their loss. Any talk of Russia is complete nonsense and a few facebook ads bought for tiny sums amounting to thousands of dollars is complete peanuts and had zero effect on any election.

    The sorelosers spent billions and still lost. And the main interference in the election has been from the sorelosers with their hoaxes and fake dossiers perpetrated by the side that lost. They cheated and they still lost. The stupid is really strong with that side.

    And the economy is doing great, with less regulations and less hindrances for businesses. It's the other party that wants more regulation, higher taxes and state control over everything, including the private sector.

    And claiming that there is no bias against conservatives on either Facebook or Twitter is also complete nonsense, as there are examples almost daily of discrimination, and nobody buys their excuses that a "mistake" was made anymore, because those "mistakes" always seem to only target one side. Hate speech to a leftist is basically anything that they disagree with, including the term "learn to code", meanwhile they are free to make actual death threats on twitter and nothing seems to ever happen to them. I guess that death threats and threats of actual violence are ok, as long as it's coming from a liberal.

    The liberal fake news dominance and their censorship fetish is getting less effective for each day that passes, and that's a wonderful thing. I'd like to see some of them go out of business soon, that would be fantastic. 

    Oh please, stop sucking Trump's cock, you old obese fart. 

    Now, that is pure hate and intolerance.  For the record, I don't think comments like the above, which are vile and pure hate, should be censored.  We can learn about what makes up each political faction by reading what they write.  And we can and should draw conclusions.  This type of hate is common today and it is most common on one side of the debate.   Frequently, those with such hate have TOLERANCE bumper stickers on their cars.  That is always ironic.
    jeffythequickSpamSandwichcgWerks
  • Editorial: Can Apple News+ kill 'fake news' and save journalism?

    Rayer said:
    apple ][ said:
    MacPro said:
    Political rival groups define each other's news outlets as fake, that's both predictable and par for the course I guess.  Defining scientific facts as fake news is bloody dangerous.  Measle epidemics (and what next, polio and smallpox?) is an example of unbelievably ignorant people believing fake news. 
    Sure, that's pretty dumb I would agree.

    However, the denial of scientific fact is not just limited to one side.


    Except it pretty much is. You don't see Democrats or non-Fox stations in droves claiming that climate change isn't real. 
    I don't know of a single person who believes the climate does not change.  It has always changed.  Conservatives definitely believe this.  We are aware of the Ice Age.  The Little Ice Age was a period of cooling that occurred after the Medieval Warm Period.   All pre-industrial.  Imagine that.   However, you do see Democrats and MSNBC eggheads claiming that only man can change the climate.  Pure BS.  
    SpamSandwichcgWerks
  • Editorial: Can Apple News+ kill 'fake news' and save journalism?

    mknelson said:
    Kentfromohio said:
    I don't know of a single person who believes the climate does not change.  It has always changed.  Conservatives definitely believe this.  We are aware of the Ice Age.  The Little Ice Age was a period of cooling that occurred after the Medieval Warm Period.   All pre-industrial.  Imagine that.   However, you do see Democrats and MSNBC eggheads claiming that only man can change the climate.  Pure BS.  
    I don't think I've ever seen anybody suggest that "only man can change the climate" except in the kind of argument you just made.

    The Current science is something like 99.9999% (might be more 9s) that the current climate shift is caused by humans.
    Your quote on "the current science" is pure ignorance.  If there was such exact science then these scientists could predict every days weather and the exact temperatures in the coming years. In fact, the global warming baloney mongers, like you, have NEVER been able to accurately predict anything.  It is pure bunk.  For real climate science see Fred Singer or  Roy Spencer.  They are two real scientists who know climate issues.  
    designr