Mike Wuerthele

About

Username
Mike Wuerthele
Joined
Visits
178
Last Active
Roles
administrator
Points
24,002
Badges
3
Posts
7,275

Reactions

11.9KLike79Dislike2.2KInformative

  • Apple has stopped providing standalone updaters in macOS Big Sur

    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele
    jdb8167 said:
    Isn't the App Store download equivalent to a combo updater? Maybe I'm missing something. Once you download the installer you can save a copy and reuse it. Along with the content caching, it doesn't seem like this is that big of a deal unless I'm missing something. You can also use the App Store download to create a bootable recovery disk if you need to distribute to users to update on their own. The real problem is for those users who have very slow or severely expensive internet. I don't see any way to avoid downloading the 12 GB installer.
    The App Store download is a full, 12GB install. The one you get through software update is 2-3ish GB. The former can take over an hour to install, the latter can take as little as five minutes, depending on a number of factors, obviously.

    Multiply this by a dozen machines, and it's a lot of time.

    It isn't the end of the world. But, it is a big deal for enterprise and other rollouts, particularly ones that have air-gapped installs and the like. The DoD isn't pleased about it, for instance.
    jdb8167Andy.HardwakeDetnatorwatto_cobradocno42

  • Child spends $16K on iPad game in-app purchases

    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele
    mystigo said:
    The boy and her mother should be required to sell one pint of blood each month for the rest of their lives, with the proceeds going to Apple and Sega. That will teach them the lesson we responsible and upstanding forumites wish upon them.
    Apple and Sega already have the money. Seems like the proceeds from your suggestion would go to the credit card company.
    Rayz2016dewmepulseimages

  • Bill introduced to strip Section 230 protections from the internet

    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele
    gatorguy said:
    The practical effect will be that a site like this AppleInsider Forum can longer exist. 

    Cheerleaders of the bill need to consider unanticipated consequences. Comment forums will largely disappear from most fan sites, and the ones that remain will heavily moderate (censor). It's rare that any of them earn enough profit to weather just one lawsuit over content posted by a user. 
    If this, or similar 230 "reform" bills are passed, the forums here will absolutely be shut down.
    That might be this site’s reaction, but all it means is a site must choose to act as a nonpartisan forum or act as a publisher exercising editorial control.

    230 did not exist until relatively recently, so it would just go back to the way it was before.

    This needs to happen.
    You probably need to talk to some attorneys about this, like we have. What you're implying here is not all it means. 

    230 has existed since 1989. 31 years.
    Get better lawyers. If users who choose to post can “sign off” on the site’s current terms of use agreement, they can certainly sign off on another form releasing the site from liability. Private contracts are binding, as long as they don’t violate the laws.
    More context has been added to my post just before you responded, and it's probably worth a read.

    You are welcome to believe what you want based on your own opinion of how you want things to work, but you are not factually correct in this matter, as it pertains to AI, and most of the Internet discussion forums.
    Graeme000Dogpersondarkvadermuthuk_vanalingam

  • Bill introduced to strip Section 230 protections from the internet

    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele
    gatorguy said:
    The practical effect will be that a site like this AppleInsider Forum can longer exist. 

    Cheerleaders of the bill need to consider unanticipated consequences. Comment forums will largely disappear from most fan sites, and the ones that remain will heavily moderate (censor). It's rare that any of them earn enough profit to weather just one lawsuit over content posted by a user. 
    If this, or similar 230 "reform" bills are passed, the forums here will absolutely be shut down.
    That might be this site’s reaction, but all it means is a site must choose to act as a nonpartisan forum or act as a publisher exercising editorial control.

    230 did not exist until relatively recently, so it would just go back to the way it was before.

    This needs to happen.
    You probably need to talk to some attorneys about this, like we have. What you're implying here is not all it means for user forums. Your "legal document" you propose in another comment is not unilaterally enforceable across the United States, as liabilities vary, and pre-moderation of all comments made by users prior to posting to ensure that they are in compliance with whatever 230 morphs into isn't cost-effective for anybody.

    230 has existed since 1989. 31 years. That is not a short period of time.
    Graeme000Dogpersonradarthekatdarkvadermuthuk_vanalingam

  • Bill introduced to strip Section 230 protections from the internet

    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele
    gatorguy said:
    The practical effect will be that a site like this AppleInsider Forum can longer exist. 

    Cheerleaders of the bill need to consider unanticipated consequences. Comment forums will largely disappear from most fan sites, and the ones that remain will heavily moderate (censor). It's rare that any of them earn enough profit to weather just one lawsuit over content posted by a user. 
    If this, or similar 230 "reform" bills are passed, the forums here will absolutely be shut down.
    Graeme000dewmeSpamSandwichurashidOferRayz2016Dogpersondarkvadermuthuk_vanalingam