randominternetperson

About

Username
randominternetperson
Joined
Visits
183
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
7,201
Badges
2
Posts
3,089

Reactions

5KLike234Informative

  • Bill Maher declares Apple CSAM tools a 'blatant constitutional breach'

    randominternetpersonrandominternetperson
    crowley said:
    jdw said:
    tedz98 said:
    The general public has no understanding of what a file hash is. 

    That really is the entire point which many who are defending Apple's move are ignoring. Nothing else matters, and certainly not the technical way in which CSAM scanning works.  That's precisely why I've said in other threads that Apple is now obligated to at the very least DELAY the release until they can do PR damage control and at least try to win more public support.  They cannot do that between now and the release of iOS 15, so the feature must be pulled from iOS 15 and delay the release until at least iOS 16.  And if they never get public support and the matter seems only to get worse and worse, then the idea may need to be permanently shelved.

    This is Tim Cook's call now.  It's no doubt a hard call for him because he's played social justice warrior at times in the past, and this no doubt would seem like a step back for him.  But it's a call he has to make and make soon.
    They should shelve it not because of the merits or demerits of the system, but because the public don't understand it?  Spare me the pandering to the ignorant.  Proper arguments only.
    I will be shocked if Apple doesn't delay the implementation of this until they can in front of the story.  No company can afford to ignore a potential firestorm of bad PR even if the main problem is public ignorance.  What's the rush?

    Apple is full of smart people. They will explain it and do the right things to get the doubters and haters to change their stands. Or, if they can't do that, then shelve the damn feature altogether.  They tried to do something to interfere with the disgusting child porn industry, but if "society" doesn't want Apple to interfere, then so be it. It's not like this "feature" was going to sell one additional iPhone.
    baconstangmacplusplus

  • 'Little Voice' is first Apple TV+ series to see cancellation

    randominternetpersonrandominternetperson
    I enjoyed the show, as did my wife.  Having said that it probably isn't in my top 10 Apple TV+ favorites.  Most of Apple's shows are "must see TV" in my household.  If Apple keeps investing in quality shows, I expect ATV+ to be an easy "must have" for at least tens of millions of people. I just hope that people try it out for Ted Lasso and stick around to try For All Mankind, Trying, Mythic Quest, Mosquito Coast, The Morning Show, Dickinson, Defending Jacob, and the Billie Eilish bio-pic.  I hope Foundation is a mega hit.
    Xedwatto_cobra

  • Apple debuts redesigned online store with dedicated 'Store' tab

    randominternetpersonrandominternetperson
    A work in progress.  I just went to apple.com and clicked on the Store link and got

    The page you’re looking for can’t be found.

    darkvader

  • Apple strikes again: Which developers got 'Sherlocked' at WWDC

    randominternetpersonrandominternetperson
    Nonsense.  None of those is an example of "Sherlocking."

    One cannot "Sherlock" a company the size of Google or even Zoom.  Also, creating an application in an existing, robust product space doesn't count.  Did Apple "Sherlock" all the other browsers when they introduced Safari?  (No; that's ridiculous.)  Finally, adding features to the OS or an application that are already well established in the marketplace doesn't count.

    Nearly every example above if one where Apple is (finally) entering a market with lots of existing players or adding features that numerous other competitors already have.

    The Zoom example is particularly silly.  FaceTime predates Zoom by years.  Is the notion that it's somehow unfair for Apple to keep it's products up to date once competitors come along?
    netlingtmayomar moralesstuartf80s_Apple_Guyaatbigorskymichelb76thttokyojimu

  • Epic Games argues Apple has app monopoly, should make iOS more like macOS

    randominternetpersonrandominternetperson
    rotateleftbyte said:
    Quote
    Quizzically, the Epic attorney also likened Apple's App Store to a scenario where if the iPhone was a car, Apple would take 30% of what the driver had to pay for gasoline.

    This is a load of baloney. I don't pay Apple a bent penny when I use one of the Apps on my phone to pay for the charging of my car.  The charging company had my card details. They don't take 30% when I use Apple Pay on my iPhone even for Gas/Petrol.

    I really hope that the Apple legal team objected to that statement. If they didn't then why not?


    I'm pretty sure you can't object to anything in an opening statement (or at least the rules are very different).  The opening statement is just a way for both parties to provide context for the evidence and witnesses they will introduce. You can't object to stupid analogies unless it's used as part of questioning witnesses.
    cornchipgregoriusmlolliver