oseame

About

Username
oseame
Joined
Visits
26
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
183
Badges
1
Posts
73

Reactions

65Like5Informative

  • Apple says Mississippi 'religious freedom' bill 'empowers discrimination'

    oseameoseame
    leighr said:
    roake said:
    There is a difference between not discriminating and being forced to abandon ones personal beliefs.  This latest movement is yet another and an endless series of attempts to marginalize or suppress Christianity.

    For example, take a random mom and pop Christian bakery with a gay couple as customers.  Most would not have problems selling items to the couple, but when it comes to endorsing or celebrating that gay union (bake a cake by that bakery, with those names on the cake, in the bakers box), then they have the right to draw a line, if not an obligation.  Within their religion and most closely-held beliefs, to make that cake is wrong, and places their own souls at jeopardy for not doing what they believe to be right.

    Sure, there are tons of other bakeries, but none cares.  They want to force the Christians to do something that is against their beliefs.

    I'd like to see this tried in muslim communities.  When good ol' Butch and Billybob go to there to order a "wedding" cake and stir up some kind of controversy, it ends up with a couple beheadings.

    It's very easy to judge people.  We always want justice for others but mercy for ourselves.  Why do you think that difference exists?
    I totally agree. I don't understand why lgbt groups feel the need to push their beliefs onto everyone else. No one else can have an opinion, no one else can disagree with lgbt. If you disagree with Lgtb then you're wrong, you're phobic and you're intolerant. LGBT will NOT tolerate other people's beliefs or opinions, it's just totally unacceptable to have your own views. If they're allowed to have their opinion, why aren't I allowed to have mine?
    You can disagree all you like, you just can't discriminate. Anyway, shouldn't you be leaving the judgement up to god and turning the other cheek if you really are a Christian?
    jroydasanman69ration alrob53supadav03dysamorialatifbpiosenthusiastpropodroundaboutnow

  • OWC ships Aura Pro X2 SSDs for upgrading select Macs

    oseameoseame
    I just replaced the SSD on a 2013 MBP with an M.2 SSD and a very cheap adapter. Why pay more for this?
    rezwitsforgot username

  • Apple Fellow Phil Schiller quits Twitter

    oseameoseame
    A lot of people assuming this is political, but maybe Phil just doesn't want to be on a platform that will be run by engineers who are treated like expendable serfs, the way Musk has treated Twitter's staff so far he's driving their most crucial talent away. Phil was in charge of improving the App Store experience for developers (shorter app review times and modifications to revenue split, better communication) so it makes sense for him to support the talented developers who realise Twitter under Musk has no respect for them. 
    9secondkox2ronndanoxwilliamlondon

  • 'iPhone SE 2' could sell up to 30M units in 2020, says Ming-Chi Kuo

    oseameoseame
    If this is true is it going to replace the 8 and if not why would someone purchase that for $50 more with a 2 year old CPU? Are they just going to reduce the base storage?
    cornchipwatto_cobra

  • App Store rolls out universal purchase support for Mac apps

    oseameoseame
    xyzzy-xxx said:
    There are too many caveats with this feature right now:

    1. you can set only one price (so the iOS version needs to become pricier)
    I don't see why that's a problem, if you want the purchase on one platform to unlock the other it only makes sense to have one price since most Mac users can pay the iPhone price and still get the Mac app. If you want different prices surely you should have two different in app purchases? I already have a Mac/iPhone couple of apps which unlock each other via iCloud NSUbiquitousKeyValueStore if the purchase has been made on the other app/device. You could use a solution like that which until now we had to, to offer users a discount on the Mac app for iPhone users and unlock the iPhone app for Mac users if you choose to.
    2. you need to set the same bundle identifier for both apps, developers that already have an iOS and macOS app would probably end to duplicate apps (meaning multiple app reviews for each update) so that old customers continue to get updates.
    This is an annoying issue, I wish they'd figured out a way to make the transition smoother. I made a catalyst app for an existing iOS app in 11.3 and was waiting for 11.4 for this feature to release it but it looks as though I'll have to go back to a version before I added the catalyst app and start from scratch now in order to use universal purchases.
    dysamoria

  • New iPad Air moves Touch ID to power button, has USB-C says leaker

    oseameoseame
    I would be very happy if the iPhone got Touch ID back on the power button, as well as Face ID.
    joeblackjrccornchipwatto_cobra

  • US Customs says it can search iPhones, but not cloud services

    oseameoseame
    Nations I will never visit in future:

    North Korea
    Russia
    USA
    brucemcprairiewalkerviclauyyc

  • DuckDuckGo Privacy Essentials extension returns to Safari

    oseameoseame
    Something to look forward to when I eventually move to Catalina. Can someone explain why ad blockers need permissions to "read sensitive information from webpages including passwords, phone numbers and credit cards"? I have Ghostery which comes in two parts, the content blocker which doesn't require that permission and effectively blocks some ads, but not as many as adblock (which requires those permissions) and the UI component which does request those permissions. So what's the UI extension doing it needs that for? It doesn't sound like it's just UI. It would be nice if Apple could grant access to page data but not form data so passwords/payment info were safe!
    minicoffeewatto_cobra

  • Adobe Creative Cloud Pro offers over 200 million assets for professionals

    oseameoseame
    I used Adobe Stock at work to license some 3D models, and there's no way to manage which users have access to the Adobe Stock 'credits' we purchase for the team. That's fine for a small company like ours, who just need a few specific models, but if we used Stock more broadly it could be a bit of a nightmare with users accidentally licensing assets at cost! It's not entirely clear you're spending money doing it, especially to some of the less tech savvy users. Giving one or two users a Pro license with unlimited asset downloads might make be both cheaper and easier for us than adding credits as we use them, but I think the models were Premium content so probably not...
    watto_cobra

  • Apple says Mississippi 'religious freedom' bill 'empowers discrimination'

    oseameoseame
    designr said:
    oseame said:
    I was merely objecting to your entirely unsubstantiated claim that I seem not to know a thing about the Christian religion. If you had expressed an argument to begin with rather that that claim, perhaps there would be one to be had. Do you want to try again with an actual argument? Substantiate your statement "Turn the other cheek refers exclusively to petty, secular behaviours, not to heresy and sin."? Would you consider adultery sin, as per the adage of throwing the first stone? Where exactly did Jesus tell us to discriminate against others based on their choice of life partner?
    So here we go again:

    1. Not throwing a stone. That is both literally and figuratively not stoning someone because of their sin.
    2. Not enabling, supporting and going along with a sin.

    These seem different to me.

    1.Throwing the stone is analogous to passing judgement i.e. stating that a same-sex partnership is immoral
    2. Unless you're getting involved in the sexual congress between same-sex partners for financial gain I fail to see how doing business with them would be enabling/supporting it. If we're talking about an 'Adam & Steve' wedding cake all you're enabling is a celebratory cake, one which could quite well be substituted for a plain cake and a tube of icing.
    londor