pdbreske

"The hack cost the taxpayers more than $1.34 million, according to Comey. No useful data was found."

Fixed it for ya.

I'm not backing either of the two major parties (and haven't for years), but this probably isn't a smart business move for Apple. Suppose Trump wins. What does Tim Cook think Trump will do when he has the power of the White House behind him? Not good.

Also, I find it interesting that Apple presumably plans to still support the Democrats, noting Hillary's backing of the Iraq war and opposition to gay marriage (she only supports gay "unions"). Plus every other thing wrong with her.

Why take sides at all? What's the end game? It's this kind of political garbage that makes people jump ship and stop buying products they've used for years.

fasterquieter said:

Can it be always on? This would make a big difference I think and make it more of an echo competitor. I have an Echo Dot sat next to my Mac which I use for music. The reason I use it is because I don't have to be at the desk to activate it. Siri on my iMac could only replace this if were always on.

I would think they wouldn't allow "Hey Siri" functionality on a computer that may have an iPhone sitting right next to it. Your phone doesn't know your query is directed at the Mac. On the other hand, with the new unlocking feature, they've shown the computer can recognize a nearby phone, so maybe they could turn off an "always listening" mode of Siri on the Mac if it knows your phone is close enough to hear your voice.

gatorguy said:

sog35 said:

easy solution.

She should put liquid on her finger. 5 tries and it will ask for password.

And then she goes to jail for not following the legal order compelling her to unlock it.  Maybe easy for you. I wouldn't call it that nor would I go to jail "on principle". I had that choice back in the early 70's and didn't choose to go to jail then either. 

Spam has it right IMHO. If it's really all that big a deal to you, for whatever reason I can't personally imagine outside of doing something I'm going to jail for if they see it, then use a passcode rather than TouchID to secure your phone. 

The trouble begins when you allow access to something and law enforcement finds something illegal that you didn't know existed, or that you thought wasn't illegal. For example, say you have a bunch of photos of a vacation and one of them shows you holding up a fish you bought at a local market. Nothing wrong so far, but what if the government can prove that particular species is protected by the laws of another country? 16 U.S. Code § 3372 states: "It is unlawful for any person— (1) to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any fish or wildlife or plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law, treaty, or regulation of the United States or in violation of any Indian tribal law; (2) to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce— (A) any fish or wildlife taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of any State or in violation of any foreign law" Merely "acquiring" that fish, in violation of a foreign law, is a crime in THIS country. Didn't know that, did ya? Of course not. No one does. Even the federal government doesn't know all the laws it's supposed to enforce, but you can bet that by willfully giving up your right to freedom from self-incrimination, the government will find some means of making you sorry for it. NEVER give up your rights in the pursuit of expediency.

TwelveSixty said:

Why in the f*ck is it gold? I'm not an automobile expert reviewer but everyone I know with a gold car, is 75+ or can't afford a better color.

Exactly right. I sold cars for a short time and one customer who was in her 60s decided not to buy a gold car because she felt it made her look like an old woman. People who want to be perceived as youthful and fun do not drive gold cars.